Article published in:
Target
Vol. 10:1 (1998) ► pp. 95–111

Choice Factors in Translation

| Voronezh State Technical University, Russia
In this article, grammatical forms in context are viewed as processual patterns of choice activity. A hierarchy of choice factors is presented, using the example of the present perfect forms in parallel translations from Russian into several languages. To ensure adequacy of comparison, the notions of grammatical contextual complex and universal grammatical integral are introduced and used as the required tertium comparationis. Particular attention is devoted to the interplay of universal and language-specific features in processes of grammatical choice in translation.
Article outline
  • 0.Introduction
    • 0.1.The Role of Context in Grammatical Usage
  • 1.The Process of Grammatical Choice
    • 1.1.Grammatical Choice in Translation
  • 2.Choice Hierarchy
    • 2.1.Choice Factors for the Present Perfect
      • 2.1.1.Textual and Stylistic Background
      • 2.1.2.General Situational Background
      • 2.1.3.Categorial Background
      • 2.1.4.Contextual Background
      • 2.1.5.Lexical Background
  • 3.The Grammatical Unit of Translation
    • 3.1.Grammatical Integrals
    • 3.2.Choice Factors in Coding and in Translation
  • 4.Conclusions
    • 4.1.Methodological Inference
  • References
Published online: 01 January 1998
https://doi.org/10.1075/target.10.1.05kas
References
Bondarko, Alexander V.
1975 “On Field Theory in Grammar—Diathesis and Its Field”. Linguistics 1571. 43–65.Google Scholar
1987 “Vvedenie: Osnovaniya funkcional’noy grammatiki [Introauction: Foundations of Functional Grammar]”. Alexander V. Bondarko, ed. Teoria funktional’ noy grammatiki [Theory of Functional Grammar]. Leningrad: Nauka.Google Scholar
Humboldt, Wilhelm von
1851 Gesammelte Werke VI: Ueber die Verschiedenheit des menschlichen Sprachbaues und ihren Einfluss auf die geistige Entwickelung des Menschengeschlechts. Berlin: Carl Brandes.Google Scholar
Kashkin, Vyacheslav B.
1991 Funkcionalnaya tipologiya perfekta [The Functional Typology of the Perfect]. Voronezh: Universitet.Google Scholar
Maturana, Humberto R.
1970 “Biology of Cognition”. BCL Report No. 901. Urbana: University of Illinois, Department of Electrical Engineering, Biological Computer Laboratory.Google Scholar
Schopf, Alfred
1984 Das Verzeitungssystem des Englischen und seine Textfunktion. Tübingen: Narr. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stepanov, Yuri S.
1981 Imena, predikaty, predlozheniya: Semiologicheskaya grammatika [Names, Predicates, Sentences: A Semiological Grammar]. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Wandruszka, Mario
1966a “Les temps du passé en français et dans quelques langues voisines”. Le Français moderne 34:1. 3–18.Google Scholar
1966b “L’aspect verbal, problème de traduction”. Travaux de linguistique et de littérature de l’Université de Strasbourg 6:1. 113–129.Google Scholar
Weinrich, Harald
1969 “Textlinguistik: Zur Syntax des Artikels in der deutschen Sprache”. Jahrbuch für Internationale Germanistik 1:1. Berlin, Zürich: Gehlen 1969 61–74.Google Scholar
1977 Tempus: Besprochene und erzählte Welt. Stuttgart: Ernst Klett.Google Scholar
Yurchenko, Vasiliy S.
1994 Realnoye vremya i struktura yazyka [Real Time and Language Structrure]. Saratov: Pedinstitut.Google Scholar
1995 Ocherk po filosofii grammatiki [Essay on the Philosophy of Grammar]. Saratov: Pedinstitut.Google Scholar