A Sociolingual Approach to Literary Translation

Hadeer M. Abdul QauyAlex UniversityFaculty of ArtsInstitution of Applied Linguistics and TranslationMA in Translation3rd TermSpring 2014

A SocioLingual Semantic Approach for Translation: the

Context of

“A Story from the Prison” by Yahya Hakki

A SOCIO-LINGUAL semantic approach for translation. 1

Contents

Abstract........................................................3

1. Introduction:..............................................4

1.1. Introduction:............................................4

1.2. Setting the Problem:.....................................4

1.3. Method of the Approach:..................................5

1.1. Objective of the Research:................................6

2. Review of the Literature:....................................6

2.1. Introduction:............................................6

2.2. The Literary Language:...................................7

2.3. The Problem of Translating Literary Texts:...............7

2.4. Translation Shift (Syntactical Shift):...................8

2.3.1 Vinay and Darblnet Categories:........................9

2.3.2 Cattford Categories:..................................9

2.6. The Short Story:........................................10


2.6.1. Characteristics of the Short Story:..................11

2.6.2. The Short Story from a Translator’s Point of View:...11

2.7. Yahya Hakki:...........................................12

3. Sample Analysis:............................................12

3.1 Introduction:...........................................12

3.2. Lexical Analyses:......................................13

3.3 Syntactical Analyses:...................................19

4.3 syntactical analyses:....................................20

4. Findings and Conclusion:....................................24

4.1 Findings:................................................24

4.2 Conclusion:..............................................25

4. Recommendations for Further Researches:...................25

5. References:.................................................26


Abstract

This paper attempts to propose a new approach in translating

literary texts. This is through tackling the lexical and

syntactical translational problems that are included in the

translation of the short story " ن� ى ال�سج� صة ف� by Davies under the "ق�title “A Story from Perison”. The source text is written by Yahya

Hakki amongg a collection of short stories under the title of "

ن� The version that is used is 1997. The researcher . "دم�اء و ط�ي�compares the source text and the target one tracing the lexical

A SOCIO-LINGUAL semantic approach for translation. 4 and the syntactical differences between them. Then, he uses the

synatagmatic and the paradigmatic axes to see whether the

translator is able to reflect any of them. After that the

researcher traces the effect of not reflecting the paradigmatic

axis of the word through the target text. The researcher

attempts to propose an approach based upon reflecting the

paradigmatic semantic axis of any word or phrase included in the

source text through the target text. This is to avoid the

deconstruction of the socio-lingual impact of the text in the

case of literary texts.


1. Introduction:

This paper aims at finding a suitable socio – lingual

approach for translating literary text. To do so, the

researcher focuses on the translation of the non – standard

linguistic levels included in the short story “ A Story from

Prison” by Yahya Hakki ( 1997 ).

1.1. Introduction:

This section goes through four main parts. The first

is the introduction where the researcher gives a summary of

the whole section. The second is setting the problem where

the researcher indicates the main dilemma that this research

attempts to solve. The third part is method of the research

where the researcher gives a hint about the tools that he

uses for analyzing his data and for reaching his results.

The last part in this section is the objective of the

research.

1.2. Setting the Problem:

The translation of literary text, as will be

discussed latter, is very problematic (Newmark, 1988). The

problems result from the hypotheses that is the act of


translation and/or interpretation necessitates tolerating

two different systems not only linguistically, but

contextually and referentially according to Gutt as cited in

(Malmkjær,2009). The idea of decoding a massage from one

language and encoding it in a different language

necessitates a great knowledge of both languages (Newmark,

1988). This Knowledge has to cover the three levels that

have been previously mentioned. In case that the three

levels are not integrated , the source text and the target

text hold two different message as will be discussed on

section four.

1.3. Method of the Approach:

To tackle this problem of the loss of the integration

between these three levels, the researcher depends on some

tools of analyses. These are:

1.3.1. Sausser’s Syntagmatic and paradigmatic axes:

Sausser ,as cited in (Chandler, 2011), says that any text

has its meaning through the different signifiers in it.

Concerning this, he differentiates between what is called

syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations. According to


Sausser as cited in (Chandler, 2011) defines these two

relation:

“[S]yntagmatic relations refer intratextually to other signifiers co-

present within the text, whilst paradigmatic relations refer

intertextually to signifiers which are absent from the text”

From this point, the researcher builds his discussion by

tracing the intratextual relation and the intertextual

relations within the source text comparing them to their

translation in the target text. The researcher focuses on

the words and syntactical structure that are informal

linguistically as they contribute to the meaning of the

text. By not translating the intertextual relations,

paradigmatic axis, the target text is semantically

alterated.

2. Al Mo’agam Al Wageez (An Arabic - Arabic Dictionary) to

indicate whether the ST word and phrases are formal or

informal.

3. Cambridge English - English Dictionary for Advanced

Learners to indicate the degree of formality of the TT words

and phrases.


1.1. Objective of the Research:

1. To trace the lexical and the syntactical differences

between a source literary text and its target one from

Arabic into English.

2. To indicate the socio-lingual and semantic effects of

the lexical and the syntactical diffewrences.

3. To propose a socio – lingual semantic model for the

literary translation process.

2. Review of the Literature:

2.1. Introduction:

This paper is based upon comparing an Arabic short

story written by Yahya Hakki to its English translation in

the sense of paradigmatic axis. This is on the word level,

lexically, and on the sentence level, syntactically. This

necessitate having a brief knowledge about :

2.2. The Literary Language:

2.3. The Problem of Translating Literary Texts:

2.4. Translation Shift (Syntactical Shift):

2.5 Syntagmatic and Paradigmatic axes.

2.6. The Short Story:

A SOCIO-LINGUAL semantic approach for translation. 9 2.7. The Short Story from a Translator’s Point of

View:

2.8 Data of the Research:

2.2. The Literary Language:

(Newmark1988) highlighted that literary text

is different from speeches and scientific language because it

has two main characteristics. These characteristics are being

allegorical and being directed to a narrow readership. These

two characteristics are obtained because of the difference

between the literary language and the ordinary one.

There is a major difference between literary

language and ordinary language. Literary language reflects the

heritage and the traditions of the society of the literary

work. This kind of reflection appears through using

referential words, personification and symbolism in order to

give the same emotional atmosphere, and the same mental

picture to whomever read the work (Anani:1997).Thus, it may be

said that literary language consists of cultural and socio-

cultural words.

A SOCIO-LINGUAL semantic approach for translation. 10 2.3. The Problem of Translating Literary Texts:

From the above discussion, reader may feel that

the language of literary text is associated with culture.

Thus, it is important to know what culture is from linguists’

point of view. (Newmark: 1988:91) says that:

“I define culture as the way of life and its manifestations that are

Particular to a community that uses particular language as its mean

of expression”.

Thus, the word that is associated to a specific community and

used to express a culturalphenomenon in this community is

what is called “culture-specific item”.

There is a strong relation between these words, the

culture-specific items, and the problem of translating literary

texts. The problem of the translation appears when there is a

cultural distance between the source culture and the target

culture. Translation is a process of delivering a message, and

this message has to be fully agreed from both the decoder and

the encoder of it. In other words, there should be an agreed

code between the sender of the message and the receiver of it.

The translator understands the code of the ST and turns it to

A SOCIO-LINGUAL semantic approach for translation. 11 the available equivalent code in the target language to form

the TT. According to (Jakobson as cited in Venuti: 1995), In

the case of cultural distance the problem comes from the

absence of the subcode equivalence from the target language.

This subcode is the non – equivalence cultural words. This

means that there will be a point where there is no matching

between the source language and the target one.

Syntactic structure seems to play a crucial role in literary

translation according to (Newmark, 1988).

2.4. Translation Shift (Syntactical Shift):

Shift or transposition is the change in the

grammar form from the ST to the TT. There are two types of this

shift. The first type is changing from singular to plural. For

example, the translator pluralizes the translation of the word

furniture in his translation for it as “meubles”1 . The secound

one one is obligatory which is used when the structure of the

ST is not contained in the TT.Fore example, the shift between

1 A French word

A SOCIO-LINGUAL semantic approach for translation. 12 the sentence structure of the SVO languages and the VSO

languages. The third type is due to the use of certain

translation strategy to elaborate the meaning as in the

translation of "در لة ال�ق into “the night when Qur’an was "ل�ي�revealed”.2The forth type is used where there is a lexical gap

between the ST and the TT. For example, the phrase " ات ي� ال�ن� "الاع�مال ب��is translated as “deeds, According to the saying, are by

“intention”.

Vinay and Darblnet indicates some cases of syntactical

shifting between ST and TT (as cited in Newmark: 1988: 86).

2.3.1 Vinay and Darblnet Categories:

2.3.1.1 SL verb, TL noun.

2.3.1.2 SL conjunction, TL indefinite adjective..

2.3.1.3 SL clause, TL noun Group.

2. 3.1.4 SL noun group, TL noun

2.3.1.5 SL complex sentence, TL simple sentence.

2 This word is included in Davies’translation ‘The Lamp of umm Hshim’


Catford as cited in (Baker:2001) gives other titles to these

categories.

2.3.2 Cattford Categories:

2. 3.2.1 Level Shift:

This shift is used where the shift is one one

linguistic level between ST and TT.

2.3.2.2. Category shift which contains

This shift is a change between the structures of the

ST and the TT as the shift between the SVO languages

and the VSO languages.

2.3.2.2.1Unit shifts:

Adjective may be translated by a morpheme or a

group by clause.

2.3.2.2.2 Class shift:

An adjective may be translated by a noun or a verb.

2.3.2.2.3Intrasystem shift:

When the SL and the TL has nearly the same

linguistic system, intra-system shift is used.

It is worthy to say that the researcher traces the category

shift on the syntactical level of the source text and the


target text to highlight the unnecessary shifts that have

been done by the translator. These shifts affect the

paradigmatic sense of the whole text.3

Newmark clarifies in his book:

“Too often the word order is changed

unnecessarily, and it is sometimes more appropriate to

translate with a lexical synonymy, retrain the word order

and forgo the transposition in order to preserve the stress.”

(Newmark: 1988:91)

Thus, the non-native translator makes unnecessary shifts

because of his confusion.

2.6. The Short Story:

This research is based upon a short story, thus it

is important to know some brief information about this genre.

2.6.1. Characteristics of the Short Story:

According to Edgar Allen Pau as cited in (Anani:

1997)4 short stories have to be not more than thirty page or a 3 The researcher means by this term the whole atmosphere and the style of the text.4 This book is written in Arabic, the taken parts are translated by the researcher.

A SOCIO-LINGUAL semantic approach for translation. 15 little bit longer. Some stories may violate this condition ,

but all stories have to (a)have one hero, (b)celebrate one

issue reated to this hero, (c)contain a development of the

actions and (d)give a united impression from the beginning to

the end of the story and. These characteristics are considered

constrains to the translator because he is expected to give the

reader the same message and feelings of the ST .Moreover, this

TT should stick to these characteristics of the genre of the

short story. This justifies Newmark`s point of view which is

that short story is the second most difficult genre of

literature to be translated (Newmark: 1988).

2.6.2. The Short Story from a Translator’s Point of View:

Because of being difficult to be translated, short

stories receive a special care from most of the scholars of

translation. One of these is Newmark who gives three main

points to be taken care while dealing with a short story in

translation. These points are:

(1)When a character or an action is repeated in the ST, it

should be repeated in the TT.


(2)When a culture-specific item in the ST has no

equivalence in the target language, the translator may try to

rephrase the whole context of this item in order to deliver the

same connotation of this cultural item through the TT.

(3)The critical eye of the translator traces which lexical

item is important and adds to the meaning and which is not

(ibid).

When a translator is able to take care of the three

of these points keeping the characteristics of the short

stories that are previously mentioned, his work is well done.

2.7. Yahya Hakki:

Yahya Hakki is the author of "ى ف� ى ال�من� صة ف� His life. "ق�contributed to his literary works specially "م ل ام ه�اش. دي�3 ن� He was."ق�born in “Al Maidda Lane” in Cairo. His governmental career

passed through to phases:

(1)After his graduation from the faculty of law, he worked

in a governmental job in “Manfalout” in Upper Egypt.

(2)Between 1929:1954, he worked at the ministry of Foreign

Affairs which enabled him to travel to many cities all over the

A SOCIO-LINGUAL semantic approach for translation. 17 world such as Rome, Paris and Ankara (Ragaa El- Nakash as cited

in Hakki:2008) .

These two phases made him combine two different ways

of life. The first one is that of the people of “Manfalaut” who

exemplify the eastern conventional life and beliefs. The second

one is that of the European countries and their people who

exemplify the western freedom and beliefs. Hakki wrote " ل ام دي�3 ن� ق�

م He wrote, also, a collection of short stories under the ."ه�اش.title of " ن� where he deals with the suffering of the , "دم�اء وط�ي�Egyptian people. “A Story from the Prison” is included within

this collection.

3. Sample Analysis:

3.1 Introduction:

The data that is used in this research is a short story

written by Yahya Hakki (1997) under the title of ( ن� ى ال�سج� صة ف� and its (ق�translation by Davies (2006) under the title of (A Story from Prison).

Based upon the discussions in the previous sections, the researcher

A SOCIO-LINGUAL semantic approach for translation. 18 picks the lexical and syntactical items in both the source and the

target texts highlighting their Syntagmatic and paradigmatic axes.

This is in relation to the social class of the characters of the story

as the researcher uses the paradigmatic axis as a measurement to the

suitability of the words to their low ranked speaker. The researcher

does so through analysing each of the lexical and syntactical

selections in a separate chart. Figure 1 indicates the words that have

easy caught syntagmatic axes; however, their paradigmatic axes are not

caught by the translator. This is because their paradigmatic axes are

associated with the social rank of the speaker. The researcher

provides the source word, its formality5. Then, he provides it

syntagmatic and paradigmatic axes. The sixth column is for the

researcher translation according to his socio – lingual semantic

approach for translation. The final column is for the discussion of

the reasons behind the change in the translation. 6

3.2. Lexical Analyses:

STWord

Formal/Informal7

Syntagmatic axis

Paradigmatic Axis8

ST Word The translation according tothe proposedapproach

Comment

5 The researcher knows whether the word ois formal or not through looking it up in the dictionary.6 This is included only in the lexical analyses.


واي��ش. ال�ش. Informal

The lowest rank of soldiers.

A police man.

Sergeant Constable. The St wordhas a hierarchal meaning than the Arabic one moreover itdoes not reflect thefear of thespeaker.

ة اخ� ي� ال�ش. Formal Part of the village.

A governmental part of the village.

Pat of the village.

A governmentalregion in the village.

Al Shiakh in Arabic is a governmental region ofany city. The ST worddoes not give this meaning.

ال�سلاح�لي�Bك

Formal Weapon container.

Weapon container.

Racks. Al Slahlik with footnotes: aweapon container.

“Racks” means the frame of the weapon;moreover, it

7 Most of the Arabic informal words has no root to look them up in the

dictionary

8 Note that the paradigmatic axes here are provided according to a low ranked class in a rural Egyptian society.


marginizes the traditionaleffect of the ST word.

ة دوري�� Formal Governmental people go around the country.

Group of the Omda’s guards pass by around the village.

Patrol. Patrol. The translator is able to catch the meaning of the word.

ف�راء خ�� Formal The Omda’s Guards.

The omda’s Guards whom people usually fear.

Sentry. Khfar. With foot notes: the plural of khafeer who is an Omda’s guard. 9

The ST wordholds different meaning from the TTword as theposition ofKhafeer in the countrysideis a good position like a police man whom peoplefear; whereas, inthe city it

9 The word patrol has to be associated with this translation to reflect a realpicture.


is not the same. Thus this meaning hasto be kept in the TT.

ي�راط ق Formal Part of the land.

Part of 24 parts of an acre.

Qirats- just overhalf an acre.

Qirat with foot notes: part of 24 parts of an acre.

Qirat is not over half an acre.

ال�عمدة Formal Mayor. The governmental rulerof a village.

Umda. O10mda with foot notes: a governmentalposition as a mayor.

Omda has a great position inthe countrysidethat’s why this has tobe indicated.

ص�اح�ب�ن� ال�طي�

Formal The owner ofthe land.

The ownerof the land (colloquial).

The fellow with the land.

The land owner.

The fellow of the landdoes not reflect thesame colloquial sense of STword.

واع�ر Formal Difficult.

Harsh (colloquial).

Hard. Harsh. In Arabic, certain dialects use the

10 The researcher changes the /U/ with the /O/ because in Arabic the word is pronounced as / ɒmdæ/ not /Ʌmdæ/.


word “waer”to refer tothe harshness of things not to their degree of difficulty.

واع�ى Formal Knows lots of things.

Intelligent and nothing cross over his head (colloquial).

Experienced.

Nothing crosses overyour head.

The word “waay” in its colloquial sense does not mean experienced. It means being so intelligentand baying attention person.

الى رح�� Formal My men. The man upon whomone can depend (colloquial).

You are my man.

You’re my right hand man.

The usage of plural form to refer to a singular thing in some Arabicdialects refers to agreat degree of appreciatio


n and dependence.

ا ي� ال�من� Formal Al Menia.

An upper Egyptian city.

Minya. Al Menia with footnotes: an upper Egyptian city.

There is noneed to omit the definite article of the word. Moreover, this word refers to acity that has to be associated with the harshness of the roadthat has been mentioned before. Thus, it has to be mentioned that it is an upper Egyptian city.

راح Informal

Went. Then (colloquial).

Went. Then. The word “rah” in colloquial Arabic has to different


senses according to the social class of the speaker. One of these is “went” and the other one is “then”. In this context, itmeans then.11

ك�وي�3سة Informal

Good. Cool (colloquial).

Fine. Cool. The word fine is more formalthan the word “kwaysa”; thus, the researcher uses the word cool as it is more informal.

11 The context is " ة ن� ي رالى س�كن� the speaker does not mean “he went and bought "راح اش.me a knife”. He means “after that he bought me a knife””, “then he bought me aknife” or “based upon what happened he bought me a knife”


ة وي�� ي��ش. Formal A little.

Just after. Egyptian people use it ina colloquial manner.

Just after.

A bit after. The TT word does not reflectthe same informal sense of the colloquial usage of the Arabic word; thus,the researcher tends to change in the Englishform to make it sound less formal.

ان� عي� ت� Informal

Exhausted.

Fatigue (colloquial).

Tired Feeling not ok!

The word “taaban” isin formal; thus, the researcher aims at using an informal phrase to reflect thesame sense.

ان� ع�لس. Informal

Because. Cause (colloqui

Because. Cause. The word “alashan”


al). is shortened; thus, the researcher shortens the word because to suit the paradigmatic context.

ان� �eب ر خ�� Formal Broken down.

Broken down.

Derelict. In a bad condition.

The word “kharban” is a formalword; however, itis used to reflect an informal sense aboutthe text and the speaker. That is whythe researcher replaces itwith a lessformal phrase thanderelict.

ب ح�طي� Informal

I put. I put (colloquial)

I put. I put. Although the ST wordis


informal, the researcher keeps the formal equivalence.

ا واد ب�� Informal

Boy. Guy. Boy. Guy. The word “wad” is aninformal word. That is why the word boy isnot suitable toexpress it.12

وا وت� ف� ت�� Informal

Pass by. Pass by (colloquial)

They’ll go.

They’ll passby.

The meaningof “yafout”is to pass by not to go.

ط�والى Informal

Straight.

Straight (colloquial)

Straight on.

Straight. The researcher omits the preposition“on” to shorten thesentence asit is shortened in Arabic.

12 The word boy can be used in a colloquial sense, but not in this context.


م ج�� Informal

Came. Came (colloquial).

They came.

They came. Although the ST wordis informal, it is hard to find an English informal word to express it.

ح�داى Informal

Next to me.

By my side (colloquial).

Alongsideme.

Next me. The ST wordis colloquial one. That is why it has to be expressed through a less formalword than the TT one.

ج�ر ال�غ� Informal

Bad people.

Thieves who has no land to set in.

Gypsies. Al Ghager with footnotes: people who have no hometown , and most of them are thieves.

Gypsies aremainly fortuneteller; whereas, AlGhager has a wider andmore general meaning than this.


One of the main problems that faced the researcher here is

the informality of the paradigmatic axis of the word in spite

being formal syntagmatically. For Example " ة وي�� in the Arabic "ش�.dictionary means the rest of the thing, but " ة وي�� here means "ي��ش.just after an action. This sense is used in the colloquial

Arabic. The translator is able to catch this meaning, but he is

not able to reflect it in the colloquial sense of the target

language. The other problem is that these words have to be

translated in the light of the social – class of the speaker.

3.3 Syntactical Analyses:

This figure discusses the syntactical analyses of the socio

– semantic structures included in the ST and their translation.

This figure consists of six columns only the seventh one, which

is for comment, is omitted because the comment upon all the

syntactical translational shifts that are included in the

translation are unnecessary and follow none of the know

syntactical shifts (see section 2.4). Moreover, all the syntactic

A SOCIO-LINGUAL semantic approach for translation. 30 Arabic structures included in the ST are not formal to reflect

the low class of the speaker who is in the prison due to stealing

some sheep. The translator translates these structures into their

syntactical formal equivalence; thus, he gives a hierarchal

social class to the speaker of these structures.

4.3 syntactical analyses:

STsentence

Formal/Informal

Syntagmatic axis

Paradigmatic Axis

ST sentence

The translation according to the proposed approach

Bة ال�لى ل�مك اي��ج�ر ع�لى ال�غ�ا ام�ال اد�

لاح؟ ك�ي�ب ف��

Informal.

You are two differenttypes of people. You cannot deal witheach other.

Adding tothe syntagmatic meaning, making fun of him.

How wasit you got mixed up withthe gypsies, then if you are a peasant?

With Al Ghager, how come! You’re a peasant, with footnotes of the word “Al Ghager”

دى و ك�ان� ع�ي� ة ماي�� ن� ك�ام ع��ى هم ف� اط�لق

Informal.

Explaining the nature ofhis work.

The way of talking reflects his poor

And I had a few head ofsheep

Had I some shep letting them in the field in spring.


ب ط وق� ي� ال�ع�ع ن� ب�� .ال�ر

fundamental conditions and being naive.

that I let loose in the fields in spring.

Footnotes: the word shepis misspelt. It is sheep. This is to reflect the real text wayof speaking.13

ل ي� ة ال�ن� ل�ما خ�ب م�ن� ي� ق ت��

ل غ� ي�ر ش�. .غ�

Informal.

Having nowork because of the flood.

The low social class of the speaker.

When the Nile flood came, Ihad no work.

The flood distroied ma work.

13 With doing this, the researcher follows Charles Dickens’ way of writing.


وى م�ا ا ع�لي� ب�� ت� رح�ش. و ان��ت

م ن� ال�ع� طال ب�� ب�� ة اي�� وع�ى ل�غ� ي ب��

وص�لهم ا ت� ي� ال�من�ر اخ�� ل�واح�د ب�

Bول�ك Bاك� ه�ي�Bا اي��سطك ع�لي�

ال�ص .ح��

Informal.

Request. Polite request in a colloquial for from a superior person toan inferior one.

Ellewi,seeing as you have nowork, why do not yougo up to Minya with mysheep and take them toa merchant I know there. I can assure you, myfriend,I’ll make itworth your while!

May Ellwa14 you take the sheep to a trader in Al Minia as you have no work.You give themto a trader there, and I’ll make youhappy ma fella.

Bارك� ن ا م�ج� ب3� .ا� Informal.

I select you.

Showing that he depends on him as

I’ve chosen you.

Chosen you I am.

14 The correct pronunciation of the word is with /a/ sound not /i/ sound.


he is a reliable person (in a colloquial way).

ق ال�لى ت�� ال�طرف� اي�� ان��ت ح��

ة س�هل .م�ن�

Informal.

Saying that the road willbe short and easy.

Putting Ellewi’s fears of the harshnessof the road aside in a colloquial manner.

The journeyis not as difficult as you think.

Easy road it’s that youfear.

كB م�ع لي� ح�� ة من� الات��ره�ن�

لق جر ب� جر م�ب� م�ب�سكB ح�دا ق� ت��

ا ي� .ال�من�

Informal.

Telling the direction.

Telling him that he has togo behindthe sea; thus, no need for being afraid from the road (colloquially).

Just keep along the Canal, going northward all the way. And youwill find yourself at

Be next to AlIbrahimia Canal in the direction of the sea,15 andyou will findyourself in front of Al Minia , with footnotes: inEgypt the seadirection is northward.

15 This is to show the naivety of the speaker.


Minya.

ة ش. اي�� م�ا اع�رق��لان3�ى ال�لى ح��

م ن� ف� ال�ع� اوق�لد دام ال�ي� ف�

.دى

Informal.

Expressing that hestopped their without acertain reson.

Expressing that knowing Al Ghageris out ofhis bad luck in acolloquial way.

But I don’t know what itwas that made mebring the sheep to a halt infront of thisvillage.

Knowing no I am make me stop with thesheep in front of thisvillage.

Bك سمي و لا ق�ب ك�دا .ح��

Informal.

Asking him aboutthe reason behind knowing Al Ghager.

Making fun of him in a roundabout way.

Or was it justyour destinythat ithappened like that?

Or was it youbad fortune, boy, which push you to this?!

رح�بف� ص�اق��

م ن� .ال�ع�

Informal.

But the sheep together.

Arranged the sheepto be able to manage them all ( in a colloquial way).

I got the sheep arranged.

I gotta the sheep queued.


ى م�ا ن� ل�سة ع�ي�ى ش. ف� لت دح��

لا و ªوم ا ال�ي� ماغة ب ج�� ي� ل�ق

ا ي¬ن� ع�لي� ي� ح��لد ة ال�ي� جن� م�ن� ن��

و س�طهمي¬ن� .ج�ماري�3

Informal.

He have not sleptyet, and found those people coming towards him.

Reflects that the characteris a naive person, from a low classas he feels that somepeople with two donkeys is somethingto be afraid of.

But my eyes hadn’t yet metup withsleep when I found agroup of people making their way towardsme fromthe direction of the village.

Being not asleep yet, found I16 in front of somegroup of people comingtowards me from the village direction among them tow donkeys.

ال�لة عود� ب�� ا�.م�ن� دا ح�ط²

Informal.

Damn his luck.

It has religiousconnotations. His luck is like the devil of which he asks for

What rotten bad luck.

May God takesthis bad luckaway.

16 Most of the researcher translations do not follow the grammatical rules to reflect the sense of the real text.


God’s support.

ق� مب و ك�ي�بوف� سىµ اش�. ق� ت��ة ال�لى ح اي��

حصل .ن��

Informal.

Expressing the action ofstanding up to seewhat is going to happen.

Curiositywith colloquial manner.

I got up and find myself to see what would happen.

I stood up with a curiosity to see what gonna happen.

4. Findings and Conclusion:

4.1 Findings:

Based upon the above discussion, the researcher finds

that to translate literary texts a socio-lingual semantic

approach seems to be sufficiently used. This is because such an

approach helps analyzing the socio-semantic level of the selected

language for each speaker in the target text. Adopting this

Figure 2: The Analyses of the Socio – Semantic Syntactical

Structures.

A SOCIO-LINGUAL semantic approach for translation. 37 approach goes through three translation processes. The first

process is getting the target text analyzed both syntagmatically

and paradigmatically in the light of the themes and the

characters of the text to get the intended meaning behind each

word and sentence in the target text. This is an intralingual

translation where the translator translates within the same

language. The second one is translating the caught meaning in to

the target language. This is interlingual translation. The final

process is the re-intralingual translation of the target text

which means to translate the target text again in the target

language to give the same source sociological effect through the

target text.

The translator in the tackled data translates most of

the words and sentences according to their syntagmatic axis;

whereas, he does not tackle the paradigmatic axes (the socio-

lingual effect of a word or a sentence) except for some few cases

as mentioned in the figures above. Thus the target text seems to

lose some features included in the source text most of which are

socio-semantic ones. Moreover, such a kind of translation is

A SOCIO-LINGUAL semantic approach for translation. 38 considered unjustified shift in the case of syntactical analysis

as it does not follow any of the known syntactical shifts. Adding

to this, it causes a kind of alteration to the meaning of the ST.

4.2 Conclusion:

This paper goes through four sections. Section one is the

introduction where the researcher gives a brief summary of his

research. Section two is the “review of the literature” where the

researcher tackles some of the literature that are done in

relation to his research. Section three is “sample analysis”

where the researcher introduces his data, and how he tackles it.

The final section is for the “findings and conclusion” where the

researcher shows the findings of his research.

In section 1, the researcher introduces the reasons behind

working on this paper. He clarifies that the translation of

literary texts has something to do with the socio-lingual

semantic level of the text. He says that the socio-semantic level

of the text relies on its paradigmatic axis both on the lexical

and the syntactical levels. In section 2, the researcher attempts

to give a brief idea about the nature of literary language,

A SOCIO-LINGUAL semantic approach for translation. 39 syntactic shifts, short story and Yahya Hakki. Section 3, is for

the lexical and syntactical analyses. In these analyses, the

researcher compares between the source text and the target text

on the syntagmatic and paradigmatic axes. Then, the researcher

provides his own translation. The final section is for the

findings of the research which prove, based on the analyses, that

literary texts maybe better translated through socio-lingual

semantic approach in translation than translating it only

linguistically.

4.Recommendations for Further Researches:

1. This research may help applying the same approach for non-

literary texts.

2. This research may help applying the same approach on political

speeches.

5. References:

1. Primary Sources:


ى ) جن� ى، ن�� ة م�صر1997خ�ف هص� ع ن�� eب م : م�طا اه�رة .ال�ق ة ن� ب3� ا عة ال�ي. ن� ،ال�طن� (.دم�اء وط�ي� .

Hakki, Yahya (2006) Davies, Johnson (ed). The Lamp of Umm

Hashem and Other Short Stories, Cairo: The American

University in Cairo Press.

2. Secondary Sources:

Baker, Mona (2001).In Other Words: ACoursebook in

Translation .London: Routledge.

Baker, Mona (2001).Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation

Studies. London: Routledge.

Malmkjær, Kristen (2009), Translation and Linguistics,

Perspectives: Studies in Translatology, 13:1, 5-20,

DOI: 10.1080/09076760508668960


Newmark, Peter (1988).A Textbook of Translation. New

York, London, Toronto, Sydney, Tokyo: Prentice Hall.

Venuti, Lawrence (1995).The Translator’s Invisibility: A

History of Translation.London, New York. Routledge.

Venuti, Lawrence (2004),Baker,Mona(ed).The Taranslation

Study Reader. New York, London: Routledge.

3. Arabic Sources:

ن3�ى ، م�حمد ) ا ات�1997ع�ي� ة ل�لكي ي�� ة ال�غامة ال�مصر ن� ة ، ال�هن� ن� ب3� ا عة ال�ي. ة ، ال�طن� وي�� Îي ( . الادت� وق�� .

ن3�ى، م�حمد) ا ر-2003ع�ي� ش. ة ل�لت� ة ال�غال�من� ي�� رك�ة ال�مصر ق ، ال�ش. ي� طي� ة وال�ي ي�� ر ط² ي¬ن� ال�ي� ة ي�� ن� ب�� مة الاد ( . الي رج��

ار وب�� ع ال�ي� �eب اه�رة : م�طا مان� ، ال�ق ح� .ل�ون��

ان3�ى،م�حمد) ر –2003ع�ي� ش. ة ل�لت� ة ال�غال�من� ي�� رك�ة ال�مصر ق ، ال�ش. ي� طي� ة وال�ي ي�� ر ط² ي¬ن� ال�ي� ة ي�� ن� ب�� مة الاد ( ، الي رج��

ار وب�� ع ت�� eب :م�طا اه�رة مان� ، ال�ق ح� .ل�ون��


ان3�ى،م�حمد) ار2012ع�ي� وب�� ع ت�� eب اه�رة : م�طا مان� ، ال�ق ح� ر – ل�ون�� ش. ة ل�لت� ة ال�غال�من� ي�� رك�ة ال�مصر م ،ال�ش. د ال�مي رج�� (. مرس�..

ان3�ى،م�حمد) ار2012ع�ي� وب�� ع ت�� eب اه�رة : م�طا مان� ، ال�ق ح� رµ – ل�ون�� ش. ة ل�لت� ة ال�غال�من� ي�� رك�ة ال�مصر مة ، ال�ش. ن� الي رج�� ( . ف�.

4. Websites:

Chandler, Daniel ( 2011 ). Semiotics for

Beginners, an online Resource.

http://users.aber.ac.uk/dgc/Documents/

S4B/sem03.html.

A Sociolingual Approach to Literary Translation

Documents

Transcript of A Sociolingual Approach to Literary Translation