Abstracts
Abstract
Translation is an act of communication across dissimilar cultures as well as a dynamic activity in which translators are required to make choices and decisions for the purpose of resolving problems. This paper draws on metaphoric expressions and their translations to recapitulate that the work of translation is not limited to the languages or the texts involved but is a dynamic activity that bridges two diverse cultures. Metaphoric expressions are non-literal, have implied meanings, and are used to emphasize a point or to enhance the expression’s impressibility. Furthermore, metaphoric expressions are affected greatly by the culture to which they belong because they are created through a complex interaction between object, image, and sense. Consequently, in order to properly communicate the true meanings of these metaphoric expressions, translators play the role of an active mediator by either replacing the metaphoric expression found in ST with a different but compatible metaphoric expression or by using non-metaphoric, descriptive expressions or by appending additional explanation. This paper uses Korean translations of metaphoric expressions found in Russian source texts as examples to discuss the socio-cultural differences between the two cultures, how these characteristics are revealed in Russian-Korean translations, and how these issues are overcome. Based on the research results, the paper also emphasizes that understanding the vastly different socio-cultural characteristics of these two cultures is essential to the field of Russian-Korean translation with its relatively short history, to not only improve the quality of translations but also for the field’s continual advancements.
Keywords/Mots-clés:
- metaphoric expression,
- culture,
- literal meaning,
- implicit meaning,
- translator training
Résumé
Cet article a pour but de réfléchir sur les stratégies utilisées par les traducteurs lorsqu’ils traduisent les métaphores, le facteur qui reflète le mieux la différence socioculturelle entre deux pays. Nous nous sommes particulièrement intéressé à la traduction en coréen de textes écrits en russe. Le résultat de notre analyse montre qu’une bonne connaissance de la différence socioculturelle de la Russie et de la Corée est un élément primordial pour assurer la qualité de la traduction et pour surmonter les limites de la traduction coréen-russe, relativement récente en Corée.
초록
번역은 상이한 문화권 사이의 의사소통 활동이자 문제의 해결을 위해 번역사의 선택과 결정을 요구하는 역동적인 활동이다. 본 논문은 번역이 단순히 언어 대 언어, 텍스트 대 텍스트의 관계에 국한되는 것이 아니라 상이한 문화권을 중개하는 역동적인 활동이라는 것을 은유적 표현의 번역을 통해 확인해보고자 한다. 은유적 표현은 비문자적이고 함축적인 의미를 가지며, 말하고자 하는 바를 강조하거나 표현력을 향상시키는 기능을 한다. 그리고, 표현하고자 하는 대상과 이미지, 센스사이의 상호작용을 통해 복합적으로 만들어지기 때문에 해당 문화권의 영향을 많이 받는다. 따라서, 이러한 은유적 표현이 가지는 의미를 제대로 전달하기 위해서 번역사는ST 은유적 표현을 상응하는 의미를 가지는 다른 은유적 표현으로 바꾸어주거나 은유적인 특성을 가지지 않는 기술적인 표현으로 바꾸어주거나 부가적인 설명을 덧붙이는 등의 적극적인 중개노력을 기울이게 된다. 본 논문에서는 러시아어 원문텍스트에 포함되어 있는 은유적 표현이 한국어로 번역된 예들을 통해서 양 문화권 사이에 어떠한 사회-문화적 차이가 있으며, 노-한 번역에서 이러한 특성들이 어떻게 나타나는지, 그리고 어떻게 극복되는지를 살펴보고자 한다. 그리고, 이러한 분석 결과를 토대로 상대적으로 그 역사가 짧은 노-한 번역이 그 번역의 질을 높이고 계속적으로 발전을 하기 위해서는 이러한 상이한 사회-문화적 특성에 대한 이해가 필수적이라는 사실을 강조하고자 한다.
Appendices
References
- Bassnett-Mcguire, S. ([1980] 1991): Translation Studies, London, Routledge.
- Choi, J.W. (2003): “Interpreting Competence and Cultural Differences”, Forum 1-1, p. 97-111.
- Goatly, A. (1997): Language of Metaphors, New York, Routledge.
- Hymes, D. (1964): Language in Culture and Society: A Reader in Linguistics and Anthropology, New York, Harper and Row.
- Kussmaul, P.(1995): Training the Translator, Amsterdam and Philadelphia, John Benjamins.
- (1997): “Text Type Conventions and Translating: Some Methodological Issues”, In A. Trosborg (Ed.), Text Typology and Translation, Amsterdam and Philadelphia, John Benjamins.
- Larson, M.L. (1984): Meaning-based Translation: A Guide to Cross-language Equivalence, Lanham, University Press of America.
- Leppihalme, R. (1997): Culture Bumps – An Empirical Approach to the Translation of Allusions, Clevedon, Multilingual Matters.
- Morgan, J. L. (1993): “Observations on the Pragmatics of Metaphor”, In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought, New York, Cambridge University Press.
- Newmark, P.(1988): A Textbook of Translation, London, Prentice Hall.
- Nida, E. and C. R. Taber (1964): Toward a Science of Translating: With Special Reference to Principles and Procedures Involved in Bible, Leiden, E.J.Brill.
- Nord, C.(1997): Translating as a Purposeful Activity: Functionalist Approaches Explained, Manchester, St. Jerome.
- Park, Y.S. (2000): The Problem of Metaphor in Korean Language, Seoul, Korea University Press.
- Richards, I. A. (1936): The Philosophy of Rhetoric, London, Oxford University Press.
- Snell-Hornby, M.([1988] 1995): Translation Studies: An Integrated Approach, Amsterdam and Philadelphia, John Benjamins.
- Shäffner, C. (1997): Strategies of Translating Political Texts, In A. Trosborg (Ed.), Text Typology and Translation, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins.
- Song, K.S. (2000): Metaphor and Metonymy in Korean and American Political Discourse, Discourse and Cognizance 7-1, p. 35-61.
- Trosborg, A. (1997): Text Typology and Translation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins.