Sei sulla pagina 1di 117

STATEMENTOFAUTHORSHIP

I certify that the present thesis A STUDY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATIONAL VERSIONS OF TRINH CONG SON’S SONGS IN TERMSOFSEMANTICANDSYNTACTICFEATURES”ismyownwork. Thisthesishasnotbeensubmittedfortheawardofanydegreeinany otherinstitution.

DaNang,2011

LươngVănNhân

ABSTRACT

TrinhCongSonhasbeenthecloseandfriendlynametomanypeople. Sometimes, he is the CONFIDANT to share the feelings of sadness and happinessbysinginghismarveloussongswhoselyricsareweavedbybrilliant butsimpleandmeaningfulwordswhichtakealotoftimetounderstandsome

phrasesandsentencesinmorethan500songsofthistalentmusician.Hismusic

issostrange!Sweetfloatingsadness!Itinsinuatesthehumanhearttomakea coolandsparkling lakewithholymelodies.Hasitgotthe“SONISM”when peoplearedrunkwithhisthinking? +“Cuộcđờiđócóbaolâumàhữnghờ.”(Mưahồng) +“Vìsaotôisống?VìĐấtnướccầnmộttráitim.” (Mỗingàytôichọnmộtniềmvui)

Morethan70ofhissongshavebeentranslatedintomanylanguages,such

as:English, French, Japanese, etc.because translators love Son’ssongs very muchandwanttoshareandintroducethosesongstofriendsaroundtheworld. However,accordingtoProfessorBuuY,afamoustranslatorandaclosefriend ofTrinhCongSon,rightbeforetranslatingSon’ssongs,translatorssurrender. Translatingisonlyforthesakeofloveforhismusic.ManyEnglishtranslational versionsofVânMai,TrầnDuyTính,NhưQuỳnh,andKhươngDuy,etc.or someforeigners,suchas:RichardFuller,PatrickGallagher,JohnC.Schaferand Jason Gibbs, etc. try to convey Son’s ideas in his songs. Those English translationalversionsonlyhelpusunderstandthegeneralmeaningbutaretoo difficulttosinglikeVietnameseversions.

TranslatingTrinh Cong Son’ssongsisanattractive trend. Besidethat, therehasnotbeenanycertainresearchonthisprobleminthelightoflinguistics. My research, by standing on the point of view in Translation strategies of

Newmark,BakerandCatfordtostudythesemanticandsyntacticfeaturesof14

songstakenfromTrịnhCôngSơn–Thecollectionofeverlastingsongs.Music

press1997.(TrịnhCôngSơn–Tuyểntậpnhữngbàicakhôngnămtháng.Nxb

Âm Nhạc 1997). The research also puts forward some suggesting English translationalversionstosettheimplicationsafterstudyingthosesongs.

TABLEOFCONTENTS

Page

STATEMENTOFAUTHORSHIP

i

ABSTRACT

ii

TABLEOFCONTENTS

iv

LISTOFABBREVIATIONS

vii

LISTOFTABLES

viii

LISTOFCHARTS

ix

CHAPTER1:INTRODUCTION

1

1.1.RATIONALE

1

1.2.SIGNIFICANCEOFTHESTUDY

3

1.3.SCOPEOFTHESTUDY

3

1.4.RESEARCHQUESTIONS

3

1.5.DEFINITIONSOFTERMS

3

1.6.ORGANIZATIONOFTHESTUDY

4

CHAPTER2:LITERATUREREVIEW&THEORETICAL

 

6

BACKGROUND

2.1.THEORETICALBACKGROUND

6

2.1.1.Whatistranslation?

6

2.1.2.Whatisequivalence?

8

2.1.3.Typesofequivalence

10

2.1.4.Whatisliterarytranslation?

16

2.1.5.Vietnam-Englishtranslation

17

2.2.1.Translationprocedures

19

2.2.2.Translationmethods

25

2.2.3.Translationofsongs

27

2.3.TRINHCONGSON’SBIOGRAPHY

28

2.3.1.WritingsaboutTrinhCongSonandhismusic

29

2.3.2.TranslationsofTrinhCongSon’ssongs

30

CHAPTER3:METHODSANDPROCEDURES

32

3.1.AIMSANDOBJECTIVES

32

3.1.1.Aims

32

3.1.2.Objectives

32

3.2.RESEARCHDESIGN

33

3.3.METHODSOFRESEARCH

33

3.4.DATACOLLECTIONANDDESCRIPTION

34

3.5.RESEARCHPROCEDURES

34

3.6.SUMMARY

35

CHAPTER4:FINDINGSANDDISCUSSION

36

4.1.SEMANTICFEATURES

36

4.1.1.Translationbyusingomission

36

4.1.1.1.Fullomission

36

4.1.1.2.Partialomission

41

4.1.2.Translationbyusingamoreneutral/lessexpressiveword

45

4.1.3.Translationbyusingamoregeneralword

50

4.1.4.Translationbyusingexpansion

53

4.1.5.Translationbyusingco-hyponym

56

4.1.7.Translationbyusingmeronymy

59

4.2.FREQUENCYOFSEMANTICTRANSLATIONSTRATEGIES

59

4.3.SYNTACTICFEATURES

61

4.3.1.Structural-shifts

62

4.3.2.Intra-systemshifts

69

4.3.3.Class-shifts

72

4.4.FREQUENCYOFSYNTACTICTRANSLATIONSTRATEGIES

83

4.5.SUMMARY

84

CHAPTER5:CONCLUSIONS

86

5.1.SUMMARYOFTHEFINDINGS

86

5.2.IMPLICATIONSFORTRANSLATION

88

5.3.LIMITATIONSOFTHESTUDY

91

5.4.SAMPLEOFSUGGESTEDTRANSLATIONS&

SUGGESTIONSFORFURTHERSTUDY

91

5.4.1.Suggestedtranslationsofsongs

91

5.4.2.Suggestionsforfurtherstudy

94

REFERENCES

95

CORPORA

100

QUYẾTĐỊNHGIAOĐỀTÀI

APPENDIX

LISTOFABBREVIATIONS

Adj

Adjective

AP

Adjectivephrase

Adv

Adverb

AdvP

Adverbphrase

Conj

Conjunction

Link

Linking

N

Noun

NP

Nounphrase

Pro

Pronoun

Prep

Preposition

Prep.P

Prepositionalphrase

QW

Questionword

SL

Sourcelanguage

ST

Sourcetext

TL

Targetlanguage

TT

Targettext

V

Verb

VP

Verbphrase

LISTOFTABLES

Table4.1:Thetokensandpercentageofsemanticstrategies

60

Table4.2:Thetokensandpercentageofsyntacticstrategies

83

LISTOFCHARTS

Chart4.1:Thepercentageofsemanticstrategies

61

Chart4.2:Thepercentageofsyntacticstrategies

84

CHAPTER1

INTRODUCTION

1.1.RATIONALE

TrịnhCôngSơn(1939-2001)wasasongwriter,musician,poetandpainter.

HewasborninDaklak,grewupinHuế,studiedinQuiNhơn,taughtschoolin

BảoLộc,andthenfinallymovedtoSaigonin1965.Aheavydrinkerandsmoker,

hediedofdiabetes,liverandkidneyfailure.Hewroteover600songs,achieving

hisfirsthit,"Ướtmi"["WetLashes"],in1957.JoanBaezdubbedhimtheBob

DylanofVietnam.Heoftenwroteabouttheephemeralnatureoflife,asinthe classic"Cátbụi" ["Sand andDust"]. The singermostassociated withhim is KhánhLy,whosehusky,mournfulvoicehelpedtopopularizehismusic.They often performed together on South Vietnamese university campuses. More recently,HồngNhunghasalsobeencelebratedforherjazzyinterpretionsofhis songs.TrinhCongSon’ssongsaresostrange,whichwerewrittenbyintellectual language.Inanotherway,theyare‘weaved’bythemostbeautifulwordsinthe treasureofVietnameselanguage.Ittakesyearstounderstandsomewordsor sentencesinTrinhCongSon’songs,butnotallofuscancatchSon’sideas,and someseemtobesodifferent.Sonhimselfcreatedhisownuniqueschoolof musicwhichisnotonlyverysublimebutalsoverysweetwithsimplemelodies. Therefore,Son’smusicisalsoforpublic,inotherword,itisalsoforallbecause itiseasytoremember. Son’ssongswillbeimmortalinpeople’sheartsnotonlyinVietnambut alsoinmanycountrieslike:France,JapanandAmerica,etc.Peoplelovetosing hissongs.Manyofthosesongshavebeentranslatedintomanylanguages,most

of them are in English, French and Japanese with different versions. For examples:

+BiếtĐâuNguồnCội(Unknownorigin) +LặngLẽNơiNày(Thequietworldofmine/Sosilenthere) +MộtCõiĐiVề(Myownlonelyworld/Arealmofreturn/Aplacefor leavingandreturning) +Cátbụi(Dustysand/SandandDust) +Đờigọiembiếtbaolần(Lifehascalledyoumanytimes) +Emđếntừnghìnxưa(You’vecomealongtime) +Gầnnhưniềmtuyệtvọng(Somethinglikedespair) +Lờibuồnthánh(SadSundayeve) +Tuổiđờimênhmông(Intoolargelife) AsanEnglishteacherandafanofTrinhCongSon’smusic,Ifinditvery interestingtostudytheEnglishtranslationsofSon’ssongswhicharevarious

withmorethan70Englishtranslatedwordsbymanypeople.However,upto

now,justafewresearchesonthelyricsoftheEnglishtranslationalversionshave beenfound. ItisclearthattherearemanydifficultiesfortranslatorstotranslateTrinh CongSon’ssongsintoEnglish.Practically,clarifyingthesyntacticandsemantic features helps us have a clear view about Son’s songs and their English equivalencesandfindoutanotherbetterwaytotranslateTrinhCongSon’ssongs withfullideasofwriterobtained.

Theoretically,morethan70ofhissongsweretranslatedintoEnglish,and

manystudiesinthelyricsandmelodiesofTrinhCongSon’ssongshavedoneso far. However, researches on the syntactic and semantic features of English

versusVietnameseversionsofTrinhhavenotbeencarriedout.Therefore,itis necessarytodoaresearchonthismattertohaveatotalviewabouttranslating Trinh Cong Son’s songs into English. “A STUDY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATIONAL VERSIONS OF TRINH CONG SON’S SONGS IN TERMSOFSEMANTICANDSYNTACTICFEATURES”hasbeencarriedout forthereasonslistedabove.

1.2.SIGNIFICANCEOFTHESTUDY

We hope this study will provide insights into the practice of translating Vietnamese songs into English, especially the strategies in handling the intricaciesofsemanticandsyntacticfeaturesofgreatworkssuchasthosewritten byTrinhCongSon.

1.3.SCOPEOFTHESTUDY

Thisstudydealswithinvestigatingtheproceduresusedintranslatingthe semanticfeaturesoflexiconandthesyntacticfeaturesofphrasesandsentences inTrinhCongSon’ssongstakenfromTrịnhCôngSơn–Thecollectionof

everlastingsongs.Musicpress1997.(TrịnhCôngSơn–Tuyểntậpnhữngbàica

không năm tháng. Nxb Âm Nhạc 1997) and website http://www.tcs- home.org/songs-en/songs.

1.4.RESEARCHQUESTIONS

Thisstudywillseektheanswerstothefollowingquestions:

(1)HowwerethesemanticfeaturesinTrinhCongSon’scollectionofsongs

translatedintoEnglish?

(2)HowwerethesyntacticfeaturesinTrinhCongSon’scollectionofsongs

translatedintoEnglish?

1.5.DEFINITIONSOFTERMS

+“Sourcelanguage”:isthelanguageinwhichatextwasoriginallywritten. +“Targetlanguage”isthelanguageintowhichatextistranslated. + “Semantic approach” is an approach to translation which has three features:

SLbias

Keepssemanticandsyntacticstructuresascloselyaspossible

Author-centered

+“Communicativeapproach”isanapproachwhichhasthreefeatures:

TLbias

Keepseffectascloselyaspossible

Secondreader-centered

1.6.ORGANIZATIONOFTHESTUDY

Thestudywillincludefivechaptersasfollows:

-Chapter1,INTRODUCTION,concernswiththestatementoftheproblem,

justification for the study, scope of the study and research questions. Organizationofthestudyisalsogivenout.

- Chapter 2, LITERATUREREVIEWandBACKGROUNDKNOWLEDGE,

dealswithsomepreviousstudiesrelatedtotheproblemandpresentstheoretical

backgroundof:

+TrinhCongSon’sbiography +TrinhCongSon’smusic +Theoryoftranslation

- Chapter 3, METHODOLOGY, consists of aims and objectives of the

study, research design, research methodology and research procedure. In

addition,datacollection,dataanalysisaswellasthereliabilityandvalidityof thestudywillbementioned.

-Chapter4,FINDINGSANDDISCUSSIONS,thischapterisdividedinto

2parts:

+Section1:ThesemanticfeaturesoflexiconinTrinhCongson’ssongs

whenbeingtranslatedfromVietnameseintoEnglish.

+Section2:ThesyntacticfeaturesofphrasesandsentencesinTrinhCong

Son’ssongswhenbeingtranslatedfromVietnameseintoEnglish. -Chapter 5, CONCLUSION, summarizes what have been discussed in chapter 4 with some comments on the limitations of this study and make suggestionsforfuturestudies.

CHAPTER2

LITERATUREREVIEWANDTHEORETICAL

BACKGROUND

2.1.THEORETICALBACKGROUND

2.1.1.Whatistranslation?

Therearemanydefinitionsoftranslation.Thesimplestwayisthetransfer oftextfromthelanguageAintolanguageB.However,goingthroughthetime, this understanding has begun to become widerand deeper depending on the positionofresearchers.Often,thoughnotbyanymeansalways,itisrendering themeaningofatextintoanotherlanguageinthewaythattheauthorintended thetext.Commonsensetellsusthatthisoughttobesimple,asoneoughttobe abletosaysomethingaswellinonelanguageasinanother.Ontheotherhand,it maybecomplicated,artificialandfraudulent. Translationwasmainlydiscussedintermsoftheconflictbetweenfreeand literaltranslation,andthecontradictionbetweenitsinherentimpossibilityandits absolutenecessity.Atranslatormustbeeitheraninterpreterorarhetorician.A goodtranslationisoneinwhichthemeritoftheoriginalworksissocompletely transfused into another language as to be as distinctly apprehended and as stronglyfeltbyanativeofacountrytowhichthatlanguagebelongsasitisby those who speak the language of original work. Recommending literal translationofsyntaxaswellaswords,itwassaidthatthesentenceisawall blockingoutthelanguageoftheorigin,whilstwordforwordtranslationisthe arcade. Before, people thought that translation is the replacement of a textual materialinonelanguage(sourcelanguage–SL)byequivalenttextualmaterial

in another language (target language – TL). The equivalent here is the grammaticalfactorsbetweentheSLandtheTL.Therefore,atthetimewiththis viewthegrammaticalequivalentbecame oneofthecriteriaforassessing the qualityofatranslation. Later, according to Newmark (1980) [17, p7], “translation is a craft consistingintheattempttoreplaceawrittenmessageand/orstatementinone languagebythesamemessageand/orstatementinanotherlanguage”. So,the textualmaterialnowchangesintothemessage–morecommunicative. Basingonthetranslationtheoryontransformationalgenerativegrammar, thetranslatorsneedto“gobeyond”explicittextstructuresandshouldconsider thetextasamerecomparisonofcorrespondingstructures.Thisleadstoanother importantawarenessthelanguageisreallyagenerativedevice,whichhelpsthe translatorstakeshapeintheirmindthetechniqueforanalyzingthetext.Thisis notonlyatechniqueusedindecodingthesourcetextbutalsotheprocedurefor choosingthesuitablecorrespondingstructuresinthetargetlanguage. Inaddition,translationisatermcoversonthreedistinguishablemeanings. That is “translating”, the process (to translate), the activity rather than the tangibleobject.“Atranslation”istheproductoftheprocessoftranslating(e.g. the translated text), and the “translation”, the abstract concept which

encompassesboththeprocessoftranslatingandtheproductofthatprocess.[1,

p13]

Furthermore,translationisalsoacommunicationbridgeoftwolanguages. Obviously, language is various and different from country to country as the samenesscannotexistbetweentwolanguages.

DanicaSeleskovitch(2009)[7],abrilliantinterpreterandwriter,hassaid:

Everythingsaidinonelanguagecanbeexpressedinanotherone-oncondition that the two languages belong to cultures that have reached a comparable degree of development”. The condition she makes is false and misleading. Translationisaninstrumentofeducationaswellasoftruthpreciselybecauseit hastoreachreaderswhoseculturalandeducationallevelisdifferentfrom,and often “lower” or earlier, than, that of the readers of the origin. Beside that, translation has been instrumental in transmitting culture, sometimes under unequalconditionsresponsiblefordistortedandbiasedtranslations,eversince countriesandlanguageshavebeenincontactwitheachother. Asameansofcommunication,translationisusedformultilingualnotices, whichhaveatleastappearedincreasinglyconspicuouslyinpublicplaces;for instructionsissuedbyexportingcompanies;fortouristpublicity,whereitistoo oftenproducedfromthenativeintothe“foreign”languagebynativesasamatter of national pride; for official documents, such as treaties and contracts; for reports,papers,articles,correspondence,textbooktoconveyinformation,advice and recommendations for every branch of knowledge. As a technique for learning foreign languages, translation is a two-edged instrument: it has the special purpose for demonstrating the learner’s knowledge of the foreign language,eitherasaformofcontrolortoexercisehisintelligenceinorderto develophiscompetence.

2.1.2.Whatisequivalence?

VinayandDarbelnet(1995)[28]viewequivalence-orientedtranslationasa

procedurewhichreplicatesthesame situationasin theoriginal,whilstusing completelydifferentwording.Theyalsosuggestthat,ifthisprocedureisapplied

duringthetranslationprocess,itcanmaintainthestylisticimpactoftheSLtext intheTLtext.Accordingtothem,equivalenceisthereforetheidealmethod when the translator has to deal with proverbs, idioms, clichés, nominal or

adjectival

With regard to equivalent expressions between language pairs, Vinay and Darbelnetclaimthattheyareacceptableaslongastheyarelistedinabilingual dictionary as full equivalents. However, later they note that glossaries and collectionsofidiomaticexpressionscanneverbeexhaustive.Theyconcludeby sayingthattheneedforcreatingequivalencesarisesfromthesituation,anditis inthesituationoftheSLtextthattranslatorshavetolookforasolution.Indeed, theyarguethatevenifthesemanticequivalentofanexpressionintheSLtextis

quotedinadictionaryoraglossary,itisnotenough,anditdoesnotguaranteea successfultranslation.

RomanJakobson's(1959)[12]studyofequivalencegavenewimpetusto

the theoretical analysis of translation since he introduced the notion of 'equivalenceindifference'.Onthebasisofhissemioticapproachtolanguageand

hisaphorism'thereisnosignatumwithoutsignum'[12,p232],hesuggeststhree

kindsoftranslation:

phrases

and

the onomatopoeia

of

animal

sounds.

Intralingual(withinonelanguage,i.e.rewordingorparaphrase)

Interlingual(betweentwolanguages)

Intersemiotic(betweensignsystems) Jakobsonclaimsthat,inthecaseofinterlingualtranslation,thetranslator makesuseofsynonymsinordertogettheSTmessageacross.Thismeansthatin interlingual translations there is no full equivalence between code units. Accordingtohistheory,translationinvolvestwoequivalentmessagesintwo

differentcodes.Jakobsongoesontosaythatfromagrammaticalpointofview languagesmaydifferfromoneanothertoagreaterorlesserdegree,butthisdoes notmeanthatatranslationcannotbepossible,inotherwords,thatthetranslator mayfacetheproblemofnotfindingatranslationequivalent.Heacknowledges thatwheneverthereisdeficiency,terminologymaybequalifiedandamplified byloanwordsorloan-translations,neologismsorsemanticshifts,andfinally,by circumlocutions.JakobsonprovidesanumberofexamplesbycomparingEnglish andRussianlanguagestructuresandexplainsthatinsuchcaseswherethereisno aliteralequivalentforaparticularSTwordorsentence,thenitisuptothe translatortochoosethemostsuitablewaytorenderitintheTT. ThereseemstobesomesimilaritybetweenVinayandDarbelnet'stheoryof translationproceduresandJakobson'stheoryoftranslation.Boththeoriesstress thefactthat,wheneveralinguisticapproachisnolongersuitabletocarryouta translation,thetranslatorcanrelyonotherproceduressuchasloan-translations, neologismsandthelike.Boththeoriesrecognizethelimitationsofalinguistic theory and argue that a translation can never be impossible since there are severalmethodsthatthetranslatorcanchoose.Theroleofthetranslatorasthe person who decides how to carry out the translation is emphasized in both theories.BothVinayandDarbelnetaswellasJakobsonconceivethetranslation taskassomethingwhichcanalwaysbecarriedoutfromonelanguagetoanother, regardlessoftheculturalorgrammaticaldifferencesbetweenSTandTT. Nida argued that there are two different types of equivalence, namelyformalequivalence-whichinthesecondeditionbyNidaandTaber (1969/1982) [20] is referred to as formal correspondence - and dynamic equivalence.Formalcorrespondence'focusesattentiononthemessageitself,in

bothformandcontent',unlikedynamicequivalencewhichisbasedupon'the

principleofequivalenteffect'[20,p159].Inthesecondedition(1982)ortheir

work, the two theorists provide a more detailed explanation ofeach type of equivalence.

2.1.3.Typesofequivalence

FormalcorrespondenceconsistsofaTLitemwhichrepresentstheclosest equivalentofaSLwordorphrase.NidaandTabermakeitclearthatthereare notalwaysformalequivalentsbetweenlanguagepairs.They,therefore,suggest thattheseformalequivalentsshouldbeusedwhereverpossibleifthetranslation aimsatachievingformalratherthandynamicequivalence.Theuseofformal equivalents might at times have serious implications in the TT since the translationwillnotbeeasilyunderstoodbythetargetaudience.NidaandTaber themselvesassertthat,typically,formalcorrespondencedistortsthegrammatical andstylisticpatternsofthereceptorlanguage,andhencedistortsthemessage,so astocausethereceptortomisunderstandortolaborundulyhard. Dynamic equivalence is defined as a translation principle according to whichatranslatorseekstotranslatethemeaningoftheoriginalinsuchaway thattheTLwording willtriggerthesameimpactontheTCaudienceasthe originalwordingdidupontheSTaudience.Theyargue: ‘Frequently,theform oftheoriginaltextischanged;butaslongasthechangefollowstherulesof back transformation in the source language, of contextual consistency in the transfer,andoftransformationinthereceptorlanguage,themessageispreserved

andthetranslationisfaithful'[20,p200].

One can easily see that Nida is in favor of the application of dynamic equivalence, as a more effective translation procedure. This is perfectly

understandableifwetakeintoaccountthecontextofthesituationinwhichNida wasdealingwiththetranslationphenomenon,thatistosay,histranslationofthe Bible.Thus,theproductofthetranslationprocess,thatisthetextintheTL,must havethesameimpactonthedifferentreadersitwasaddressing.OnlyinNida andTaber'seditionisitclearlystatedthatdynamicequivalenceintranslationis farmorethanmerecorrectcommunicationofinformation. Despite using a linguistic approach to translation, Nida is much more interestedinthemessageofthetextor,inotherwords,initssemanticquality. Hethereforestrivestomakesurethatthismessageremainsclearinthetarget text.

Catford's(1965)[5]approachtotranslationequivalenceclearlydiffersfrom

thatadoptedbyNidasinceCatfordhadapreferenceforamorelinguistic-based approachtotranslationandthisapproachisbasedonthelinguisticworkofFirth and Halliday. His main contribution in the field of translation theory is the introductionoftheconceptsoftypesandshiftsoftranslation.Catfordproposed verybroadtypesoftranslationintermsofthreecriteria:

Theextentoftranslation(fulltranslationvs.partialtranslation); Thegrammaticalrankatwhichthetranslationequivalenceisestablished (rank-boundtranslationvs.unboundedtranslation);

(total

translationvs.restrictedtranslation). Inrank-boundtranslationanequivalentissoughtintheTLforeachword, or for each morpheme encountered in the ST. In unbounded translation equivalences are not tied to a particular rank, and we may additionallyfindequivalencesatsentence,clauseandotherlevels.Catfordfinds

The

levels

of

language involved

in translation

fiveoftheseranksorlevelsinbothEnglishandFrench,whileintheCaucasian languageKabardianthereareapparentlyonlyfour. Thus,aformalcorrespondencecouldbesaidtoexistbetweenEnglishand Frenchifrelationsbetweenrankshaveapproximatelythesameconfigurationin bothlanguages,asCatfordclaimstheydo. Oneoftheproblemswithformalcorrespondenceisthat,despitebeinga usefultooltoemployincomparativelinguistics,itseemsthatitisnotreally relevantintermsofassessingtranslationequivalencebetweenSTandTT.For thisreasonwenowturntoCatford'sotherdimensionofcorrespondence,namely textualequivalencewhichoccurswhenanyTLtextorportionoftextisobserved onaparticularoccasiontobetheequivalentofagivenSLtextorportionoftext. He implements this by a process of commutation, whereby 'a competent bilingual informant or translator' is consulted on the translation of various sentenceswhoseSTitemsarechangedinordertoobservewhatchangesifany occurintheTLtextasaconsequence.

House(1977)[9]isinfavourofsemanticandpragmaticequivalenceand

arguesthatSTandTTshouldmatchoneanotherinfunction.Housesuggeststhat

itispossibletocharacterizethefunctionofatextbydeterminingthesituational

dimensionsoftheST.Infact,accordingtohertheory,everytextisinitselfis

placedwithinaparticularsituationwhichhastobecorrectlyidentifiedandtaken

intoaccountbythetranslator.AftertheSTanalysis,Houseisinapositionto

evaluateatranslation;iftheSTandtheTTdiffersubstantiallyonsituational

features,thentheyarenotfunctionallyequivalent,andthetranslationisnotofa

highquality.Infact,sheacknowledgesthatatranslationtextshouldnotonly

matchitssourcetextinfunction,butemployequivalentsituational-dimensional meanstoachievethatfunction. CentraltoHouse'sdiscussionistheconceptofovertandcoverttranslations. InanoverttranslationtheTTaudienceisnotdirectlyaddressedandthereis thereforenoneedatalltoattempttorecreateasecondoriginalsinceanovert translationmustovertlybeatranslation.Bycoverttranslation,ontheotherhand, ismeanttheproductionofatextwhichisfunctionally equivalenttotheST. House also argues that in this type of translation the ST is not specifically addressedtoaTCaudience. House'stheoryofequivalenceintranslationseemstobemuchmoreflexible thanCatford's.Infact,shegivesauthenticexamples,usescompletetextsand, moreimportantly,sherelateslinguisticfeaturestothecontextofbothsourceand targettext. New adjectives have been assigned to the notion of equivalence (grammatical,textual,pragmaticequivalence,andseveralothers)andmadetheir appearanceintheplethoraofrecentworksinthisfield.Anextremelyinteresting

discussionofthenotionofequivalencecanbefoundinBaker(1992)[2]who

seems to offer a more detailed listof conditions upon which the concept of equivalencecanbedefined.Sheexploresthenotionofequivalenceatdifferent levels,inrelation tothetranslation process,including alldifferentaspectsof translation and hence putting together the linguistic and the communicative approach.Shedistinguishesbetween:

Equivalencethatcanappearatwordlevelandabovewordlevel,when translating from one language into another. Baker acknowledges that, in a bottom-upapproachtotranslation,equivalenceatwordlevelisthefirstelement

tobetakenintoconsiderationbythetranslator.Infact,whenthetranslatorstarts analyzingtheSTs/helooksatthewordsassingleunitsinordertofindadirect 'equivalent'termintheTL.Bakergivesadefinitionofthetermwordsinceit shouldberememberedthatasinglewordcansometimesbeassigneddifferent meaningsindifferentlanguagesandmightberegardedasbeingamorecomplex unit or morpheme. This means that the translator should pay attention to a numberoffactorswhenconsideringasingleword,suchasnumber,genderand tense.

Grammaticalequivalence,whenreferringtothediversityofgrammatical categoriesacrosslanguages.Shenotesthatgrammaticalrulesmayvaryacross languages and this may pose some problems in terms of finding a direct correspondence in the TL. In fact, she claims that different grammatical structures in the SL and TL may cause remarkable changes in the way the information or message is carried across. These changes may induce the translatoreithertoaddortoomitinformationintheTTbecauseofthelackof particular grammatical devices in the TL itself. Amongst these grammatical deviceswhichmightcauseproblemsintranslationBakerfocusesonnumber, tenseandaspects,voice,personandgender.

Textualequivalence,whenreferringtotheequivalencebetweenaSLtext andaTLtextintermsofinformationandcohesion.Textureisaveryimportant featureintranslationsinceitprovidesusefulguidelinesforthecomprehension andanalysisoftheSTwhichcanhelpthetranslatorinhisorherattemptto produceacohesiveandcoherenttextfortheTCaudienceinaspecificcontext.It isuptothetranslatortodecidewhetherornottomaintainthecohesivetiesas wellasthecoherenceoftheSLtext.Hisorherdecisionwillbeguidedbythree

mainfactors,thatis,thetargetaudience,thepurposeofthetranslationandthe texttype. Pragmaticequivalence,whenreferring to implicaturesand strategiesof avoidance during the translation process. Implicature is not about what is explicitlysaidbutwhatisimplied.Therefore,thetranslatorneedstoworkout impliedmeaningsintranslationinordertogettheSTmessageacross.Therole ofthetranslatoristorecreatetheauthor'sintentioninanothercultureinsucha waythatenablestheTCreadertounderstanditclearly. Popovic (1970) [22], in his definition of translation equivalence, distinguishesfourtypes:

- Linguisticequivalence:wherethereishomogeneityonthelinguisticlevel ofbothSLandTLtexts,i.e.wordforwordtranslation. -Paradigmaticequivalence:wherethereisequivalenceof“theelementsof aparadigmaticexpressiveaxis”,i.e.elementofgrammar,whichPopovicseesas beingahighercategorythanlexicalequivalence.

- Stylistic (translational) equivalence: where there is “functional

equivalenceofelementsinbothoriginalandtranslationaimingatanexpressive

identitywithaninvariantofidenticalmeaning.

- Textual (syntagmatic) equivalence: where there id equivalence of the

syntagmaticstructuringofatext,i.e.equivalenceofformandshape.

2.1.4.Whatisliterarytranslation?

According to Professor Rainer Schulte (1980) [24], literary translation bridgesthedelicateemotionalconnectionsbetweenculturesandlanguagesand furtherstheunderstandingofhumanbeingsacrossnationalborders.Intheactof literary translation the soul of another culture becomes transparent, and the

translatorrecreatestherefinedsensibilitiesofforeigncountriesandtheirpeople through the linguistic, musical, rhythmic, and visual possibilities of the new language. Aliterarytranslationisthetranslationofliteraturesuchasnovels,playsand poems. The translation of literary works is considered by many one of the highestformsoftranslationasitinvolvessomuchmorethansimplytranslating text.Aliterarytranslatormustbecapableofalsotranslatingfeelings,cultural nuances,humourandothersubtleelementsofapieceofwork. A rather interesting approach to literary translation comes from Michel

Riffaterre(1992)[25,p204-217].Heseparatesliteraryandnon-literaryuseof

language by saying that literature is differentbecausei) it semioticicizesthe discursivefeaturese.g.lexicalselectionismademorphophonemicallyaswellas semantically,ii)itsubstitutessemiosisformimesiswhichgivesliterarylanguage itsindirection,andiii)ithas“thetextuality”thatintegratessemanticcomponents

oftheverbalsequence(theonesopentolineardecoding)-atheoreticallyopen-

endedsequence-intooneclosed,finitesemiotic,system"thatis,thepartsofa literarytextsarevitallylinkedtothewholeofthetextandthetextismoreorless self contained. Hence the literary translation should "reflect or imitate these differences".Heconsidersaliterarytextasanartifactanditcontainsthesignals,

which mark it as an artifact. Translation should also imitate or reflect these markers. Thetraditionaldiscussionoftheproblemsofliterarytranslationconsiders findingequivalentsnotjustforlexis,syntaxorconcepts,butalsoforfeatures likestyle,genre,figurativelanguage,historicalstylisticdimensions,polyvalence, connotationsaswellasdenotations,culturalitemsandculture-specificconcepts

andvalues.The choicesmadebythetranslatorslikethedecisionwhetherto retain stylistic features of the source language text or whether to retain the historicalstylisticdimensionoftheoriginalbecomeallthemoreimportantinthe caseofliterarytranslation.Forinstance,whethertotranslateChaucerintoold Marathiorcontemporaryisveryimportant.Inthecaseoftranslatingpoetry,itis vitalforatranslatortodecidewhethertheverseshouldbetranslatedintoverse, orintofreeverseorintoprose.

2.1.5.Vietnamese–Englishtranslation

Translationhassofarbeenaninterestingtopicforstudyallovertheworld. Infact,translationwiththeproblemsintranslatinghasbeendealtwithbymany famous linguists in both English and Vietnamese. The study of translation originatedinRoma,anditsdutyistotranslatetheworksofliteraturesatthat time. It was also mentioned the role of context, grammar and pragmatics in translation.Generally,hisworkmainlystudiedthetranslationontheaspectsof theory. In Vietnam, there has been a growing concern about the quality of Vietnamese–English translations. Some have been called by prestigious translatorsas“disastersofthetranslationart”.Indeed,thepracticeoftranslation isnotonlyacraft,butalsoascienceandanart,whichneedstobeconstantly improvedwithaviewtobringingtheVietnamesemassculturetonewheights. Particularly,Englishisthelanguageofbillionsofdocumentsavailableinall fields,academicorpopular.Therefore,itishardlysurprisingthatmanyscholars andlecturersteachingtranslationatuniversitieshavesparednoeffortstowork onthefrequentlyseentypesofmistakesinEnglish–Vietnamesetranslationas wellastechniquestranslatorsmayemploytoavoidthem.However,thefieldof

studyin Vietnam began comparatively recently and thenumberofpublished worksremainsmodest.Whilesomeresearcheshavefocusedonthebasictheory oftranslation,otherworkhassoughttoshowdifferentexamplesoftranslation techniquesorprovidesampletranslations. Much of the work published for internal circulation in universities emphasizes the former aspect, which is the theoretical basis of translation. Prominent publications of this type (in Vietnam) include Interpreting and

TranslationCourseBook(BùiTiếnBảo&ĐặngXuânThu,1999)[3],Theoryof

Translation (Huỳnh Trung Tín & Nguyễn NgọcTuyền, n.d.)[10] and some scattered academic essays found on the Internet. Differentfrom international booksonthetheoryoftranslation,thesepublicationsarecloselyrelatedtothe English–Vietnamesetranslation.Writtenbyexperiencedtranslatorswhohave spent years practicing translation as a profession and working with students learning translation skills, the books concentrate on addressing the main theoreticalissuesencounteredbytranslationlearnersinVietnam.Thiscanbea solidbasistostartanyfurtherresearchonthepracticeoftranslationinVietnam. Forinstance,inInterpretingandTranslationTheory,theauthorshavementioned thebasicprocessoftranslationwiththefour-levelapproach. AnothertrendofcopingwithtranslationissuesinVietnamistofigureout what are the weaknesses lingering in translation work and suggest specific techniquestohelptranslatorsavoidrepeatingfrequently mademistakes.This kindofapproachcanbeseeninHướngdẫnkĩthuậtdịchAnh–Việt(English–

VietnameseTranslationTechniques)(2005)byNguyễnQuốcHùng[19]andLê

VănSự’sTranslationandGrammar(2003)[15].Bothbooksarepracticaland

usefulforreadersastranslationlearnersiftheyaretodeveloptheirtranslation

skillsandabilitytodealwiththornysituations.Theauthorsbasetheirarguments onverifiedstudiesbywell-knownscholarsovertheworldandtheirscopeof studyisbroad.

2.2.TRANSLATIONPROCEDURESANDMETHODS

2.2.1.Translationprocedures

Thetranslatingprocedures,asdepictedbyNidaandTaber(1969/1982)are

asfollows:

I.Technicalprocedures:

analysisofthesourceandtargetlanguages;

athoroughstudyofthesourcelanguagetextbeforemakingattempts

translateit;

Makingjudgmentsofthesemanticandsyntacticapproximations.

II.Organizationalprocedures:

Constantreevaluationoftheattemptmade;contrastingitwiththeexisting availabletranslationsofthesametextdonebyothertranslators,andcheckingthe text's communicative effectiveness by asking the target language readers to evaluateitsaccuracyandeffectivenessandstudyingtheirreactions.

Krings(1986:18)[13]definestranslationstrategyas"translator'spotentially

consciousplansforsolvingconcretetranslationproblemsintheframeworkofa

concretetranslationtask,"andSeguinot(1989)[26]believesthatthereareat

leastthreeglobalstrategiesemployedbythetranslators:(i)translatingwithout

interruptionforaslongaspossible;(ii)correctingsurfaceerrorsimmediately;

(iii)leavingthemonitoringforqualitativeorstylisticerrorsinthetexttothe

revisionstage.

Moreover, Loescher (1991) [14, p8] defines translation strategy as "a potentiallyconsciousprocedureforsolvingaproblemfacedintranslatingatext, or any segment of it." As it is stated in this definition, the notion of consciousnessissignificantindistinguishingstrategieswhichareusedbythe learners or translators. In this regard, Cohen (1998) [6, p4] asserts that "the elementofconsciousnessiswhatdistinguishesstrategiesfromtheseprocesses thatarenotstrategic." Furthermore, Bell (1998) [1, p188] differentiates between global (those dealingwithwholetexts)andlocal(thosedealingwithtextsegments)strategies and confirms that this distinction results from various kinds of translation problems.

Venuti(1998)[27,p240]indicatesthattranslationstrategies"involvethe

basictasksofchoosingtheforeigntexttobetranslatedanddevelopingamethod totranslateit."Heemploystheconceptsofdomesticatingandforeignizingto refertotranslationstrategies. Jaaskelainen (1999) [11, p71] considers strategy as, "a series of competencies, a set of steps or processes that favor the acquisition, storage, and/orutilizationofinformation."Hemaintainsthatstrategiesare"heuristicand flexible in nature, and their adoption implies a decision influenced by amendmentsinthetranslator'sobjectives." Taking into account the process and product of translation, Jaaskelainen divides strategies into two major categories: some strategies relate to what happenstotexts,whileotherstrategiesrelatetowhathappensintheprocess. Product-relatedstrategies,asJaaskelainenwrites,involvethebasictasksof choosing the SL text and developing a method to translate it. However, she

maintainsthatprocess-relatedstrategies"areasetof(looselyformulated)rules or principles which a translator uses to reach the goals determined by the translatingsituation".Moreover,Jaaskelainendividesthisintotwotypes,namely global strategies and local strategies: "global strategies refer to general principlesandmodesofactionandlocalstrategiesrefertospecificactivitiesin relationtothetranslator'sproblem-solvinganddecision-making." ThefollowingarethedifferenttranslationproceduresthatNewmark,oneof

themostpopulartranslationscholars,(1988)[18]proposed:

-Transference:itistheprocessoftransferringanSLwordtoaTLtext.It

includestransliterationandisthesameaswhatHarvey(2005)[8,p5]named

“transcription”. -Naturalization: itadaptstheSLwordfirsttothenormalpronunciation, thentothenormalmorphologyoftheTL. -Culturalequivalent: itmeansreplacingaculturalwordintheSLwithTL one.However,“theyarenotaccurate.” -Functionalequivalent:itrequirestheuseofacultural-neutralword. -Descriptive equivalent: in this procedure, the meaning of the cultural- basedtranslation(CBT)isexplainedinseveralwords. -Componentialanalysis:itmeans“comparinganSLwordwithaTLword whichhasasimilarmeaningbutisnotanobviousone-to-oneequivalent,by demonstratingfirsttheircommonandthentheirdifferingsensecomponents.” -Synonym:itisa“nearTLequivalent”.Hereeconomytrumpsaccuracy. -Through-translation:itistheliteraltranslationofcommoncollocations, namesoforganizationsandcomponentsofcompounds.Itcanbecalled:claque orloantranslation.

-Shiftsortranspositions:Transposition,orshiftasCatfordcallsit,reflects thegrammaticalchangethatoccursintranslationfromSLtoTL.Accordingto Newmark,itinvolvesachangeinthegrammarformSLtoTL,forinstance,(i) change from singular to plural, (ii) the change required when a specific SL structuredoesnotexistintheTL,(iii)changeofanSLverbtoaTLword,(iv) changeofanSLnoungrouptoaTLnounandsoforth. -Modulation:WithNewmark,itoccurswhenthetranslatorreproducesthe messageoftheoriginaltextintheSLtextinconformitywiththecurrentnorms oftheTL,sincetheSLandtheTLmayappeardissimilarintermsofperspective. -Recognizedtranslation:itoccurswhenthetranslator“normallyusesthe officialorthegenerallyacceptedtranslationofanyinstitutionalterm.” -Compensation:itoccurswhenlossofmeaninginonepartofasentenceis compensatedinanotherpart. -Paraphrase:intheprocedure,themeaningoftheCBTisexplained.Here theexplanationismuchmoredetailedthanthatofdescriptiveequivalent. -Couplets:itoccurswhenthetranslatorcombinestwodifferentprocedures. Anotherpopulartranslationscholarwhoseworkontranslationpracticeis

widelyadoptedisMonaBaker(1992)[16],pointedout8strategiesfordealing

withnon-equivalenceatwordlevel. -Translationbyamoregeneralword(superordinate):thisisoneofthe commonest strategies for dealing with many types of non-equivalence, particularlyintheareaofpropositionalmeaning.Itworksequallywellinmost, ifnotall,languages,sincethehierarchicalstructureofsemanticfieldsisnot language-specific.

-Translationbyamoreneutral/lessexpressiveword:thisisalsooneof thecommonestwaystosettheequivalencebetweentwoormorelanguagesby usingawordorphrasetogetthegeneralmeaning. -Translationbyculturalsubstitution:Thisstrategyinvolvesreplacinga culture-specificitemorexpressionwithatarget-languageitemwhichdoesnot havethesamepropositionalmeaningbutislikelytohaveasimilarimpactonthe targetreader. -Translationbyusingaloanwordorloanwordplusexplanation:this strategyisparticularlycommonindealingwithculture-specificitems,modern concepts,andbuzzwords.Followingtheloanwordwithanexplanationisvery useful when the word in questions repeated several times in the text. Once explainedtheloanwordthencanbeusedonitsown;thereadercanunderstandit anditisnotdistractedbyfurtherlengthyexplanation. -Translationbyparaphraseusingarelatedword:thisstrategytendstobe usedwhentheconceptexpressedbythesourceitemislexicalizedinthetarget languagebutinadifferentform,andwhenthefrequencywithwhichacertain formisusedinthesourcetextissignificantlyhigherthanwouldbenaturalinthe targetlanguage. -Translation by paraphrase using unrelated word: if the concept expressedbythesourceitemisnotlexicalizedatallinthetargetlanguage,the paraphrasestrategycanstillbeusedinsomecontexts.Insteadofarelatedword, the paraphrased may be based on modifying the superordinate or simply on unpackingthemeaningofthesourceitem,particularlyiftheiteminquestion semanticallycomplex.

-Translationbyomission:thisstrategymaysoundratherdrastic,butin factitdoesnoharmtoomittranslatingawordorexpressioninsomecontexts.If themeaningconveybyaparticularitemorexpressionisnotvitalenoughtothe development of the text to justify distracting the reader with lengthy explanations,translatorscanandoftendosimplyomittranslatingthewordor expressioninquestion. -Translatebyillustration:thisisausefuloptionifthewordwhichlacksan equivalent in the target language refers to a physical entity which can be illustrated,particularlyiftherearerestrictionsonspaceandifthetexthasto remainshort,concise,andtothepoint.

Atthesyntacticlevel,Catford(1965)[5],anotherwell-knowntranslation

studiesscholarsuggestsexamining“shifts”,hedefinesthemasdeparturesfrom

formalcorrespondenceintheprocessofgoingfromtheSLtotheTL.Catford

arguesthattherearetwomaintypesoftranslationshifts,namelylevelshifts,

wheretheSLitematonelinguisticlevel(e.g.grammar)hasaTLequivalentata

differentlevel(e.g.lexis),andcategoryshiftswhicharedividedintofourtypes:

Structure-shifts, which involve a grammatical change between the

structureoftheSTandthatoftheTT;

Class-shifts, when a SL item is translated with a TL item which

belongstoadifferentgrammaticalclass,i.e.averbmaybetranslatedwitha

noun;

Unit-shifts,whichinvolvechangesinrank;

Intra-system shifts, which occur when SL and TL possess systems

which approximately correspond formally as to their constitution, but when

translationinvolvesselectionofanon-correspondingtermintheTLsystem.For instance,whentheSLsingularbecomesaTLplural. Catford wasvery much criticized forhis linguistic theory oftranslation.

OneofthemostscathingcriticismscamefromSnell-Hornby(1988),whoargued

thatCatford'sdefinitionoftextualequivalenceiscircular,histheory'srelianceon bilingualinformantshopelesslyinadequate,andhisexamplesentencesisolated and even absurdly simplistic. She considers the concept of equivalence in translationasbeinganillusion.Sheassertsthatthetranslationprocesscannot simplybereducedtoalinguisticexercise,asclaimedbyCatfordforinstance, sincetherearealsootherfactors,suchastextual,culturalandsituationalaspects, whichshouldbetakenintoconsiderationwhentranslating.Inotherwords,she doesnotbelievethatlinguisticsistheonlydisciplinewhichenablespeopleto carryoutatranslation,sincetranslatinginvolvesdifferentculturesanddifferent situationsatthesametimeandtheydonotalwaysmatchfromonelanguageto another.

2.2.2.Translationmethods

Newmark (1988b) [18, p81]mentions the difference between translation methodsandtranslationprocedures.Hewritesthat,“Whiletranslationmethods relate to whole text, translation procedures are used for sentences and the smallerunitsoflanguage.”.Hereferstothefollowingmethodsoftranslation:

-Word-for-wordtranslation:inwhichtheSLwordorderispreservedand thewordstranslatedsinglybytheirmostcommonmeanings,outofcontext. -Literal translation: in which the SL grammatical constructions are convertedtotheirnearestequivalents,butthelexicalwordsareagaintranslated singly,outofcontext.

-Faithful translation: it attempts to produce the precise contextual meaningoftheoriginalwithintheconstraintsoftheTLgrammaticalstructures. -Semantictranslation:whichdiffersfrom“faithfultranslation”onlyinas farasitmusttakemoreaccountoftheaestheticvalueoftheSLtext. -Adaptation:whichisthefreestformoftranslation,andisusedmainlyfor plays(comedies)andpoetry;thethemes,characters,plotsareusuallypreserved, theSLcultureisconvertedtotheTLcultureandthetextisrewritten. -Free translation: it produces the TL text without the style, form, or contentoftheoriginal. -Idiomatic translation: it reproduces the “message” of the original but tends to distort nuances of meaning by preferring colloquialism and idioms wherethesedonotexistintheoriginal. -Communicative translation: it attempts to render the exact contextual meaningoftheoriginalinsuchawaythatbothcontentandlanguagearereadily acceptableandcomprehensibletothereadership. Theterms“strategy”and“procedure”havenotbeendistinguishedclearly byanytranslationscholars.Inthisresearch,westandonthepointofviewof

JohnKearns(2009)inRoutledgeEncyclopediaorTranslationstudies,editedby

MonaBakerandGabrielaSaldanha.Hestatedthatthosetwotermscanbeused interchangeablytodescribethewaysoftranslatingunitssmallerthantext.From thispointonwards,inthisstudy,weusetheterm“strategy”.

2.2.3.Translationsofsongs

AccordingtoPeterLow(2006)[21],inartsongs,thesourcetextsoften

haveintrinsiccomplexityandliteraryvalueaspoetry,andthewordsgenerally

receivegreaterrespectthaninothertypesofsong.Forthosesongsthatmost

depend for their effect on verbal comprehension, good translations are particularly important. With a sung text,rhymes usually observe the syllable countoftheoriginal.Thisisatranslationdesignedtofitthemusicandtobe performedwithit.Besides,atranslationhasgivenprioritytomatchingthemusic, it will be too inaccurate structurally and semantically to help the singer in untanglingthesourcetext.Healsopointedthataline-by-lineapproachisunduly restrictive:itmeansthatsomeofthenormaltoolsofcompetenttranslators--tools such as transposition, modulation, paraphrase, compensation in place--are renderedunavailable,totallyorpartially.Inthecaseofsongtexts,thetypical readeroftranslationsisoftenamusicloverratherthanapoetrybuff,andmaybe illequippedforteasingmeaningoutofanopaquetext.Thereforeconsiderations of purpose should affect the translators' handling of cultural and contextual details.Withasingabletranslation,makingsingabletranslationsisadifficult task.One issubjectto huge,multipleconstraintsimposed by thepreexisting music,becauseonecannotignoretherhythms,thenotevalues,thephrasingsor the stresses of the music--even phrasings and pitch levels may have to be consideredandtoreducethenumberofshortvowelsoundsandtheclusteringof consonants.Ideally,thenewversionmustsoundasifthemusichadbeenfitted toit,eventhoughitwasactuallycomposedtofittheoriginal.Itisnotsurprising, then,thatmanyoftheseversionsaretoobadlydonetobeusable,manyareso marredbyforcedrhymesandunnaturallanguagethatperformerssimplycannot singthemwithconviction.Theargumentinfavorofsingabletranslationspoints outthatmostsongswereintendedtocommunicateverballyaswellasmusically. Thedevisingofthiskindofsingabletextpresentsthetranslatorwithfascinating

challenges.Thetranslatorisjudgedonfiveevents:singability,sense,naturalness, rhythm,andrhyme. Thesongtranslatorcannotandneednotgivepreciseequivalentsforevery detailoftheoriginaltext;hemustandcantranslatewhatisessentialtothemusic. Itisverystrictlyconfinedinregardtorhythmanddeclamation:hemustfitthe musicexactly.Butheneednotandindeed,ifhewishestopreservetherhyme schemeand,atthesametime,useidiomatic,understandableEnglish,hecannot paralleltheprecisemeaningofeveryline.Hemayignoredetailswhicharenot reflectedinthemusicandhencehavenoeffectinthesong.Thusheisatonce morerestrictedandfreerthanthetranslatorofpoetryassuch.

2.3.TRINHCONGSON’SBIOGRAPHY

TrịnhCôngSơn(1939-2001)wasasongwriter,musician,poetandpainter.

HewasborninDaklak,grewupinHuế,studiedinQuiNhơn,taughtschoolin

BảoLộc,thenfinallymovedtoSaigonin1965.Aheavydrinkerandsmoker,he

diedofdiabetes,liverandkidneyfailure.Hewroteover600songs,achievinghis

firsthit,"Ướtmi" ["WetLashes"], in 1957. JoanBaezdubbed him the Bob DylanofVietnam.Heoftenwroteabouttheephemeralnatureoflife,asinthe classic"Cátbụi" ["Sand andDust"]. The singermostassociated withhim is KhánhLy,whosehusky,mournfulvoicehelpedtopopularizehismusic.They often performed together on South Vietnamese university campuses. More recently,HồngNhunghasalsobeencelebratedforherjazzyinterpretionsofhis songs.TrinhCongSon’ssongsaresostrange,whichwerewrittenbyintellectual language.Inanotherway,theyare‘weaved’bythemostbeautifulwordsinthe treasureofVietnameselanguage.Ittakesyearstounderstandsomewordsor sentencesinTrinhCongSon’songs,butnotallofuscancatchSon’sideas,and

someseemtobesodifferent.Sonhimselfcreatedhisownuniqueschoolof musicwhichisnotonlyverysublimebutalsoverysweetwithsimplemelodies. Therefore,Son’smusicisalsoforpublic,inotherword,itisalsoforallbecause itiseasytoremember.

2.3.1.WritingsaboutTrinhCongSonandhismusic

TrinhCongSon’smusichasbeenthesubjectofmanystudiesfromnormal people who write because of love saving for Son to linguists to clarify and discoverhisschoolofmusic,hiswaysofusinglanguageandmelodiesandhis thoughtsinthelyrics,notonlyinVietnambutalsoinmanyothercountries,such asAmerica,Japan,France,etc.YoshiiMichiko,aJapaneselady,studiedTrinh CongSonmusicbydoingherMasterdegreeinFrenchatParisUniversityin

1991onthetopicChansonsanti-guerredeTrinhCongSon[62].Besidethat,

Nguyễn ThịThanh Thúy, who is now the lecturer ofQuy Nhon University,

wroteaboutTrinhCongSoninherMasterthesisin2006withthetopic“Thân

phậnConngườivàTìnhyêutrongcatừTrịnhCôngSơn”[44].TrinhCongSon’

musicseems to betheunlimited treasure todo research.NguyễnThịThanh Huyền studied the hyponym syntax on Son’s lyrics in her Masterdegree of

LiteratureScience,inHoChiMinhcity2009bythetopic“Môhìnhẩndụcấu

trúctrêncứliệucatừTrịnhCôngSơn”[46].NearlyamonthafterTrinhCong

Son’sdeath,manywritings,andbooksabouthimwerepublished.TrịnhCông Sơn–Mộtngườithơca,mộtcõiđivềbyNguyễnTrọngTạo,NguyễnThuỵKha, ĐoànTửHuyếncollectandcompile(Musicpublisher–Centerofcultureand

languageEastWest,HàNội,5–2001)[47].Someyearslater(2004)thisbook

withsomeaddedinformationwasrepublishedwithanewnameMộtcõiTrịnh

CôngSơn(ThuậnHoáPublisher-CenterofcultureandlanguageEastWest).

Besides,inthisperiod,therehadotherbooks,suchas:TrịnhCôngSơn-Cátbụi

lộnglẫy(ThuậnHoápublisher-HươngRivermagazine)[53];TrịnhCôngSơn-

Ngườihátrongquanhiềuthếhệ(Youthpublisher,7–2001)[43];TrịnhCông

Sơn-CuộcĐời-ÂmNhạc-Thơ-HộiHọa&SuyTưởng(ArtpublisherTP.

HCM,11-2001)[58];TrịnhCôngSơn:mộtnhạcsĩthiêntài(BửuÝ–Youth

publisher4-2003)[31];TrịnhCôngSơn-Cómộtthờinhưthế(NguyễnĐắc

Xuân–Literaturepublisher,1-2003)[40];TrịnhCôngSơnvàcâyđànlyacủa

Hoàngtửbé(HoàngPhủNgọcTường–Youthpublisher,2/2005)[36].In2008,

BùiVĩnhPhúc–aliteraturecritic-wroteaboutTrinhCongSoninhisbook-

TrịnhCôngSơn–Ngônngữvànhữngámảnhnghệthuật(SaiGonCulture

publisher,2008)[30].

2.3.2.TranslationsofTrinhCongSon’ssongs

TherearesomeVietnameseandforeigners,bytheirlove,translatedTrinh

CongSon’ssongsintoEnglish.TranDuyTinhhas11songs,suchas:Bàica

dànhchonhữngxácngười-Asongdedicatedtoallthecorpses;Chomộtngười

nằmxuống-Toonewholaysdown;Cuốicùngchomộttìnhyêu-Theendofa

love;Đạibácruđêm-Cannonfirelullsthenight,etc.Besidethat,TonThat QuynhDualsohasConmắtcònlại-Theremainingeye;Emđitrongchiều-In theEveningYouWalk;Phôipha-PassageofTime,etc.VânMai,oneofthefew femalestranslatingTrinhCongSon’ssongs,contributedasignificantnumber

with12songs,forexamples:Ướtmi-Mistyeyes;Tôiơiđừngtuyệtvọng-Dear

I,don’tdespair;Thươngmộtngười-Lovingsomebody;Ruđờiđinhé-Lullaby

tolife,etc.RichardFuller,anEnglishlanguageteacherinSaiGonnow,usedto

beonTVshowabouthistranslationsofSon’ssongs,hassomegoodEnglish

versionsbytheviewofaforeigner,suchas:Nốivòngtaylớn-TheGreatCircle ofVietNam;Cadaomẹ-Amother'slament;NgườicongáiViệtNam-Girl with yellow skin, etc. Patrick Gallagher, a true fan of Son’s music, tried to introduceSon’ssongstohispeopleinAmericabytranslatingsomesongs,for

instance:Háttrênnhữngxácngười-NowIsingthedead;Hoavàngmấyđộ-

Brightyellowflower;Mưahồng-Lifetoolongforsadness,etc.AlltheEnglish translationalversionsofVanMai,TranDuyTinh,NhuQuynhandKhuongDuy, etcorRichardFuller,PatrickGallagher,JohnC.SchaferandJasonGibbs,etc

(viewwebsite:http://www.tcs-home.org/songs-en/songs)[64]playanimportant

roleinbuildingupthecollectionofEnglishtranslationalofTrinhCongSon’s

songs.

CHAPTER3

METHODSANDPROCEDURE

3.1.AIMSANDOBJECTIVES

3.1.1.Aims

Startingfromtheframeworkbasedonthesemanticfeaturesoflexiconand syntacticfeaturesofphrasesand sentencesbetweenEnglishand Vietnamese, thisresearchwilltakeTrinhCongSon’sEnglishtranslatedversionsversustheir originalsinVietnamesetoinvestigatethesimilaritiesanddifferenceswhenthose songs are translated from Vietnamese into English in order to come to the generalizationsofhowthetranslatingmethodsarerendered.

3.1.2.Objectives

Toachievethisaim,thestudywillhavethefollowingspecificobjectives:

-Toexaminethesemanticfeaturesoflexiconwhentheyaretranslated. -Toexaminethesyntacticfeaturesofphrasesandsentenceswhentheyare translated. -To examine a number of Trinh Cong Son’s songs and their English translatedversionswithafocusonthesemanticfeaturesoflexiconandsyntactic featuresofphrasesandsentences. -To identify the similarities and differences in terms of semantic and syntactic features between English and Vietnamese versions of Trinh Cong Son’ssongs. -And finally to come to some considerations and generalizations for translationofTrinhCongSon’ssongs.

3.2.RESEARCHDESIGN

Onthepurposeofcarryingoutaninvestigationintothesemanticfeaturesof lexiconandsyntacticfeaturesofphrasesandsentencesbetweenVietnameseand English translation by taking Trinh Cong Son’s songs as the data, we have decided to do research through descriptive and contrastive approaches. The researchdesignisplannedtocarryoutsuchimportantthingsas:

-Providingsomebasictheoreticalconceptsrelatedtotranslation,semantics aswellassyntax. -Collectingandclassifysemanticfeaturesoflexiconandsyntacticfeatures ofphrasesandsentencesbytakingTrinhCongSon’ssongsasthedata. -Describing and analyzing the collected data to find out the semantic featuresoflexiconandsyntacticfeaturesofphrasesandsentencesonthebasisof translationtheory.

3.3.METHODOFRESEARCH

Thisresearchpaperiscarriedoutwiththecombinationofbothdescriptive methodandcontrastivemethod. The descriptive method in the study is expressed in describing the semanticfeaturesoflexiconandsyntacticfeaturesofphrasesandsentencesof TrinhCongSon’sVietnamese-versionandEnglish-translatedversionsongs. The contrastive method in this study is expressed in comparing the similarities and differences, in terms of semantic features of lexicon and syntactic features of phrases and sentences between Vietnamese and English versionsinTrinhCongSon’ssongs. Due to the described and contrasted data, this study will find out the strategiesandmethodswhichareusedmorepopularly.Then,it’sveryimportant

to identify and analyze possible linguistic and non-linguistic factors that influence consciously and unconsciously in choosing each strategy for translatingTrinhCongSon’ssongs.

3.4.DATACOLLECTIONANDDESCRIPTION

Thedataincludes14songstakenfromTrịnhCôngSơn–Thecollectionof

everlastingsongs.Musicpress1997.(TrịnhCôngSơn–Tuyểntậpnhữngbàica

khôngnămtháng.NxbÂmNhạc1997)andmorethan40songstakenfromthe

website http://www.tcs-home.org/songs-en/songs. All of them have both VietnameseandEnglishversionswithdifferenttranslators. Thelexicon(wordsandphrases)aswellasthephrasesandsentenceswill beexaminedandidentifiedaccordingtothesetsofstrategiessuggestedbyBaker, NewmarkandCatford.

3.5.RESEARCHPROCEDURES

Fortheresearchtobecarriedoutproperly,thestepsbelowwillbetaken:

-Collectinglexicon(wordsandphrases)andsentencesfrom14songsof

TrinhCongSon(VietnameseandEnglishversions)inthedata. -Doingliteraturereview -Sortingoutthewords-phrasesandphrases-sentencesaccordingtothe setsofstrategiessuggestedbyBaker,NewmarkandCatford. -Calculatetheexactpercentageforeachstrategyusedintranslating the lexiconandphrasesandsentencesfromVietnamesetoEnglishinTrinhCong Son’ssongs. -Investigatethelinguisticandnon-linguisticfactorsinfluencingthechoice ofusingeachstrategyintranslatingthelexiconandphrasesandsentencesfrom VietnamesetoEnglishinTrinhCongSon’ssongs.

-Making some recommendations concerning translation of Trinh Cong Son’s songs from Vietnamese into English as well as putting forward some suggestionsfortranslatingsomeofSon’ssongs.

3.6.SUMMARY

In thischapter,besidesmentioning theresearchdesign, researchmethod anddatacollection,wepresentedfullytheproceduresweneedtofollowwhen doingresearch.Thesearesomeconclusions:

Firstly, the paper is carried out through the descriptive and contrastive methodswhicharecrucialtotheaimandtheobjectivesofthestudy. Secondly,duetothedatacollectionanddescription,wefocusondescribing the process of collection, the kinds of data collected, the number of data collectedfromtranslatedworksbothVietnameseandEnglishversionsofTrinh CongSon’ssongs. Finally,theproceduresofthestudyareclearlymentioned,whichlayagood foundationtocarryoutinvestigationaccordingtoaproperdirection.

CHAPTER4

FINDINGSANDDISCUSSION

ByusingthestrategiessuggestedbyNewmarkandBakerandCatord,we examine the semantic features of words and phrases in the 14 English translationalversionsofTrinhCongSon’ssongsincontrasttothesourcetextsin Vietnamese. Besides, we also stand on the point of view of Catford to run

throughthesyntacticfeaturesinthose14songs.Allthetypicalstrategiesusedby

thetranslatorinthese14songsareillustratedfromthehighestfrequencytothe

lowest ones. Finally, as a summary of findings, all the figures will be demonstratedbycharts.

4.1.SEMANTICFEATURESOFWORDSANDPHRASES

AfterexaminingtheparallelcorpusofVietnameseandEnglishversionsof

thecollectionofTrinhCongSonsongs,containing1569Vietnamesewordsand

1585English words,7strategieswerefound.Inthispart,eachstrategywith exampleswillbepresentedanddiscussed.

4.1.1.Translationbyusingomission

Thisstrategyappearsinallthe14songswiththehighestappearingtimes:

83 tokens and occupies nearly a half ofthe proportion in allstrategies with 48.5%. Besides, the Translation by using omission strategy also has its specificfeatures.

4.1.1.1.Fullomission

Inthiscase,wecareaboutthemissingofwordsandphrasesintheEnglish translationalversionsareopposedtoVietnameselyrics.Thisisalossinmeaning

whichoccursinallthe14songs.

Itistruethattranslatingsingabletextsismoredifferenttootherkindsandit ismoredifficulttomaintainthemeaningfromthesourcetextswhilegetting along with the sound beats. In the entire corpus examined, the most typical featureofOmissionisthedroppingmeaningofwordsandphrases.Forexample, inthesong“BIẾTĐÂUNGUỒNCỘI–ORIGINUNKOWN”,thephrase “ngàykia”isomittedinthesetwosentences,resultinginthecompletelossof meaningofthephrase:

(1)Ngàykia trăng sẽ già
(1)Ngàykia
trăng
sẽ
già

Ø Themoon willbe

old

[line5,Appendix1]

Similarly, in the example below, to maintain the 6 sound beats like Vietnamese lyric, the translator omits the phrase “lắng nghe” and the word “nằm”:

(2)Lắngnghe consông
(2)Lắngnghe
consông

Ø Theriver

nằm kể Ø tells(itstale)
nằm
kể
Ø
tells(itstale)

[line10,Appendix1]

Thiscaseappearsinallthefollowingexamplestakenoutfromtheother13

songs.In thesong“CÁTBỤI–DUSTY SAND”,the phrase“trêncao”are passedbyinthesepairsofsentences:

(3)Láúa

trêncao

rụngđầy

(3)Láúa trêncao rụngđầy Deadleaves Ø arefallingdown [line12,Appendix2] The translator only uses two words to

Deadleaves

Ø

arefallingdown

[line12,Appendix2]

The translator only uses two words to express the full meaning of the Vietnamesephrase.Wecanseethat,intheEnglishversion,theadverbialphrase “trêncao”disappears.However,onlyhavingtheverbphrase“fall+down” which means something drops from a high position to a lower position, the prepositionalphrase“trêncao”ishiddeninside.Inotherwords,whileomitting particularwordorphrase,thetranslatorretainsitsmeaningelsewherenearby.

In the song “CON MẮT CÒN LẠI – THE OTHER EYE”, the verb

“nhìn”disappearsinline7:

(4)Conmắtcònlại

nhìn

cuộctìnhphai

(4)Conmắtcònlại nhìn cuộctìnhphai Theothereye’s Ø foranoldlove [line7,Appendix3]

Theothereye’s

Ø

foranoldlove

[line7,Appendix3]

Inthesong“ĐỜIGỌIEMBIẾTBAOLẦN–LIFEHASCALLED YOUMANYTIMES”,despitewellsettingthebalanceintermsofsoundbeat between Vietnamese lyric and its English translationalversion, the translator alsopassesbythemeaningofsomewordsandphrases.Thisoneisatypical example:

(5)Bướcchân khôngchờ ai đón Ø Noone iswaitingfor (you) Ø
(5)Bướcchân
khôngchờ
ai
đón
Ø Noone iswaitingfor
(you)
Ø

[line3,Appendix4]

InthesongEMĐẾNTỪNGHÌNXƯA-YOU’VECOMEALONG

TIME,atthethirdappearingtime,thephrase“xalạ”isomitted:

(6)Tôivẫnnhìnthấy

“xalạ” isomitted: (6)Tôivẫnnhìnthấy I see em giữađámđông xalạ inthecrowd Ø youare

I see

em giữađámđông

xalạ

inthecrowd Ø youare
inthecrowd
Ø
youare

[line11,Appendix5]

Inthesong“GẦNNHƯNIỀMTUYỆTVỌNG -

SOMETHING

LIKEDESPAIR”,theabverbialphrase“cónhiềukhi”ispassedby:

(7)Cónhiềukhi rơi xuống bênđời Ø (That’s) fallen straightdown by
(7)Cónhiềukhi
rơi
xuống
bênđời
Ø (That’s)
fallen
straightdown
by

[line5,Appendix6]

life

In thesong “LỜIBUỒN THÁNH– SAD SUNDAY EVE”,theword “nằm”and“đìuhiu”areomitted:

(8)Nằm trongcăngác

đìuhiu

EVE ”,theword “nằm” and “đìuhiu” areomitted: (8)Nằm trongcăngác đìuhiu Ø (Alone) inmyownden Ø

Ø

(Alone)

inmyownden

Ø

[line1,Appendix7]

Inthesong“LẶNGLẼNƠINÀY-THEQUIETWORLDOFMINE”,

thephrase“xavắng”isalsoomitted:

(9) Tantheo

chúttình

xavắng

isalsoomitted: (9) Tantheo chúttình xavắng Fliesalong alittlelove Ø [line12,Appendix8] Inthesong“

Fliesalong

alittlelove

Ø

[line12,Appendix8]

Inthesong“MỘTCÕIĐIVỀ-MYOWNLONELYWORLD”,the

phrase“vôtình”isomittedinthissentence:

(10)Continhyêuthương

vôtình

chợtgọi

(10)Continhyêuthương vôtình chợtgọi Alover-demon Ø hasjustcalled [line16,Appendix9]

Alover-demon

Ø

hasjustcalled

[line16,Appendix9]

Inthesong“NGHETIẾNGMUÔNTRÙNG-HEARALLSOUNDS

AROUND”,theword“đêm”isomitted10times.Hereisanexampleofthis

case,inwhichtheword“gió”isalsoomitted:

(11)Đêm nghe
(11)Đêm nghe

Ø (I)hear

gió tựtình Ø whisp’ring
gió
tựtình
Ø
whisp’ring

[line1,Appendix10]

Inthesong“NHƯCÁNHVẠCBAY-LIKEAFLYINGHERON”,the

noun“đời”isomittedinthisphrase:

(12)Rớtxuống

fallingdown

đời

làmsónglênhđênh

(12)Rớtxuống fallingdown đời làmsónglênhđênh Ø asbobbingwaves [line4,Appendix11] Inthesong“

Ø

asbobbingwaves

[line4,Appendix11]

Inthesong“QUỲNHHƯƠNG-ALITTLEROSE,ALITTLELOVE”,

thephrase“miệngcười”isomittedinthissentence:

(13)Miệngcười

khúckhích

trênlưng

(13)Miệngcười khúckhích trênlưng Ø Achuckle onyourlips [line4,Appendix12] Inthesong“

Ø

Achuckle

onyourlips

[line4,Appendix12]

Inthesong“TUỔIĐỜIMÊNHMÔNG-INTOOLARGELIFE”,the

verb“ôm”isomittedinthiscase:

(14)Ôm

cuộcsống

trongtay

“ôm” isomittedinthiscase: (14)Ôm cuộcsống trongtay Ø (With) fulllove inhands [line6,Appendix13] Inthesong“

Ø

(With)

fulllove

inhands

[line6,Appendix13]

Inthesong“XINTRẢNỢNGƯỜI-IPAIDMYDEBT”,thephrase

“thơdại”isomitted2times:

(15)Thơdại

rađi

khôngnhớgìtôi

isomitted2times: (15)Thơdại rađi khôngnhớgìtôi Ø (You) left withoutrememberingme [line5,Appendix14]

Ø

(You)

left

withoutrememberingme

[line5,Appendix14]

Those16examplesabovearethetypicalonesformorethan50timesof

appearing of this strategy. One more time, it is necessary to emphasize that becauseoftryingtosettheEnglishtranslationalversionsequallytothesource texts in Vietnamese, many words and phrases cannot be conveyed and maintainedwithfullmeaning.AllthecasesillustratedabovebelongstotheFull omission.

Besides,thereappears3othercasesinwhichthewordsandphrasesare

translatedwithonlyahaftthemeaning.Someomissionsappliedtothenouns, sometoverbsandsomeotherstoadjectivesandadverbs.

4.1.1.2.Partialomission

a.Omissionofadjective

ThiscasestandsonthesecondrankafterthefeatureFullOmissionwith13

tokensin7songs.Thetranslator,inmanycases,omitstheAdjective.

(16) mậtngọt (tìnhyêumậtngọt)

honey

(ahoneylove)

[line1,Appendix8]

Sourcetext

Targettext

Backtranslation

Omission

mậtngọt

honey

mật(ong)

ngọt

Whiletranslatingthephrase“mậtngọt”,thetranslatorusesonlyoneword

“honey”=“mật(ong)”tosettheEnglishequivalent,whichmakesthetarget textdropouttheadjective“ngọt”. (17) tìnhsâu (trảnợmộtđờichưahếttìnhsâu)

love

(adebtoflovehasnotbeenpaid)

[line13,Appendix14]

Sourcetext

Targettext

Backtranslation

Omission

tìnhsâu

love

tình

sâu

Whiletranslatingthephrase“tìnhsâu”,thetranslatorusesonlyoneword “love”=“tình”tosettheEnglishequivalent,whichmakesthetargettextdrop outtheadjective“sâu”. b.Omissionofnoun

Thisisalsoconsideredasatypicalfeatureafterexamingthroughthe14

songs.With8timesofappearing,theOmissionofNounexistsin5songs.These

aresomeexamplestoillustrate.

(18) cátbụi

sand

(tôivềlàmcátbụi)

(Icomebacktosand)

[line6,Appendix2]

Sourcetext

Targettext

Backtranslation

Omission

cátbụi

sand

cát

bụi

Whiletranslatingthephrase“cátbụi”,thetranslatorusesonlyoneword

“sand”=“cát”tosettheEnglishequivalent,whichmakesthetargettextdrop

outtheword“bụi”.

(19) nhànhhoa

arose

(mộtnhànhhoagiữatâmhồn) (aroseinyoursoul)

[line18,Appendix4]

Sourcetext

Targettext

Backtranslation

Omission

nhànhhoa

arose

mộthoa(hồng)

nhành

Whiletranslatingthephrase“nhànhhoa”,thetranslatorusesonlyoneword

“arose”=“mộthoa(hồng)”tosettheEnglishequivalent,whichmakesthe

targettextdropouttheword“nhành”.

(20) rộnghaivai

immense

(biểnrộnghaivai)

(theimmensesea)

[line6,Appendix8]

Sourcetext

Targettext

Backtranslation

Omission

rộnghaivai

immense

rộng

haivai

Whiletranslatingthephrase“rộnghaivai”,thetranslatorusesonlyone word“immense”=“rộng(mênhmông)”tosettheEnglishequivalent,which makesthetargettextdropouttheword“haivai”. (21) ngàyvui (nơiemvềngàyvuikhôngem)

alljoys

(whereyouare,aretherealljoys)

[line17,Appendix11]

Sourcetext

ngàyvui

Targettext

alljoys

Backtranslation

tấtcảniềmvui

Omission

ngày

Whiletranslatingthephrase“ngàyvui”,thetranslatorusesonlyoneword “alljoys”=“tấtcảniềmvui”tosettheEnglishequivalent,whichmakesthe targettextdropouttheword“ngày”. (22) nợngười (xintrảnợngười)

mydebt

(Ipaymydebt)

[line1,Appendix14]

Sourcetext

Targettext

Backtranslation

Omission

nợngười

mydebt

nợcủatôi

người

Whiletranslatingthephrase“nợngười”,thetranslatorusesonlyoneword “mydebt”=“nợcủatôi”tosettheEnglishequivalent,whichmakesthetarget textdropouttheword“người”. c.Omissionofverb

Thiscaseappears3timesin2songsandstandsonthefourthrankinthe

strategyTranslationbyusingomission.

(23) nằmkể

tell

(lắngngheconsôngnằmkể)

(therivertellsitstale)

[line4,Appendix1]

Sourcetext

Targettext

Backtranslation

Omission

nằmkể

tell

kể

nằm

Whiletranslatingthephrase“nằmkể”,thetranslatorusesonlyoneword

“tell”=“kể”tosettheEnglishequivalent,whichmakesthetargettextdropout

theverb“nằm”.

(24) xinlàmquánđợi

serveasaninn

(tôixinlàmquánđợi) (Iserveasaninn)

[line14,Appendix1]

Sourcetext

Targettext

Backtranslation

Omission

xinlàmquánđợi

serveasaninn

phụcvụnhưquán

trọ

xin/đợi

Whiletranslatingthephrase“xinlàmquánđợi”,thetranslatorusesonly one word “serve as an inn” = “phục vụ như quán trọ” to set the English

equivalent,whichmakesthetargettextdropout2verbs“xin”and“đợi”.

Possessing 48.5%ofallthestrategiesusedin translating these14Trinh CongSon’ssongs,TranslationbyusingOmissionissuchapopularone,butitis also real that conveying full meaning of source text to target text is a big challengeandseemstobeneverachieved.

4.1.2.Translationbyusingamoreneutral/lessexpressiveword

Thesecondrunner-upinallisthestrategyTranslationbyusingamore

neutral/lessexpressiveword,whichhas21.6%for37tokens.Inthiscase,the

translatorcannotexpressthetruemeaningofthesourcetextbyusinganexact equivalentin thetargettext.Usingthisstrategy istohelp readersorsingers understandsomepartsofmeaningofwordsorphrasesinthesourcetext. (25) hìnhhài (vươnhìnhhàilớndậy)

aman

(togrowupaman)

[line2,Appendix2]

Sourcetext

Targettext

Backtranslation

hìnhhài

aman

mộtngười

“Hìnhhài”-Thiswordmeanstheshape,thebodyofsomeone.Maybe,the

translatorunderstandsdeeplythelyricofthissong.Besides,healsohasaclear

viewinBuddhism.“Hìnhhài”ispointedoutdirectlybythephrase“aman”

whichhelpslisteners,singerswhenobservingtheEnglishversionunderstandthe

truemeaning.

(26) trắngnhưvôi

(chợtmộtchiềutóctrắngnhưvôi)

turnwhite

(justonedaymyhairturnwhite)

[line10,Appendix2]

Sourcetext

Targettext

Backtranslation

trắngnhưvôi

turnwhite

trởnêntrắng

“trắngnhưvôi”-ThisisanidiomaticphraseinVietnamesewhenpeople compare something with white colorto the lime.In the English version,the translator uses the phrase “turn white” – which hasn’t expressed fully the meaning,but,thegeneralmeaningispartlytransferredandconveyed.

(27) trămnăm

lifetime

(chotrămnămvàochếtmộtngày)

(forlifetimewillendsomeday)

[line13,Appendix2]

Sourcetext

Targettext

Backtranslation

trămnăm

lifetime

cuộcđời

“trăm năm” in this situation does not mean “a hundred year” as its denotativemeaning,butitreferstoanotheraspect,thelifetimeofaperson. Understanding the implied thinking of Son, the translator, by using the

communicative approach in translating, sets the English equivalent for this

phrase“lifetime”.Wecanseethisphrasein[line12,Appendix6]and[line6,

Appendix9].

(28) lêncao–xuốngthấp (nhìntôilêncao,nhìntôixuốngthấp)

upthere–downhere (seemeupthere,seemedownhere)

[line2,Appendix3]

Sourcetext

Targettext

Backtranslation

lêncao–xuốngthấp

upthere–downhere

trênđó–dướinày

Withthedenotativemeaning,wecanunderstandthephrases“lêncao– xuốngthấp”likedescribingthedifferentpositionofsomeonewhentheychange their seat or living. By starting the point view of connotative meaning, the phrases“lêncao–xuốngthấp”mayconsistsofotherdeepermeanings.Itcould bethejob,thesuccess,thelove,livingcondition,etc,whichsometimesgetto the highest, the happiest, butsometimes drop to the level off, to the end of sadness.Inthissituation,thetranslatoradds“there–here”whichclarifyone aspect in the deep meaning of Vietnamese lyric. Therefore, connotative descriptionisusedinthiscase.

(29) rãrời depressedandsad

(tôilắngnghelòngtôirãrời) (Ifeelmyheartdepressedandsad)

[line9,Appendix6]

Sourcetext

Targettext

Backtranslation

rãrời

depressedandsad

buồn,phiềnmuộn

Thephrase“rãrời”isanadjectivephrasewhichisthecombinationoftwo words“rã”and“rời”withthemeaningoffeelingweariedorexhausted.Inthis case, the translator doesn’t use direct English equivalent of “rã rời”, by describingthedeepfeelinginsidewiththemeaningofasadheart,hechooses

thecombinationoftwoadjectivestomakeanadjectivephrasewhichrunsasthe

EnglishequivalentforVietnameselyric.

(30) xuânthì

earlyyears

(trongxuânthìthấybóngtrămnăm)

((In)earlyyearsisseenawholelife)

[line11,Appendix6]

Sourcetext

Targettext

Backtranslation

xuânthì

earlyyears

nhữngnămđầu

In the same way with the translations above when using a neutral/less expressivewordsorphrasestoexpresspartlythemeaninginside,thetranslator inthissituationusesthisstrategytosettheEnglishequivalent.Ifweconsiderthe deepmeaninginside“xuânthì”byclarifyingthesyntaxstructureofthisphrase, we will know the answer for choosing English equivalent of the translator. “Xuânthì”isanounphrasewhichisthecombinationofanadjectiveandanoun “xuân+ thì”.“Xuân”,in this case,“xuân”doesn’tmean “Spring”,butits connotativemeaning“young”.Thìmeanstime.Connectthemeaningofthese separated words, the English equivalent could be “the young time”. Setting “early” instead of “young”, the translator can only describe some parts of meaninginthisphrase.

(31) sôngcạnđámòn

allfadesaway

(nơiđâunơiđâu,sôngcạnđámòn) (ohwhereohwhere,allfadesaway)

[line10,Appendix9]

Sourcetext

Targettext

Backtranslation

sôngcạnđámòn

allfadesaway

tấtcảphaimờ

In terms of semantics, this is an idiom in Vietnamese. However, when

translatingfromVietnamesetoEnglish,thetranslatordoesn’tgoclosetoeach word,suchassông river;đá stone,butusingthethisstrategytoclarify andhelplisteners,readersunderstandthealittlemeaningofthisphrase.

(32) Lặnglẽnơinày

Aworldofmine

quietandsad

(tiêuđềbàihát) (thetitleofthissong)

[Title,Appendix9]

(sadlikeblooddrop,quietandsad)

[line16,Appendix9]

Sourcetext

Targettext

Backtranslation

lặnglẽnơinày

aworldofmine

quietandsad

mộtthếgiớicủatôi

tĩnhlặngvàbuồn

Lặnglẽnơinày:ThisNounphraseappearstwotimesinthesongwithtwo

differentEnglishtranslationalversions:

-thetitleofthesong, -inthesentencebuồnnhưgiọtmáu,lặnglẽnơinày. Intermsofsemantics,“nơinày”cangetitsEnglishequivalent“place”,but thetranslatormakes“nơinày”becomealonelylandwhereonlyoneperson staysin.NotgoingdirectlyintothewordtosetEnglishequivalent,thetranslator, in most of case, tries to describe the word with its deep meaning, with the

impliedideaswhichthewriterwantedtoblowin.Inthissituation,thetranslator uses“worldofmine”,theplacesoimmensebutlonelyandsad.However,inthe second appearing, the phrase “nơi này” disappears and becomes hidden understanding. There appears 3 times the translator uses the word “around”to setthe

EnglishequivalentfortheVietnameselyrics.Inall3cases,thiswordcannot

expressacompletemeaningoftheVietnamesetexts.

(33) loanhquanh

around

(điđâuloanhquanhchođờimỏimệt)

(togoaroundontiredlife)

(34) trùngvây

around

[line2,Appendix9]

(nghelăngmiếutrùngvây)

(Feelallshrinesaround)

(35) đẩyđưa

around

[line7,Appendix10]

(Đêmnghetiếngmuôntrùngđẩyđưa)

(Hearandfeelallsoundsaround)

[line18,Appendix10]

Sourcetext

Targettext

Backtranslation

loanhquanh

trùngvây

đẩyđưa

around

xungquanh

4.1.3.Translationbyusingamoregeneralword

With11.1%for19tokens,thisstrategystandsonthethirdrankinallthe

strategies and is used in 9 songs/14 songs. In contrastto the strategy above whichthetranslatorusesaneutral/lessexpressivewordtodescribethesource

text,inthistrategy,thetranslatortriestofulfillthemeaningofsourcetexta

moregeneralwordthathelpslisteners/readersorsingersunderstandthegeneral

meaning.

(36) đácuội

smallstone

(tôixinlàmđácuội)

(Iwouldasmallstone)

[line17,Appendix1]

Sourcetext

Targettext

Backtranslation

đácuội

smallstone

đánhỏ

Itissuchadifficultquestionthatwhythetranslator,inthiscase,doesnot

usetheword“coobble”whichisequivalenttothesourcetext,andalsohas2

syllables that suit the sound beat. The word “stone” is the hypernym with generalmeaningwhile“đácuội”isthehyponymy,atypicaltypeofstone.“đá cuội”alsoappearsinthesong“CÁTBỤI–DUSTYSAND”withthesame

Englishequivalent“stone”.[line15,Appendix2]

(37) tìnhphai

oldlove

(nhìncuộctìnhphai)

(foranoldlove)

[line7,Appendix3]

Sourcetext

Targettext

Backtranslation

tìnhphai

oldlove

tìnhcũ

“phai”couldgettheEnglishequivalent“fade”whichmeanssomething

becomesunclearbyseeingorinsomeone’smind,someone’sremember.Itcould

beanimage,aloveaffairwhichnolongergoestogetherwiththecarrierwho

burdensthatmemory.Incontrast,thetranslatorchooses“old”insteadofusing

“fade”.“Old”meanssomethingisnotnew,butwhocanbesurethatsomething

oldissomethingfade?However,withalove,itcouldbe.Especially,inthiscase,

thetranslatoronemoretimeusesageneralwordwiththemeaningofhyponymy

totranslatebyhidingtheword“phai”intotheword“old”.

(lăntheogóthài)

(38) lăn

move

(movewithyoursteps)

[line17,Appendix1]

(39) langthang

moving

(mộtđờiemmãilangthang)

(allyourlifeyouaremoving)

(40) rađi

move

[line4,Appendix4]

(baonhiêunămrồicònmãirađi)

(howmanyyearsstillonthemove)

[line1,Appendix9]

Sourcetext

Targettext

Backtranslation

lăn

langthang

rađi

move/moving

dichuyển

chuyểnđộng

Inthe3casesabove,thetranslatorusesthesameEnglishequivalentforthe

3sourcetextswhichhavedifferentEnglishequivalentifconsideringtheirtrue

meaning.Theverb“move”cannotexpressthemeaningofthosethreewords,but

thegeneralmeaningiseasilyobtained.

Inthesamewaywiththethreecasesabove,inthisone,thetranslatoruses2

differentEnglishequivalentstodescribeoneVietnameseword“nắng”which

shouldget“sunlight”tobeitsEnglishequivalent,insteadofusing“warmth”

and“light”intheseexamples:

(41) nắng

light

(42) nắng

warmth

(43) nắng

light

(khitronglòngkhôngchútnắng)

(whennolightinyourheart)

[line2,Appendix4]

(trảlạinắngtrongtim)

(warmthisbackinyourheart)

[line11,Appendix4]

(nắngcóhồngbằngđôimôiem)

(islightpinkasyourpinklips)

[line1,9,Appendix11]

Sourcetext

nắng

Targettext

light

warmth

Backtranslation

ánhsáng

hơiấm

(44) mộthôm

once

(mộthômbiếnmất)

(oncedisappeared)

[line8,Appendix3]

Sourcetext

Targettext

Backtranslation

mộthôm

once

mộtlần

“mộthôm”cangettheEnglishequivalent“oneday”.However,goinginto deeper,whenreadingfullphrase“mộthômbiếnmất”,weseeanimageofthe sudden,thesurpriseandtheat-faultfeelingthatwehaven’tbeenreadytoget. Thetranslatorusesandadverb“once”tosettheEnglishequivalentfor“một hôm”withtheintentionofdescribingthedeepermeaningofthisphrasebythe meansofusinggeneralword.

4.1.4.Translationbyusingexpansion

Appearing11timeswith6.4%,thisstrategystandsonthefifthrankinall

strategiesused. Inthiscase,thetranslator,becauseoftryingtomaintainthe ideasgettingalongwiththesoundbeats,sometimesomitsthemeaningofsome wordsandphrases,butsometimesaddswordstosupportthemeaning.

(45) kể
(45) kể

Tell itstale

(consôngnằmkể)

(therivertellsitstale)

[line10,Appendix1]

Inthisexample,onlytheword“tell”isenoughtoexpressthemeaningof

“kể”,butthetranslatoradds“itstale”for2purposes:tomakethewordsequal

tothesoundbeat;toclarifythemeaningbyaddingsomewords.Sequently,these

examplesbelowarealsoruninthisway.

(46) xóabỏ

(46) xóabỏ Crossout myname (…xóabỏkhônghay) (…crossoutmyname) [line20,Appendix2] Adding “myname”

Crossout myname

(…xóabỏkhônghay)

(…crossoutmyname)

[line20,Appendix2]

Adding“myname”inthiscasehelpsreadersorsingerseasiertounderstand

onepartofmeaningthatthewriterwantsexpress.

(47) bạnbè Good friends
(47)
bạnbè
Good
friends

(…cóquêhươngbạnbè)

(…countriesandgoodfriends)

[line6,Appendix5]

Maybe,“bạnbè”=“friends”areallthe“good”peoplewhowecanshare

everythingfromthesadnesstothehappinesswhichleadsthetranslatorchoose

thisadjectivetoaddbeforethenoun.

(48) rơi xuống
(48) rơi
xuống

Fall straight

down

(…rơixuốngbênđời)

(…fallenstraightdownbylife)

[line2,Appendix6]

Tomakethestateoffallingclearer,thetranslatoraddsonemoreadjective

“straight”while“falldown”isenoughfor“rơixuống”.

(49) xanhxao

Pale andsad
Pale
andsad

(…tiếnghátxanhxao)

(…paleandsadevesong)

[line3,Appendix7]

Sometimes,thisadditionmakesthedeepmeaninginsidewordsclearer.The

translator,inmostofcases,understandsthesourcetextsomuchthathehelpus

knowwhatthewriter–TrinhCongSonwantedtodescribe.Inthisexample,the emotionisexpressedoutbyaddingtheadjective“sad”while“pale”canbethe

Englishequivalentfor“xanhxao”.Alsousing“sad”,the2examplesbelow

showsthesamewayinexpandingthemeaningofsourcetext.

(50) lặnglẽ Quiet
(50) lặnglẽ
Quiet

andsad

(50) lặnglẽ Quiet andsad (…lặnglẽnơinày) (…quietandsad) [line18,Appendix8]

(…lặnglẽnơinày)

(…quietandsad)

[line18,Appendix8]

(51) mắtem (buồnbằngđôimắtem) Your sad eyes (sadasyoursadeyes)
(51) mắtem
(buồnbằngđôimắtem)
Your
sad
eyes (sadasyoursadeyes)

[line2,Appendix11]

Intheexamplebelow,“hear”isanactthatyoupassivelyreceivethesound,

butthisverbbecomemoreemotionalwhenthetranslatoraddsonemoreverb

“feel”.

(52) nghe

Hear andfeel
Hear
andfeel

(nghetiếngmuôntrùng…)

(hearandfeel…)

[line16,Appendix10]

The“town”=“thànhphố”becomesclosely,friendlyandsowarmlywith

fulloflovewhenthetranslatoraddstheadjective“dear”.

(53) thànhphố Dear town
(53)
thànhphố
Dear
town

(…trongthànhphốnày)

(…inourdeartown)

[line22,Appendix13]

4.1.5.Translationbyusingco-hyponym

Itisreallydifficultformusictranslatorstofindoutagoodequivalentword

orphraseintargetlanguagethatalsogetsalongwithsoundbeatofsourcetext

andsingable.Thisdifficultyleadsthetranslator,inthese14songsofTrinhCong

Son,chooseswordsorphraseswhichareinthesamefunctionaltypesandhave

similarmeaningtohelpreadersorsingerseasiertounderstandthesourcetext.

(54) ngờ

Know

(consôngđâucóngờ…)

(theriverdoesn’tknow…)

[line5,Appendix1]

“ngờ” belongs to Volition verb. The translator uses a cognitive verb “know”tosettheEnglishequivalent.Bothofthesetwoverbsareofthesame

type“mentalverb”.Consequently,thetranslatoralsouses“know”foranother

verbphraseinthesourcetext“nhớra”whichisinthesamecognitivecategory.

(55) nhớra

Know

(…màsôngkhôngnhớra)

(…theriverdoesn’tknow)

[line9,Appendix1]

Intheexamplesbelow,thetranslatorusesperceptionverb“feel”tosetthe EnglishequivalentforaVietnameseperceptionverb“nghe”.Thiscaseappears

5timesinthreesongs.

(56) lắngnghe

Feel

(57) nghe

(tôilắngnghelòngtôirãrời)

(Ifeelmyheartdepressedandsad)

[line9,Appendix6]

(nghelăngmiếutrùngvây

(nghexacáchcuộcđời)

(nghehoangphếcạnhđây)

Feel

(58) nghe

Feel

(allshrinesaround) (Feelawayfromlife) (Feelallrunsnearby)

[line5-6-7,Appendix10]

(tanghenghìngiọtlệ)

(Ifeelscoresoftears)

[line19,Appendix11]

Besidesusingverbsofthesametype,thetranslatoralsousesAdjectiveand

NouninthesamegrouptosettheEnglishequivalentforsourcetexts.Inthe

example(59),theadjective“mad”and“hờnghen”aredifferentbuttheyarein

thesamegroupofAttitudeadjectives.Intheexample(60),thetranslatorusesa

hyponymy“arose”toillustratethehypernym“nhànhhoa”.

(59) hờnghen

Mad

(60) nhànhhoa

Arose

(nắngcócònhờnghenmôiem)

(islightstillmadatyourlips)

[line9,Appendix11]

(mộtnhànhhoagiữatâmhồn)

(aroseinyoursoul)

[line20,Appendix4]

Appearing 10 times with 5.8%, the strategy Translation by using co-

hyponymisoneofthemostusedstrategiesinthese14songs.

4.1.6.Translationbyparaphraseusingunrelatedword

Sometimes,tosetthewordsandphrasesgettingalongwithsoundbeats,the

translator cannot use exact equivalent for source text. To make the sentence

singable,headdssomewordsorphrasesthathavenorelatedmeaningtothe

sourcetext.

(61) chiều

Eve

(chiềuChủnhậtbuồn)

(sadSundayeve)

[line1,Appendix7]

“chiều”-ThiswordmustgettheEnglishequivalentafternoon,butinthis situation,thetranslatorchoosesthewordeve=evening.WeoftenseeChristmas EveorNewYear’sEve.Withthemeaningofevening=đêm,itisfardifferent

fromtheVietnameselyric.However,thedifficultyhereisthat,thereisonly1

the musical sound beat, while the word afternoon has three syllables which

require3soundbeats.Ontheotherhand,thewordeveningwhichcontainsthree

syllablesandalsorequires3soundbeat,butluckily,thiswordcanbeshorten

intoeve–whichhasonly1syllable=1soundbeat.Therefore,wecangettothe

point that, in this case, the translator doesn’t use either semantic or communicative approach to transfer from Vietnamese to English, but he translatestomakethewordgetalongwiththemusicalsoundbeat.

(62) haivai

Head

(trênhaivaitađôivầngnhậtnguyệt)

(justoverheadthesunandmoon)

[line4,Appendix9]

“hai vai” could get the English equivalent “shoulders”. However, the translatorusesanotherphrase“head”whichseemsnottobegettingalongwith theVietnamese.Inthiscase,wecanseethat,translatingsongsisratherdifficult because of the musical sound beats. Sometimes, the translator(s) pass by a beautifulwordorphrasethatisveryequivalenttothewordorphraseinSL,to chooseanotheronewhichhasthesamemeaningornearlythesamebuthaving thesuitablesoundbeatwiththemusicandmelody.Besidesthat,translatingwith themostmaintainedmeaningisthetargetofanytranslator.Therefore,howto

express and describe the meaning of the word or phrase is the reason why translatorsdonotchooseexactequivalentwordorphraseinTL,butusinga differentonetoillustrateandconveyafullimageinsidetheword.Thissituation isatypicalexample.Thetranslatorchooses“head”,thoughthemeaningisnot equivalentto theVietnamese, its generalmeaning and the image ittreasures couldperformbetterthantheword“shoulders”.

Thisstrategyappears7timeswith4.1%inallthestrategiesusedtotranslate

inthe14songs.

4.1.7. Translationbyusingmeronymy Inthiscase,thetranslatorusesPart–WholerelationshiptosettheEnglish equivalentfor source textin Vietnamese.This strategy appears 4times with

2.5%.

InsteadofusingcorrectEnglishequivalent,thetranslatorchooses“you”to

describe“vai”=“shoulders”;“chânem”=“yourfeet”.

(63) vai

You

(64) chân

You

(mâyhờnngủquêntrênvai)

(angrycloudsasleeponyou)

[line6,Appendix11]

(đườngdìuchânemđi)

(mùacâytráiníuchânvề)

(theywilltakeyouout)

(seasonfruitstakeyouback)

[line16-19,Appendix13]

4.2.FREQUENCYOFSEMANTICTRANSLATIONSTRATEGIES

After studying through 14 songs both in Vietnamese and their English translationalversions,using translation strategiessuggested by Newmark and

Baker,wefound thatthere are7strategiesmostusedandtheirfrequencyis illustratedinthetablebelow:

Table4.1:Thetokensandpercentageofsemanticstrategies

Strategy

Tokens

Percentage

Translationbyusingomission

83

48.5%

Translationbyusingamoreneutral/less

   

expressiveword

37

21.6%

Translationbyusingamoregeneralword

19

11.1%

Translationbyusingexpansion

11

6.4%

Translationbyusingco-hyponym

10

5.8%

Translationbyparaphraseusingunrelatedword

7

4.1%

Translationbyusingmeronymy

4

2.5%

 

171

100%

Inthedata,thestrategy“Translationbyomission”appears83timesand

takethehighestpercentagewith48.5%whilethetwostrategies““Translationby

amoreneutral/lessexpressionword”and Translationbyamoregeneralword

(superordinate)”standonthesecondandthirdrankwith21.6%for37tokens

and11.1%for19tokens.

Stayingatthefourthandfifthrankisthetwostrategies“Translationby

Expansion”with6.4%for11tokensand“TranslationbyusingHyponymand

Co-hyponym”5.8%for10tokens.

Standingatthesixthandseventhrankisthetwostrategies“Translationby

paraphraseusingunrelatedwords”with4.1%for7tokens,and“Translationby

usingMeronymy”with2.5%for4tokens.

Byexaminingthefrequencyofthose7strategies,thestrategy“Translation

byomission”ismostusedwithnearlyahaftofproportion.

Thepercentageof7strategiesisillustratedasfollows:

Thepercentageof7strategiesisillustratedasfollows: Chart4.1:Thepercentageofsemanticstrategies

Chart4.1:Thepercentageofsemanticstrategies

4.3.SYNTACTICFEATURES

Basedonthe4strategiessuggestedbyCatford,280pairsofsentencesboth

in the Vietnamese and English versions were examined to find out which strategyisused.

Number

Strategy

1

Structural-shifts

2

Class-shifts

3

Unit-shifts

4

Intra-system-shifts

Inthispart,eachstrategywithexampleswillbepresentedanddiscussed.

4.3.1.Structural–shifts

These are amongst the most frequent category shifts at all ranks in translation;theyoccurinphonologicalandgraphologicaltranslationaswellasin totaltranslation.Ingrammar,structure-shiftscanoccuratallranks.

Examiningallthe14songs,thisstrategyappears17timeswith22%inall

thestrategiesused.

(65) thubóngtôi darknessshink

(…vàtôithubóngtôi)

(…andIdarknessshrink)

[line21,Appendix1]

Withthesurfacemeaningwhencomparingtothefirstphrasecâytrưathu bóngdài,wecanunderstandbóngtôiliketheshadowofthewriter,atnoon,like the trees shrink their shadow at noon. However, translator uses the word darkness–sodifferentfrombóngtôiinusingtheequivalenttosetintheTL. ThedarknesshereisalsoanexpressivewaytothedeepmeaningofVietnamese inaconnotativeway.Wedon’tconsidertherightorwrongfactorintranslation, butwecanrecognizethat,inthissituation,thetranslatorusescommunicative approachtoreachthemeaning.

Structuralshifts

VOtoOV

Thu bóngtôi
Thu
bóngtôi

Darkness shrink

(66) saoemđànhvội

whydon’tyoulongerstay

(…ốiasaoemđànhvội)

(…whydon’tyoulongerstay)

[line16,Appendix1]

By using structureofaquestion withmodifying the wayto expressthe meaning,thetranslatorsuccessfullytransferfromSLtoTLwithkeepingthetrue

meaningdespitethedifferenceinstructureofthosetwoquestions,buthavingthe

sameelements.WiththeVietnameseversion,wecanseethat:

Sao

em

đành

vội

QW+

S

+

Aux

+V

WhiletheEnglishversionhasthestructure:

Why

don’t

you

longer

stay?

QW+

Aux+

S

+

Adv+V

Structuralshifts

(QW+S+Aux+V

QW+Aux+S+Adv+V)

Sao em đành
Sao em
đành

Why don’t you

vội longer stay?
vội
longer
stay?

(67) tìnhphai

oldlove

(conmắtcònlạinhìncuộctìnhphai)

(theothereye’sforanoldlove)

[line7,Appendix3]

BothVietnameseandEnglishversionshavestructureofaNounphrase.

-

tình

phai

Noun+ adjective

old

love

Adjective+Noun

Structuralshifts

(N+AdjAdj+N)

tình phai old love
tình
phai
old
love

(68) làconmắtai

whoseeyeitis

(conmắtcònlạilàconmắtai)

(theothereye,whoseeyeitis)

[line10,Appendix3]

Thisisaquestion.Thetranslatoralsousesasyntacticstructureequivalent

totranslatefromVietnameseintoEnglishwhoseeyeitis?

 

conmắt

ai

Structuralshifts

Structuralshifts

(V+SS+V)

Whose eye it

is

(69) phốthênhthang

warm,busytown

(vềlạitrongphốthênhthang)

(backtowarm,busytown)

[line16,Appendix4]

thênhthangcangettheEnglishequivalentimmense;largeorspacious.The translator,withadeepunderstandinginthelyricsofTrinhCongSon’ssongs, expressesthe love, the warmth, the people and the feeling inside the phrase

thênhthangbychoosingtheEnglishequivalentwarm,busytown.Thesyntactic

structureofthesetwophrasesisinversed:

-

phố

thênhthang

Noun

+ Adjectivephrase

 

-

warm

busy

town

Adjective

+

Adjective

+

Noun

Structuralshifts

(N+Adj.PAdj.P+N)

phố thênhthang warmbusy town
phố
thênhthang
warmbusy
town

(70) đờigọiem

youarecalled

(đờigọiemvềgiữađauthương)

(youarecalledtocomeinlove)

[line8,Appendix4]

ThetranslatorchangesfromActivevoiceofVietnamesesentencetoPassive

voiceofEnglishsentence.

- Đời

gọi

em (Activevoice)

- You

are

called(Passivevoice)

Đời gọi em (Activevoice) …
Đời gọi
em (Activevoice)

You are called(Passivevoice)

Structuralshifts

(ActivePassive)

(71) giữathiênnhiênhiềnhòa

peacefulnatureamidst

[line15,Appendix5]

Thesyntacticstructureinthisexampleisalsoreversed:

Structuralshifts

(Prep+N+Adj

Adj+N+Prep)

giữa thiênnhiên hiềnhòa

(Prep+N+Adj  Adj+N+Prep) giữa thiênnhiên hiềnhòa peaceful nature amidst (72) mìnhvẫncôliêu 

peaceful nature

amidst

(72) mìnhvẫncôliêu

lonelyIam

(ôhaymìnhvẫncôliêu)

(ohnowlonelyIam)

[line6,Appendix7]

TheVietnameseclauseconsistsofthestructureS+V+Adj:

-

mình

vẫn

côliêu

S

+

Tobe(V)

+

Adj

However,whentransferringfromVietnameseintoEnglish,thetranslator

usestheInversiontoemphazisethelonelinessinthesong.

 

-

lonely

I

am

 

Adj

+

S

+

Tobe(V)

 
 

mình

vẫn

côliêu

Structuralshifts

 
Structuralshifts  

(SVAdjAdjSV)

 

lonely

I

am

(73) lặnglẽnơinày

 

(tiêuđề)

aworldofmine

(thetitle)

[Title,Appendix7]

Intermsofsyntax,wecanseethat,lặnglẽnơinàyisaAdjectivephrase

whichisthecombinationofAdjectivephrase,NounandDeterminer:

- lặnglẽ

nơi

này

Adjectivephrase + Noun+ Determiner Incomparison,thetitleofthissongisaNounphrasewhichconsistsof Determiner,AdjectiveandNounphrase:

-

the

quiet

worldofmine

Determiner +

Adjective

+

Nounphrase

Structuralshifts

(Adj+N+DetDet+Adj+N)

lặnglẽ nơi này the quiet worldofmine
lặnglẽ
nơi
này
the
quiet
worldofmine

(74) đểlạichoai forwhomisleft

(tìnhyêuvôtội,đểlạichoai)

(anaïvelove,forwhomisleft)

[Line15,Appendix8]

Intermsofsyntax,therearetwomaindifferentpointsbetweenVietnamese and English. First, while Vietnamese is a To-infinitive phrase, the English translational version is set in Passive voice Verb phrase. Beside that, the translatoralsousesInversionwhenputtingthePrepositionalphrasechoaiafter the To-infinitive, its English version standing before the Passive voice Verb phrase:

-

đểlại

choai

Verbphrase(To-inf)

+ Prepositionalphrase

-

forwhom

isleft

Prepostionalphrase

+ Verbphrase(Passive)

Structuralshifts

(To-infinitivePassive)

(V+Prep.PPrep.P+V)

đểlại

đểlại

choai(To-infinitive)

forwhom isleft(Passive)

forwhom isleft(Passive)

(75) tamangchoemmộtđóaquỳnh aflowerhereI’vebroughtyou

[Line1,Appendix12]

Byconsideringthesyntacticfeatures,wecanseethedifferenceinstructure

ofthesetwosentences.WiththeVietnameseversion,itistheSVOO:

Ta

mangcho em mộtđóaquỳnh

S

V

O

O

WiththeEnglishtranslationalversion,itistheOSVO:

Aflowerhere I ’vebrought you

O

S

V

O

Structural-shifts

(SVOOOSVO)

Ta

mangcho em mộtđóaquỳnh

(SVOO  OSVO) Ta mangcho em mộtđóaquỳnh Aflowerhere I ’vebrought you (76)

Aflowerhere I ’vebrought you

(76) Emmangchotamộtchúttình Alittleloveyou’vebroughtme

[Line3,Appendix12]

By considering the syntactic features, we can see the difference in structureofthesetwosentences.WiththeVietnameseversion,itistheSVOO:

Em

mangcho

ta

mộtchúttình

S

V

O

O

WiththeEnglishtranslationalversion,itistheOSVO:

Alittlelove you ’vebrought me O S V O Em mangcho ta mộtchúttình Structural-shifts (SVOOOSVO)
Alittlelove you ’vebrought
me
O
S
V
O
Em
mangcho
ta
mộtchúttình
Structural-shifts
(SVOOOSVO)
Alittlelove you ’vebrought
me

(77) Tamangchoemmộtchútbuồn AlittlesorrowI’vebroughtyou

[Line9,Appendix12]

Byconsideringthesyntacticfeatures,wecanseethedifferenceinstructure

ofthesetwosentences.WiththeVietnameseversion,itistheSVOO:

Ta

mangcho em mộtchútbuồn

S

V

O

O

WiththeEnglishtranslationalversion,itistheOSVO:

Alittlesorrow I

S

’vebrought

you

O

V

O

Ta

mangcho em mộtchútbuồn

you O V O Ta mangcho em mộtchútbuồn Structural-shifts (SVOO  OSVO) Alittlesorrow I

Structural-shifts

(SVOOOSVO)

Alittlesorrow I

’vebrought you

(78) emnợngọtngào yousweetnessown

(haimươinămemnợngọtngào) (twentyyearsyousweetnessowe)

[Line12,Appendix14]

Byconsideringthesyntacticfeatureofthesetwosentences,thegrammatical

elementsarethesame,butthepositionofthemisdifferent.WiththeVietnamese

version,itisthecombinationofSVO:

Em

S

nợ ngọtngào

V

O

whiletheEnglishtranslationalversionisthecombinationofSOV:

You sweetness owe

S

O

V

Structural-shifts

(SVOSOV)

Em nợ ngọtngào
Em
nợ
ngọtngào

You sweetness owe

4.3.2.Intra-systemshifts

Inalistingoftypesoftranslation-shift,suchaswegaveabove,onemight expect “system-shift” to occur along with the names of the types of shift affectingtheotherfundamentalcategoriesofgrammar-unit,structureandclass. Mostofthecasesarethechangesfromsingularinsourcetext–inVietnamese– topluralintargettext–inEnglish.

Intheentirecorpusexamined,thisstrategyappears21timeswith27%inall

thestrategiesused.

InAppendix1,thestrategyIntra-system-shiftsappears2timeswhenthe

translator uses Plural nouns in the English translational version for Common/SingularnounsinVietnameseversion:

(79)

Vietnamese(singular)

English(Plural)