Abstract
Translating culture-specific concepts seem to be one of the most challenging tasks to be performed by a translator; in other words, culture and intercultural awareness, are far more complex phenomena than it may seem to the translator. The more a translator is aware of complexities of differences between cultures, the better a translator s/he will be. It is probably right to say that there has never been a time translators were unaware of cultural differences and their significance for translation. Translation theorists have been aware of the problems of cultural knowledge and cultural differences at least since ancient Rome. Cultural knowledge and cultural differences have been a major focus of translator training and translation theory for as long as either has been in existence. The present paper aims to present some procedures and strategies of translating cultural concepts by different theorists, which might help translators during the translation process and make them choose the procedures that seem to be more effective than the others. DOI: 10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n1s1p476
Highlights
The main concern has traditionally been with words and phrases that are so heavily grounded in one culture that they are almost impossible to translate into the terms –verbal or otherwise – of another
The first theory developed in this field was introduced by Mounin in 1963 who underlined the importance of the signification of a lexical item claiming that only if this notion is considered will the translated item fulfill its function correctly
The problem with this theory is that all the cultural elements do not involve just the items, what a translator should do in the case of cultural implications which are implied in the background knowledge of source language (SL) readers? The notion of culture is essential to considering the implications for translation and, despite the differences in opinion as to whether language is part of culture or not, the two notions of culture and language appear to be inseparable
Summary
The main concern has traditionally been with words and phrases that are so heavily grounded in one culture that they are almost impossible to translate into the terms –verbal or otherwise – of another. A "gloss translation" mostly typifies formal equivalence where form and content are reproduced as faithfully as possible and the TL reader is able to "understand as much as he can of the customs, manner of thought, and means of expression" of the SL context. Contrasting with this idea, dynamic equivalence "tries to relate the receptor to modes of behavior relevant within the context of his own culture" without insisting that he "understand the cultural patterns of the source-language context". According to him problems may vary in scope depending on the cultural and linguistic gap between the two (or more) languages concerned
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
