Lexical Non- Equivalence in Translation

الترجمة في المفرداتي التكافؤ عدم

A Presentation given by

Eyhab A. Bader EddinMarch 30, 2015

Theoretical Setting 1. There is no exact equivalence of

meaning between the words of different varieties of languages.

National standards of English use the same lexical items to mean completely different concepts.

A few examples are: (Different words to mean exact objects and concepts)

British English American English

Railway Railroad

Tin Can

Petrol gasoline

Autumn Fall

More confusing words : Same words to mean different concepts

British English American English

Cider (unless specified as ‘sweet cider’ is ALCOHOLIC

Cider (unless specified as ‘hard cider’ is NONALCOHOLIC

School excludes colleges and universities

School includes colleges and universities

A first –floor flat is the one above the ground floor

A first-floor flat is the one on the ground floor

This has prompted a linguistic phenomenon to sprout, i.e. The difference among languages in referring to the same object, using the same linguistic form.

Lexical AnisomorphismOr

Lexical Incongruence

Light blue vs Navy blue

Language development does not follow the same lines of semantic thoughts.

. In other words, two corresponding words in English and Arabic do not generate the same polysemes.

There is an overlap in the development of certain terms and their equivalents.

- A one-to-many lexical equivalence supports the theory that language categorizes areas of meaning differently.- Languages often do not coincide in seeing the same analogous relationships between various objects. أرض درجةEarth, ground, floor, estate,

regionStep, degree, grade, rank, class

Consciousness figure

شعور وجدان، وعي، ضمير، تمثال جسم، شكل، رقم،

In contrast to English using a single verb in collocation with many objects and concepts, Arabic DOES amazingly use a distinct verb for each of them

Break (v)

Glass كسر

Law خالف

Record حطّـم

Spell أبطل

Fast أفطر

String قطع

Engagement فسخ

Promise نكث

Habit أقلع

Silence بّدHد

The multiplicity of words used in Arabic where English uses one word, reveals how the simple actions of ‘breaking’ are perceived by the English and the Arabs in two strikingly different manners.

Cut

Wire قطع

Bread قسم

Finger جرح

Price خـفّـض

Lecture قاطع

The Arabic kinship system, as opposed to its English counterpart, is worth reflecting on. Why?

Cousinابن العم

ابن العمة

ابن الخال

ابن الخالة

بنت العم

بنت العمة

بنت الخال

بنت الخالة

Based on the previous table, we can say ….

The meanings of these terms are defined –in the Arab society- on the basis of three componential features, namely. Sex, generation and lineality.

It is confusing to an Arab to hear or read the repeated reference to ‘cousins’ without being able to differentiate the precise nature of kinship

Arabic and English segment another area differently. The day is roughly divided into 9 basic divisions in Arabic, corresponding to ONLY 6 in English.

العشاء المساء الغسق)

)

المغرب

العصر الظهر

الغداة

الصباح الفجر الصبح)

)

السحر

------ evening

----- afternoon

noon

----- morning

Day-break

Dawn

It would be interesting to survey the lexical items used in Arabic to express the division of a crowd into smaller units

Group

قبيل شرذمة لمّـة رهط نفر

فوج ثلة ثبة طائفة عصبة

فئام جلة sُز ُزمرة حزب فرقة

جُـبـل جُـبلة قِـبص حزيقة حزلة

Another area of interest would be the ‘horse gait’

While English uses the following verbs to describe the horse gait (walk, trot, canter, gallop and pace),

Arabic uses والهملجة والعنق والترقيب الخبب،والخناف والضبع والضبر والتقّدي والفلج واإلرتجال

واإلحضار واإلمجاج واالبتراك والّدحو والرديان والعجيلىواإلهماج ) واإلهّداب واإلرخاء

Translation problems arising from lexical incongruence:

1. Terms that are ONLY partially equivalent.

One instance might be the use of ”uncle“ as a translation of both ” “و عم

خال” “. One more instance is ” جمالية“ ” أو “عوجاء They are rendered instead by ….“generic terms” or “superordinate

lexical item”.

Whereas English has only one main verb ‘love’, Arabic has much more words signifying varying types and intensity of love.The last example on this type of problems is ….

Love

واللوعة والشغف والعشق والكلف والعالقة الهوىوالتدليه والتبل والتيم والجوى والشغف والالعج

والهيام والوله

Leonard Bloomfield states boldly and clearly that:

‘If the forms (of words) are phonemically different, we suppose that their meanings are also different’.

An example is ‘quick, fast, swift, rapid and speedy’.

2. Terms with the same referential meaning, but different stylistic value:

Sometimes the only available equivalent to an Arabic word is one which belongs to a different level of usage, and thus with a different stylistic value.

In such cases, a translator is left to dive deep in the sea of language to come up with ‘poetic diction’ or ‘highly literary lexical items’.

Here is a table, revealing that:

Standard Arabic Literary

قلم يراع

الشفاه اللمى

نحيل أعجف

جريح كليم

ابتعد اُزور�

أبغض شنأ

لبنة مدماكDo we have the same in English?

Interestingly enough, Arabic is characterized by the fact that some plurals are associated with poetic echoes or emotive force. How?

Neutral Emotively or poetically Charged

أضالع أضلع

األحشاء الحشى

أُزهار أُزاهير

كلمات كلم

دموع أدمع

أوالد ولدان

3. Terms with the same referential meaning but different connotation

In every linguistic community, there is tacit agreement about the associations and connotations of words among its speakers.

There are words whose referential meanings have gradually accumulated new emotive components.

An example is ” وليّـة“ ” أو whose “حرمةEnglish available equivalent is only ‘woman’.

Why is ‘woman’ not equivalent to the Arabic ” ولية“ ” أو ?“حرمة

Because the following semantic properties and components are absent from the English given equivalent, namely.

Female inferiorityVeiled and tabooWeakness or helplessness

4. Terms with the same referential meaning but different intensity.

Look at the following Arabic sentence:

” خرافاته عني Hجر“- One translator gave the equivalent ‘to feed’ for ع Hجر“.- The Arabic verbal pattern لHفع implies causation or

the use of force, which are already incorporated by the Arabic verb ع Hجر.

- The word ‘feed’ is a shift to a different semantic domain, i.e. that of eating, and it lacks the aspect of force.

The final example is:” � مدرارا دمعا� عيناه “سحّـت

Hسّح represents an action of greater intensity than do the other verbs which could have replaced it

(e.g. - - - نزل- هتن سال جرى (هطل It is made even stronger by the use of a

morphological form that implies emphasis and exaggeration (the adjective � مّدرارا

If the emotive force generated by these two lexical items can be reproduced, they should be through other modes of expression, NOT through exact lexical parallelism.