Theorist

Author: Charles Kelly

Is there a distinct and separate feminist research methodology or simply social research informed by feminist ideas? Introduction: The feminist theories and ideas focus on the relationship that exist between gender and social analysis, the perspective of the feminist theory is that inequality in the society is not as a result of biological differences but as a result of social organisation. Some feminist argue that the sociology learnt today is sociology of men stating men point of view and therefore the theories and ideas given are biased with the absence of women based theories and ideas. The feminist ideas are can be traced back to the work of Mary Wollstonecraft, according to the feminist idea they state that women are oppressed, restrained, used, abused by men and subordinated, therefore the feminist theories tend to answer the question what about women in the society. Therefore it is clear that there is a social finding that is informed by the feminist idea in the social research field. The feminist theories report on inequality in the society, they therefore borrow on the idea of Marx regarding inequality and therefore feminism is a Marxist theory, there exist various forms of feminism and these forms address various issues that affect women in the society, for this reason the feminism view of society is a distinct field of research whereby they focus on the existence of gender inequality in the society. Feminist theorist however only focuses on gender problems in the society and do not address other society issues that are greater importance, other theorist such as Emile Durkheim and Karl Marx focused on almost all issues in the society. The feminist are concerned with male dominance and how changes in the society will lead to a gender equal society. This paper focuses on the feminist ideas and the methods they use in research in order to build up their theories and hypothesis. Feminist theories: Mary Wollstonecraft (1759 to 1797) was a philosopher and a feminist theorist, she stated that women are not inferior to men and inferiority only occurred due to the fact that women lacked education, she was the founder of feminism. After Wollstonecraft many feminist theories have been developed and that there exist various political tendencies in feminism and these include: academic feminists, radical feminism, socialist feminism, material feminism, black feminism, white feminism, female supremacy feminism and liberal feminism. Liberal feminism: The liberal feminism is considered the mainstream feminism. Their idea is to assert that men and women are equal through their efforts that are aimed at achieving legal and political reforms. Some of the theorists in this form of feminist include Wollstonecraft, Gloria Steinem, Rebecca Walker and Betty Freidan. Their actions help in showing women ability as a way by which they could gain equality, some of the issues they focus on include equal pay, health care and domestic violence. They achieve their objectives through law whereby they aim at eradicating institutional biasness, in the US their efforts led to the amendment of the equal right constitution. The liberal feminist are aimed at ending domestic violence, ending of racism, promoting lesbian rights, gaining abortion rights and achieving economic justice among women. For this reason therefore the liberal feminism are referred to as the mainstream feminist because they have not deviated from their course of actions and that they are aimed at political reforms that will help achieve gender equality. Black feminism: Black feminism are more concerned with the needs of the black women, their needs include access to food, water and fuel, their needs vary with the needs of the white woman whose needs include equal pay, equal opportunity, equal education opportunities and abortion on demand, from the above therefore the black feminist focus on the needs of the black women and this needs are different from the needs of the white women. Radical feminism: Radical feminists include Carol Hanisch, Judith Brown and Kathie Sarachild, Radical feminism is concerned with the issue of male dominance, they believe that male dominance is the cause of all the women problems, they believe that the power invested in men is the cause of all the problems they face, the radical feminist also view social institutions as rthe root cause of male dominance, they therefore believe that patriarchy is the major cause of oppression whereby the system of patriarchy teaches women how to submit and teaches men how to dominate. The ill of patriarchy are evident from cases of domestic violence, harassment and oppression. Radical feminism state that men benefit from the oppression of women, they claim that men use the social system to maintain male dominance and to keep the women suppressed, for this reason therefore they believe that the elimination of patriarchy and other radical changes in the society will eliminate male domination and women oppression and problems. Material feminism: Material feminism draw their ideas from the work of Marx on social class, they believe that there exist a relationship between class and gender, for this reason therefore there is a controversy in the material feminist idea on whether to seek men or operate independently where by Marx idea is sociology of men whereas other seek to work independently without referring to ideas of the opposite sex. Academic feminism: Academic feminism are concerned with research and teaching of the sex blind academic knowledge taught in the institutions of education, they are concerned with criticising the social learning that does not include women ideas in these institutions, they believe that sociology taught in these institutions is sociology of men and states men point of view in the absence of women ideas in sociology. Academic feminist is the only way in which the feminist could make a breakthrough into the field of sociology, they argue that sociology learnt is sociology of men and for these reason sociology should be rewritten in the presence of women ideas. Feminist research methodology: Despite the various divisions in feminists it is clear that the feminists have led to an increase in the social knowledge regarding the society, feminist ideas are a new finding in the field of social inquiry, this can be supported by the feminist idea that the sociology we learn today is sociology of men that only give us the men points of view regarding the society, however others still argue that the existence of social systems that support male dominance is the main root course of women problems. According to the feminist theory women are oppressed, there is the existence of domestic violence and dominated upon by men, for this reason the radical feminist state that there is need for radical changes in the society in order to gain social equality. They state that the system of patriarchy teaches women how to submit and men how to dominate, for this reason therefore this system should be abolished and replaced by another form of society system which is characterised by equality. Despite the feminist arguments as independent from men ideas it is clear that most of these feminist theories have borrowed from the work of previous men sociologist as a way in which to support their movement, the issues of oppression and domination by men is evident from the work of Marx, they have borrowed from men ideas, for example the material feminism have used Marx idea on social class and oppression, however from Marx theory about women he clearly states that women are not a propertied class and for this reason women are kept as possession to undertake certain activities. Feminist theory is a holistic theory concerned with the global oppression of women and their subordination to men, feminist theory is a political theory practiced with the aim of freeing women from men supremacy and exploitation, for this reason the feminist theory can be viewed as a Marxist theory whereby it is concerned with domination and subordination. Despite its criticism emanating from various theorists it is clear that the origin of feminist can be traced back to the work of Fredrick Engel who wrote the book the origin of the family and private property. According to Fredrick Engel the status of women today is not as a result of biological differences but as a result of the economic system that exist and the emergence of private property in our society. For this reason therefore feminist theorist should be more concerned with the origin of inequality in the society rather than the present state of inequality. According to Marx women are not a propertied class but they produce heirs to the property owned by men, nature the entire family, provide emotional support, and provide sexual gratification to the men who are owners of the property. For this reason it is clear that feminist theory is a Marxist theory but still being a Marxist theory their views are criticised by Marxist theory. Feminist being a Marxist theory depict that the sociology we learn today is a sociology based on the experience of those who hold political and economic power, in this case the sociology we learn is from those who hold power and it men, for this reason we are biased in learning from only those who hold power who according to the feminists are men, therefore the knowledge on social sciences and society is based on those who hold power in the society and for this reason the women in society still remain invisible. Despite the feminist deviating from their original ideas and theory it is still clear that the feminist theorist have their own original ideas and society knowledge, there exist many forms of feminist that have their concerns and issues. It is therefore wrong to criticise their ideas that the sociological knowledge we learn today is based on the work and experience of men in the absence of men. The only way in which the feminist theorist can have a breakthrough is through academic feminism, this will involve challenging and criticising theories and introduction of findings through research. But the questions that feminist pose is that should we rewrite sociology again and this time include the view of women. In most areas of social enquiry there is no ideological position supporting feminism, some support the subordination of women as a social factor and not as a result of biological differences, women are present in most social institutions and where they are not included it is through deliberate efforts to do so and where the women are present their positions and roles are inferior to those of women. The feminist theorist therefore still stand with the idea that in the society we live in today women arte restrained, oppressed, abused and used by men, for this reason therefore it is important to consider them in social scientific enquiry. From the feminist view point it is biased to only take the ideas of men in society whereas there exist women in the society who also play a major role in the society, their ideas are based on Marxism theory of class and social inequality, however they have added on his ideas to a different perspective which is the gender perspective of inequality. To the feminist inequality exists as a division in society in terms of gender. Many sociological theories have failed to support feminist theory, most accept that inequality created in society as a result of gender is not as a result of biological differences between men and women but due to the social organisation that exist. For this reason therefore the feminist theories have contributed to the advancement in social knowledge where new findings are reported as a result of inequality that exists in the society. According to Wollstonecraft book entitled Vindication of the Rights of Women, it is clear that she advocated for offering women equal opportunity to education so that they would gain equal opportunity in the society, she stated that women had rational thoughts if they were given equal opportunity to education. She criticised other scholars such John Gregory for their argument that women did not deserve to be educated. However Wollstonecraft called on the men to initiate the changes in the society that would see equality of opportunity in the society. From the work of Wollstonecraft it is clear that she wrote in a society that was faced with gender inequality, today feminist still report the changes in the society that will bring about gender equality in the society, like Wollstonecraft the feminist theorist urge men to initiate these changes in the society, changes have occurred but still there is evidence of inequality in our society. Betty Freidan was a radical feminist who wrote the feminist Mystique, her writing was influenced by findings in her research findings in 1942 where she found out that women were unease with their lives, for this reason she found out that women had a false belief and that there was need to for them to find an identity. For this reason Betty wrote the book Feminine Mystique. She criticised the notion that women could only find fulfilment in homemaking and childbearing. Her book depicted the roles played by women in the industrial society as housewives and brought encouragement to those women who preferred to be educated. She was however criticised by scholars whereby she was criticised that her analysis was only relevant to the rich and middle class women, also doubts on the sample Betty used to conclude and hypothesis that women were had a false belief and felt unease with their lives. Betty Freidan and Mary Wollstonecraft were feminist theory who analysed the problems that women face, they both agree that women are oppressed and live in a state of false consciousness as Marx stated, Freidan undertook a survey on women regarding women and found out that women were unease with their lives and for this reason it is clear that the feminist research methodology is not different from that of the other theorist, however her findings was criticised for data and methodology used and other theorist claimed that her findings did not reflect the current state of the society. Conclusion: The feminist theories are concerned with inequality that exist in the society as a result of gender, according to the feminist men oppress women and they benefit from oppressing women, they also state that the existence of inequality in the society is as a result of social organisation that exist in the society and not as a result of biological differences. feminist argue that sociological knowledge learnt is the sociology of men stating men point of view and for this reason the theories and ideas given are biased with the absence of women ideas. The origin of feminism can be attributed to the work of Mary Wollstonecraft (1759 to 1797), other feminist theories include Gloria Steinem, Rebecca Walker, Betty Freidan, Carol Hanisch, Judith Brown and Kathie Sarachild. However there exist divisions in feminist sociological enquiry depending on their objectives and needs, these forms include radical feminism, liberal feminism that are referred to as the mainstream feminism, lesbian feminism, black feminism and academic feminism. The liberal feminism is concerned with the idea that men and women are equal and they do this through their efforts that are aimed at achieving legal and political reforms. Black feminism is concerned with the needs of the black women which include access to food, water and fuel. Radical feminists are concerned with the issue of male dominance, they believe that male dominance is the cause of all the women problems and that the power invested in men is the cause of all the problems they face, they also view social institutions as the root cause of male dominance. Material feminism base their argument on Marx work on social class, and finally the Academic feminism are concerned with research and teaching of the sex blind sociological ideas taught in the institutions of education, they criticise the social learning that does not include women ideas in these institutions. The feminist theories have initiated a new sociological research methodology whereby we are to be concerned about the knowledge we learn, we are supposed to be aware that the sociology we learn today does not include the views of women. It is therefore important to include the views of the women in the society and also their ideas because they live in the society and they exist in many institutions in our society. Their views are not taken seriously despite them being oppressed and dominated upon by men. Mary Wollstonecraft and Betty Freidan were feminist theorist both agree that women are oppressed and live in a state of false consciousness as Marx stated, the survey undertaken by Freidan showed that women were unease with their lives and for this reason it is clear that the feminist research methodology is not different from that of the other theorist, however her findings was criticised by other scholars as incorrect. The feminist findings do not use any distinct research methodology but however they focus on different situations in the society which is gender inequality, they focus on the right of women and how inequality could come to an end. For this reason therefore we should not reject feminist ideas as they add into the social field of study, this is where new findings are reported and society and social knowledge is gained. References: Bryson (1999) Feminism Debate: Theory and Political Practises, Macmillan publishers, London Daniel Horowitz (1998) the Making of Feminine Mystique, University of Massachusetts Press, Massachusetts Ellen Willis (1992) Radical Feminism and Feminist Radicalism, Wesleyan University Press, Mary Wollstonecraft (2004) Vindication of the Rights of Women, Penguin publishers, London Mills S (1998) Postcolonial Feminism Theory: Contemporary Feminism Theories, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh Taylor B. (2003) Feminist Imagination of Mary Wollstonecraft, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/education-articles/11877-feminist-theories-2212609.html

About the Author

Author is associated with SuperiorPapers.us which is a global Research Papers and Term Papers Writing Company. If you would like help in Research Papers and Term Paper Help you can visit Term Paper Help, Non-Plagiarized Essays and College Essays.

Author: Alireza Sadeghi Ghadi

Translator Studies has undergone a shift from focus on SC constraints to the manipulation by TC patronage. Translators play an active role in different phases of the activity and their agency has not been given due attention. Norms determine the suitability of translation. Non-compliance is not only possible but also necessary at times, though the behavior involves a price to pay. Norms and the translator's agency are two sides of every translation activity. The former lays down socio-cultural constraints on translating, and the latter is the source of creativity. Both adherence to and breach of norms require the translator's agency. Both the theory and praxis of translation would stand to benefit from a dialectical, rather than a mechanical, view of their relationship.

 Traditionally, translation was defined from the perspective of linguistics. According to Eugene A. Nida, the renowned American theorist on translation, "Translating consists in reproducing the receptor language the closest natural equivalent of the source-language message, first in terms of language and secondly in terms of style"(1969/1982:12). Another English translation theorist by the name of Catford more clearly defined translation as "the replacement of textual material in one language（SL）by equivalent textual material in another language（TL）" (1965:20).

Thus, translation studies conducted from linguistic perspective result in the neglect of cultural factors involved in translation. Translation is in nature a cross-cultural communication rather than a mere handling of languages. As is known to all, language, as a cultural phenomenon and a major carrier of culture, can't survive once separated from the cultural background in which it is deeply rooted. So, translating itself is a process in which cultural intercourse is conducted through the very cultural carrier of language. Every language was born of culture and draws nutrition from it. Therefore, translators should not just concentrate on how to convey the message in one language by the means of another language but endeavour to display the differences of the two cultures' modes of thinking and the habits of expressing feelings.

 All through the history of translation study, the concept of naturalness has been changed by different definitions. It has been affected by some misunderstandings and false assumptions. There is no doubt that offering a natural translation cannot be assumed to be an easy issue inasmuch as it can turn out to be very troublesome in practice and needs very sensitive decision-making on the part of both translator and reader within translation process and evaluation.
Lack of consensus can be considered as the major problem. Each of translation studies' scholars have offered their own definition that will have been rejected or taken under questions by another one. If the scholars consider a set of criteria for their particular definition, it can be possible to depict a shared platform for them. The principle for presenting a new discipline includes two facts, firstly to have a comprehensible definition and then introducing a set of basic rules for it. Naturalness is a reader-oriented approach and can be checked at both macro and micro structural level (Lambert and Vangorp, 1985). In order to judge about naturalness of translation, the norms of target language are considered as the scales of evaluation. These norms are specified by native speakers of that language. Native speaker is defined by The Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary as follow: "A person who speaks a language as their first language and has not learned it as a foreign language".
All languages have particular terminology, some of which are deeply rooted in the culture of the speakers of the specific language; consequently, they can pose unique difficulties in the comprehension of culture specific texts. To evaluate naturalness of a translation, reader should be aware of these items which are constituent of target culture norms.

Norms refer to the translation of general values or ideas shared by a group - as to what is conventionally right and wrong, adequate and inadequate - into performance instructions, appropriate for and applicable to particular situations, specifying what is prescribed and forbidden, as well as what is tolerated and permitted in a certain behavioral dimension (Toury 1998: 15). Translation, as a social and cultural activity, is norms-governed. Norms are not to be understood as hard and fast rules though. Norms operate not only in translation of all kinds, but also at every stage in the translating event (Toury 1995: 58). John Dryden's metaphor of 'dancing on ropes with fettered legs' refers to the constraints imposed by the source text and by the linguistic-cultural ethos of the potential or intended target text as well as to the linguistic and cultural norms on translation. On the other hand, as a highly creative task, translation sometimes requires the practitioners to move beyond norms. The relationship between translation norms and the translator's agency is hence paradoxical and complex. This paper is an attempt at clarifying the relationship between the two. The article begins with a review of the translator-studies literature, and after a discussion of the possibility and necessity of loosening up norms, investigates the translator's role in the different phases of translation. It perorates with the conclusion of a dialectical view of the relationship between translation norms and the translator's agency. 

 The existence of competing norms in a society involves choices. Translators tend to follow the mainstream norms so as to be more easily patronized. In some cases, however, particularly at times of cultural transition, several conflicting norms might be equally influential. This enables translators to decide to go with one norm and accept one patronage rather than another. The translator's position is crucial at this moment.

The translator's response to the editor's poetic requirements and the critic's comments is also complex. Translators normally obey the obligatory requirements, but may accept or reject the technical suggestions according to their own professional judgment. Some translators may establish good relationships with the critics, while others may insist on their own principles in spite of the critics' opposition.

The selection of alternative norms involves a price to pay. But it does not necessarily lead to severe punishment, nor does it mean the invalidity of norms. At times, a slight breach of norms is not only tolerated, but also encouraged.

"Some literary translators might claim that their intention is precisely to break these norms. And translations of advertisements sometimes appear deliberately to flout the expectancy norms of the target culture"

(Chesterman 1997: 60)

Norms are "the main factors ensuring the establishment and stability of a social order" (Toury 1995:55), but they may also, in effect, restrain innovation. In this sense, they must sometimes be challenged and changed. Otherwise, prejudice will last a long time. Hence failure to adhere to norms does not always mean anything negative. On the contrary, it may be the source of cultural creativity. Only when the previous norms are broken is it possible for new ones to become dominant, and for cultures to develop.

The Translator's Agency in Different Phases of Translation

Translation is governed by norms, but as a creative activity, it also requires the maximum use of the translator's agency.

"The translator's agency is manifested not only in the translator's comprehension, interpretation and artistic re-presentation of the source texts, but also in the selection of source texts, the cultural motivations of translation, the adoption of strategies, and the manipulation in the prefaces of the expected functions of the translations in the target culture".

(Cha et al 2003: 22)

The translator's role in text selection varies from time to time. In most cases, it is the publisher who selects source texts and translators. But translators have the right to accept or reject the rendition of certain works. Regardless of the actual power of translators, in the Chinese context, text selection has often been an important criterion of translation criticism. The product of translating is directly shaped by the translator's comprehension of the source texts and the specific strategies he employs. Competence is crucial to the accuracy of translation, but the translator's conscious or unconscious intervention is inevitable, particularly in the forms of ideological and/or poetical deletions, rewritings and additions. Manipulation exists not only in the translations, but also in the prefaces and postscripts, which are short, conspicuous, and therefore very effective in manipulating the readers to produce the desired cultural results.

Translators manipulate the source texts in the service of power. They are in turn manipulated by the patronage so that the target readers and society are manipulated. On some occasions, however, translators may manipulate their patrons.

"Translation involves trust. The audience, which does not know the original, trusts that the translation is a fair representation of it".

(Lefevere 1990: 15)

Trust from readers and translation commissioners bring some power to translators, the exercise of which is closely connected with the translator's loyalty and reliability. In case translators have access to information unavailable to their clients, or where translators are in short supply, they might make full use of this and manipulate both the source texts and the patrons in order to achieve certain purposes. This helps us to understand why translators who have exclusive or near-exclusive access to information otherwise unavailable to those in power tend to be closely supervised and vetted for political loyalty (Hermans 1999b: 130).

 

Among all factors affecting the occurrence of stylistic shifts, the role of the translator stands as the most recognizable factor. The majority of optional shifts taking place in translation can be attributed to the differences between the original writer and the translator as two text-producers. However, the impacts of these differences are usually suppressed by the literary norms of the TL and the norms of the translation activity itself. More important is the translator's relation to the text given. This relation is neatly described by Popovič (1970:80) as follows:

It is not the translator's only business to 'identify' himself with the original; that would merely result in transparent translation. The translator also has the right to differ organically, to be independent, as long as independence is pursued for the sake of the original, a technique applied in order to reproduce it as a living work... Thus shifts do not occur because the translator wishes to 'change' a work, but because he strives to reproduce it as faithfully as possible and to grasp it in its totality.

Popovič's statement reminds us of many factors, which affect the translator's adoption of a particular style in rendering a particular text into another language. One of these factors is the literary norms that may differ in the SL and TL, the case which leaves the translator with three choices: to imitate the original style, to rely on the TL stylistic norms, or to compromise the two by practicing his own stylistic prejudice. The last two options would naturally result in a great deal of stylistic shifts.

The other point is that some languages may have much more highly developed aesthetic and rhetorical patterns than other languages, which gives the translator more freedom to choose the way he likes in expressing the original message. Moreover, the range and refinement of some literary genres could be more developed in one language than in another. Both cases are typically applicable to the translation of elevated literature such as poems, epics, religious texts, etc.

The third factor relevant to the role of the translator in stylistic shifts relates to the 'national features' of the ST. In this regard Zora Jesenka (quoted by Popovič, 1970:81) has the following to say:

Both the translator and the reader are the children of their generation, which displays its own character in its manner of perception and expression. And the older the work we translate and the more distant the culture which produced it, the more crucial culture is the question of how to preserve the temporal and national features of the original and to make them accessible to the actual perception of the present reader.

Thus, it is the aim of making such literary works accessible to the TL reader that encourages the translator to use stylistic shifts. Following Popovič (ibid.), such shifts are expected as a rule "because the identity and difference in relation to the original cannot be solved without some residue." Up to this point, the translator's dilemma becomes evident: he would never strive to preserve all the singularities of the original but rather he would try to reflect his own identity while preserving the gist of the original message. Furthermore, he will try to make use of contemporary equivalents and comprehensible by his perceptive reader. Doing all these tasks, the translator will display much of his translation skill and literary taste. Skill and literary taste are two prerequisites to produce a 'natural' translation because the act of substituting the SL norms by TL ones is a highly subjective issue that demands creative intuition on the part of the translator. Again, this is so because direct transfer of specific stylistic features from the SL into the TL is hindered by both the organic character of the ST components and the divergence between the two stylistic norms of both languages, on the other. This transfer becomes possible "only by means of an equivalent function, namely by appropriate shifts." (Popovič).

To sum up, our perception of the role of the translator is that he is a performer of a dual task. On the one hand, he has to adhere as much as he can to the content of the message, including its form (if it is part of this content); on the other hand, he tries to reflect his identity and tends to produce a 'natural' text. This tendency, we believe, can best be achieved by means of a set of stylistic shifts.

Shifts of Cohesion and Coherence

 

Approached from reader's point of view, Blum-Kulka (in Venuti 2000:304) equates coherence with the text's interpretability. In considering shift in coherence through translation she points out the possibility that the text may change their potential meaning through translation. The above quotation answers the question ‘what' is coherence and what is shift of coherence. Bell (1991:165) identifies that coherence consists of the configuration and sequencing of concepts and relations of the textual world which underlie and are realized by the surface text. Hu (1991:42) states that coherence covers cohesion and they are intertwined. Further she describes that coherence in the SLT is closely tied to cohesion, and translation equivalence can sometimes be attained by manipulating those markers that are overt. As search for coherence is a general principle in discourse interpretation, Blum Kulka (in Venuti 2000:298) states that coherence can be viewed as a covert potential meaning relationship among parts of a text, made overt by the reader through process of interpretation. For this process to be realized, the reader or listener must be able to relate the text to relevant or familiar worlds, either real or fictional. From the above description, in relation to this study we can say that coherence shift is an adjustment of SL unknown concept into known TL concept by making overt the covert discoursal potential meaning relationship among parts of the text through process of interpretation. On the other hand, as semantic translation, it can be stated that cohesion shift is meaning adjustments of meaning components in textual relationships of a known concept in a different linguistic system of two languages. 

 

Theoretical Framework

 

The Theoretical Framework of this study based on the theory proposed by Blum-Kulka (in Venuti 2000) about ‘Shifts of Cohesion and Coherence in Translation', for the classification of cohesion shift of expression. This theory is supported by Larson (1998) for the analysis of meaning components of a concept of expression, for the translation equivalent.

Blum-Kulka quotes Haliday and Hasan (1976), cohesion ties do much more than provide continuity and thus create the semantic unity of the text. The choice involved in the types of cohesive markers used in a particular text can effect the texture as being "loose" or "dense" as well as the style and meaning of that text. On level of cohesion, he divides shifts in cohesion into two:

 

a. Shifts in levels of explicitness, namely the general levels of the target text's textual explicitness is higher or lower, than that of the source text.

 

b. Shifts in text meaning(s); namely the explicit and implicit meaning potential of the source text changes through translations.

 

Cohesion in this study means cohesive relationship of meaning component in a semantic domain of a concept. Larson (1998:429) states that semantic domain does not refer to using the same form or referring to the same specific item over and over (this would be concordance), but rather to the fact that the things being referred to are from the same domain, i.e., center around the same topic or have certain semantic components in common. For example: from specific to generic meaning component or vice versa, from explicit to implicit meaning or vice versa. On coherence, for objects and events which are unknown in the receptor culture, this study quotes Larson (1998:181) that understanding correspondence of the form and its function is crucial to finding good lexical equivalents (we are not talking about linguistic form, but physical form). She divides the correspondence of the FORM and its FUNCTION into four possibilities: 

 

a. A THING or EVENT in one language ands culture may have the same FORM and the same FUNCTION in another language. For example, eyes with the function of seeing are the same in all cultures and languages.

 

b. The FORM may be the same but the FUNCTION may be different. For example, fried rice for western people may only be served for breakfast, but for eastern people may be served for lunch and dinner as well.

 

c. The same FORM does not occur, but another THING or EVENT with the same FUNCTION does occur. For example, heart in SL expression broken heart, does not have the same FORM in TL.

 

d. There may be no correspondence of FORM and FUNCTION at all. For example, sheep has the function of being a sacrifice for sin for a certain culture. However, for a SL culture animal sheep does not occur because of no comparable animal for a sacrifice for sin. There is no correspondence of either form or function. In that case, the translation will need to use a descriptive phrase for both the FORM and function.   

 

COHESION AND COHERENCE SHIFT OF EXPRESSION IN THE TRANSLATION

 

2.1 Cohesion Shift of Expression

In translating concept of meaning, it is often found that there is no exact equivalent between the SL and target language expression due to linguistic differences of two languages. There will be expressions which have some of the meaning components combined in them matching an expression which has the components with some additional ones. There will be overlap, but there is seldom a complete match between languages. Further, Blum-Kulka defined that on the level of cohesion, shifts in types of cohesive markers used in translation seem to affect translations in one or both of the following directions:

 

2.1.1 Shifts in Levels of Explicitness

 

In translating, the process of interpretation performed by the translator on the source text might lead to a TL text which is more redundant than the SL text. This redundancy can be expressed by the higher level of cohesive explicitness in the TL text.

 

(1)The General Level of the Target Text's Textual Explicitness is Higher than that of the Source Text

Larson (1998:495) stated that in the most general terms, the rule is that implicit information should be made explicit, if the receptor language necessitates it in order to avoid wrong meaning or in order to present the material in natural forms and pleasing style.

 

(2)The General Level of the Target Text's Textual Explicitness is Lower than that of the Source Text

The guidelines for the discussion are very similar to those given above but are the converse, since the level of target text's textual explicitness is not always higher than that of source text. They also have to do with the requirements of the target language grammatically, semantically, and stylistically as, always, general principle in translation. 

 

Coherence Shift of Expression

From the above discussion, in cohesion shift, as a semantic translation, there is an adjustment of target texts' textual explicitness that can be overtly seen at textual relationship namely objectively detectable of lexically dependable in the phrase (as a language pair-specific phenomenon) of TL translation. On the other hand, as a communicative translation, coherence shift is an adjustment of meaning concept of a covert discoursal potential meaning relationship among parts of the text made overt by the translator through process of interpretation. Larson, (1998:181) stated that when the concept of expression for objects and events to be translated is not known in target language, the translator will be looking for a way to express a concept which is part of the translator world knowledge related to the experience of target language reader by transferring them into SL objects /events. Such transferring may result shift of SL text meaning. Further, he states that things and events can be looked at from the perspective of the FORM (FORM here means physical form not linguistic form) of the THING or EVENT, or from the perspective of its FUNCTION. 

 

CONCLUSION 

A translator is at the same time social and individual. Which means he is constrained by social and cultural norms of the time, and at the same time, has his own specific individuality and agency. The translator's agency and the factors that constrain his agency exist side by side. On the one hand, the translator is bound to constraints by certain factors in his exercise of agency. Faced with many constraints, on the other hand, the translator still has room to exert his agency. Translation is a combination of universal constraints on translators as a group and the agency of translators as individuals. As Hermans (Hermans 1999b:74) put it, "translation decisions are neither fully predetermined nor totally idiosyncratic". Over-emphasis on social constraints and ignoring the translator's agency will result in the fall of the translator's status and responsibility as well as the quality of translations. And negligence of cultural norms might lead to random translation.

Translation, as a norms-governed creative work, requires the translator to follow his own inclinations, but within an acceptable range of norms. For this, the maximum use of the translator's agency is required. Norms ensure the suitability of the translation behavior, and the translator's agency is the source of creativity. Both the adherence to and loosening up of norms require the translator's agency. A dialectical rather than a mechanical view of their relationship is healthy for translation studies and practice.

In transferring the source language expression, the translator applies cohesion shift and coherence shift. In brief, it can be stated that cohesion shift is meaning adjustments, of meaning components in textual relationships of a shared or known concept in a different linguistic system of two languages. On the other hand, coherence shift is an adjustment of an unknown meaning concept of a covert discoursal potential meaning relationship among parts of the text made overt by the translator through process of interpretation to appropriate the meaning for the intended reader. The principles of classification of cohesion and coherence shifts of expression are as follows:

 

Cohesion shift of expression: (1) Shifts in Levels of Explicitness namely the general level of the target texts' textual explicitness is higher or lower than that of the source text, (2) Shifts in Text Meaning(s) namely the explicit and implicit meaning potential of the known and unknown concept of SL text changes through translation due to different TL linguistic system.

 

Coherence shift of expression: Changes on most general level of SL unknown concept with the text's interpretability. As a covert SL potential meaning relationships among parts of a text, it is made overt by the translator through process of interpretation namely: (1) From the FORM of the THINGS to the different FORM of the THINGS, (2) From the FORM of the THING to the FORM of the EVENTS, (3) From FORM of the EVENT to the different EVENT, and (4) Coherence shift by cultural gap.

 

REFERENCES 

 

Bell, Roger T. 1991. Translation and Translating. London: Longman Group UK Limited.Longman House, Burnt Mill, Harlow, Essex CM 20 2JE.

 

Blum-Kulka, Shoshana. 2000. Shifts of Cohesion and Coherence in Translation. In The Translation Studies Reader. 298-313. London: Routledge.

 

Catford, J.C. 2000. Translation Shifts: In The Translation Studies Reader. 141- 147. London: Routledge.

 

Halliday, M.A.K. and Ruqaiya Hasan. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman Group Ltd.

 

Hornby, A S. 2003. Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English. London: Oxford University Press.

 

House, Juliane. 1997. Interlingual and Intercultural Communication. Tubingen: University of Amsterdam.

 

Hu, Helen Chau. 1999. Cohesion and Coherence in Translation Theory and Pedadogy. Word 50 (1): 33-45. University of London.

 

Larson, Mildred L. 1998. Meaning-Based Translation. A Guide to Cross- Language Equivalence. Lanham. Maryland: Second Edition.UniversityPress of America, Inc.

 

Maclachlan, Gale and Ian Reid. 1994. Framing and Interpretation. Melbourne University Press.

 

Nida, Eugine. 2000. Principles of Corresspondence. In The Translation Studies Reader. 126-140. London: Routledge

Tan, Zaixi (1991) Brief History of Western Translation Beijing: The Commercial Press.

Toury,Gideon(1995)DescriptiveTranslation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Toury, Gideon (1998) A Handful of Paragraphs on Translation and Norms, Current Issues in Language & Society, Vol. 5, Nos. 1&2.

Wang, Kefei & Fan, Shouyi (1999) Translation in China: A Motivating Force Meta, XLIV, (1).

 

Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/non-fiction-articles/shift-in-translation-or-translation-shift-2116778.html

About the Author

MA in TRANSLATION, Great Translation Theoretician,Mazandaran Province, Ghaemshahr City,IRAN

Author: Susan M Kovalinsky

In the past few decades,  with the advance of quatum theory and the popularization of quantum physics as New Age ideology,  philosophy has suffered somewhat of an epistemic exile within popular culture.    Something should be done,  but what?

Omnes and Sangalli in their text,  Quantum Philosophy (Princeton University Press,  1999)   speak about "the fracture"  which occurred within the realms of philosophy,  logic, and science,   forever designating Aristotlean thinking as "classical" while quantum philosophy is termed as "formal".  Their fine text  engages in a comprehensive study,  the details of which go beyon the scope of this article.  But I open with a quote from another work by Roland  Omnes:  ". . . the deepest forms of questiong arise. . . from quantum physics".    As Omnes rightly assets,  the line between quantum sicence and philosophy is a blurred one.  When I speak of the need for a cohesive theory,  I am speaking of one that will appeal to the general,  intelligent public, and not specialized academic theories,  which nonetheless are the origins of popular ones.

My interest is in applied philosophy:  That which it has to offer the culture,  in ethics,  counseling, and popular theoretical discourse.  A robust theory which could speak to general interests in an elegantly simple way would be the best beginning.  Much of current "New Age"  theory is so sloppy,  soft,  sentimental,  and plain silly so that the rift between science and philosophy in academia,  and popular culture would seem to be widening irrevocably.  When I first read Anthony Peake in 2007,  it was an accidental encounter.  A random search on the internet showed his essay,  Cheating the Ferryman:  A New Pardigm of Existence? Leaving aside personal bereavement issues and a background in Nietzsche studies which made Peake extremely appealing to me ,  I was taken by his ability to fuse quantum physics with one of the central docrtines of Nietzsche:  the eternal return of the same.

I have often wondered if the popular culture could be made to leave its juxtaposition of old world religious ideas and new fangled new age fantasies.  Peter Novak made an excellent start in The Division of Consciousness.  But matters did not unfold well:  Novak became pre-occupied both with reincarnation and Armageddon.  In Anthony Peake,  I thought I saw a better Novak.  One more subtle and less given to mania.  Of course Peake has had to go it alone in many senses:  He has been labled by turns as a pseudo-scientist, a solipsist,  an author whose key role is to engage in sophistry,  an afterlife theorist,  and a new age icon.  What he has not been taken seriously as is a theorist who has much to offer Nietzschean philosophy ,  and by association ,  the thinking of Heidegger,  Schopenhauer,  Jaspers,  and Kierkegaard.  Is Peake an existential messenger?  I think so.  But rather than expounding on his ideas here,  I welcome New Yorkers,  whether they be academics,  readers,  or journalists,  to come hear hims on August 3 at the Roosevelt Hotel,  in a public lecture hosted by Gnosis Arts Multimedia.  Peake's lecture will begin at 6 p.m.m and there will be a complimentary bar and buffet for attendees, in the Broadway Suite. ( Madison Avenue @ E 45,  NYC 10017).

Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/philosophy-articles/why-we-need-a-coherent-quantum-philosophy-1028369.html

About the Author

SM Kovalinsky is a blogger, writer, reporter, and publicist from Morris County, NJ, with a strong emphasis on philosophical analysis of American culture and politics. She is blog master of "Musing in Obama's America".

Author: DR. ARSHAD HUSAIN

 By Arshad Husain

 

Introduction

The dynamic business environment, increasing global competition, increased factor mobility especially that of human resources within and across national borders, rapid technological innovations and rapidly evolving product and services markets compel the organizations of today to be flexible in each and every respect of their structure and operations in strive for survival and growth. Under these conditions, there is only one constant for the organization, and that is change. The existing body of literature focuses mainly the reengineering and radical redesigning of processes in manufacturing organizations. This article seeks to examine and elaborate the management of structural and process change in service organizations where human psycho-social cognitive elements are important determinants of success of change interventions. With dominant role of human resources as the competitive weapon, service providers are increasingly facing problems in structural and process transitions for achieving and maintaining competitive advantage in the struggle of survival and growth. This article aims to present a model dealing with the management of change in service organizations using the change agents from strategic apex and techno staff by sequentially removing the physical and psychological barriers to change. The postulated relationships and model would serve to enhance the understanding of management theorists and practitioners in dealing with change and the management of change in dynamically evolving contemporary service organizations.

The recent growth of services sectors and services organizations in the developed and developing economies has brought them to the focus of management theorist and practitioners to judge the applicability of conventional organizational models in these new organizational settings. With dominant role of employees performance as a predictor of such firms' performance, this paper seeks to develop a model of organizational change, emphasizing the role of strategic apex in making intervention in the psycho-social cognitive elements of soft structure of organizations. The organization change refers to any alteration in the processes and structure of the organization, which results in the evolution and development of the organization, keeping in view its continuously changing environment. At the same time, it is even more about changing how people do the business, how they think and act, it is about changing part(s) of schemata and worldviews of people (Spencer, 2001).

Change should not be taken only as an operative refinement; rather it's a strategy to accomplish some overall goal. Usually organizational change is provoked by some major external drivers, e.g. increased competition, technological advancements, emerging markets, etc. Typically, organizations must undertake organization-wide changes to evolve to another sequential stage in their life cycle, e.g., going from a highly reactive, entrepreneurial venture to a more stable and planned development and ultimately towards being a perpetual institution. The organizational ecologists, thus, advocate that the success of an organization is dependent on its flexibility to cope to the changing environment and change itself in accordingly

Despite the wide body of research in the area, very few researchers have noted the importance of identifying organizational parameters prior to change. Cameron et al (1993) regard such parameters as "organizational readiness" for change. Depending on the existing culture and the degree to which a change (such as TQM) differs from that culture, an organization may be more or less ready for such a change. Tichy and Devanna (1986) discuss "creating a need for change and opening up the organizational culture to be receptive to the change. They indicate that this is especially difficult when there is no crisis, but rather the long-range vision of a leader is the basis of such change, who anticipates the implementation time of organizational change. At this point, the role of strategic apex i.e. top management team (TMT) is emphasized as decisive and most effective in making the change visible and viable. The objective of this article is to develop a model of organizational change postulating the dominant role of TMT in creating need for change. The use of culture as tool as well as a target of such change is emphasized, which serves to reduce the negative impact of rigid culturally embedded processes of services organization on employees' behavioral resistance to organizational change.

Dimensions of change

Introduced as the only constant in the rapidly changing world of today, change has got many dimensions, characterized on the basis of magnitude, timing and scope of change.

Organization change versus Subsystems change

The Organization change refers to an overall change in organization on a broader level as compared to a subsystem change. The organization change might be seen where there is reorganization of the overall system e.g, downsizing and restructuring, while a subsystem change is smaller in scope, and is characterized by activities like introducing new production technology, or change in product attributes.

Transformational versus Incremental change

Transformational change is also known as radical redesigning, or reengineering, while incremental changes in the organizations are carried out on a smaller scale at a continuous basis in the organization.. (Carter, 1997) Continuous process improvement ensures that there is an ongoing culture of continuous incremental improvements throughout the processes of the organization, while transformational change refers to the complete makeover of systems.

Remedial versus Developmental change

Change undertaken in order to rectify a problem in the organization is known as remedial change while the effort of change which is undertaken to prevent any such problems is known as the developmental change. That is, if the organization undertakes preventive and developmental efforts, the need for remedial changes do not arise.

Planned versus Unplanned change

Planned Change is change resulting from a deliberate decision to alter the organization, while unplanned change is imposed on the organization and is often unforeseen e.g, retrenchment from export operations owing to a ban on exports of a certain commodity. The difference between planned change and unplanned change is of strategic back up. The unplanned change lacks prior strategic iteration, which makes its prospects of successful and efficient implementation questionable.

Change Management in Service Organizations

Service Organizations are such organization which are characterized by the non tangible nature of their offerings.

‘A service is an activity or a series of activities of more or less intangible nature that normally, but not necessarily take place in interactions between the customer and the service employee and/or physical resources or goods and/or systems of the service provider, which are provided as solutions to customer problems.'(Gronroos, et al, 1990)

Services do not have a physical dimension. When these are described using tangible nouns, it obscures the nature of the service which remains intangible.(Shostack, 1987)

The most important characteristic of services is that these are a function of human involvement throughout the delivery and consumption process. That is why the human resources are supposed to be the competitive weapons of the organizations. However, where there are human beings, there is always a resistance to change, an inertia which opposes the changes in the structure, processes and culture of the organizations, as people have an innate preference for stability and continuity.(Brooks, 1994)

According to Suddaby, Greenwood, 2005 "those resisting change adopt the mythology of moral tradition and choose words that evoke a value orientation and scenarios of change that neglect the existing order of things".

 

 

Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/organizational-articles/change-management-in-service-organizations-2632183.html

About the Author

CAREER PROFILE OF ARSHAD HUSAIN          

                                                                                                        

                  

Arshad Husain, is a PROFESSOR of MARKETING & HRM, Member of the Management Committee, and a Head of Department at one of the best universities in Pakistan. He was previously CHAIRMAN of MARKETING & HR at another excellent university. He himself, is extremely well educated from the very best universities.

 

 

He has had a long career progression in multinational organizations rising very quickly at a young age through the Oil, Engineering, Telecommunications, Automobile, and finally the Pharmaceutical Sector. He has traveled widely Internationally overseeing contracts specially, during his work experience based in ENGLAND at a top management position as General Manager, International Operations, Heading the Marketing , Human Resources, and Material Operations departments in a multinational global organization based in LONDON. He has independently headed an HR Department, as Director Human Resources in a multinational global organization.

 

 

He became a CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER (CEO), of a global multinational company in PAKISTAN, which position he held for a number of years, and was later (even as a CEO), visiting faculty at top universities before settling down as permanent faculty.

 

 

He teaches a total of 31 Management Science subjects which includes the whole range of Human Resource Management and Marketing subjects, plus other subjects of interest in Management such as Leadership, Decision Making, Organizational Development etc.

 

 

Today, he is a guest speaker at many universities in Pakistan, and abroad. He has written a book on Business Research which is presently under publication as per HEC requirements, and is in the process of writing a book on Project Management, and yet another, on the New Perspective of HRM in Pakistan. He has to his credit, many well researched articles published internationally besides having actively organized and participated in both local and international lectures, seminars, workshops and conferences.