Explicitation Profile and Translator Style Renata Kamenická Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic

Concepts Explicitation ~ translation universals + simplification, normalization, avoidance of repetition etc. Explicitation ~ the third code Explicitation ~ the third code

Concepts Translator’s style vs. author’s style Baker, 2000 Bosseaux, 2001 Winters, 2004 Saldanha, 2005

Concepts Typology of explicitation (Klaudy) Obligatory ~ due to language system Optional ~ to preserve “naturalness“ Pragmatic ~ bridging the cultural gap Translation-inherent ~ inherent to the translation process

Concepts Explicitation profile = a set of characteristics describing the translator’s behaviour in terms of explicitation with respect to a certain text (/translation in general?)

Concepts Language metafunctions (Halliday) Ideational – experiential – logical InterpersonalTextual

Explicitation at the crossection of approaches studying: - the individual x the general in translation - translation as a process x as a product - cognitive aspects x sociocultural aspects (norms)

Studying explicitation through - parallel corpora (Vanderauwera, Øveras) - comparable corpora (Baker, Olohan, …) - parallel corpora again?

Material parallel corpus of literary texts – novels by different translators

Objectives To l ink patterns of explicitation choices ~ the translator’s style with respect to a specific literary text the translator’s style in general the stage of the translator’s career etc.

 Characteristics of explicitation behaviour shared by different translators?  Individual characteristics of explicitation behaviour?  In/dependence of explicitation profile of/on a particular text?  Stability of explicitation profile over time?  “Prototypical“ expl. profiles?

Sampling frame Shortlist Inclusion criteria - contemporary translations (1945-) - contemporary originals (1940-) - novels – not historical, not non-fiction, not detective fiction, not experimental not detective fiction, not experimental

Final criterion: maximum span of time maximum number of relevant translations

Radoslav Nenadál (b. 1929) 1973 – 1991 Antonín Přidal (b. 1935) 1974 – – novels each

Pilot study Nenadál (1990): Falconer – J. Cheever Přidal (1984):Small World – D. Lodge

“Explicitation phenomena“ = explicitation + implicitation = explicitation + implicitation→ explicitation/implicitation profile

Language metafunctions (Halliday) Ideational – experiential – logical InterpersonalTextual

 Experiential explicitation / implicitation  Logical explicitation / implicitation  Interpersonal explicitation / implicitation  Textual explicitation / implicitation

Halliday: language as social semiotic meaning potential → instantialization „polyphony“

Systemic functional linguistics Ideational function the „observer function“ the clause as a figure in the flow of events

Systemic functional linguistics Interpersonal function the „intruder function“ the clause as a move in dialogic interaction

Systemic functional linguistics Textual function meaning as texture the clause as a message in the flow of information the clause as a message in the flow of information

Pilot study - material 3 sections of 5,000 words each (parallel text) Section 1 – opening of the novel Section 2 Section 3

Experiential E/IExperiential E/I Logical E/ILogical E/I Interpersonal E/IInterpersonal E/I Textual E/ITextual E/I Narrator level of discourseNarrator level of discourse Characters’ level of discourseCharacters’ level of discourse

Results - general E rate 50 / 5,000 words 1 occurrence / 100 words fairly stable rates

Results – translator-specific Translator 1 (Nenadál) E >I (E rate 3 times higher) E: more varied EXP-N, IP-CH I: fairly stable EXP-N Translator 2 (Přidal) E ~ I E: more varied highly variable I: fairly stable EXP-N

Results – translator-specific Translator 1 (Nenadál) Explicitation preferred over implicitation Avoidance of repetitions „Summarizing“ Translator 2 (Přidal) Flexible management of meaning potential Repetitions: ? E/I compensation

Other results Problematic cases of explicitation generalizing vs. specificity pragmatic explicitation → refining the definitions?

? Klaudy and Károly, 2003: A SL unit of a more general meaning is replaced by a TL unit of a more special meaning → EXPLICITATION

? E: “No one can figure out how she can stand being married to Howard.“ Cz*: “No one can figure out how she can stand being married to that kind of man.“

? E: „terminal One at Heathrow“ Cz*: „the main building of the London airport“

Other results Systemic differences between E and Cz “but“ in E and Cz

E: “They made their trip back to their home in the swamp after dark, and Farragut could not see this.“ Cz*: „They made their trip to their home in the swamp after dark, but Farragut could not see this.“

Thank you for your attention!