LITERALITY (LITERALISM)

LITERAL THE WORD A WRITING A TEXT IN THESE CASES, MEANINGS –OF A WORD –OF A PASSAGE OF WRITING –OF A WHOLE TEXT MAY NOT FULLY COINCIDE WITH ONE ANOTHER.

THE TEXT “…IS NOT MADE OF LEGO BRICKS, ITS COMPONENTS CANNOT BE CONSIDERED IMMUTABLE…” NATURAL LANGUAGE CHARACTERISTICS: –NO FINITE FORM, TEXTURE, COLOR, OR ASPECT. –NATURAL LANGUAGE IS ANISOMORPHIC

THE DEBATE ON LITERALITY THE POLEMIC USE OF THE ADJECTIVE “LITERAL” THE TRANSLATION OF THE BIBLE –THE HELLENIST SCHOOL (SPIRITUAL, ALLEGORICAL INTERPRETATION) –THE JEWS (MATERIALIST)

THE DEBATE ON LITERALITY ALLEGORY = RHETORICAL FIGURE ACCORDING TO WHICH A WORD REFERS TO A DEEPER AND HIDDEN SENSE. The Greek etymology of the word leads to the sense of “speaking in another way”.

THE DEBATE ON LITERALITY HEBRAIC/JEWISH VS. HELLENIST/GREEK –CULTURAL DIFFERENCES THE HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION OF BIBLICAL EVENTS CAN BE CONSIDERED THE MOST LITERAL AND DEPLORABLE.

THE DEBATE ON LITERALITY CHINESE AND JESUIT EXEGESIS –“THE ANALYSIS CARRIED OUT BY JESUIT MISSIONARIES CREATED THE ILLUSION OF A LACK OF GRAMMATICAL CATEGORIES AND, CONSEQUENTLY, OF THE ABSENCE IN THEIR CULTURE OF THE NOTION OF “EXISTENCE”; MORE GENERALLY, OF THE CHINESE LANGUAGE’S INABILITY TO EXPRESS ABSTRACT CONCEPTS AND THE SUBSEQUENT INTERPRETATION OF ALL CONCEPTS AS CONCRETE”.

LITERALISM VS. FIGURATIVE LANGUAGE “…THE CULTURES THAT WERE ABLE TO ASSIGN A FIGURATIVE MEANING TO THE WORDS WOULD BE ABLE TO GRASP THE LITERAL MEANING AS WELL; BY CONTRAST, THE CULTURES ABLE TO GIVE ONLY A PURELY LITERAL MEANING TO WORDS WOULD BE ABLE TO GRASP JUST THAT, AND NOT A FIGURATIVE ONE.”

LITERAL VS. ALLEGORICAL WORD OR TEXT AS A WHOLE LITERALITY = THE INTERPRETATION OF A TEXT IGNORING ITS CONTEXT AND CO-TEXT. LITERAL = LEXICAL THE NATURALITY OF THE TRANSLATION (UNDERSTANDABLE) MISUNDERSTANDING OR SLOW DOWN IN THE PERCEPTION

THE DEBATE ON LITERALITY “THOSE WHO CONSIDER THIS WAY OF TRANSLATING “WRONG” IMPLICITY PREFER A QUICK AND EASY TEXT ASSIMILATION, WITHOUT SUCH FREQUENT INTERPRETIVE REFLECTIONS. FROM THIS POINT OF VIEW, LITERALISM IS THE ENEMY OF PRAGMATIC, FAST, FUNCTIONAL COMMUNICATION, BUT IS A FRIEND TO SLOW, PROFOUND TEXT ASSIMILATION.”

EQUIVALENCE LITERAL = NOT A TRANSLATION METHOD, BUT A STAGE IN TRANSLATION TRANSLATION OCCURS IN STAGES CONCERNING NOT THE TRANSLATOR’S MIND, BUT THE DEGREE OF ELABORATION OF THE TEXT. –THE PROTOTEXT –THE INTERMEDIATE TEXT –THE METATEXT

POEM BY EMILY DICKINSON “IT’S ALL I HAVE TO BRING TODAY THIS AND MY HEART BESIDE. THIS AND MY HEART AND ALL THE FIELDS AND ALL THE MEADOWS WIDE. BE SURE YOU COUNT – SHOULD I FORGET SOMEONE THE COUNT COULD TELL THIS AND MY HEART AND ALL THE BEES WHICH IN THE CLOVER DWELL.” ESTO ES TODO YO TENGO TRAER HOY ESTO Y MI CORAZóN AL LADO. ESTO Y MI CORAZóN Y TODOS LOS CAMPOS Y TODAS LAS PRADERAS ANCHAS. ESTA SEGURO Tú CUENTAS – DEBERíA YO OLVIDAR ALGUIEN LA CUENTA PODRíA DECIR. ESTO Y MY CORAZóN Y TODAS LAS ABEJAS CUALES EN EL TRéBOL HABITAN”

POEM BY EMILY DICKINSON “IT’S ALL I HAVE TO BRING TODAY THIS AND MY HEART BESIDE. THIS AND MY HEART AND ALL THE FIELDS AND ALL THE MEADOWS WIDE. BE SURE YOU COUNT – SHOULD I FORGET SOMEONE THE COUNT COULD TELL THIS AND MY HEART AND ALL THE BEES WHICH IN THE CLOVER DWELL.” ES TODO LO QUE TENGO QUE TRAER HOY, ESTO Y, AL LADO, MI CORAZóN. ESTO Y MI CORAZóN Y TODOS LOS CAMPOS Y TODAS LAS ANCHAS PRADERAS. TEN POR SEGURO QUE Tú CUENTAS – ACASO LO OLVIDARíA. ALGUIEN PUDIERA ESTA CUENTA LLEVAR. ESTO Y MY CORAZóN Y TODAS LAS ABEJAS QUE EN EL TRéBOL HABITAN”