Similarities and Differences between English and Chinese With Reference To Translation - Research Paper Example

Similarities and Differences between English and Chinese With Reference To Translation Section I Definition of Translation English and Chinese fit into two extremely diverse groups of the languages of human beings. The relationship among the translation with the original text is quite complex. The term Translation has various meanings, and they can be put into classes. Firstly, translation can be defined as a precise as well as complete procedural turn of phrase of a single language of the article that had been articulated before, by way of a different language. Translation is also an action by a translator of changing a text in an individual verbal communication into a text having similar meaning, but in a different language, also it is a printed or a spoken expression of a language. Thirdly, it is an aptitude comprising of the efforts to substitute a noted down text or declaration in an individual language, by similar note or declaration in a different language. Next, translation can also be termed as a way of endowing communication between two languages, through construction of words in the target language, planned entirely to substitute the original words.1 Translation is also the replication of the contiguous likely correspondent of the original language text in the receiving language, primarily based on description as well as style. Lastly, it is the explanation of oral symbols in a certain language by way of oral signs in a different language.2 Chinese and English languages have a variety of similarities as well as differences in translation as well as pronunciation as will be discussed in this paper. Section II Translation With Reference to Diction, Syntax, and Semantics Translation is a form of a variety of practices and can be termed based on the three levels of languages, which are syntax, spoken clarity along with semantics. With reference to diction, translation can be termed as the substitution of the sentence structure as well as expressions of the original language by the words along with grammar of another language.3 It is also assigning the sagacity of the original language with no alteration into the target language. Therefore, the explanation of the text must be unchanging, even when the structure of the original language alters as it is changed into the structure of a different language. The structure here stands for the grammatical superficial form of the verbal communication, whereas the meaning stands for the Semantic profound form. A conversion based on the semantic form of the language considers the circumstances of communication; past along with cultural setting, author’s target and the diverse sorts of meaning found in the explicit, as well as implicit message’s information.4 Therefore, semantic concentrates on the dissimilarities between two contradictory worldviews as well as on the way to convey the original language in a manner that it is incorporated in the target language world in a natural way.5 Conversely, in translation with reference to syntax, the procedures of the anthology are determined by the sentence structure. The semantic practices carry out explanation based on the syntax, connecting characteristics to the symbols of grammar, and the standards of the characteristics are worked out by semantic policies linked to the production of the grammar. Similarities and Differences between English and Chinese There are various comparisons as well as difficulties met when interpreting terms in Chinese and English. The foremost distinction between English wording and Chinese wording is the short of spaces in Chinese messages. Unlike Chinese words, terms in English are separated by spaces in a sentence. Contrasting to English, there is no segmentation when handing out Chinese documents since every character is viewed as a word.6 The two languages also differ in terms of deixis; that is, words that totally relies on the context. In English, there is a recurrence of pronouns whereas in Chinese, they are omitted. For example, in a poem that was written by Tang, the terms; “Chuang qian ming-yue guang”, directly translated in English as “Bed front bright moon light” means “Before my bed, there is bright moonlight”.7 Therefore, there is the omission of the word “is” in Chinese language, while it is added in English for the sentence to make sense. In addition, English contains personal pronouns in terms of the object as well as subject form, unlike the Chinese. For example in a subject structured sentence like “I like dogs”, it is translated as “Wo xihuan gou”, while in an object form sentence such as, “Dogs like me”, means “Gou xihuan wo”. Therefore, the object as well as the subject form is similar in the Chinese language since the word “wo”, has been used to represent both “me” along with “I”.8 However, the two languages have similarity in first, second as well as the third person pronouns, which are extremely constant and there exists various direct translations in place as well as time deixis for English in Chinese. In addition, both English along with Chinese languages have similar near as well as far signifying expressive pronouns, also do not contain provisions that indicate “middle distance” such as the Turkish language. For example, the use of “here”, as well as “there”, for demonstrating in English, and use of ‘you’ in Chinese language. Further, Chinese’ writing is found to be more difficult than English since it has more necessities such as scene, person, and many more. Therefore, one needs to commit idioms as well as phrases to memory in order to write well in Chinese, unlike for the case of English writing, which does not necessitate for any memorization of expressions. In addition, Chinese language consists of numerous vocabularies and phrases that make its writing complicated, while in English, an individual just needs to remember words only, to make writing easier.9 In both English and Chinese, there are aspects relating to modality, which are formal, reasonable, diachronic, functional as well as synchronic. Modal verbs in both languages comprise a grammatical class, which fits in to the verb. Further, the English Auxiliaries’ features are extremely dissimilar from those of Chinese. There is a similitude in the auxiliaries’ morphosyntactic features of both languages, where their ancillary verbs can be annulled with a negative indicator. However, this similitude is contrasted by the fact that in English language, “Can be negated” is a decisive factor for ancillary verbs consisting of a small number of exceptions. Thus, in English language, one has to make use of a negated ancillary such as “do not”, in order to invalidate a complete verb. Conversely, “Can be negated”, is a decisive factor for ancillary verbs having scores of exceptions in Chinese language. Therefore, all verbs in Chinese can be directly annulled by use of a prior negative pointer. Hence, the two languages have implemented different techniques relating to the auxiliary verbs classification. There is only a single negative marker found in English language, which is “not”, whereas in Chinese, there are relatively a number of them.10 Chinese as well as English have comparison in their metaphors; that is, the figurative contrivance of articulating one item in terms of a different item, which takes numerous forms comprising of simile, synecdoche, maxim, allusion, witticism, to mention but a few.11 In both the languages, there exists metaphors that are related to “Chinese-or English-Speaking people”. These might comprise of real-life human beings as well as legendary characters, and the legendary allegories can stand for themselves as foreigners to orators of different languages. For example, if people desire to wish long life to someone in Chinese, they can say, “shouru Peng Zu”, which literary means “An age like that of Peng Zu”. In this case, Peng Zu was a Chinese Legendary character, who was said to live for as long as 80 decades. Peng Zu is an exclusive figure in the formation of Chinese language and is recognizable only to the Chinese speakers. Similarly, the other historical figures in Chinese such as ‘Zhin’, ‘Niukang’ as well as ‘Xishi’ are solitary actively significant to Chinese speakers.12 In addition, there is a phrase, “Gouzuili tubuchu xiangya”, which plainly means, “dog mouth cannot produce an Ivory”, and can be translated as “a filthy mouth cannot utter decent language”. On the other hand, we have several metaphors represented in English language. These are such as; “Top Dog” meaning “The most important person”, also “Top Dog”, which means an extremely significant individual. Therefore, given these metaphors, it is clear that the Chinese have a different perspective of dogs from the English language. The word ‘dog’ in English is most of the time used with a relatively affirmative or compassionate implication, although the expressive connections with the word ‘dog’ in Chinese are normally awful. In addition, jest-related allegories in Chinese language are complex to interpret in English, similarly to English pun-based allegories as well as other jokes, are tricky to interpret to Chinese language.13 Further, many features of the English system of phonology, leads to complicated learning to Chinese learners. This is because, some of the phonemes in English are not found in Chinese and the stress as well as pattern of the accents is not the same. In Chinese, pitch of a speech sound is used to make a distinction in the meaning of the word. On the other hand, in English highness or lowness in speech, is used to express emotion or else to lay emphasis on something. In addition, there are more vowel sounds in English that they are in Chinese language, hence the faulty pronunciation of words such as “it/eat”, “ship/sheep” and many more. Chinese students come across complexity in hearing the disparity between the sound ‘l’ as well as ‘r’, as a result, they wrongly pronounce ‘rice’ as ‘lice’, also ‘rake’ as ‘lake’. There is also a main problem with the general English last consonant, which is not that regular in Chinese, therefore, learners either do not produce the consonant or insert an additional vowel at the last part of the word. For example, ‘hill’ may be termed as if it is without the double ‘l’, rather with an elongated ‘i’. Chinese language also, does not consist of articles; hence, they are prone to have difficulties in using proper English. Therefore, some of the Chinese students may face problems when pronouncing some words found in English, due to the difficulty with modulation, hence their deeply accented English.14 Direct translation is never the best way to express a statement or text from a dissimilar language. From the above examples of Chinese and English texts translations, it is obvious that text can entirely change its meaning when translated literally to a different language. The meaning of a message to a language is established by the aptitude of the rendition, to estimate multilingual speaking to a monolingual communication.15 Therefore, the meanings of phrases from a certain language should always be viewed from a different perspective apart from its literal description. As a result, translation can be viewed as a procedure as well as the outcome of that procedure. It is a socially communication between dissimilar language cultures with the presence of an intermediary. Translation can also be termed as interpretation of a given text in a certain language to another language without changing the meaning of that text. Section III Pragmatics- Observation about Translation Pragmatics normally develops around the meaning of texts. They tend to determine the purpose of the writers of the texts, and if they intended to illustrate, influence, instruct or even tell a story. These are the purposes that make text-types come out as they were supposed to be. The style, syntactic, as well as semantic forms of a message, is extremely vital since they establish the interpretability of the message.16 Therefore, the basic features of a noted down message are the contents that the writer has used in the message. Translation on its own is a pragmatic impression, which is used to show the type of communication someone intends to speak. In translation, there is always dissimilarity in context as well as language; which is itself a pragmatic problem. Therefore, the translator should know this problem to be able to provide the appropriate solution. Pragmatic forms can be grouped into figurative, predictable, reference as well as gestural. In a practical sense, demonstrative pronouns are used to persuade the reader. Near references are used in place deixis, to refer to historical events to allow the speaker take the reader to that moment in time. There exists pragmatic differences between the near references like ‘this’ along with ‘that’ in English and the one in Chinese. The Chinese ‘zhe’ as well as ‘na’, are practically used to articulate subjectivity in order to bring the real meaning of the text. ‘Na’ in China is also used to commence the next phrase, thus acts as a topical index to the first phrase as well as linking the two together, also can be used to introduce the listener to the conclusion, which acts as a topic to the provision of the sentence. The use of all these references in both languages, therefore, is meant to bring about the pragmatic meaning as well as structure of the text. The deictic placing of ‘na’, as well as ‘zhe’, in Chinese is not grammatically necessary, but they pragmatically convey the narrator’s way of thinking, outlook, position, to mention but a few. Although English language does not have the same system of articulating subjectivity as that one of Chinese, different approaches are used to attain the same objective in by use of deixis.17 Through surveillance of different translation in Chinese as well as English, it is clear that various approaches are used to obtain the exact meaning of a text. People are always interested in practical outcomes rather than principles or assumptions. There should be practical strengthening to reinforce enlightening, which is compulsory in the progression of dealing with problems in communication. ‘Pragmatic Strengthening’ now days is utilized in a form of synchronic point of view. It reveals how, in an ordinary dialogue, verbal communication is applied for the phrasing of extra-linguistic certainties of the world, the societal as well as the personal world of the people occupied in the conversation. A text has either a descriptive or else no-descriptive connotation. Descriptive connotation is realistic, in that, it can be clearly affirmed or refuted, and in some cases, it can be independently established. Non- descriptive, however, cannot be easily defined, and is subsumes for a significant component, which is the expressive sense of the text.18 The significance of this meaning nevertheless should not be overstated. This is because human beings are social beings with socially prescribed and socially sanctioned purposes. They may not always be consciously projecting one kind of self-image rather than another; they may not be deliberately expressing the feelings and attitudes that they do express in order to manipulate the hearer and achieve one goal rather than another. Nevertheless, it is impossible for them to express their feelings and attitudes in language, however personal and spontaneous these attitudes and feelings may be, otherwise than in terms of the distinction that are encoded in a particular language system.19 Hence, ‘Pragmatic Strengthening’ in this case is viewed to have helped in diachronic determining of certain grammatical, as well as lexical methods of certain structures of languages. Different languages select analogous or dissimilar grammatical as well as lexical ways to program eloquence. Synchronically, practical intensification is a way that orators make use of, for cognizant or unconscious articulateness. Pragmatic Strengthening’ in Chinese language can be applicable when the demonstratives co-appear with a personal pronoun in a noun phrase. In English language, ‘Pragmatic Strengthening’ is revealed in the form of ‘deictic realignment’, due to the virtual structural intransigence of the language.20Therefore, to obtain the pragmatic meaning of a message, people always examine the proceedings of a story with prominence on the lessons that can be well read from them. It is always necessary for a translator to give a matter-of-fact approach in deciphering a problem from a different language in order to be able to get the real meaning of the text that the writer intended to express. In conclusion, every message passed on by the speakers, be it in the form of writing or oral, is meant to pass a particular message to the listeners or readers. Therefore, the message can be communicated in different cultures, thus, the need for proper translation to express the real meaning of that text. Hence, translation should always be viewed in a deep manner, to allow effective outcomes from its process. Even though different languages different tones of voices, as well as words like in this case, they should always aim at producing essential results and not distorting the message by directly translating it. Bibliography Apostoli, Ariel, & Cao, Pei, & Yang, Stewart, and Zhu, Hongjun. N-gram Statistics in English and Chinese: Similarities and Differences International Conference on Semantic Computing, 2007. Pp 454-60. Arduini, Stefano & Hodgson, Robert. Similarity and difference in translation. American Bible Society, 2007. Edwards, Patricia & Li, Guofang. Best Practices in ELL Instruction. New York: The Guilford Press, 2010. Li, Renzhi. Modality in English and Chinese: A Typological Perspective. New York: Boca Raton, Florida, 2004. “Meaning-Based Translation”, 2003, Accessed on October 25, 2011 from: Methven, Andrew. A Comparative Study of Deixis in Chinese and English, MA Chinese Translation Practice and Theory, 2006. Accessed on October 25, 2011 from: Ouayed Abdul-Jabbar. Manipulation of Semantics and Syntax: The Use of Emotive Language in English and Arabic News Reports and Editorials With Reference to Translation, 2010. Accessed on October 25, 2011 from: Shiyab, Sayid. A textbook of Translation. Theoretical and Practical Implications. London: Garant Publishers, 2006. Shoebottom, Paul. The differences between English and Chinese, 2001. Accessed on October 25, 2011 from : Sokolovsky, Yaroslav, “On the Linguistic Definition of Translation”, Journal of Siberian Federal University, Humanities and Social Sciences 2, no. 3 (2010): 285-292, Accessed on October 24, 2011 from: Wu, Yian. Spatial demonstratives in English and Chinese: text and cognition. Amsterdam; John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2004. Read More