Hi Minh,
I still don’t understand what you mean by “What sort of information
assists you in your translation? Or what do you consider when you do
this?”
I did not do the translation myself. The English sentences including ‘but’
have been translated by (Arabic/English) Bilingual postgraduate students.
I also have data from translated work such as the Holy Quran. Consider,
for instance, the translation of the English correction ‘but’ into ‘bal’
’am yaqulūna bihi ğinatun ‘bal’ ğa’ahum bilhaq
Or they say in him madness ‘but’ brought them with truth
‘Or say they: “There is madness in him?” Nay, ‘but’ he brought them the
truth.’
(The Holy Quran: Part 23, Verse 70: Translated by Abdullah Yusuf Ali 1934)
Best
Miri
> Hi Miri
>
> Look like you have missed my point. My question is: what sort of
> information leads you to translate English but into different Arabic
> items as you do? Or what sort of information assists you in your
> translation of English but into different Arabic items? What do you
> consider when you do this?
>
> best
> Minh
>
> Miri Hussein <M'i.Hussein@newcastle.ac.uk> wrote:
> Hi Minh,
>
> Well, I think, the contextual information does not affect the translation
> of English ‘but’ into different linguistic items as in Arabic or other
> languages. It is rather the lexical nature of ‘but’ what controls the
> choice of the cognitive effect. ‘But’ is an ambiguous linguistic
> expression. I don’t think that contextual information has any influence on
> the translation process.
>
> If we want to take this from a Blakemorian relevance-theoretical
> procedural point of view, we can say that the linguistic meaning encoded
> by ‘but’ plays a role in constraining the choice of cognitive effect and
> it is not the other way round. And if, it is true that the English ‘but’
> is an ambiguous item, then it has to encode different meanings and thus
> separate (though related) procedures. Or am I wrong?
>
> Best
>
>> Miri
>>
>> Regarding your view on the role of contextual information, how do you go
>> about translating English but into three Arabic items as reported? What
>> information influence your decision? Is that contextual information?
>>
>> Minh
>>
>> Miri Hussein wrote:
>> Now, regarding your question on how we ‘as hearers’ choose the relevant
>> independent procedure encode by ‘but’ and whether the procedure encoded
>> by
>> ‘but’ constrains the contextual effect or vice versa, my view is the
>> following:
>>
>> I don’t think that the contextual information offers great help in
>> choosing the relevant procedure encoded by ‘but’, it is rather the other
>> way round. The lexical import of ‘but’ is what facilitates the choice of
>> the relevant cognitive effect.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Miri
>>
>>> Miri,
>>>
>>> Thanks for your contribution. Again, my question is: how does the
>>> hearer
>>> select the relevant procedure from all the independent procedures said
>>> to
>>> be encoded in the linguistic item but? An answer would be consideration
>>> of
>>> contexual information available. But but is claimed to specify 'certain
>>> properties of context', isn't it? So is it the case that context
>>> information helps to determine which of the procedures of but is in
>>> opertation or that the procedure encoded in but determines or guides
>>> the
>>> hearer in the selection/construction of context?
>>>
>>>
>>> Minh
>>>
>>> Miri Hussein wrote: I agree with you, Minh,
>>> that the denial, contrast and correction’ but’ do
>>> not encode the same procedure. There is actually a (slight) difference
>>> between the three meanings encoded by ‘but’. That is why ‘but’ is
>>> translated to different words in some languages as is previously
>>> claimed
>>> by Anscombre and Ducrot (1977) and Horn (1989.
>>>
>>> For instance, in Standard Arabic there are three different
>>> corresponding
>>> lexical items to ‘but’:
>>>
>>> a) Lakinna (the denial but)
>>>
>>> ‘He is rich lakinna-hu stingy’
>>>
>>>
>>> b) ’Innama (the contrast but)
>>>
>>> ‘John is rich ’innama Peter is poor’
>>>
>>> c) Bal (the correction but)
>>>
>>> He is not rich bal poor
>>>
>>>
>>> These three lexical items which are all translations of ‘but’ in
>>> English
>>> are not replaceable. I think that the relevance theoretic
>>> uni-procedural
>>> analysis of ‘but’ proposed by Blakemore (1987, 2002) and Iten (2005)
>>> cannot account for these three different meanings in the same way, i.e.
>>> ‘but’ in the tree uses does not encoded one and the same procedure, as
>>> you
>>> speculate.
>>>
>>>
>>> An alternative account could be that ‘but’ is a multi-procedural
>>> linguistic expression. It encodes different procedures and thus puts
>>> separate (though related) constraints on the inferential part of the
>>> interpretation of the utterance in which it occurs. I don’t have a
>>> clear
>>> idea so far how this could be done, but it could be something like:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In stead of having one general (unified) procedure of ‘but’ as in (1):
>>>
>>> (1) What follows (Q) contradicts and eliminates an assumption that
>>> is manifest
>>> in the context.
>>>
>>>
>>> We can have three different (though related) procedures:
>>>
>>> In the case of denial, the procedure could be that:
>>>
>>> ‘The following clause is relevant as a denial and replacement of an
>>> assumption communicated (or manifest) in the preceding clause’
>>>
>>> (NB the following clause = the clause that follows but & preceding
>>> clause
>>> = the clause the precedes but)
>>>
>>> In the case of contrast, it could be:
>>>
>>> ‘The following clause is relevant as contradiction and replacement of
>>> an
>>> assumption communicated (or manifest) the preceding clause’
>>>
>>> In the third case, the procedure could be:
>>>
>>> ‘The following clause is relevant as correction and replacement of an
>>> assumption communicated (or manifest) the preceding clause’
>>>
>>>
>>> It seems to be that these three procedures are related in the sense the
>>> content of the but-clause in the three cases replaces the assumption
>>> communicated in the preceding clause. However, these procedures are
>>> different due to the differences between three linguistically encoded
>>> meanings of ‘but’ namely ‘denying’, ‘contradicting’ and correcting’
>>>
>>> To deny something does not really mean to contradict or correct it, or
>>> to
>>> contradict something, you don’t have to correct it, etc.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> It is well-known that several languages have separate words for
>>>> denial/contrast but and for correction but [nhung and mà in
>>>> Vietnamese,
>>>> aber and sondern in German, pero and sino in Spanish, and Swedish,
>>>> Finnish, and Hebrew as reported in Iten (2005: 123 book)]. Fraser
>>>> (2006)
>>>> also reports a similar observation with Arabic, Catalan, Danish,
>>>> Estonian, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Korean, Sinhala, Spanish,
>>>> and
>>>> Vietnamese. Let me take Vietnamese as a case study.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> B = but; N = nhung; M = mà
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1. It is true that denial B is/must be translated in Vietnamese as N.
>>>>
>>>> (a)
>>>> - He’s rich but very stingy.
>>>> - Ông ta giàu nhung rất bủn xỉn.
>>>>
>>>> 2. It follows from (1) that encoded in denial B and N is one and the
>>>> same procedure. Otherwise it would be a bad/unacceptable or even
>>>> impossible translation.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 3. It’s true that correction B is/must be translated into Vietnamese
>>>> as
>>>> M (not N).
>>>>
>>>> (b)
>>>> - John is not my father but my uncle.
>>>> - John không phải là bố tôi mà là chú tôi.
>>>>
>>>> 4. It follows from (3) that encoded in correction B and M is one and
>>>> the
>>>> same procedure. Otherwise the translation would be bad or unacceptable
>>>> or even impossible.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 5. It is true that RT claims that denial B and correction B encode one
>>>> and the same procedure, that RT does not distinguish between the two.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 6. It follows from (2, 4 and 5) that encoded in N and M and B is one
>>>> and
>>>> the same procedure. This does not seem to be right, since it is true
>>>> that N and M cannot be intersubstituted.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 7. It follows from (6) that B seems to be procedurally ambiguous. This
>>>> is not to mention other special uses of but as in (c-d) below.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> (c) Every one but John was there.
>>>> But must be translated as trừ (except)
>>>> Mọi nguời ðều có mặt ở ðó trừ John
>>>> Mọi nguời trừ John ðều có mặt ở
>>>> ðó.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> (d) You can’t expect much from him. He is but a three year old boy.
>>>> This but must be translated as chỉ (only/ just)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------
>>>> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try
>>>> it
>>>> now.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Miri Hussein
>>> PhD Student in Linguistics
>>> Semantics and Pragmatics
>>> School of English Language and Linguistics
>>> Percy Building
>>> Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU
>>> Website: http://www.students.ncl.ac.uk/miri.hussein/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------
>>> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
>>> Search.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Miri Hussein
>> PhD Student in Linguistics
>> Semantics and Pragmatics
>> School of English Language and Linguistics
>> Percy Building
>> Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU
>> Website: http://www.students.ncl.ac.uk/miri.hussein/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
>> Search.
>
>
> --
> Miri Hussein
> PhD Student in Linguistics
> Semantics and Pragmatics
> School of English Language and Linguistics
> Percy Building
> Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU
> Website: http://www.students.ncl.ac.uk/miri.hussein/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
> Search.
-- Miri Hussein PhD Student in Linguistics Semantics and Pragmatics School of English Language and Linguistics Percy Building Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU Website: http://www.students.ncl.ac.uk/miri.hussein/Received on Tue Mar 4 14:22:43 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Mar 04 2008 - 14:28:21 GMT