THE NATURE OF TRANSLATION

Introduction
Translation is a common linguistic concept, since for hundreds of years there
have always been different languages present in the world. Partially preserved
translations of the Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh is often deemed the first
translating work and it was performed as early as around 2000 B.C 1. And
reflections on the nature of translation can be dated back to antiquity, when
ancient Greeks debated on concepts of metaphrase (which can be understood as
literal translation) and paraphrase (quite the opposite). The theory of translation
was later developed in 17th century and in 18th century Onufry Kopczyski, in one
of his writings, made an attempt to summarize the then practice of translating
and highlight certain important features of developing valuable translating
culture. Among them was the idea of benefiting from other translators works,
cultivating native language and referring more to the dictionaries. Although the
times are different nowadays, and science recorded great advances, the true idea
behind translation continuously raises questions and doubt among linguists 2.

Term and definition

To consider any aspect of translation, whatsoever, it is necessary to begin with
exploring the meaning of the term itself. A word translation is derived from the
Latin translatio, which means to bring /carry across. Even this basic knowledge
can tell something about the idea. It looks like the idea is to bring something
existing in one place (narrowing it to the linguisticcontext, the place corresponds
to the source language) to different place (target language). This modest attempt
to extract the meaning of translation can be supported by Jeremy Mundays view
on the subject. In his Introducing Translation Studies he states that
The process of translation between two different written languages involves the
translator changing an original written text (the source text or ST) in the original
verbal language (the source language or SL) into a written text (the target text or
TT) in a different verbal language (the target language or TL). 3
What arises from such definition is the linguistic concept of translation applied
only to verbal languages. Additionally it is presented as a rather technical
process. However, this is only one view on translation and, as mentioned before,
the concept is being widely discussed by various linguists, writers and
1 J.M. Cohen, Translation", Encyclopedia Americana, 1986, vol. 27, p. 12.
2 Z. Florczak, L. Pszczoowska, Ludzie Owiecenia o jzyku i stylu, vol.2, Warsaw 1958
3 J. Munday, Introducing Translation Studies. Theories and applications, Routledge, London and
New York 2001

1|

translators. Next paragraph will serve as a brief summary of their different

visions.

Specialists view
Some language specialists, among them linguists, poets, writers and translators,
are in agreement that translation is a very difficult process, involving set of many
competencies and skills. As pointed out by Tadeusz Boy-eleski in 1922, it is
very often more complex and demanding than original writing 4. Miguel de
Cervntes Saavedra compared it even to Flanders tapestries seen from behind,
as being evenly imperfect and far from the true sense or beauty. 5
On the other hand others find translation fascinating and perceive it as an art
rather than science or craft. Kornei Chukovsky made a step even forward stating
that "translation is not only an art, but a high art." 6
From this two polarized approaches on conclusion can be drawn for certain
when it comes to defining the true nature of translation it is in the eye of the
beholder. Many specialist translators see their work as a profession, craft.
Literature translators, especially working in the field of childrens literature, may
perceive their undertakings as a constant struggle and search for equivalents and
right choices. Writers, who have never translated anything, valuing their concepts
and ideas the most often underestimate translation as a secondary, reproductive
work. Finally there are translators of poetry, who may see the results of their
translations as separate, truly valuable works and the process of translating itself
as a process of creation.

Two paths of translation

Therefore it can be stated that translation can go two different ways. It is either
done for certain purposes or for the sake of art.
The first type of translation serves usually for conveying certain message,
transferring concepts from one setting to the other. It is meant to affect the
reader, influence him/her or show him/her ideas originally provided for in the
source text. It is indeed a mean of communication.
The second type regards translation as the process of creating something anew.
The message can be different, the means can be different, what is important is
4 E. Balcerzan, E. Rajewska, Pisarze polscy o sztuce przekadu 1440-2005.
Antologia, Pozna, 2007.
5 ibidem.

6 K. Chukovsky, The Art of Translation: Kornei Chukovsky's a High Art,

University of Tennessee Press, 1984.

2|

the language. The priority is creating a new world of linguistic blocks, full of
artistic beauty.

Conclusions
Although translation theory has been present in linguistic studies for many
decades, the concept is still full of questions, misconceptions and disambiguity.
Although it is possible to trace the etymology of the term and thus seek for
certain explanation it is still too broad and insufficiently defined. It can be clearly
seen in opinions of specialists performing translations. They perceive different
aspects of translation and thus assess it differently. However it is this phenomena
of such a considerable number of different opinions and ideas, very often
contradictory, that leads to the conclusion that translation is not an ideally
unequivocal term or idea. It may represent different needs only called the same
name. One polarization emerged quite clearly translation is either done for
certain purpose and thus can be regarded as demanding craft, often reproductive
and not requiring innovative and broad thinking, or it is done for the beauty of
language and for the sake of creation.

References
1. Balcerzan, E., Rajewska E., Pisarze polscy o sztuce przekadu 1440-2005.
Antologia, Poznan, 2007;
2. Chukovsky, K., The Art of Translation: Kornei Chukovsky's a High Art,
University of Tennessee Press, 1984;
3. Cohen J.M., "Translation", Encyclopedia Americana, 1986, vol. 27, p. 12;
4. Florczak Z., L. Pszczoowska, Ludzie Owiecenia o jzyku i stylu, vol.2,
Warsaw 1958;
5. Munday J., Introducing Translation Studies. Theories and applications,
Routledge, London and New York 2001.

3|