PROBLEMAS EN LA TRADUCCIÓN DE TEATRO

María Guirao publicó un artículo con igual temática: Los problemas en la traducción de teatro.. el artículo puede consultarse en este vínculo https://www.dropbox.com/s/izeu3s1fgq4mpys/2.3%20Los%20problemas%20de%20la%20traducci%C3%B3n%20de%20teatro.pdf?dl=0%C3%B3n%20de%20teatro.pdf?dl=0 

puede consultarlo antes de leer a Lapeña

Mutis por el páramo: panorama sobre la traducción teatral

Alejandro L. Lapeña

Alejandro L. Lapeña(@alelapenya) es licenciado en traducción e interpretación por la Universidad de Granada y actualmente es doctorando por esa misma universidad e investigador externo del grupo TETRA de la Universidad de Lisboa. En 2012 defendió su trabajo de fin de máster titulado: Cuando traducir es un espectáculo. La traducción teatral: el caso de Vieira Mendes, donde ahondaba en la problemática de la traducción teatral. Asimismo, lleva desarrollando desde 2004 labores de actuación, dirección y escritura y adaptaciones de guiones en el ámbito del teatro amateur.

Extracto tomado de http://www.lalinternadeltraductor.org/n8/traduccion-teatral.html

En primer lugar, hablaremos de la oralidad. El teatro es «dialogue, en devenir» diálogo (…) fiesta, es decir, comunicación viva en constante cambio]. Por ello, podemos afirmar que es un texto «híbrido» pues, a pesar de estar escrito, su objetivo último será el de ser leído en voz alta (Lapeña, 2012: 12). Sin embargo, como apunta Sellent (2009: 85) se trata de una oralidad fingida ya que tiene en cuenta que no se produzcan cacofonías, ambigüedades indeseadas, arritmias u homofonías. Esto repercutirá, como menciona este autor (2009: 88), en una mejora de la recepción por parte del público.

En segundo lugar, tenemos que mencionar la inmediatez. Es decir, el público que asiste a una obra de teatro no tiene poder para modificar su ritmo o para volver atrás si no ha entendido algo como el lector de un libro o como una persona que está viendo un DVD pregrabado. Se asemejaría aquí, pues, al espectador de un cine. Como señala Ramos  [el espectador de una representación teatral estará siempre ligado a un momento y un lugar específicos e irrepetibles. (…). Es un momento único de producción de significado que nunca más se repetirá]. Podemos decir, entonces, que el espectador asume una actitud pasiva con respecto al texto teatral ya que no lo «trabaja» sino que simplemente lo recibe.

En tercer lugar, hemos de mencionar la multidimensionalidad. En el texto teatral confluyen estructuras de signo tanto verbales como no verbales. No en vano, Ezpeleta (2009: 13) afirma que al ser el teatro un «espectáculo multisensorial» permite «la actualización de una serie de dominantes escénicos (intelectuales, visuales, sonoros, etcétera) que se hallan incardinados en el texto escrito». A este respecto, Lafarga (1998: 104-105) nos indica que el traductor deberá imaginar una puesta en escena del mismo modo que el lector hace su propio montaje teatral mentalmente cuando lee el texto de una obra de teatro.

Otro criterio que marca la diferencia entre el texto teatral, y por ende su traducción, y la representación es el hecho de que, mientras que un lector solo necesitará de sus ojos y de luz para poder leer un texto, un espectador necesitará de muchos otros agentes para poder ver representada una obra (actores, director, técnicos, etcétera). No existe, pues, esa «intimidad» entre el receptor y el texto (Lafarga, 1998: 101).

Existe también un asunto muy espinoso en la traducción teatral que es la diferenciación entre traducción, adaptación y versión, y el saber dónde empieza una y dónde acaba otra. Teniendo en cuenta que, como ya hemos señalado antes, el espectador deberá oír un mensaje que se produce en un momento dado e irrepetible ―ya que, aunque vaya a ver dos veces la misma obra por la misma compañía, el resultado no tiene por qué ser el mismo―, que no tiene la oportunidad de volver atrás si hay algo que no ha entendido y que tampoco puede descuidar el canal visual ya que parte de la información se recibe a través de los ojos (gestos, decorados, atrezo, etcétera), es lógico pensar que haya autores que indiquen que es más útil para el público realizar adaptaciones o, dicho de otro modo, tener una visión domestica de la traducción. El teórico y dramaturgo Enrique Llovet (1988: 12) marcaba con estas palabras su visión de la traducción teatral: «Convertir un texto nacido en alemán, para espectadores alemanes, en un texto para españoles no es traducir. Tendrá que adaptar, buscando una y otra vez equivalencias, ritmos, modos, formas, compensaciones que se instalen en una audiencia para la que no nacieron, buscando obtener efectos similares a los producidos por el original.»

Hurtado (2001: 68) irá un paso más allá y afirmará que «existen (...) algunos textos (por ejemplo, una comedia urbana de crítica social, anclada en el punto de partida) cuya única solución traductora, para no perder funcionalidad, es la adaptación de todo el texto al medio de llegada». Este es un factor que nos parece clave: la funcionalidad. Es decir, para qué concibió el autor la obra originalmente… el actor e investigador portugués Mora (2012: 210) afirmará lo siguiente: La tarea del traductor, más allá de la elemental transposición de un texto de partida a un texto de llegada, habrá de tener en cuenta (ardua tarea), además del significado, el significante. Así, la traducción lingüística se convertirá en una traducción intersemiótica, una transculturación para que la intencionalidad de partida sea equivalente a la intencionalidad de llegada.

Como se señala habitualmente, y ya lo decía Larra en 1836, para traducir teatro hay que cumplir una serie de requisitos, entre ellos, conocerlo. Quizá uno de los problemas a los que se enfrenta el traductor de obras de teatro es que tiene que conocer el funcionamiento interno de este. En el caso de que el traductor no disponga de esos conocimientos, deberá dejarse asesorar por alguien que sí los posea. Es lo que Matteini denomina traductor a pie de escenario (Matteini, 2008: 477-480).

Pensemos en una representación teatral cualquiera. Para que el público pueda ver y oír a los actores fue necesario que estos fueran dirigidos por un director.¹A su vez, este director necesitó de un dramaturgo que escribiera el texto —de forma más o menos directa—, aunque también pudo haber sido él mismo el dramaturgo. Es en esta compleja cadena de relaciones donde el traductor ha de insertar su trabajo. Este, que se encuentra entre el dramaturgo, por un lado, y la compañía y el público, por otro, habrá de lidiar con estas «presiones» para conseguir agradar a todos. Asimismo, ha de ser consciente de que la traducción teatral no es algo «inmaculado» sino que, como diría Paulo Eduardo Carvalho (1999: 57), la traducción está en constante transformación y está forjada por el ejercicio de la representación.

En resumen, si bien la traducción teatral presenta las dificultades ya mencionadas, no podemos escudarnos en ellas para no profundizar en esta tipología textual. Grupos de teatro y traductores tenemos que trabajar de la mano para mejorar la calidad de los textos y producir traducciones realistas, con el objetivo de obtener textos con los que los actores y el director puedan trabajar y sacar el máximo partido para el disfrute de los espectadores, destinatarios últimos del texto teatral. 

Bibliografía 

Bassnett-Mc Guire, Susan. Translation Studies. Londres: Methuen, 1980.

Braga, Jorge. La traducción al inglés de las comedias del Siglo de Oro. Madrid: Fundamentos, 2009.

Carvalho, Paulo Eduardo. «Pérolas, esferas e círculos: A tradução de teatro». EnTeatro. Escritos 2: Está tudo bem com o teatro em Portugal? Lisboa: Cotovia, 1999, p. 57-70.

Di Pasquale, Daniela y Carvalho, Manuela. «Introdução: Os estudos de tradução teatral como disciplina». En Carvalho, Manuela y Di Pasquale, Daniela (org.).Depois do labirinto: Teatro e tradução. Lisboa: Nova Vega, 2012, p. 9-55.

Espasa, Eva. La traducció dalt de l’escenari. Vic: Eumo, 2001.

Espasa, Eva. «Repensar la representabilidad». Trans: Revista de traductología 13 (2009), p. 95-105.

Ezpeleta, Pilar. Teatro y traducción: aproximación interdisciplinaria desde la obra de Shakespeare. Madrid: Cátedra, 2007.

Ezpeleta, Pilar. «Introducción». Trans: Revista de traductología 13 (2009), p. 11-17.

Goldoni, Carlo. «La sposa persiana». En Tutte le opere IX. Milán: Mondadori, 1969.

Hurtado, Amparo. Traducción y traductología. Madrid: Cátedra, 2001.

Lafarga, Francisco. «La traducción teatral: Problemas y enfoques». En Ruiz, Rafael y López, Rodrigo (col.). El teatro, componentes teóricos y prácticos para la enseñanza-aprendizaje de una lengua extranjera. Granada: La Gioconda, 1998, p. 101-116.

Lapeña, Alejandro L. Cuando traducir es un espectáculo. La traducción teatral: El caso de Vieira Mendes. Granada: Universidad de Granada, 2012.

Larra, Mariano José de. «De las traducciones». El Español (11 marzo 1836).

Mac Auley, Gay. «Translation in the performance process». About Performance 1. [Sídney: The University of Sidney] (1995), p. 111-125.

Mateo, Marta. La traducción del humor: Las comedias inglesas en español. Oviedo: Universidad de Oviedo, 1995.

Matteini, Carla. «La traducción teatral». En Tortosa, Virgilio (ed.). Re-escrituras de lo global: Traducción e interculturalidad. Madrid: Biblioteca Nueva, 2008, p. 471-485.

Mora, José Guilherme. «Entre Arnold e Valentina – uma idea de cozinha: Ensaio sobre uma versão portuguesa de The Kitchen». En Carvalho, Manuela y Di Pasquale, Daniela (org.). Depois do labirinto: Teatro e tradução. Lisboa: Nova Vega, 2012, p. 183-212.

Pirandello, Luigi. «Illustratori, attori e traduttori». En Ghidetti, E. (ed.). L’umorismo e altri saggi. Milán: Giunti, 1994, p. 189-203.

Ramos, Sara. «Quando o palco e a página se encontram na tradução». En Carvalho, Manuela y Di Pasquale, Daniela (org.). Depois do labirinto: Teatro e tradução. Lisboa: Nova , 2012, p. 213-250.

Santoyo, José María. «Traducciones y adaptaciones teatrales: Ensayo de una tipología». Cuadernos de Teatro Clásico 4 (1989), p. 95-112.

Santoyo, José María. «Reflexiones, teoría y crítica de la traducción dramática: Panorama desde el páramo español». En Lafarga, Francisco y Dengler, Roberto (eds.). Teatro y traducción. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra, 1995, p. 13-23.

Sellent, Joan. «Funcional e invisible». Trans: Revista de traductología 13 (2009), p. 83-93.

Vigouroux-Frey, Nicole. «Traduire le théâtre: le jeu de la différence». En Ruiz, Rafael y Martínez, Juan Antonio (eds.). Propuestas metodológicas para la enseñanza de lenguas extranjeras: Texto dramático y representación teatral. Granada: Universidad de Granada, 1996, p. 13-22.

Zuber-Skerrit, Ortrun (ed.). Page to page. Theatre as Translation. Ámsterdam: Rodopi, 1984.

ELEMENTOS DE LA POESIA

ELEMENTOS DE LA POESÍA.

Recuperado de

http://recursos.cnice.mec.es/lengua/profesores/eso1/t3/teoria_5.htm 

I. La poesía: sus elementos

Llamamos poesía a la literatura escrita en verso.

Un texto poético está formado por las siguientes unidades:

1.   Verso: Cada una de las líneas del poema. Necesita de otros versos para comunicar.

2.   Estrofa: Conjunto mínimo de versos que contiene una serie de elementos sujetos a ritmo.

3.   Poema: Unidad mayor con mensaje completo cuyos componentes están sujetos a ritmo. Existe la diferenciación entre poemas estróficos, los cuales están formados por estrofas, y entre poemas no estróficos, que son aquéllos que no tienen estrofas.

Versos según su medida

Los versos, según su medida, se pueden dividir en dos grandes grupos:

• De arte menor: Aquellos que tienen menos de 8 sílabas.
• De arte mayor: Aquellos que tienen más de 8 sílabas.

Los versos mayores de 12 sílabas, además de ser de arte mayor, son versos compuestos, los cuales están formados por dos hemistiquios que, al medir, funcionan como versos independientes y, por tanto, habrá de aplicárseles las mismas licencias métricas y reglas de acentuación que a éstos.

Nombre de los versos según su medida

Arte menor		Arte mayor
N° de sílabas	Nombre	N° de sílabas	Nombre
2	Bisílabo	9	Eneasílabo
3	Trisílabo	10	Decasílabo
4	Tetrasílabo	11	Endecasílabo
5	Pentasílabo	12	Dodecasílabo
6	Hexasílabo	13	Tridecasílabo
7	Heptasílabo	14	Alejandrino
8	Octosílabo

[^]

Tipos de rima

En cuanto a la rima, los versos pueden ser:

• De rima consonante o total: Si, desde de la última sílaba acentuada, riman vocales y consonantes.
• De rima asonante o parcial: Si, desde la última sílaba acentuada, sólo riman las vocales.

Licencias métricas

A la hora de medir los versos hay que tener en cuenta las licencias métricas y la acentuación de la última palabra del verso.

Licencias métricas: Son las modificaciones que sufre la medida del verso al aplicar unos determinados fenómenos, que son los siguientes:

·        La sinalefa: Consiste en formar una única sílaba con la última de una palabra que termine por vocal y la primera de la siguiente que empiece por vocal.

me-ta um-bro-sa al- va-que-ro-con-ven-ci-do

Góngora. Soledad Primera.

·        Diéresis: Consiste en dividir en dos palabras las vocales que deberían ir en una sola porque forman diptongo. A veces viene indicada por el poeta con el signo de la diéresis (¨).

la-del-que-hu-ye el- mun-da-nal-ru-ï-do

Fray Luis de León. Oda a la vida retirada.

·        Sinéresis: Consiste en lo contrario de la diéresis, es decir, en la unión, para formar una sílaba métrica, de dos vocales contiguas que no forman diptongo en el interior de una palabra.

de-noc-tur-no-Fae-tón-ca-rro-za ar-dien-te

Góngora. Soledad Primera.

Versos sin rima

Se denominan versos sueltos a aquellos versos que quedan sin rima dentro de un poema junto a otros versos que sí mantienen una rima.

Son versos blancos aquéllos que forman un poema y que, si bien se ajustan a la medida de los versos, no presentan rima.

El verso libre forma parte de poemas que no se ajustan a ninguna norma métrica, es decir, que no tienen ni rima ni una medida fija, ni tampoco se amoldan a una estrofa concreta.

Algunos tipos de estrofas

De acuerdo a las actividades planteadas, señalaremos los siguientes tipos de estrofas:

• Terceto: Estrofa de tres versos, de arte mayor, rima consonante y que rima ABA.
• Cuarteto: Estrofa de cuatro versos, de arte mayor, rima consonante y que rima ABBA.
• Sextilla: Estrofa de seis versos, de arte menor, rima consonante y esquema de rima variable. En el caso de la sextilla manriqueña o de pie quebrado el esquema de la rima es abcabc. 

Un documento adicional, con mayor riqueza de contenido; lo encuentra aquí

BASIC ELEMENTS OF POETRY

  

FIN DEL ARTICULO

SKOPOS THEORY: BASIC PRINCIPLES AND DEFICIENCIES

SKOPOS THEORY: BASIC PRINCIPLES AND DEFICIENCIES

Journal of the College of Arts. University of Basrah No. ( 41) 2006

Recuperado de http://www.iasj.net/iasj?func=fulltext&aId=50013  el 19 de septiembre de 2014.

Assit. Lecturer: Jawad Kadhim Jabir

College of Arts University of Basrah

1.Abstract

Skopos theory is a theory of translation by the German translator Vermeer in 1978. In this theory, the process of translation is determined by the function of the product. This function is specified by the addressee. This theory is one of the functionalist approaches whose aim is to dethrone the source text (ST). This is done by emphasizing the role of the translator as a creator of the target text (TT) and giving priority to purpose (skopos) of producing TT. Functionalism is a major shift from a linguistic equivalence to functional appropriateness. Thus, ranslation is considered primarily as a process of intercultural communication whose end product is a text which has the ability to function appropriately in specific situations and context of use(Schaffner,1998a:3).

       Skopos is a Greek word for 'purpose'. According to skopostheorie, the basic principle which determines the process of translation is the purpose (skopos) of the translational action. The idea of intentionality is part of the

very definition of any action (Nord,1997:27).

       This paper aims at investigating the principles of the skopos theory and its deficiencies. Within the flow of the discussion the differences between functionalist and the non-functionalist approaches are incorporated. It is hypothesized that this theory has nothing to do with the ST; it concentrates on the purpose of the translation process. It is a common knowledge that every theory has its own drawbacks. Skopos theory is no exception.

2. Skopos and its Related Terms:

Out of the introduction above we can recognize that skopos is a technical term for the aim or purpose of a piece of translation. In Vermeer's theory, there is a distinction between the terms aim and purpose. This is further explained by Nord (ibid:28-29). The gist of Vermeer's discussion is that aim is considered as the final result which an agent tries to achieve via an action; whereas purpose is a provisional stage in the process of achieving an aim.

Function is yet another term that refers to what a text means. The meaning of the text is viewed by the receiver. Another related term to skopos is intention which is regarded as an aim- oriented plan of action on the part of both the sender and the receiver. This points towards an appropriate way of producing or understanding the text.

In order to remove the ambiguity resulting from the difference between intention and function, Nord (1991:47f) has proposed a distinction between intention and function. The sender is responsible for specifying intention and by using a text he tries to achieve a purpose. The receiver uses the text with a certain function, depending on his/her own expectations, needs, previous knowledge and situational conditions.

This distinction is important to the field of translation as the sender and receiver belong to different cultural and situational settings. Some say that translation is translating cultures. So, intention and function can be analyzed from two different angles. The former is viewed from the sender's point of view while the latter is seen from the receiver's.

3. Skopos and Translation Brief

As it is mentioned earlier, the skopos rule shows that a translational action is determined by its skopos .That is to say , ' the end justifies the means' (Reiss and Vermeer, 1984: 101) Furthermore, Vermeer explains the skopos rule as follows (cited and translated by Nord, 1997: 29):

Each text is produced for a given purpose and

should serve this purpose. The skopos rule thus

reads as follows: translate/interpret/speak/write

in a way that enables your text/translation to

function in the situation it is used and with the

people who want to use it and precisely in the

way they want it to function.

A variety of skopoi are allowed in most translational actions. These skopoi may be related to each other in a hierarchical order. The task of translators is to justify their choice of a particular skopos in a given translational situation. The skopos of a particular translation task may require a 'free' or 'faithful' translation. Making a decision depends on the purpose for which the translation is intended. Accordingly the role of translators is essential especially in making the purpose of translating a text clear. Kangarioo (2004:2) in his paper Sense Transferring Through Poetry Translation states that there are new considerations concerning "target readers, the unavoidable translator subjectivity and the purpose and function of translations". For instance, as Xiaoshu and Dongming (2003: 2) put it, literary translation has to reproduce the spirit and features of the original. In addition, they also show that even the artistic images should be reproduced by the translator in a way that attracts the target reader's attention as the writer of the original text does. Thus, the receiver is the main   factor determining the target –text skopos. There are many cases where relative literal translation is required, for example in the translation of a marriage certificate or driver's license, foreign legal texts for comparative purposes or direct quotations in a newspaper report.

It is worth mentioning that translation is normally done 'by assignment' .A client needs a text for a particular purpose and calls upon the translator for a translation, thus acting as the initiator of the translation process (Nord , 1997 : 30). The initiator is the person who initiates the process of translation because he wants the ST to be translated. He can be the ST author, the TT recipient, the translator, a private company, an agent from the government etc... To give a concrete example, the colonizing countries in Iraq can be considered as the initiator of some processes of translation in that they have carried out projects, e.g. refurbishing schools and clinics , providing equipment for certain departments and the like. These are done by giving contracts which the Iraqi contractors provide quotes about. The Iraqi contractors receive leaflets concerning their projects. These leaflets need to be translated into Arabic, and the quotes need to be rendered into English. The purpose of such translation is to know what to do, the time span specified for the whole work, the quality of the work and so on. In an ideal case which is suggested by Nord (ibid), the client would give as many details as possible about the purpose, explaining the addressees, time, place, occasion and medium of the intended for a given text. This information would constitute an explicit translation brief. Translation brief is a term which is the equivalent of the German term 'Ubersetzung sauftrag'. This information is important as it is needed by the translator to accomplish his/her task.

The German term creates a translation problem in the sense that it can be translated as either translation commission or translation assignment.Nord (1991: 8) has introduced the term translating instructions. However, Nord (ibid) said that Janet Fraser is the one who uses the term brief which is meant by the German Ubersetzung sauftrag. A translator receives the basic information and instructions but is then free to carry out those instructions. The instructions or commissions, which are represented by the brief, specify the goal or purpose of a piece of translation. The translator must interpret ST information "by selecting those features which most closely correspond to the requirements of the target situation"(Shuttleworth and Cowie, 1997:156).In short, the skopos of translating a given text is decided by the client and translator.

4. Skopos in Relation to Intertextuality and Intratextuality

In skopos theorie, the workability of the brief is based on the target culture. The source text is part of the brief, i.e. the instructions received. Receivers help make the text meaningful. What is important is that different receivers find different meanings which are offered by the text.

A text in skopos theorie approach is considered as an offer of information. This offer is directed from the producer of the text to its recipient. Translation is then is a secondary offer of information about information originally offered in another language within another culture (Schaffner , 1998 b :236). Translators are aware of the fact that the norms of the target language will not necessarily go in line with those of the source language. That is why a kind of accommodation (adjustment) in the target text is needed so as to arrive at a solution for the problem (Baker, 1992; 243). Consequently, a TT is an offer of information formulated by a translator in a target culture and language about an offer of information in the source culture and language. A translator is in a position to produce a text that is meaningful to target –culture receivers. In Vermeer's terms, the TT should conform to the standard of 'intratextuality coherence'. This is explained in his book in collaboration with Reiss (Reiss and Vermeer, 1984 b:109ff). For a text to be communicative and understandable, it has to be coherent with the receivers' situation. Being 'coherent with' is synonymous with being 'part of' the receivers' situation and context of use.

What is significant is that there is a relationship between a ST and TT since a translation is an offer of information about a preceding offer of information. Vermeer calls this relationship ' intertextual coherence ' or 'fidelity' ( Nord , 1997 :32 ). The intertextual coherence relationship holds between source and target texts. The form of this coherence depends on:

a. the translator's interpretation of the ST and

b. the translation skopos.

According to Bell ( 1991 : 170-171 ) intertextuality refers to "the relationship between a particular text and other texts which share characteristics with it ; the factors which allow text-processors to recognize , in a new text , features of other texts they have encountered". Intertextuality allows readers to identify scientific texts and poems as different types of texts. Thus, one can say that texts fulfill quite specific and distinct communicative functions.

One of the examples of intertextual coherence is being faithful to the source text. Literary translation is good exemplification for this. The postulate of fidelity to the ST is the goal that most literary translators try to achieve. It is a common knowledge that language is the central subject of any discussion about translation. However, there are certain elements involved in the process of translation which go beyond this conventional area. This is specially true for literary translation. According to Jackson (2003), literary translation is a translational species in itself, but it "differs in many respects from the kind of translation practiced in a language class". He contends that , on the one hand, literary translation involves a good deal of interpretation about the intent and effect. On the other hand, the literary translator is often not as much interested in literal 'transliteration' as in finding a corollary mood , tone , sound , response and so forth. The intertextual coherence is part of the skopos rule. However, skopos theory and functionalism give the translator more freedom and simultaneously more responsibility. In a situation like this the translator becomes a TT author who is freed from the "limitations and restrictions imposed by a narrowly defined concept of loyalty to the source text alone"(Schaffner,1998b:238).

Unlike the non-functionalist approaches, the functionalist approach translator is loyal to his client and he must be visible. The translation processes should be target text oriented. Furthermore, the aim of translation is considered as communicative acceptability ( Honig , 1998 : 14).

5. The Deficiencies of Skopos Theory

Skopos theory has been criticized for allowing the end to justify the means in the translation process. This would make this theory inappropriate to the translation of texts –such as literary or religious translation – that are largely determined by the author's personal intention. Newmark (2000: 259-260) criticizes this theory saying that

to translate the word ' aim ' into Greek , and

make a translation theory out of it , and exclude

any moral factor except loyalty , added on as an

afterthought by Nord ( e.g. , Nord , 1997 ) to

Vermeer ( who wrote that the end justifies the

means , ( e.g. Vermeer ,1978 ) is pretending too

much and going too far.

Interestingly enough, Nord (1997: 109-123) has devoted a whole chapter surveying and discussing criticism directed to skopos theory. She successfully defended this theory against these criticisms (See Nord: ibid). For the sake of brevity I will summarize the most important points of shortcomings in the following paragraphs.

The first important criticism is that not all actions have an intention. The essence of action-based translation theories is questioned. Some critics claim that there are actions that do not have any intention or purpose, referring mainly to the production of works of arts, often presumed to be literary texts in general or at least some literary texts.

Secondly, it is claimed that not every translation can be interpreted as purposeful. In addition to that, the translator does not have a specific purpose in mind while translating the ST. Having such a purpose would limit the possible translation procedures and thus the interpretations of the TT.

Thirdly, it is also claimed that skopostheorie is not an original theory in that since functionalism is based on something as obvious as the fact that human actions are guided by their purposes, it cannot claim to be an original theory. Peter Newmark (cited in Nord, 1997:114) attacked this theory harshly. He says that "…in order to do anything well, you have to know why you are doing it , and that if you're translating a soap advert, you won't do it in the same way as you translate a hymn ."This is a common sense. Moreover, the position of the purpose of translation is also questioned because if the purpose intended resides in the target culture, so there is nothing of significance to be transferred. This point is also emphasized by House(2001:243-257)when it comes to tackling the evaluation of a translation as any translation is linked to its origins and the presuppositions and conditions that govern its reception in the new environment.

Fourthly, it is also claimed that functionalism is not based empirical findings. This weakness is levelled by Koller as cited in Nord (1997:116). Koller has said that functional models of translation have a theoretical –speculative approach rather than an empirical one. Functionalists like Reiss and Vermeer say that translators offer just so much information and in just the manner which is optimal for the recipient in view of their translation. Koller says that if these sentences were based on , say, 1000 translations from English into German revealing that %95 of cases the important factor for the translation was the translator's decision as to what and how to translate.

Another important point of criticism is that functional approaches go beyond the limits of translation proper. This is basically related to the feature of equivalence which is considered as a constitutive one as far as translation is concerned. Nord (ibid:112) cites the definition of translation provided by Koller (1995:193) in his paper the Concept of Equivalence and the Object of Translation Studies which says that translation is 

the result of a text-processing activity, by means

of which a source-language text is transposed into

a target-language text. Between the resultant text

in L2 (the target-language text)and the source text

in L1 (the source-language text) their exists a relationship,

which can be designated as a translational,

or equivalence relationship. 

Koller considers equivalence as a flexible and relative concept. This is in contrast to the earlier definitions of this concept like the one given by Catford(1965:20)as the "replacement of textual material in one language (SL)by equivalent material in another language(TL)".As for Koller, skopos theory makes the contours of translation vague and difficult to be surveyed.

The last point of concern is the one that is raised by House (ibid). To him, skopos theory failed on a number of issues:

(1) the notion of function which is crucial to the approach is never made explicit in any satisfactory way,

(2) its inability to determine the (relative)equivalence and adequacy of a translation ,

(3) the indeterminacy of the linguistic realization of the skopos of a translation and

(4) due to the role of the 'purpose' of a translation , the ST is considered as a mere offer of information.

6. Conclusions

Skopos theory claims to be general or universal model of translation . The main idea of skopos theory could be paraphrased as the translation purpose justifies the translation procedures. This would be acceptable whenever the translation purpose is in line with the communicative intentions of the original author. Thus, things related with source text are essential. We cannot dethrone the ST. Doing so will negatively affect the translation process. Besides, due to absence of massive evidence of empirical nature, skopos theory cannot be considered as a universal theory.

The translation brief, a term brought into focus by skopos theory, limits the job of the translator. This is because the instructions received do not let the translator to follow up his job as he wants. If the translation brief requires a translation whose communicative aims are incompatible with the author's opinion, the skopos rule can  be interpreted as 'the end justifies the means', and there would be no restriction to the range of possible ends. Further, the ideal brief provides explicit or implicit information about the intended TT function(s), the TT addressee(s), the medium and so on.

In this theory, the notion of the translator as a mediator has been challenged by the skopos theorists who regard the translator as an independent text producer who produces a new text based on criteria determined by the target receivers. Turning his back on the source text, Vermeer views the translator as a text designer whose task is to design a target text capable of functioning optimally in the target culture.

References

Baker, M.(1992).In Other Words: A Coursebook on Translation. London: Penguin Publishers.

Bell , R.T. (1992).Translation and Translating :Theory and Practice. London : Longman.

Honig, H.G. (1998). Postions , Power and Practice: Functionalist Approaches and Translation Quality Assessment. In C. Schaffner, ed. Translation And Quality. Pheladelphia :Multilingual Matters, pp.6-34.

House , J. (2001). ' Translation Quality Assessment : Linguistic Description versus Social Evaluation '. Meta, XLVI , 2.

Jackson,R (2003). From Translation to Imitation. Available from: www.utc.edu/~engldept/pm/ontransl.htm  [accessed:12/3/2003]

Kangarioo , M.R. (2004). Sense Transferring Through Poetry Translation. Available from : www.TranslationDirectory.com  [accessed: 20/9/2005]

Newmark , Peter (2000). The Deficiencies of Skopos Theory: A Response to Anna Trosborg. Current Issues in Language & Society , 7(3),259-260.

Nord , C. (1991). Skopos , Loyalty and Translational Conventions. Target , 3 (1) , 91-109.

----------------(1997). Translating as a Purposeful Activity Functionalist Approaches Explained. Manchester: St. Jerome.

Reiss , K. and H. Vermeer (1984). Groundwork for a General Theory of Translation. Tubingen: Niemeyer.

Schaffner , C.(1998a). Action (Theory of Translational action). In M. Baker, ed. Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London: Routledge, pp.3-5.

------------------(1998b). Skopos Theory. In M. Baker, ed. Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London: Routledge , pp.235-238.

Shuttleworth, M.& Cowie, M. (1997). Dictioanry of Translation Studies. Manchester: St.Jerome.

Vermeer , H.(1989a). Skopos and translation Commission.Heidelberg: Universitat.

Xiaoshu , S. & Cheng Dongming (2003). Translation of Literary Style. Translation Journal 7 (1) , Available from:http://accurapid.com/journal/23 style.htm.[accessed 3/10/2005]

THE END OF THE ARTICLE