Abstracts
Abstract
It has been commonly understood (in Korea) that Japanese and Korean’s linguistic similarities make Japanese-Korean translation easier than translations from other languages into Korean. However, this does not concur with the fact that Japanese-Korean translations are not better compared to other language combinations from the readers’ point of view. This might be due to the problem of translationese caused by language interference, but the present research zooms in on translator’s ‘creativity’ and observes the effects of translator’s creativity on translation quality. The method of research involves analyzing transcriptions gathered through Think Aloud Protocol (TAP) from thirteen professional translators for the purpose of evaluating the strategies used by the translators and examining the occurrence of shift. The research confirms that Japanese-Korean translator creativity is restricted, and such result demonstrates the need for scholars and educators in translation education to recognize and appreciate the concept of creativity and to devise new educational approaches for nurturing creativity.
Keywords/Mots-clés:
- creativity,
- TAP,
- translation strategy,
- change,
- shift
Résumé
Les similitudes qui existent entre le coréen et le japonais tendent à faire croire que la traduction de cette combinaison linguistique est relativement aisée par rapport à d’autres combinaisons linguistiques. Toutefois, une étude sur l’évaluation par les lecteurs montre une faible appréciation des traductions, illustrant un véritable écart entre nos préjugés et la réalité. Les interférences linguistiques peuvent expliquer cette faible appréciation mais le présent article tient à vérifier l’influence du manque de créativité sur la qualité de la traduction. La méthodologie adoptée est l’analyse des traductions de 13 traducteurs professionnels à travers le TAP (Thinking Aloud Protocol). Cette étude permettra d’examiner les stratégies adoptées par les traducteurs et d’analyser les passages où s’effectuent des modifications. Le résultat démontre qu’il existe un véritable manque de créativité chez les traducteurs du coréen vers le japonais, ce qui met en lumière la nécessité d’une pédagogie permettant d’améliorer la créativité des traducteurs et la prise de conscience des enseignants en la matière.
초록
일한 번역은 일본어와 한국어의 유사성으로 인해 다른 언어배합보다 ’쉬운 번역‘이라는 통념이 있으나, 실제 번역결과물에 대한 독자의 평가는 그리 높지 않은 현실과의 괴리가 존재한다. 이는 언어간섭으로 인한 번역투 등의 문제점도 있지만, 본 연구에서는 특히 번역사의 ’창조성‘에 주목하여 번역사의 창조성 결여가 번역의 질에 어떤 영향을 미쳤는지 살펴보았다. 연구방법론으로서는 13명의 전문번역사에 대해 TAP 을 실시하여 얻어진 발화내용을 분석하여 번역사가 적용한 번역전략을 살펴보고, 또한 shift가 일어난 부분을 분석하였다. 그 결과 일한 번역사의 창조성 발휘가 억제되어 있음을 확인할 수 있었으며, 향후 번역 교육에서 번역사의 창조성 개념에 대한 교육자 및 학습자들의 교육자들의 인식 및 창조성 제고를 위한 교육방법론의 고안이 요구된다.
Appendices
References
- Cho, S. E. (2004): A Think-aloud Protocol (TAP)-Based Study of Japanese-into-Korean Translation Process: Focusing on the Relation Between Translation Units and Readability, Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies Graduate School of Interpretation and Translation.
- Danks, J., Shreve, G. M., Fountain, S. B. and M. K. McBeath (Eds.) (1997): Cognitive Process in Translation and Interpreting, London and New Delhi, SAGE.
- Jääskeläinen, R. (2000): “Focus on Methodology in Think-Aloud studies on Translating”, in S. Tirkkonen-Condit, S. and R. Jääskeläinen (ed.). Tapping and Mapping the Processes of Translation and Interpreting, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins, p. 71-81.
- Kiraly, D. C. (1995): Pathways to Translation, Kent, The Kent State University Press.
- Kussmaul, P. (1995): Training the Translator, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins.
- Kussmaul, P. (2000): “A Cognitive Framework for Looking at Creative Mental Processes”, Intercultural Faultlines: Research Models in Translation Studies I Textual and Cognitive Aspects, Manchester/Northampton, St. Jerome. p. 57-70.
- Kussmaul, P. and S. Tirkkonen-Condit (1995): “Think-Aloud Protocol Analysis in Translation Studies”, TTR 8-1, p. 177-191.
- Mackenzie, R. (1998): “Creative Problem-Solving and Translator Training”, Translator’s Strategies and Creativity, Selected papers from the 9TH International Conference on Translation and Interpreting, Prague, September 1995 in honor of JIRÍ Levy’ and Anton Popovič, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins, p. 201-206.
- Malmkjaer, K. (ed.). (1998): Translation and Language Teaching: Language teaching and translation, Manchester, St. Jerome.
- Malmkjaer, K. (2000): “Postscript: Multidisciplinary in Process Research”, in Tirkkonen-Condit, S. and R. Jääskeläinen (ed.). Tapping and Mapping the Processes of Translation and Interpreting. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins, p. 163-169.
- Neubert, A. (1997): “Postulate for a Theory of Translation”, in Danks, J., Shreve, G. M., Fountain, S. B. and M. K. M. Mcbeath (Eds.). Cognitive Process in Translation and Interpreting, London and New Delhi, SAGE.
- Newmark, P. (1991): About Translation, Multilingual Matters LTD.
- Olohan, M. (2000): Intercultural Faultlines: Research Models in Translation Studies I Textual and Cognitive Aspects, Manchester/Northampton, St. Jerome.
- Shreve, G. M. and G. S. Koby (1997): “Introduction: What’s in the ‘Black Box’? Cognitive Science and Translation Studies,” in Shreve, G. M., Danks, J. H., Fountain, S. B., and Mcbeath, M. K. M. (Eds.). Cognitive Process in Translation and Interpreting, London and New Delhi, SAGE.
- Tirkkonen-Condit, S. and R. Jääskeläinen (2000): Tapping and Mapping the Processes of Translation and Interpreting, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins.