The translation is not a mere substitution of words on a linguistic level: during this process we have to consider first of all the style. In fact it is the style that determines the quality of a work. This can be explained by making a comparison between the translation done by a human translator and the one made by a machine. The translation made by the computer is devoid of style.
The translator often finds himself in a situation in which he has run out of all the possibilities without finding an adequate lexical translating word. The translator is required to keep what holds together the individual textual elements. Everything is perfectly organized and linked. We must establish the place of each element in the overall system. The "form" is not shared by the content but functionally unifies the various textual elements.
The stylistic interpretation of the translator
When the translator works, his first task is to understand and interpret the prototext. Considering the context and the culture of the work may help the translator. More things the translator knows about the topic, more he is able to grasp fully the invariant of the prototext.
But the translational operations do not only relate to the theme and language. Operations have also a stylistic character. The textual invariant is the nucleus that passes from prototext to the metatext.
Since it is impossible to convey the structure of a text and its theme without leaving some residues, the translator decides to make some changes.
It is essential that the translation residue is compensated, at least in part, in one way or another.
The "principle of functional equivalents" presupposes a certain degree of freedom of the translator in the choice of means for the translation. And this inevitably leads to the exclusion of something, changes or additions.
The stylistic change is the demonstration of the impossibility to reproduce perfectly the prototext but also shows the attempt to make the texts as similar as possible, while resorting to some changes. We do not come to these changes only because the translator wants to change the prototext, but also because he strives to transmit the message as accurately as possible. For this reason, the accuracy of translation should not be opposed to the freedom of the translator.
The so-called "absolute translation" is neither in theory nor in practice. There is no absolute faithfulness or freedom. However, there is a way in which it is possible to compensate functionally the residue of the prototext. This stylistic change is defined optimal variant.
The freedom of the translator
The degree of accuracy of the translation of the different types of text must vary because each text is characterized by the use of certain linguistic elements (scientific texts for the use of proper terminology and the artistic texts for the use of connotative elements).
Since these types of linguistic elements have different correspondences, it follows that the degree of freedom of the translator varies depending on the genre of the text (minimum freedom when he translates scientific texts and maximum freedom when he translates a poem).
The translator has a certain degree of freedom in the choice of language resources. This freedom derives from the fact that natural languages and their components are not accurately described. Even the degree of precision must always be the same and does not vary on the basis of the genre of the text we are translating nor on the basis of the reader: it is always a functional precision.
The degree of precision remains the same. What changes are the means that the translator uses to achieve this precision, using in some cases some absolute correspondences that give the illusion of a greater precision and in other cases using indirect correspondences and compensations that give the illusion of less accuracy and consequently the illusion of a greater freedom.
Translator’s strategies
The changes objectively necessary are opposed to the “individual” changes, known as the "poetics of translator". The translator, as author of the metatext, can occupy different stylistic positions. First he has to consider that cultural differences arise from time differences between literatures.
As for the relationship between the individual style of the translator and the style of contemporary cultural context, it is clear that the translator write for the modern reader and he should have in mind the international standards and conventions of the reader.
The aging of the metatext is the other important phenomenon: the translation of a certain work is replaced by another translation, and in so doing, in turn the experience of the person who receives changes.
The stylistic changes
The main stylistic changes are: the “modernization”, that is changes relating to the area of the text, sometimes the one of the theme and the “adaptation” of the characters or realia. Doing a review on the various operations made by the translator on a stylistic level, we obtain the following possibilities:
- The translator reproduces stylistically the semantic invariant of prototext;
- The translator has got the corresponding expressive means to recreate the invariant of the prototext but he intentionally accentuates certain stylistic features thereby conveying other aesthetic information;
- The translator levels off the expressive peculiarities of the prototext, impoverishes and simplifies the style (adverse/negative change);
- The translator uses alternative means. In these cases we can talk about the replacement of the untranslatable expressions. This type of transformation is called replacement.
