Translation from a major language into a minor one is very different from translating in the opposite direction. INTRODUCTION
It has been suggested that minoritylanguages are not even acknowledged in many parts of the world, and whereacknowledgement does exist they are defined as uncultured, primitive,simple dialects because they have been suppressed by the more dominant,official languages. Lotman and Uspensky believe the structure of languagemust be at the centre of every culture for it to survive, describing languageas the heart within the body of culture and putting into perspectivethe distinctions between a language accepted as minor, and that which is aflourishing major language (Lotman and Uspensky 1978, Pages 211 - 32). Researchinto minor languages, however, reveals a taxonomic sophistication thatadequately expressed its speakers' cognitive requirements synchronically, buthas not evolved adequately to incorporate the plethora of technologicalterminology that dominant languages encompass with relative ease, resulting inmany loan words taken from the influence of adjacent major languages. Manyminor languages die out as their speakers age, but some undergo a revival asenthusiasts propound the benefits of their continued value. The fundamental difficulty withinmany of the minority languages today, however, continues to be one ofterminology, described as a semiotic science of cognitive and communicativeorganisation of knowledge (Myking, 1997) and considered to be thecentral discipline or the common denominator for all the aspects of atranslator's work (Holljen, Translation Journal, 1999, January). Mostminority languages are often not particularly suited to adequate translation interms of modern concepts and technologies and are more inclined towardsmaintaining the socio-linguistic aspects associated with those languages, asrecognised by Holljen: The scientific aspect of any languageis dependent on the vocabulary of that language. The possibility must beretained for people to be able to express themselves in any given field intheir mother tongue, no matter on which level of abstraction ( Holljen, Translation Journal, 1999,January). Some of these minority languagegroups, such as the Nordic languages, are now utilising language planningtechniques to standardise their natural languages rather than indiscriminatelyincorporating loan words from technically advanced languages such as English.As a result, NORDTERM has spearheaded the campaign for a standardisationprocedure across Finland, Norway and Sweden, designated the 'NordicTerminological Record Format' (Holljen, Translation Journal, 1999,January), supported by theEuropean Charter for Regional or Minority Languages to 'protect and supporthistorical, regional and minority languages in Europe' (Part I, Article 1, Council ofEurope, http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/EN.htm). DISCUSSION
Toury noted that Translation is akind of activity which inevitably involves at least two languages and twocultural traditions (Toury 1978:200). Nida concurred, adding that, if thecultural and linguistic disparity was particularly great the socio-linguisticfacet would be more of a problem (Nida, 1964, Page 130). The potentialdifficulties in translating major languages into minor languages can beillustrated through the concept of the 'space of possibilities' upon whichutterances based on context provide a background for semantic representationsof inferred language that might be spoken or, equally, left unspoken and fromwhich linguistic form triggers interpretation rather than conveyinginformation (Winograd and Flores 1986, p.57), contributing to externalinfluences which, with memorised sequences and pre-cognitive learning (Gutt,1991, p.26), can all be attributed to a meaning's intertextuality, or allpervasive textual phenomenon (Hatim, 1997a, Page 29). Newmark identifies cultural,technical or linguistic disparity that might require a translator to add extrainformation to maintain intelligibility...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document