Transposition
Transposition
Introduction
Translation is a complex process that goes beyond the literal, word-for-word transfer of text; it requires adapting grammatical and stylistic structures to fit the nature of the target language. In this context, linguists Jean-Paul Vinay and Jean Darbelnet established a systematic model in 1958 featuring seven core translation procedures. In this lesson, we will explore the fourth procedure of this taxonomy, "Transposition", which is one of the most essential and frequently used techniques to ensure the fluency and naturalness of the translated text without altering its original meaning.
According to V &D We use this term for the procedure which consists of replacing one part of speech with another, without changing the meaning of the message. This procedure can be applied within the same language just as well as in the specific case of translation. "Il a annoncé qu'il reviendrait" (He announced that he would return) becomes, by transposition of the subordinate verb into a noun: "Il a annoncé son retour" (He announced his return). We call this second formulation: the transposed expression, as opposed to the first, which is the base expression.
In the field of translation, we will be required to distinguish between two types of transposition: (1) obligatory transposition and (2) optional transposition. For example: "dès son lever" must not only be translated (Procedure No. 3) but obligatorily transposed (Procedure No. 4) into "As soon as he gets up" (or "got up"), English having in this case only the base expression. But in the opposite direction, we have the choice between a calque and a transposition, since French possesses both expressions.
Conversely, the two equivalent sentences "après qu'il sera revenu" and "after he comes back" can both be rendered by a transposition: "après son retour" / "after his return".
The base expression and the transposed expression are not necessarily equivalent from a stylistic point of view. The translator must therefore be ready to perform the transposition if the resulting expression fits better into the sentence or allows for the restoration of a stylistic nuance. Indeed, it can be seen that the transposed expression generally has a more literary character.
The cross-transposition or chassé-croisé (88) is a particularly frequent case of transposition.
The Procedure Under Other Nomenclatures
This procedure has received widespread attention and is frequently utilized by many translation theorists and researchers, albeit under different terminologies. Prominent among them are:
-
J.C. Catford: Addressed this concept under the broader term "Shifts". Specifically, he referred to transposition as "Class shifts", which occur when the translation equivalent of a source language item is a member of a different grammatical class in the target language (e.g., shifting from a verb to a noun) (Catford, 1965).
-
Peter Newmark: Adopted the term "Shift" as a direct synonym for Transposition. He emphasized in his works that this procedure is the most common and practical in daily translation, allowing the translator to intuitively overcome structural and grammatical differences between languages (Newmark, 1988).
-
Eugene Nida: Referred to these types of grammatical changes within the framework of his "dynamic equivalence" theory under the name "Structural Adjustments". For Nida, these adjustments are necessary to produce a natural and equivalent effect for the target audience (Nida, 1964).
Criticisms of the Procedure
Despite the immense utility of the transposition technique and Vinay and Darbelnet's classifications in general, their approach has not been immune to criticism. Several theorists have directed critiques at this method, most notably:
-
Jean-René Ladmiral and Henri Meschonnic: They strongly criticized the strict, prescriptive linguistic approach established by Vinay and Darbelnet. They argued that translation should not be reduced to mere mechanical grammatical transformations (like transpositions) or switching structural templates between languages. Instead, they argued that translation is a process that concerns "discourse" and the overall contextual meaning.
-
Hélène Chuquet and Michel Paillard: In 1987, they noted that categorizing translation into these specific procedures could be too static. They warned that an over-reliance on procedures like transposition might drive the translator to focus too heavily on micro-linguistic structures at the expense of the text's overall vitality and broader communicative intent.
Conclusion
In conclusion, "Transposition" is a pivotal and indispensable tool in the professional translator's toolkit. It provides the necessary flexibility to handle grammatical discrepancies between languages, ensuring the target text flows naturally without compromising the original semantic message. Despite criticisms regarding its mechanical or purely linguistic nature, transposition—whether called a shift, a class shift, or a structural adjustment—remains, in many instances, an obligatory step and a crucial stylistic choice for elevating the quality and readability of a translated text.
-
Catford, J. C. (1965). A Linguistic Theory of Translation: An Essay in Applied Linguistics. London: Oxford University Press.
-
Chuquet, H., & Paillard, M. (1987). Approche linguistique des problèmes de traduction anglais-français. Paris: Ophrys.
-
Ladmiral, J.-R. (1979). Traduire : théorèmes pour la traduction. Paris: Payot.
-
Newmark, P. (1988). A Textbook of Translation. New York: Prentice-Hall.
-
Nida, E. A. (1964). Toward a Science of Translating. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
-
Vinay, J.-P., & Darbelnet, J. (1958). Stylistique comparée du français et de l'anglais: méthode de traduction. Paris: Didier. (Source text reference).