Translating onomatopoeia: An attempt toward translation strategies

Introduction

 

Onomatopoeias, in general, are words which imitate natural sounds and are common phenomenon found in all languages. Oxford online dictionary defined onomatopoeia as "formation of a word from a sound associated with what is named (e.g. cuckoo, sizzle)" (Onomatopoeia, n.d.). Drabble (2000) defined it as "the formation of a word by an imitation of the sound associated with the object or action designated" (p. 743). She also stated that it is also "applied to the use of a combination of words to evoke by sound a certain image or mood" (p. 743).

 

In linguistics, it is commonly accepted that the relation between sound and meaning is arbitrary; therefore there is no connection between form and meaning. Saussure (1959) stated that "the bond between the signifier and the signified is arbitrary" (p. 67). One exception to the rule is onomatopoeia or onomatopoeic word. A specific characteristic of onomatopoeias is the peculiar relationship between the signifier and the signified, as they imitate the sound of what they represent. In other words, the connection between form and meaning of an onomatopoeic word is non-arbitrary (Lyons, 1981).

 

Onomatopoeias' traces can be seen everywhere. They are expressive words which can evoke images and arouse feelings in the reader. Casas-Tost (2012) expressed that "their vivacity, rhythm and musicality means that onomatopoeias also fulfill a stylistic or poetic function, so it comes as no surprise to find them in many and varied contexts, as well as in different text genres, which of course includes literature" (p. 41). In addition, they are found in all languages of the world (Yule, 2006). The use of onomatopoeias varies in different languages and cultures. For example, while some languages possess a relatively small number of onomatopoeic words, other languages like Japanese possess a great deal of them (Sugahara, 2010). This difference poses problems to learners, trainers, and translators of any language.

 

Facing problems surrounding the phenomenon of onomatopoeia is inevitable for those translators who want to exhibit a proper translation. Sugahara (2010) stated that onomatopoeia is special because its form appears to be more directly associated with its meaning. He added that "onomatopoeic words can convey imaginative, animated, and picturesque meanings that ordinary (i.e. non-onomatopoeic) words do not indicate" (p. 1). Also, Tamori and Schourup stated that in some languages like Japanese, onomatopoeia plays a key role in everyday language and works of literature (as cited in Sugahara, 2010). Despite its importance in the world’s languages, many scholars have regarded it as peripheral and as "second class citizens among words" (Anderson, 1998, p. 129). These marginal tendencies lead to lack of having adequate familiarity with the subject matter which is problematic for scholars in related fields such as linguistics and translation. Regarding the translation of onomatopoeia, there are a few published studies which have focused on its different aspects. Mostly, they have investigated translators’ behavior and attitude toward onomatopoeia but have not proposed strategies or procedures for the translation process. Due to the significance of both onomatopoeia and choosing appropriate strategies for the translation process, the present study seeks to take a closer look at the translation of onomatopoeia in order to present applicable strategies for the translation process. To this end, the extracted elements i.e. onomatopoeias of the Persian literary work and its English translated version have been analysed.

 

As it was mentioned, most published studies which have focused on the translation of onomatopoeia have investigated translators’ behavior and attitude toward onomatopoeia but have not proposed strategies or procedures for the translation process. The present study attempts to make inroads into the gap and present applicable strategies for the translation process. It is hoped that this attempt encourages further researches and decreases difficulties in choosing appropriate strategies and approaches for the translation process. It should be noted that related scholars who want to know about onomatopoeia and its translation may benefit from the research.

 

Onomatopoeia

 

As suggest from its Greek root, onomatopoeia―from onomatopoios, from onoma (genitive onomatos) "word, name" + a derivative of poiein "compose, make", "the making of a name or word", in imitation of a sound associated with the thing being named, (Onomatopoeia, n.d.) ―is a word which imitates natural sounds. Drabble (2000) defined it as "the formation of a word by an imitation of the sound associated with the object or action designated" (p. 743). She also stated that it is also "applied to the use of a combination of words to evoke by sound a certain image or mood" (p. 743). Dickins, Hervey and Higgins (2002) noted that onomatopoeias are words which their phonic forms imitate sounds like bang, cuckoo, etc. However, defining onomatopoeia is not as simple as it might appear. When attempts have been made to define it, there has been unanimity and difficulty (Bredin, 1996). Bredin also stated that there is confusion and vagueness about various types of onomatopoeia and some related phenomena like sound symbolism or synaesthesia. In this paper, onomatopoeia has been used as a word which its sounds conveys or gives clues to its meaning.

 

Saussure (1959, p. 67) believed that "the bond between the signifier and the signified is arbitrary"; therefore there is no connection between form and meaning. The main characteristic of onomatopoeias is the peculiar relationship between form and meaning, as they imitate the sound of what they represent. In other words, they present a non-arbitrary connection between the form and the meaning (Lyons, 1981). They have been recognized as an exception to the theory of arbitrariness of language and are found in any language of the world (Lyons, 1981; Yule, 2006). Depending on the language, onomatopoeias operate differently. They can be noun, verb, adjective, etc. In English, they generally function either as verbs or nouns (Tamori & Schourup (as cited in Sugahara, 2010); Sugahara, 2010). Casas-Tost (2012) stated that "in Chinese their adverbial function is a predominant feature while in Spanish they are often used as nouns or interjections" (p. 40). In Japanese, onomatopoeia and mimetic words function essentially as adverbs, although the latter could have other grammatical functions (Inose, 2008). In standard Arabic, onomatopoeias are doubled and reduplicative verbs (Dickins et al., 2002). In Persian, they can be noun, verb, adjective, etc. A specific characteristic of onomatopoeias is reduplication. Although reduplication can be found in other parts of speech, in the case of onomatopoeias this is very frequent and distinctive (Casas-Tost, 2012).

There are several ways to classify onomatopoeia. Ullmann (1962) divided onomatopoeias into two types; primary and secondary onomatopoeia. Primary onomatopoeia refers to the imitation of sound by sound where the sound is truly an echo to the sense and "the referent itself is an acoustic experience which is more or less closely imitated by the phonetic structure of the word" (p. 84). Secondary onomatopoeia is one in which the sounds evoke, not an acoustic experience, but a movement (dither, dodder, quiver, slither, slouch), or some physical or moral quality (gloom, grumpy, mawkish). He believed that such sounds constitute a great challenge to translators. Attridge (1988) stated that onomatopoeia can be either lexical or nonlexical. He differentiated between these two as follows:

In lexical onomatopoeia, the more common variety, the words of the language are deployed in such a way as to suggest a more than usually strong link between the sounds of speech and the non-speech sounds (or other physical features of the world) being represented. In nonlexical onomatopoeia, the rarer form, the letters and sounds of the language are used for a similar purpose, but without the formation of words. (2009, p. 473)

Bredin (1996) divided onomatopoeia into three categories: Direct onomatopoeia, associative onomatopoeia, and exemplary onomatopoeia. Direct onomatopoeia is a word which attempts to imitate the sounds they are denoting. He illustrated it using the verbs "hiss", "buzz", and "moan" (p. 558). Associative onomatopoeia is a word which indirectly conveys the sound that it refers to. "Cuckoo" and "whip" are examples of this type (p. 560). Bredin defined exemplary onomatopoeia as follows: "Its foundation rests upon the amount and character of the physical work used by a speaker in uttering a word" (p. 563). He used "Nimble" and "dart" to illustrate this type (p. 563).

 

Translating Onomatopoeia: Previous Studies

 

Regarding onomatopoeia from the perspective of translation, there are a few published studies which have considered its different aspects. Flyxe (2002) examined translation of Japanese onomatopoeia into Swedish and proposed reasons why some of onomatopoeias often remaining without translation. As he mentioned, it is possible that in the target language (TL), Swedish, onomatopoeias are considered to be childish and vulgar, thus translators avoid using such expressions. Also, the variations and possibilities of catching and expressing the subtle differences are not the same in two languages, so attempting to give an equivalent to source text (ST) onomatopoeia runs the risk of missing nuances expressed in the source language (SL). He pointed out the style as another explanation for the many omissions. Due to the excessive informality of onomatopoeias in the TL, they might not be regarded as appropriate for maintaining the style of the translation. He identified six methods used by translators: (a) adjectives, (b) adverbs, (c) verbs, (d) paraphrases, (e) onomatopoeia, and (f) omission. Inose (2008) also added three more methods, used to translate Japanese onomatopoeia and mimetic words into Spanish and English, to those introduced by Flyxe (2002): (a) translation using nouns, (b) translation using idioms, and (c) translation using two adjectives, or combination of adverbs, adjectives or verbs. Inose stated that:

Except for very few cases in which onomatopoeic or mimetic words do not add extra information, omission is not a desirable method of translation. When there is no equivalent word in the target language, the translators should consider using other resources, such as explicative paraphrases or combination of various words. (p. 115)

 

Ramírez in his manual for translating from Chinese to Spanish devoted a short section to the translation of Chinese onomatopoeias and expressive words into Spanish (as cited in Casas-Tost, 2012). He argued that:

 

Expressive words are those which strictly speaking do not imitate a sound, but their phonemes do suggest a sound or another sensation, as for example ‘murmullo’ (murmur) or ‘borbotón’ (bubbling), and come under the heading of ‘conventional sound symbolism’ as defined by Hinton et al. (1994). (as cited in Casas-Tost, 2012, p. 41)

 

He believed that the phonological peculiarities of these words are important and advocated finding phonological equivalents whenever possible. However, he considered other cases and stated that this kind of equivalence may not be possible for various reasons: They may not exist in TL; there may be phonological differences or they could result in cacophony, not forgetting a mismatch in frequency of use (as cited in Casas-Tost, 2012). Casas-Tost (2012) stated that, in these cases Ramírez opted for:

 

not translating onomatopoeias and expressive words as such, but rather to find  a semantically equivalent or related term. Nevertheless, while he is more inclined to resorting to the semantic equivalent in the case of expressive words, he is less so in the case of onomatopoeias, arguing that their sound is the most important component and must be conveyed in the translation. (p. 41)

 

Also, Casas-Tost noted that Ramírez’s theoretical approach is backed up by ample experience as a translator and illustrated that there is a considerable difference between Ramírez’s options for translation of onomatopoeias and those of other professional translators, who do not appear to have any qualms about suppressing onomatopoeias in their translations from Chinese to Spanish.

 

Muhaidat (2009) discussed various problems involved in translation of onomatopoeias into Arabic. Also, she identified different techniques such as rewording, using an equivalent which conveys a similar meaning although it is not onomatopoeia, explication, transliteration, etc. for dealing with onomatopoeias. Casas-Tost (2012) identified three main tendencies when translating Chinese onomatopoeias into Spanish: Substitution of the original onomatopoeias for another type of word other than an onomatopoeia, omission of ST onomatopoeias in the target text (TT), and translation of ST onomatopoeia using a TL onomatopoeia. She explained that these three tendencies depend on various factors such as the type of onomatopoeia, availability and frequency of use in the TL, linguistic issues, and the method and approach adopted by the translators and all of which are embodied in the translation techniques chosen in each case. She emphasized that:

 

In addition to linguistic factors, among which I believe the semantic factors to be a prominent feature, translators also play a decisive role in how onomatopoeias are translated. (p. 47)

 

Seyyedi and Akhlaghi (2013) investigated onomatopoeias in The Qur’an and believed that in cases of onomatopoeic words, which often do not have equivalent in the TL, omission could be an appropriate method of translation, and translators should consider other methods such as explicative paraphrases or combination of various words when there is no equivalent word in the TL. Emami (2014) focused on onomatopoeia in literary translation and selected a parallel corpus of American short stories translated into Persian to investigate how onomatopoeia is treated and used by the translators. He found that in most cases, "Persian onomatopoeic words appear as the nominal part of compound verbs, hence remain intact, different to their English correspondents which may no longer be distinguished as onomatopoeia, especially when conjugated as a verb" (p. 20). He also identified three groups of onomatopoeic words in Persian translations of English corpus. First, Persian onomatopoeias corresponding to English onomatopoeias with either similar or dissimilar sounds were found. Second, Persian onomatopoeias as translations of genuine non-onomatopoeic English words for which either no equivalent is available in Persian or the translator has decided not to use the non-onomatopoeic option; and third, Persian onomatopoeias as a straightforward option while describing a rather complicated emotion or state. He stated that on many occasions the translators have used non-onomatopoeic Persian words and using onomatopoeia is not popular amongst Persian writers either. Sharifi Moghadam and Ghazizade (2016) investigated onomatopoeias in Holy Defense literary works and the strategies adopted to translate them. Their study showed that Persian onomatopoeic words are mostly translated by using an equivalent onomatopoeia in English. They stated that "if the equivalent onomatopoeia exists in the TL, it is not only the most appropriate strategy but also the only acceptable way to translate onomatopoeia" (p. 13).

 

Translating Onomatopoeia: A Case Study

 

When planning the case study, different text types, genres, and corpora were considered. However, the chief purpose was to emphasize that onomatopoeias are not only limited to comics, oral, or colloquial, but also used in other types of literature. In addition, it was aimed to investigate a different text type from that of previous works in order to provide examples from various text types and languages toward the end of better understanding of the phenomenon. The corpus of the study included a Persian literary work and its English translation. The Persian work was the first book of the Masnavi by Mowlana Jalal ad-Din Mohammad Balkhi (1993), also known as Rumi, which was based on Nicholson’s Persian edition and its English translation by Jawid Mojaddedi (2004). Rumi and his works especially the Masnavi have had widespread impact on Persian and world literature as well as the spiritual and literary life of people at different times and places, as evidenced by the presence of many commentaries, books, thesis, essays, and translations. The Masnavi is a series of six books of poetry that amounts to about 26,000 verses altogether and is referred to commonly as 'Koran in Persian' (Mojaddedi, 2004). Mojaddedi’s translation is one of the newest one, and he was awarded the Lois Roth Prize for translation of Persian literature by the American Institute of Iranian Studies for The Masnavi: Book One. He translated the Masnavi into verse in accordance with the aim of the original work. He used rhyming iambic pentameters, "since this is the closest corresponding form of English verse to the Persian masnavi form of rhyming couplets" (Mojaddedi, 2004, p. xxvii). For the purpose of identifying onomatopoeic words in the original text, Farhang-e Namavaha dar Zaban-e Farsi [Dictionary of Onomatopoeia in Persian] by Vahidian Kamyar (1996) was used. Oxford online dictionaries were applied to identify English onomatopoeic words.

 

To achieve the objectives of the study, the ST was studied from the beginning to the end to extract all onomatopoeias. After careful study of the corpus and based on Farhang-e Namavaha dar Zaban-e Farsi [Dictionary of Onomatopoeia in Persian] by Vahidian Kamyar (1996), 95 different onomatopoeias were identified. Also, 475 couplets which contained the onomatopoeic words were identified. Then, English correspondences proposed by the translator for ST items were provided. After textual analyses of the Persian and English data, five strategies used by the translator when translating Persian onomatopoeias into English were identified, which are as follows:

1. Translation using onomatopoeia
2. Translation using another type of word other than onomatopoeia (‎non onomatopoeic word)
3. Translation using paraphrases
4. Translation using pronoun
5. No translation (omission)

There are some key factors influencing choice of a strategy: The translators involved in the process, availability of onomatopoeia in the TL, text type, priority of content over form or vice versa, and culture.

 

Strategies Used to Translate Onomatopoeias from Persian into English

 

1. Translation using onomatopoeia

 

There are cases that the ST onomatopoeia has been rendered by an onomatopoeic equivalent in English, as shown in the following example:

 

Example 1:

ST: Zān sabab kandar šodan ū mānd dīr        Xāk rā mīkand o mīġorīd šīr (1074, ṣ 47)

Literal Translation (LT): From that reason coming he was late          Soil dug he and roared lion

TT: That lion slew foes, and the hare was late,

       So he would beat the ground and roar, irate: (1060, p. 67)

 

Vahidian Kamyar (1996) stated that ġorīdan is an onomatopoeic word which means to utter a loud deep sound. In the above example, roar, an onomatopoeic word, has been used to translate ġorīdan. Oxford online dictionary defined roar as utter a loud, deep, prolonged cry and stated that roar is an onomatopoeic word (Roar, n.d.).

 

2. Translation using another type of word other than onomatopoeia (‎non-onomatopoeic word)

 

In some cases where there is an onomatopoeic word in Persian, the translator has opted for conveying it by means of another type of word, as shown in the following example:

Example 2:

ST: Jozvhā rā rūyhā sūy-e kolast         Bolbolān rā ʿašq bā rūy-e golast        (773, ṣ 34)

LT: Components faces towards whole is        Nightingales love with face of flower is

TT: Round Universal Being contingents turn

      While roses make each nightingale’s heart burn. (767, p. 49)

 

Vahidian Kamyar (1996) stated that bolbol is onomatopoeia and defined it as a kind of bird which has beautiful and sweet song. In the above example, nightingale, a non-onomatopoeic word, has been used to translate bolbol. Nightingale is "a small migratory thrush with drab brownish plumage, noted for its rich melodious song which can often be heard at night" (Nightingale, n.d.). There are possible reasons for the choice: This substitution could be due to the lack of onomatopoeic equivalents in English. Culture is another possible factor. According to Encyclopedia of Iranica’s website, bolbol (nightingale) has an important role in Persian literature, and it is virtually impossible to speak of the nightingale apart from the rose, as can be seen in the above example (Clinton, 1989). The rose and the nightingale are important motifs in Persian literature, in the imagery of Persian poetry, and in Persian culture (Diba, 2012). Also, these two have been widely used in English literature. So, it has been tried to preserve the cultural relevance.

 

3. Translation using paraphrases

 

In some cases paraphrase has been used to preserve the ST onomatopoeia, as shown in the following example:

 

Example 3:

ST: Bād-e ṣarṣar kū deraxtān mīkanad           Bā gīyāh-e past eḥsān mīkonad       (3395, ṣ 144)

LT: Wind of cold and strong that trees uproots         With plant of fragile mercy shows it

TT: Although strong winds uproot the tallest trees,

       They beautify moist grass just like a breeze; (3338, p. 204)

 

Vahidian Kamyar (1996) stated that ṣarṣar is an onomatopoeic word which means strong and cold wind. In the above example, the ST onomatopoeia has been paraphrased which may be due to lack of an onomatopoeic equivalent in English.

 

 

4. Translation using pronoun

 

In rare cases, pronoun has been used to render the ST onomatopoeic word, as shown in the following example:

 

Example 4:

ST: Čon kasī rā xār dar pāyaš jahad                Pāy-e xod rā bar sar-e zānū nahad

      Vaz sar-e sūzan hamī jūyad saraš              Var nayābad mīkonad bā lab taraš

      Xār dar pā šod čonīn došvār yāb              Xār dar del čon bovad vādeh javāb

      Xār dar del rā gar bedīdī har xasī             Dast key būdī ġamānrā bar kasī     (150-153, ṣ 9)

LT: Because someone thorn in his foot          Foot of himself on top of knee would put

       With tip of needle seek its head              If not find he with lip moisten it

       Thorn in foot is such hard find                Thorn in heart if was tell answer

       Thorn in heart if see anybody                  Hand when was sorrow on someone      

TT: When someone stumbles barefoot on a thorn

       He stops and checks what he has trod upon,

 

       To use a needle to dislodge its head,

       Or failing that, by moistening it instead:

 

       If in your foot it proves so hard to find

       Imagine one that’s pierced your heart and mind!

 

       If such thorns could be traced by any fool

       How then could sorrow ever hope to rule! (150-153, p. 13)

 

Vahidian Kamyar (1996) stated that xār is onomatopoeia which means hard sharp leafless point on the branch of a plant. In third couplet, it and one has been used to translate xār. This substitution is not due to the lack of equivalents in English or lack of awareness, since there are English equivalents for the word and the translator used them when he faced the word in other couplets. There are possible reasons for the choice: Since xār has been mentioned in the first couplet, the translator has used pronouns to maintain the form as much as possible. Also, it was felt that using pronoun dose not result in loss of information. The ST is poem so both form and content are important. In other words, text type plays a key role in the translation process.

 

5. No translation (omission)

 

There are a few cases that the translator has omitted the ST onomatopoeia, as shown in the following example:

 

Example 5:

ST: Ū be ẓāher vāʿaeẓ-e aḥkām būd               Līk dar bāten ṣafīr o dām būd     (366, ṣ 18)

LT: He of outside preacher of rules was         But inside whistle and trap was

TT: Although he seemed to teach mere ordinances

       He led to hidden traps his audiences: (366, p. 26)

 

Vahidian Kamyar (1996) stated that ṣafīr is onomatopoeia and defined it as (a) a device that makes a loud sound when a person blows air through it and (b) a high and loud sound. In the above example, the ST onomatopoeia i.e. ṣafīr has been omitted. This loss, however, is not due to the lack of equivalents in English or lack of awareness, since there are English equivalents for the word and the translator used onomatopoeic equivalents when he faced the word in other couplets. There are possible reasons for the choice: (a) the translator has tried to maintain the form as much as possible. (b) in this case, omission did not result in loss of information.

 

 

 

Translating Onomatopoeia: Common Strategies

 

As stated above, different scholars have studied onomatopoeia from the perspective of translation namely Flyxe (2002), Inose (2008), Muhaidat (2009), Casas-Tost (2012), Emami (2014), and others. On the basis of their works and the case study, it was attempted to outline some of the most common strategies used by professional translators for dealing with onomatopoeias. It should be emphasized that it is impossible to present an absolute framework for dealing with onomatopoeias found in any language. It is an attempt which encourages further researches.

 

There are some key factors influencing choice of a strategy for dealing with onomatopoeia. The linguistic system in all languages is a determining factor in translating onomatopoeias (Casas-Tost, 2012; Muhaidat, 2009; Pischedda, 2011). Since the use of onomatopoeias varies in different languages and cultures, and as Casas-Tost remarked, type of onomatopoeia, availability and frequency of use in languages, and semantic field are factors which govern the choice of a strategy. In addition, there are other factors such as translators involved in the process. Translators play a decisive role in how onomatopoeias are translated since their respective behaviours are completely different (Casas-Tost, 2012). The individual style of each translator and how sensitive the translator is to the phenomenon are determining factors in choosing the translation strategy (Casas-Tost, 2012). Flyxe (2002) also referred to the importance of translator’s role. He indirectly pointed out that translator’s assessment of what is appropriate in a given situation is another important factor. Also, style, text type, priority of content over form or vice versa, "translation norms which govern each translation" (Casas-Tost, 2012, p. 42) as well as culture are other influencing factors.

 

 

1. Translation using another type of word other than onomatopoeia (‎non-onomatopoeic word)

 

This strategy involves using a non-onomatopoeic word in the TL as an equivalent for the SL onomatopoeia. It tends to be used when the nearest semantic equivalents of a SL onomatopoeia in the TL are not onomatopoeia. Since the use of onomatopoeias varies in different languages and cultures, this strategy is often used. Casas-Tost (2012) considered it as the most common employed strategy for dealing with onomatopoeia. It may be the safest one particularly when ST onomatopoeia has a thematic or expressive function (Dickins et al., 2002).

 

2. Translation using onomatopoeia

 

This strategy involves using an onomatopoeic word in the TL which has similar meaning as that of the SL onomatopoeia. Flyxe (2002), Ramírez (2004), Inose (2008), Casas-Tost (2012), and Emami (2014) also referred it as a strategy for dealing with onomatopoeia. This strategy may seem as the ideal solution, but it cannot be used for all cases since, as mentioned before, the use of onomatopoeias varies in different languages and cultures.

 

3. Translation using paraphrases

 

This strategy tends to be used when an equivalent cannot be found in the TL, when it seems inappropriate to use onomatopoeia in the TT, or when "the frequency with which a certain form is used in the source text is significantly higher than would be natural in the target language" Baker (2011, p. 36). Flyxe (2002) referred it as a strategy for dealing with onomatopoeia. Baker (2011) believed that paraphrase as a strategy for dealing with non-equivalence at the word level has advantages and disadvantages. She stated that "the main advantage of the paraphrase strategy is that it achieves a high level of precision in specifying propositional meaning" (p. 41). Disadvantages of using this strategy are that paraphrase cannot convey expressive, evoked, or any kind of associative meaning and it is awkward because it involves filling a one-item slot with an explanation consisting of several items (Baker, 2011). Inose (2008) also argued that this is a very common strategy for dealing with onomatopoeia, but there is also the risk of making the phrases too redundant, thus lacking the natural fluency in the TL.

 

4. No translation (omission)

 

This strategy involves omission of the ST onomatopoeia in the TT. Inose (2008) stated that when the omission does not result in a loss of information or when an equivalent onomatopoeia does not exist in the TL, it seems an appropriate method for dealing with onomatopoeia. However, Inose proposed that except for very few cases in which onomatopoeic or mimetic words do not add extra information, omission is not a desirable strategy, and translators should consider other resources such as paraphrases when there is no equivalent in the TL. Baker (2011) also believed that when "the meaning conveyed by a particular item or expression is not vital enough to the development of the text to justify distracting the reader with lengthy explanations, translators can and often do simply omit translating the word or expression in question" (p. 42). However, omission of words and expressions in a translation causes some loss of meaning; therefore, it is advisable to use it only as a last resort; when the advantages of producing a smooth, readable translation clearly outweigh the value of rendering a particular meaning accurately in a given context (Baker, 2011). Casas-Tost (2012) argued that one factor which is an obstacle to the translation process is that these text units i.e. onomatopoeias have been given little importance at theoretical and practical level. "This is reflected by the lack of onomatopoeia entries in all manner of reference books, including dictionaries, which I believe is one of the reasons why they are rarely used, or even suppressed ..." (p. 39). She remarked that omitting ST onomatopoeias means that their rich expressive quality is lost which is an important consideration for all text types, but perhaps even more so when it comes to literature since both form and content are important. She explained that the translator’s choice to omit the ST onomatopoeia is governed by various factors such as the translation method s/he has chosen, availability and frequency of use in each language, and semantic field. Flyxe (2002) pointed out style as another explanation for using this strategy. Sometimes onomatopoeias might not be regarded as appropriate for maintaining the style of the translation (Flyxe, 2002).

 

5. Translation using loan word with or without explanation

 

This strategy involves using SL onomatopoeia in TL as a loan word. Pischedda (2011) has identified ‘Repetition’ and ‘Addition’ as strategies for dealing with onomatopoeia which are similar to this strategy. He has defined them as follows: "Onomatopoeia has been left intact" (p. 17); for example: The English ‘Zip’, ‘Click’ has been left intact in the Italian translation and "onomatopoeia has been left but spelling/phonetic changes have been applied" (p. 17); for example: The English ‘Beep’, has been became ‘Bip’ in the Italian translation. Casas-Tost (2012) referred it as one of the ‘techniques’ which translators can use for dealing with onomatopoeia. Also, using loan word is particularly common in dealing with culture-specific items (Baker, 2011).

 

Conclusion

The study set out to investigate translation of onomatopoeia in order to present applicable strategies for the translation process. To this end, a case study and related works of other researchers were used. Relying on their works and the case study, five strategies were presented: (a) translation using another type of word other than onomatopoeia (‎non onomatopoeic word), (b) translation using onomatopoeia, (c) translation using paraphrases, (d) no translation (omission), and (e) translation using loan word with or without explanation. The analyses suggested that the linguistic system, type of onomatopoeia, availability and frequency of use in languages, semantic field, translator involved in the process, style, text type, priority of content over form or vice versa, translation norms, and culture are key factors which govern choice of a strategy for dealing with onomatopoeia. It should be highlighted that it is an attempt that encourages more researches and studies to provide a thorough and comprehensive description of the phenomenon, to detect more strategies, and to assess the advantages and disadvantages of each strategy in various contexts.

تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 4,544

تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 1,787