Some factors determinig the function of translation in LDL
Abstract
The present work was written by Josu Zabaleta as a presentation to, and prologue for, the cycle organized at the summer courses of the University of the Basque Country entitled "Translation and Interpretation: instrument of communication and normalization" .
The author begins by recalling one of the ends which had been sought in the creation of the Association of Basque Translators, Correctors and Interpreters (EIZIE), namely, that of collaboration between translators of different languages incontinuing the process of isolating, defining and gathering information about the situation of minority languages and those of limited diffusion. This knowledge could then be used to bear upon and guide those translations being carried out. It was hoped that in this way they would attain their rightful place.
There are more minority languages and languages of limited diffusion than there are languages of extensive diffusion. Therefore circumstances are more diverse and translations methods vary greater in the former two groups than in the latter. This, in turn, means that the area of work is both more extensive and more complicated.
Another of the points analyzed is the influence certain translations have had in the inception of so many national literatures, and the fundamental role they have played in the spread of knowledge and thought in both East and West.
Later, the role of translator and the translation of minority languages and languages of limited diffusion are studied, as well as their social acceptance and the misgivings that they arouse. These misgivings are fruit of a sentiment which the author terms "original sin", existent in those societies that, given their situation, have been obliged to translate proportionately more than other societies in which more extensive languages are used.
It is for this reason that it is necessary to delimit what we understand by minority languages and languages of limited diffusion. Providing concrete quantified data in this respect demonstrates how insufficient these prove in providing an adequate typology. Other factors, such as territory, diglossia, and the normalization process in which they are involved, therefore exist which have to be taken into consideration in order to come to an understanding of this classification.
Language is granted two ends by society. The first is the purely functional, constituting the need for communication, and the second, on a more symbolic level, that of uniting a community and lend ing it identity . The function of translation can be no other than that of communication, and any variant that hampers this has, in fact, aims other than those of attracting and engaging the prospective reader. The author illustrates this section with various examples from minority languages.
The article closes with a consideration of the status of the translator and his/her social acceptance in which the variables and factors that influence both are studied.
