1887
Volume 11, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0155-0640
  • E-ISSN: 1833-7139
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Implicit in every metaphor is a comparison involving 5 parts: like a is to b, so x is to y. When translating into languages in which metaphors are seldom or never used, some or all of these parts must be made explicit to make the metaphor understood. Metaphors may be categorized as 1) incidental, 2) repeated, 3) extended, 4) thematic and 5) symbolic; the importance of retaining them being progressively greater from 1) to 5). We may 1) leave the metaphor literal, 2) render it a simile, 3) make explicit one or more of the parts, 4) use a cultural substitute or 5) drop the metaphor and translate the meaning. Making all 5 parts explicit may skew the focus or result in unnatural style.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/aral.11.1.05cro
1988-01-01
2019-12-11
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Beekman, J. and J. Callow
    (1974) Translating the Word of God. Dallas, TX, Summer Institute of Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Larson, M. L.
    (1984) Meaning-based translation: a guide to cross-language equivalence. Lanham, MD, University Press of America.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Marshall, I. H.
    (1978) The Gospel of Luke. The New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Richards, I. A.
    (1936) The philosophy of rhetoric. New York, Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Rountree, S.
    (1984) A preliminary guide to comprehension checking. Notes on Translation101:3–14. Dallas, TX, Summer Institute of Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/aral.11.1.05cro
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error