The present study combines quantitative and qualitative methods to investigate translation strategies applied in a translation of a few chapters in Cat Counsellor, which is a book about cat behaviour. A cognitive approach and translation strategies are the focus of this essay, which arrives at the conclusion that figurative language in general, and conceptual metaphors and hyperboles in particular, are used to manipulate, or rather convince readers of Cat Counsellor of a certain outlook. The translation strategies investigated in this essay are literal translation, transference translation and meaning translation. Of these translation strategies literal translation was applied 70% of the time, which indicates that similar cultures use similar figurative language. It also indicates that the target text and language often benefit from new figurative language rendered in the source language and source text. An important conclusion is that metaphorical language, such as conceptual metaphors and hyperboles may seem easy to translate, while in fact concepts can vary across cultures, which indicate that the translator carefully has to consider his or her translation choices in order to produce an accurate translation.

This thesis examines translation strategies for translating figurative language with a focus on metaphors, idioms, and phrasal verbs. Translators often state that figurative language presents challenges in the translation process. This is mainly because the translator must consider the language’s pragmatic, cognitive, and aesthetic functions. This analysis combines a modified translation approach based on Liu and Zhang (2005), Newmark (1988) as well as Lakoff and Johnson (2003). Using the strategies literal translation, transference, meaning translation, omission, and addition to reduce the loss between the source and target texts, this paper seeks to map how frequently these strategies are applied in the translation of metaphors, idioms, and phrasal verbs in the source text. This paper also discusses any potential problems arising in conjunction with these strategies. The findings of this analysis show that literal translation is the most commonly used translation strategy, in line with Liu and Zhang’s recommendations (2005). Overall, the second most frequently used strategy is transference, followed by meaning translation. This analysis also highlights interesting research gaps regarding omission and addition and encourages further research on these subjects. Greater knowledge and application of these strategies could lead not only to a better and more efficient target text but also a target text that is closer in word count to the original, thereby reducing the expansion of the source text.

Submitted by Rachel Pereira (rachelprr@yahoo.com.br) on 2016-01-06T18:40:25Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Daniel-Merigoux-Tese-de-doutorado.entregue-gravado-cd.pdf: 2050684 bytes, checksum: 8de8c55d9ee41a7f60baaee2c8d811a7 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-01-06T18:40:25Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Daniel-Merigoux-Tese-de-doutorado.entregue-gravado-cd.pdf: 2050684 bytes, checksum: 8de8c55d9ee41a7f60baaee2c8d811a7 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014-04-07 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / A existência de uma barreira da linguagem, transponível por uma “tradução” em que se perde a verdade pura, justifica geralmente a Divulgação Científica (DC). Problematizamos esse pressuposto retraçando as diferenças teóricas entre as linguagens ditas científica e leiga, bem como sua construção sócio-histórica. Concebemos a DC como parte de uma Comunicação Científica estendida, intra e extrapares, na perspectiva da acumulação de conhecimento, pautados mormente pelos conceitos de reprodução e capital simbólico de Bourdieu. Apreendemos cientista e leigo como atores comparáveis, embora socialmente distintos, recusando qualquer separação a priori, absoluta, natural ou anistórica entre eles. Os primórdios da DC são geralmente datados dos diálogos de Galileu e Fontenelle no século 17. Mas os modernos defendem primeiro o sigilo. Herdeiros do “Mênon” de Platão, aderem a uma filosofia pitagórica tão restrita ao par quanto o “artificial” latim, mesmo quando opõem a este o logos inato, vivo e dialético, representado pelos romances. Contra o poder central papal e o monopólio escolástico das universidades, a quantificação moderna do mundo legitimava os soberanos das nações europeias mercantilistas nascentes, patrocinadores das academias científicas oficiais. A linguagem do Livro da Natureza de Galileu é absolutamente divina: afirma um universo unificado e unívoco, acima das disputas clericais e interpretações qualitativas da Bíblia, mas nega à expressão leiga qualquer verdade científica, inviabilizando a Divulgação. Em vista disso, a DC surge na Atenas dos séculos 5 e 4 a.C., quando a retórica faz a dialética privada entrar na arena pública, governada por escolhas democráticas. Aristóteles seculariza a verdade filosófico-científica, imputando-a a um ato de fala humano, explicitamente regrado pela univocidade sistemática (uma palavra=um sentido), a qual distingue até hoje a linguagem científica da leiga. A definição do Termo impõe à determinação bivalente da verdade tanto quanto à sua comunicação a seleção de um único sentido correto entre aqueles possíveis, prefigurando uma teoria da informação, sem estatísticas. Associada à escrita e ao dialógico agonístico, a univocidade perpetua a ordem social pelo desempate e acerto simbólicos. Oposta à violência física e ambiguidade oraculares, transmite a verdade segundo um ideal de reprodução sem perda. Traduz partes do discurso profano em símbolos impessoais eternos, equivalentes às entidades pitagóricas imateriais e sagradas. Essas, demostradas pelo ato de fala, podem ser trocadas na ágora como bens simbólicos “purificados” entre cidadãos “pares”. A posse da verdade torna-se publicamente perceptível, “qualificando” o leigo pelo “déficit” simbólico, espiritual, moral, cognitivo, social. As linguagens lógico-matemáticas seguem ocultando as marcas linguísticas (pessoa, tempo e modalidade) do ator mortal que as profere. Na perspectiva quantitativa, histórica e progressista da Modernidade, a expressão da experiência e verdades antes incomensuráveis, torna-se unificada, previsível, replicável, incrementável, universal e capitalizável como divisas simbólicas. Antes portado apenas pela voz do filósofo, o ideal de reprodução é impulsado pela mecanização dos meios de comunicação: desde a imprensa até o sinal da comunicação digital, a verdade transmite-se com menor perda física, tempo e intervalo, a um público sempre mais numeroso e distante, enquanto a reprodução sócio-simbólica do cientista cresce exponencialmente. Contudo, nunca foram comprovadas a existência de uma comunicação absolutamente sem perda ou de uma unidade de sentido a priori ou naturalmente présegmentada, refutando uma diferença linguística irreversível entre científicos e leigos. Como o Hípaso de Metaponte da lenda pitagórica, divulgador efetivo da “imperfeição” dos números irracionais e origem humana da ciência, hoje os hackers expõem as falhas da linguagem computacional unívoca, a qual separa as sociedades ditas imaterial e material na “nova” ordem tecnológica informacional. / Science Popularization (SP) is generally justified by a language barrier, overcame by a “translation” that loses “pure” truth. We discuss this presupposition tracing the theoretical differences between so-called scientific and common languages, as well as their socio-historical construction. We assume SP is part of a Scientific Communication extended to both peers and non peers, in the perspective of knowledge accumulation, mainly based on Bourdieu's notions of symbolic capital and reproduction. We comprehend Scientists and laypersons as comparable actors, nevertheless socially distinct and not separated by any a priori, absolute, natural or innate characteristic. While it is admitted that early SP dates back to Galileo's and Fontenelle dialogs, the moderns prove firstly to be secretive. Heirs of Plato's Meno, they stick to a Pythagorean philosophy, as restricted to peers as the “artificial” Latin, even when they oppose to this the dialectic, innate and living logos, represented by romances. Against central papal power and scholastic university monopoly, moderns' universe quantification legitimates the emerging Mercantile European nations' sovereigns, who funded the official academies of science. The language of Galileo's Book of Nature is absolutely divine, above clergymen disputes and qualitative Bible interpretations. But it denies any scientific validity to lay expression of truth, then obstructing SP. Considering this, SP emerges in Athena during 6th-5th centuries BC, when rhetoric makes private dialectic enter the public arena, governed by democratic choices. Aristotle secularizes philosophico-scientific truth, imputing it to a human speech act, explicitly ruled by systematic univocity (one word=one meaning), which until now distinguishes scientific from common language. Term definition imposes to bivalent determination of truth and its communication the selection of a single correct meaning among possible ones, prefiguring an information theory yet without statistics. Combined with writing and agonistic dialog, univocity perpetuates social order trough symbolic settlement. Contrary to oracular ambiguity and physical violence, it transmits and accumulates truth according to an ideal of lossless reproduction. It translates parts of profane discourse into impersonal and eternal symbols, equivalent to Pythagorean entities, immaterial and sacred. Demonstrated trough a speech act, these can be exchanged in the agora, as “purified” symbolic goods, between citizen “peers”. Truth possession turns publicly perceptible, “qualifying” layperson by his symbolic, spiritual, moral, cognitive, then social “deficit”. Still, logico-mathematical languages hide the linguistic markers (person, tense, modality) of the mortal actor who utters them. In the quantitative, historical and progressive perspective of Modernity, the expression of incommensurable experiences and truths becomes unified and predictable, universal replicas that can be incremented and capitalized as symbolic currencies. Once restricted to philosophers' voice reach, the ideal of reproduction is boosted by the mechanization of communication techniques. From printing to the signal of digital communication, truth is transmitted with decreasing physical loss, time and interval, to an always more numerous and distant public, while scientists socio-symbolic reproduction grows exponentially. Nevertheless, neither lossless communication nor naturally pre-segmented or a priori units of meaning have ever proven to exist in absolute, refuting any impassable linguistic differences between laypersons and scientists. Just as Hippasus of Metapontum in the Pythagorean legend indeed popularized the “imperfection” of irrational numbers, betraying the human origin of Science, today's hackers expose the flaws of the univocal computing language, which divides our “new” informational and technological order into the so-called immaterial and material societies.