Master thesis English Linguistics: The equivalence of English – Vietnamese translation of noun phrases in the book “Fire and fury” by Michael Wolff

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI

UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES

LÃ THỊ PHƢƠNG LOAN

THE EQUIVALENCE OF ENGLISH – VIETNAMESE

TRANSLATION OF NOUN PHRASES IN THE BOOK

“FIRE AND FURY” BY MICHAEL WOLFF

Tính Tƣơng Đƣơng Trong Bản Dịch Anh – Việt Đối Với Cụm Danh Từ Trong

Tác Phẩm “Bão Lửa Và Cuồng Nộ” của Michael Wolff

M.A. THESIS (PROGRAM 1)

Field:English Linguistics

Code:8220201.01

HANOI – 2020

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI

UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES

LÃ THỊ PHƢƠNG LOAN

THE EQUIVALENCE OF ENGLISH – VIETNAMESE

TRANSLATION OF NOUN PHRASES IN THE BOOK

“FIRE AND FURY” BY MICHAEL WOLFF

Tính Tƣơng Đƣơng Trong Bản Dịch Anh – Việt Đối Với Cụm Danh Từ Trong

Tác Phẩm “Bão Lửa Và Cuồng Nộ” của Michael Wolff

M.A. THESIS (PROGRAM 1)

Field: English Linguistics

Code:8220201.01

Supervisor: Assoc. Professor Dr Le Hung Tien

HANOI – 2020

DECLARATION

I declare that this thesis “The equivalence of English – Vietnamese

Translation of noun phrases in the book Fire and Fury by Michael Wolff” has been

composed solely by myself and that it has not been submitted, in whole or in part, in

any previous application for a degree. This thesis is submitted after a carefully

checking progress in order to fulfill the requirements of the M.A degree.

Hanoi, 2020

i

Lã Thị Phƣơng Loan

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

It is my gratitude to the beloved supporters who played important roles in my

accomplishment of this thesis entitled: “The equivalence of English and Vietnamese

Translation of Noun Phrases in the book Fire and Fury”. I realize that this thesis

was not completed without their support. I would like to express my sincere

gratitude and respect to:

 Assoc. Professor Dr Le Hung Tien whose precious guidance, advice and

supervision are the assets to the thesis;

 All the lectures of English Department of Hanoi University of Language and

International Studies who have always been reliable teachers for the

encouragement and enlightenment;

 My colleagues for their support of time and encouragement;

 Last but not least, the members in my family who have always given me

great support and encouragement all the time.

Finally, I thank for all the constructive criticism and suggestion from the readers

for the better contribution of the thesis.

Hanoi, January 2020

ii

Lã Thị Phương Loan

ABSTRACT

There have been various researches on translation equivalence which have

been key words in the field of translation so far. Within the thesis, an investigation

of the equivalence of the English and Vietnamese translation of the noun phrases

collected in Chapter II of the book “Fire and Fury” by Michael Wolff was taken

under the aspects of lexicon, grammatical structure, situational and cultural context.

The study aims at testifying the importance of equivalence in the process of

translation among languages and clarifying the mismatches between the two

languages according to the theory of Meaning-based Translation by Larson (1984).

The mismatches of lexicon, grammatical structure, situational and cultural context

between the two versions are the principal elements for the assessment of the

equivalents of the collected noun phrases in the translation. The contrastive analysis

was implemented at the level of phrase and lexis to draw out the mismatches

between the two language texts in term of lexicon, grammatical structures and

situational and cultural context. The method of descriptive qualitative and approach

as well as the inductive method was used for the implementation of the study. 67

mismatches of lexicon in term of surface structure and one case of mismatch in

deep structure (deep meaning) were found. In the case of changes in deep meaning,

the original information can be distorted. Deep structure is therefore given higher

priority over the surface structure in order to get the faithful and natural translation.

There are 16 cases of situational and cultural mismatch (four cases of cultural

mismatch, eleven cases of situational mismatch). The translator showed the flexible

attitude to make the justifiable adjustment, which is clearly illustrated with three

cases stay intact, three cases translated in target culture and nine cases following the

style of source culture. 18 mismatches of grammatical structure were found, which

shows the fact that the English text has the priority of noun phrases while

Vietnamese favors verbal expression. 6 cases of literal translation have been found

iii

during the investigation. From the findings, useful experiences and principles of

translation have been drawn out: Mismatches in term of language features and

situation communication are inevitable, the theory of equivalent translation is

therefore very necessary in translation. The knowledge of divergent language

systems, cultural norms and mismatches of lexicon would help the translator,

English teacher and their students deal with the gaps in term of language and

iv

cultures and gain their targets effectively.

TABLE OF CONTENT

DECLARATION .............................................................................................. i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .............................................................................. ii

ABSTRACT .................................................................................................... iii

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES ............................................................ vii

CHAPTER 1 .................................................................................................... 1

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1

1.1. Rationale ................................................................................................... 1

1.2. Aims and objectives of the Study ............................................................ 2

1.3. Scope of the Study .................................................................................... 3

1.4. Methodology ............................................................................................. 3

1.5. Organization of the thesis ........................................................................ 4

CHAPTER 2 .................................................................................................... 5

Literature Review ............................................................................................ 5

2.1. Translation theory .................................................................................... 5

2.1.1. Concept of translation ............................................................................ 5

2.1.2. Notion of equivalence: ........................................................................... 7

2.1.3. Translation equivalence ......................................................................... 8

2.1. Larson’s Translation strategies ............................................................ 10

2.1.1. Concerning concepts ............................................................................ 10

2.1.2. Larson’s translation strategies ............................................................ 13

2.2. Noun phrase ............................................................................................ 17

2.2.1. English Noun phrase ........................................................................... 17

2.2.2. Noun phrase in Vietnamese ................................................................. 18

CHAPTER 3 .................................................................................................... 21

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .................................................................... 21

v

3.1. Research question ..................................................................................... 21

3.2. Research approach ................................................................................... 21

3.3. Research method ...................................................................................... 24

3.4. Data collection ......................................................................................... 25

3.5. Data analysis ............................................................................................ 25

3.5.1. Categorizing .......................................................................................... 25

3.5.2. Classifying ............................................................................................. 26

3.5.3. Analyzing ............................................................................................... 26

CHAPTER 4 .................................................................................................. 30

DESCRIPTION AND EVALUATION OF EQUIVALENT

TRANSLATION OF ENGLISH NOUN PHRASES ................................. 30

4.1. Data analysis ........................................................................................... 30

4.1.1. Mismatches of lexicon .......................................................................... 31

4.1.2. Mismatches of grammatical structure ................................................. 37

4.1.3. Mismatches of situational and cultural context ................................. 41

4.2. Cases of literal translation ..................................................................... 44

4.3 Discussion ................................................................................................. 46

4.4. The findings and implication ............................................................... 48

4.4.1. Findings ............................................................................................... 48

4.4.2. Implication ........................................................................................... 50

CHAPTER 5 .................................................................................................. 53

CONCLUSION .............................................................................................. 53

5.1. Results and significance of the study .................................................... 53

5.2. The limitation of the study .................................................................... 55

REFERENCES .............................................................................................. 56

APPENDIX ....................................................................................................... I

vi

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES

Figure 1: Translation process by Larson (1984: 4) ................................................... 13

Figure 2: Translation as a continuum by Larson (1984: 17) ..................................... 14

Table 1: Ngữ Pháp Tiếng Việt by Nguyễn Tài Cẩn (1998: 203) .............................. 19

vii

Table 2: The summary of findings for mismatches are shown as the table below ... 48

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1. Rationale

Translation means conveying information from one language (source language)

to another language (target language). Nowadays, in the world of communication and

international integration in various aspects of life, the need for information exchange

and development or enhancement of relationships with different people and nations of

various cultures at the international level is more and more indispensable, the role of

translation is therefore inevitable. Of all languages, English, as one of the officially and

widely recognized international languages, has the largest number of target language or

source language in term of translation. In fact, English covers almost in-formal as well

as formal material of all fields as a language of target text or source text.

Unexceptionably, we have seen the need for Vietnamese language to be in the relation

with English as the target language or source language in all kinds of material.

However, translators have dealt with many obstacles during their process of translation

due to the differences in term of language features, communication situation and

culture. Those differences show the inevitable reality in translation, which forces the

theorists to set out the concepts of equivalence in translation that help translators to be

justifiably aware of the differences and have the reasonable methods for their task. That

is the reason why the concept translation equivalence is one of the key words in my

thesis. Due to the length of the thesis, it is impossible for the author to refer to all

linguistic ranks and the collection of noun phrases in the chapter II of the book “Fire

and Fury” was taken to get the data for the study “The equivalence of English and

Vietnamese Translation of Noun Phrases in the book Fire and Fury”. Both English

noun phrases and Vietnamese noun phrases have pre-modifiers and post-modifiers;

nevertheless, the formation of noun phrase in the two languages is different in term of

structure and order of modifying-elements. The post-modifiers are rather complex,

ranked from phrases to finite, non-finite and verbless clauses. However, the author has

learnt from other theses that the difficulties in translation of noun phrases in term of

1

structures (basing on structural differences of noun phrases in the two languages:

English and Vietnamese) have been investigated. One more experience learnt from the

article “The characters and functions of the nominalization in the science and

technology document” by Professor Hoang Van Van that it is not proper if the

elements such as situational context, culture, communication situation etc. are not taken

into consideration when translating noun phrases”, the author therefore decided to

apply the translation strategies basing on the meaning-based method by Larson (1984)

for the assessment of the equivalence of Noun phrases in the book “Fire and Fury”.

Strategies in translation would be regarded for the treatment of the linguistic situations

where mismatches exemplified for the holes between the two languages in term of

lexicon, grammatical structure, situational and cultural context. Those kinds of gaps

need filling to gain the equivalence. The basic theoretical concepts of meaning and

lexical choice in Larson (1984) Meaning –Based Translation, would be very helpful

for the analysis of the data. The complex of modifiers in English noun phrase reflexes

the fact that a large amount of information of the message can be contained in a noun

phrase. Translators therefore may cope with many obstacles to decode meaning and

capture rightful information contained in English noun phrase during the process of

translation. This reality encourages me to take the rank of noun phrase into the

investigation.

1.2. Aims and objectives of the Study

1.2.1 Aims of the study:

- To compare the noun phrases in the original text of the book “Fire and

Fury” by Michael Wolff and the Vietnamese version translated by Tran Trong Hai

Minh and to identify mismatches between the two texts in term of lexicon,

grammatical structure, situational and cultural context.

- To find out how the translator deal with those mismatches to achieve the

equivalent translation.

1.2.3 The objectives of the study:

- To clarify the mismatches between the two languages found in the

translation of the noun phrases in the Chapter II of the book “Fire and

Fury” according to the theory of Meaning-based Translation by Larson

2

(1984).

- To investigate the equivalence between the source text and target text at

the range of noun phrase.

1.3. Scope of the Study

The thesis investigated the equivalence of the English and Vietnamese

translation of the noun phrases collected in Chapter II of the book “Fire and Fury”

by Michael Wolff, published by Henry and Holt Company in New York in the year

2018 and its target text in Vietnamese “Bão lửa và cuồng nộ” translated by Tran

Trong Hai Minh (a journalist and reporter) and published by Vietnam Literature

Association. The mismatches of lexicon, grammatical structure, situational and

cultural context between the two versions are the principal elements for the

assessment of the equivalence of the collected noun phrases in the translation. The

theory of translation strategies by Larson (1984) and theories of dynamic

equivalence are the resorts for the assessment.

1.4. Methodology

The contrastive analysis will be taken at the level of phrase and lexis to draw out

the mismatches between the two language texts at the range of lexicon, grammatical

structures and situational and cultural context. 28 examples of noun phrase in the

source language text and their target version are analyzed and interpreted. The

thesis concentrates on how the noun phrases are translated in Vietnamese

equivalence.

The method of descriptive qualitative and approach was resorted to make the

description and interpretation of the language of translation of the noun phrases in

the target text in order to find out the useful and practical implications for

translators and students of the area.

The inductive method is used for the implementation of the study. From the typical

examples of English noun phrases taken from the book “Fire and Fury”, I based on the

language features as well as the differences in term of situational and cultural context

between the two languages to conduct the assessment of translation equivalence

between the two versions, then draw out some experiences and rules for the translators

3

and English learners.

1.5. Organization of the thesis

Chapter 1: Introduction

The rationale for the study, aims of the study, scope of the study, methodology used

to conduct the study and the organization of the thesis are introduced in this part.

Chapter 2: Literature review: (1) translation theories, Larson‟s translation

strategies and (3) Notion of noun phrase and noun phrases in English and

Vietnamese.

Chapter 3: Methodology

Chapter 4: Description and Evaluation of The Equivalence of English Noun

Phrases in The Translation: (1) data analysis and (2) implication and findings.

4

Chapter 5: Conclusion

CHAPTER 2

Literature Review

2.1. Translation theory

2.1.1. Concept of translation

Commonly, translation regards to notions of transferring, conveying or moving

information contained in one word, phrase or text from one language to another.

The language to be translated is called source language (SL) while the language of

the translated product is the target language (TL). There have been many definitions

of translation by different authors in the field, depending on how they view

language and translation. According to Foster (1958), translation is defined as a

mental activity in which meaning of a given language discourse is rendered from

one language to another. Through the process of translation, linguistic entities are

transferred from one language into their equivalents to another language, which

means that many related elements are deliberately considered in the translation, and

translation therefore is not only a normally physical movement of linguistic entities

but the mental one.

Peter Newmark (1988: 7) identifies translation as “a craft consisting in the

attempt replace a written message and/or statement in one language by the sane

message and/or statement in another language”. The word “craft” does not only

mean the act of crafting but also refers to connotative meaning. Peter Newmark‟s

view on „translation‟ is showed clearly in his work “A Textbook of Translation”. He

refers to translation as a science, a skill which entails the knowledge. The process of

translation bears the creative, the intuitive, the inspired and a matter of taste.

Translation, as defined by Catford (1995), is the replacement of textual material

in one language by equivalent textual material in another language. Types and shifts

are the main concepts in his contribution in the field of translation. There are three

criteria of types including: full translation, total translation, rank-bound - translation

and unbounded translation; while Shifts refer to the changes that take place during

5

the translation process. However, Catford (1995) mainly bases on linguistic theory

to discuss the nature of translation therefore he does not refer to cultural, situational

and historical factors which should also be taken into consideration along with the

discipline as claimed by Snell-Hornby (1988).

Hatim and Munday (2004: 6) define translation as “the process of transferring a

written text from source language (SL) to target language (TL)”. In the two points

of view, the authors do not explicitly express that the object being transferred

is meaning or message, they only points to the text itself.

Ghazala (1995) goes further with the translation which is partly more concrete

“translation is generally used to refer to all the process and methods used to convey the

meaning of the source language into the target language”. He focuses on both terms:

meaning as an essential element in translation and method that helps to transfer

meaning. That is, understanding the meaning of the source text as well as the effective

method is the vital and decisive element to gain the appropriate equivalence in the

target text. It is meaning that is translated related to lexicon, grammar, culture,

situational communication and so on and methods are the resort to solve the differences

regarding to the above elements.

Besides, Nida and Taber (1982: 12) also refers to the reproduction of the meaning

of the source language text into that of the target language text by saying that

translation comprises the transforming in the receptor language at the nearest natural

equivalent level of the source language message in term of both meaning and style.

Larson (1984) highlights the result of the translation process, which regards to

the conformity of the target text to the source text in relation to the semantic

structure. He poses that meaning of the source text must not be distorted when it is

translated into the target text, which means that the original flavor shall be kept

unchanged. He raises the importance of keeping the meaning constant despite the

changes in form when linguistic entities are turned into the form of the target

language.

In summary, only Catford (1995) and Hatim and Munday (2004) do not refer to

6

meaning or message as well as the related elements that need deliberately

considering, including language features, culture, situational contexts. They only

refer to the text itself which is only the container not the flavor of the source text.

The others all refer to the concept of equivalence in translation in different ways.

Peter Newmark (1988) uses the words knowledge, art, science and skill to describe

the task of translation, which implies the gaps between the two texts need filling

during the process of translation by translators. According Foster (1958), translation

process does not mean physically substituting words, he realized that linguistic

entities must be mentally transferred into their equivalents to another language with

a deliberate consideration of related elements. Ghazala (1995), Nida and Taber

(1982), and Larson (1984) all refers to the word meaning in their views of

translation. Ghazala (1995) uses the phrase appropriate equivalent to express his

view of translation target while Nida and Taber (1982) say the nearest equivalent in

term of meaning and style is necessary in translation. Larson (1984) raises the

importance of keeping meaning instant despite the changes in form.

2.1.2. Notion of equivalence:

The notion Equivalence plays the central role in translation. The equivalence‟s

typical status in translation helps it to evolve many different points of view in

translation. In fact, we deal with two systems of languages: source language and

target language. Each language has its own set of language features, culture,

communication situation of which some are shared and some are not shared. In case

of literal translation, it is easy for us to be aware of the notion of equivalence, hence

all the translator does is substitute words from one language for words in another

language and clarify grammar features. However, the translation itself is factually

much more complicated. Literal translation cannot help to convey the original

flavor of the source language text due to the differences or even big holes in term of

language, culture and communication situation between the two languages;

subsequently concepts don‟t always exist equally in two different languages or

cultures. The translator then often decodes the deep structure of words or phrases in

7

a sentence by using his understanding of context and culture, then seek the correct

encoding in the target language. This requires the translator to have a deep

understanding of both cultures, not just the language. In fact, one can speak both

languages fluently, but if he/she does not understand the idiomatic meaning of

words and culture behind them, the translation would be unfaithful to the original

spirit. A literal translation is unacceptable – it is very necessary for the translator to

capture the deep structure or meaning behind the words. Equivalence is a powerful

tool in service of that goal, but it is only an effective resort when you have a deep,

comprehensive understanding of the deep meaning of words or phrases. As Peter

Newmark (1988: 51) points out that meaning is basically known as a network of

various relations which is very complicated and it shall be deliberately considered at

many levels in the process of translation.

2.1.3. Translation equivalence

Translation equivalence is an important concept of translation theory. It is

considered one of the most important and core issues in translation theory since the

second half of the twentieth century. Gaining equivalents has become the

problematic factor that the translator deal with. As Catford indicates “the central

problem of translation practice is that of finding target language equivalents. A

central task of translation theory is that of defining the nature and conditions of

translation equivalence.” (Catford, 1965, P.21). In fact, the concept of equivalence

in translation theory is included in many works by prominent theorists.

Nida (1964: 159) evolves two essential orientations in translating, including

formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence. Formal equivalence focuses on the

message itself in term of both form and content while dynamic equivalence aimed at

complete natural expression. The formal equivalence comprises the view of point

that the message in the receptor language text should as close as possible match the

different elements in the source language text. However, the dynamic equivalence

does not involve the relation between the source message and the target message, a

follower of dynamic equivalence tries to relate the receptor to modes of behavior

8

relevant to the context of his own culture.

Baker (1992) proposes a more detailed list of elements relating to the concept of

equivalence. She investigates the notion of equivalence at different levels, in

relation to the translation process, including various aspects of the linguistic and the

communicative approach. She identifies the different aspects of equivalence: (1)

Equivalence can happen at levels of word and above word. She mentions words as a

single unit which is assigned an equivalent in target language; and a single word can

be assigned in different meanings in different languages, which evolves the fact that

the translator shall look at a number of factors when considering a single word such

as number, gender and tense. (2) In term of textual equivalence, Baker aims at

essential factors, including the target audience, the purpose of the translation and

text type, would guide the translator‟s decision. In her opinion, it is very necessary

for the translator to create a cohesive and coherent text for the target audience in a

specific context. (3) With respect to grammatical equivalence, she regards to the

diversity of grammatical categories across languages. She argues that grammatical

rules are different across languages, which may lead to obstacles in term of finding

a correspondence in target language. More specifically, she claims that differences

in term of grammatical structure between the source language and the target

language may cause significant changes in the way the information or message is

carried across. These changes may cause the unfaithfulness to the original spirit due

to addition or omission of information in the target text because of the lack of

certain grammatical devices in the target language. (4) Besides, Baker proposes the

pragmatic equivalence. The author pays much attention to the notion implicature in

translation since it refers to the information which is not explicitly said in the source

text, it lies under the surface linguistic structure. It is therefore necessary for

translators to discover the implied meanings in translation in order to get the source

message across. The translator has the duty to reproduce the author‟s intention in

another language of different linguistic features and in another culture in such a way

that enables the target readership to capture it clearly.

9

Bell (1991: 6) refers to the term equivalent translation of different levels such as

semantics, grammar, lexis, context and so on. He claims that texts in different

languages can be fully or partly equivalent at different ranks of words, phrases and

sentences. The source language text sometimes has no meaning in the target text and

the meaning in the target text gained partly or fully equivalent to the source language

text because the two texts may share the communicative situation and purpose.

House (1997) argues that the original and translation should match one another

in function. The author raises the importance of function in equivalence. The

translation is only considered to be adequate in quality if it matches the “textual”

profile and function of the original. She evolves two types of translation: overt

translation and covert translation. In an overt translation text, the translator makes

no attempt to hide the fact that it is a translation, in other words reader find it easy

to recognize that it is a translation. However, a cover translation always makes the

target readers feel that it is not a translation because some implicit information

captured by intended reader of the source language text is made explicit in the target

language text for the benefit of the target culture and intelligibility.

Newmark‟s point of view on the equivalence translation is expressed in his two

books: Approaches to Translation (1981) and A Textbook of Translation (1988). He

does not refer to the terms formal and dynamic equivalence like Nida does, instead

he notes the term semantic and communicative translation respectively. Semantic

focuses on meaning, while communicative which refers to the needs of the

addressee focuses on effect. The communicative translation therefore tries to satisfy

the readers by producing the target language text with the deliberate consideration

of smoothness and readability. Particularly, Newmark (1981) shows his strong

belief that literal translation is the best approach in term of semantic and

communicative translation, but the communicative translation would be more

favored in case of conflict between the two forms of translation.

2.1. Larson’s Translation strategies

2.1.1. Concerning concepts

Larson clarifies the concepts with respect to what he interprets in his translation

10

strategies.

(1) Form and meaning: Form is something that can be seen in sprint and heard

in speech like words, phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraph etc. which are regarded

as surface structure of a language. Form of one language, source language, is

placed by the form of another, target language, in the process of translation.

Meaning, on the other hand, is referred to as deep structure which is information or

content to be transferred from source language text to the target language text. It is

constituted by the elements of lexical and grammatical structure, communication

situation and cultural context of the source language text. The translator has to

analyze the above elements to determine meaning.

(2) Implicit meaning and explicit meaning: Various kinds of meaning constitute

the meaning of the text on a whole. Some of those may not be overtly expressed in

the forms of the source language text, which is called implicit meaning. Clearly,

explicit meanings are those overtly expressed in the source language text. The

translator therefore shall consider both explicit and implicit information to uncover

the whole meaning of the source language text.

(3) Referential meaning, organizational meaning and situational meaning:

Referential meaning is what the communication refers to. It is the information or

content contained in the source language text which is organized into the semantic

structure. Organizational meaning is formed on the base of the information referred

earlier in the same text. It therefore helps to put the information together in order to

create a coherent text. The translator sometimes builds up meaning on the base of

the communication situation, by that way, the organizational meaning is formed. It

is crucial to the understanding of any text. The situational matters resulting in

situational meaning may include where and when the communication take places,

age, sex and social status of the addresser and addressee, cultural back grounds and

so on.

(4) Primary meaning, secondary meaning and figurative meaning: We have seen

that there are various ways in which form expresses meaning, which permits kinds

11

of meaning existing in one form. Primary meaning happens when there is one to

one correlation between form and meaning. While the characteristic of “skewing” is

the reason for the constituting the secondary and the figurative meaning. In each

language, there is the diversity or the lack of one to one correlation between form

and meaning which is the characteristic of “skewing”. Larson (1984) points out that

distinctive forms for representing the meaning are different across languages and

“skewing” helps to avoid the literal translation which may leads to the distortion of

meaning since the same meaning may be expressed in different forms in the other

language. In fact, one language may be interested in forms of noun while the other

is interested in verbal usage. The skewing between grammar and semantic structure

therefore shall be considered in order to find the underlying meaning. In any

circumstance, meaning always takes the priority over form.

(5) Lexical equivalent: Normally, the two languages are spoken by people of

different cultures, the lexical of the two certain languages will therefore not match.

Accordingly, the term lexical equivalent, a term crucial to matters of faithfulness

and naturalness, has become so popular in translation. Larson (1984: 153) says there

are three matters concerning to the choices of adequate lexical equivalents,

including: concepts when knowledge is shared, concepts when knowledge is not

shared and key terms of the text that need special treatment. He further discusses the

complexity of the term lexical equivalent by pointing out that even in the case of

shared concepts “the way in which they are expressed in the two languages is often

very different”. Meaning components and the way in which they are combined are

different across languages, especially mismatches in term of secondary senses and

figurative senses of lexical items. In fact, some senses of meaning may be figurative

in one language but non-figurative in another, positive in one language but negative

in another.

(6) Communication situation: According to Larson (1984), the elements

concerning to communication situation comprises of the author, purpose in his

writing, the audience, the relationship between the author and the audience, culture

12

of the source text, common knowledge shared by both readers of source language

and target readership, social context and other factors. Of which the author‟s

attitude toward his audience in an important part of communication as author

always writes with his writer in mind. Culture is also an indispensable element in

the communication situation for the fact that language is part of culture and as

stated by Larson (1984: 431) “translation from one language to another cannot be

done adequately without knowledge of the two cultures as well as the two language

structures”.

2.1.2. Larson’s translation strategies

According to Mildred Larson, Translator bases on the source language text to

discover the meaning and then represses the meaning in the receptor language.

During the process of translation, he/she can use tools like dictionaries, lexicons,

grammars, cultural descriptions etc. of both source language and target language.

She holds the opinion that the translator has the duty to keep meaning constant in

the target language text. Basically, the form of the source language may change as it

is turned into the target language text however the distortion of meaning is not

permitted in the translation. The translator therefore often considers the different

kinds of meaning (primary meaning, secondary meaning and figurative meaning)

which convey the explicit and implicit information of the text, as well as

communication situation which comprises historical setting, cultural setting,

Text to be translated

Translation

Discover the meaning

Re-express the meaning

MEANING

author‟s intention when translating the document.

13

Figure 1: Translation process by Larson (1984: 4)

As argued by Larson, translation concerns not only linguistic features but

also other elements of communication situation, hence referential and structural

meaning, situational meaning is regarded as a crucial factor that helps the translator

interpret the author‟s culture or the cultural information given in the text. According

to Larson (1984: 15), there are two main types of translation, mainly form-based

and meaning-based translation. Form-based translation attempts to follow the form

of Source Language and is known as literal translation, while meaning-based

translation makes every effort to communicate the meaning of the SL text in the

natural forms of the receptor language. Such translation is called idiomatic

translation which means that translation shall not sound like a translation. It shall

gain both targets: natural as much as possible in the target language text and not to

fall into “unduly free translation”.

Figure 2: Translation as a continuum by Larson (1984: 17)

Larson (1984: 16) says that idiomatic translations use the natural forms of

the receptor language both in the grammatical constructions and in the choices of

lexical items. A successful translation would be an idiomatic translation which

seems to be written originally in the receptor language. However, a translation is

often a mixture of literal and idiomatic forms of language. Translation then falls on

a continuum from very literal, to literal, to modified literal, to near idiomatic, to

idiomatic, and may fall, even more on the unduly free as displayed above. Within

my thesis, I grouped the cases into two groups: literal translation and idiomatic

translation. This division is based on Larson‟s framework of translation strategies

14

and the collected data.

Mismatch of grammatical structure:

Larson (1984: 58) also notes that the translator shall consider the skewing

between grammar and the semantic categories in order to find the underlying

meaning. He must be aware of this skewing in the source language as the same form

may be used as two different parts of speech. Since language system has its own

way to arrange concepts into different parts of speech, there is little guarantee that a

noun in one language is often best translated by a noun in another language. One

language may have the preferential use of noun while the other may be expressed in

the same meaning by forms of verbal noun. Being aware of the natural differences

between languages would be very useful for the translator to gain both faithfulness

and intelligibility in his/her translation because skewing between semantic classes

and part of speech occurs often.

Mismatch of lexicon:

Larson (1984: 154) points out the fact that the languages may share some

concepts but may not share the others. Even in cases where concepts are shared, the

way in which they are expressed in the two languages is not always the same, it is

often very different. Meaning components are combined, divided and grouped

differently in different languages. She also states “there is usually complete

mismatch between secondary senses and figurative senses of lexical items between

languages”. How to attain the best lexical equivalent for the translation is an uneasy

question for translators. According to Larson (1984), the translator must be aware of

the fact that a single word in source language text may be translated by one word or

by more than one word in the target language text and vice versa several words in

the source language text may be sometimes translated by one word in the target

language text. A complete match between the two languages happen when there is

the same primary sense used in both texts. Besides, the translator shall accept

different ways in the two languages in expressing the same concepts since lexical

structures of the two languages are different. Sometimes, the translator unpacks the

15

meaning components of a word in source language and then use phrase and clause

in target language to express the meaning in the translation. The equivalent lexical

items will almost never have the same secondary senses from one language to

language; figure senses therefore always need adjustments in translation.

Sometimes a nonfigurative equivalent will be needed in the receptor language.

Mismatch of situational and cultural context:

For Larson, choices of lexical items shall be taken into consideration from

the point of view of situational context. Communication situation is very important

for rightful interpretation of information contained in the source language text. The

meaning is partly determined by who author was, purpose in his writing, who the

text was written for, the relationship between author and his audience, the culture of

the source text, how much common information shared by both source language

audience and target language audience, and other factors of the communication

situation (social context, age, sex, social status, culture‟s ideals etc.). Lexical

choices will depend on various factors of the situation where communication is

presented, the translator shall therefore be aware of the meaning of words conditioned

by situational context (Larson 1984: P131). In fact, situational context helps the

translator to define the appropriate events, things or behaviors referred in the message.

The translator shall base on the spirit of the whole text to unpack bundles of meanings

and interpret the noun phrases with the most adequate lexical choices in the receptor

language. Concepts of three kinds of meaning: referential meaning, organizational

meaning and situational meaning referred as above in the theoretical part would

exemplify for the useful ways to deal with the mismatches of cultural and situational

context and gain the equivalent translation which is faithfully and naturally nearest to

the receptor language. The meanings must be understood and translated in the light of

situational context and lexical items shall be looked at from the point of view of the

situational context (Larson 1984: P 421). The chapter talked about the worry or partly

surprised feeling of Trump‟s inner circle when they were trying to support him in his

new position as President of United State. The book‟s genre clearly belongs to political

16

prose and the differences in term of political system, geography, and the culture of the

two countries produces the mismatches, of which including nil-equivalences (not

translated) and idiomatic equivalent in the interest of target readership.

2.2. Noun phrase

2.2.1. English Noun phrase

Noun phrases as well as other phrases are essential parts in constituents of any

language. Without noun phrase, no agents, no patients, no recipient occurs. The

occurrence of noun phrase in language is inevitable. Thus, a single word is often

insufficient in expressing our thought in communication.

Traditionally, noun phrases are phrases whose head word is a noun which acts

like a noun as a whole. There are often a group of words in a noun phrase.

Noun phrase, as defined by Quick, R and other Grammarians (1972: 127), is the

element in the sentence which typically functions as subject, object and

complement.

The structure of a noun phrase is rather complex, there are words standing

around the head noun to function as modifiers. A noun phrase thus comprises of

three potential parts: The head noun part, the central part of a noun phrase, is an

indispensable part which is essentially required for the occurrence of a noun phrase.

The other two parts are optional, of which, the one precedes the head noun is called

the pre-modification and the one follows the head noun is known as the post-

modification.

Example:

(1) A beautiful girl is standing near the door.

(2) The beautiful standing near the door is my sister.

(3) The girl in the corner is my classmate.

When describing a noun phrase like those cited above, it is essential that we

have to distinguish three parts which help to construct a noun phrase.

(a): Pre-modification: The part comprises five elements: identifier (the book, my

pen…), numeral/quantifier (some orange juice, three tables…), adjective ( a red hat,

17

a handsome boy…), noun modifier (schoolboys), proper noun (Harvard University,

New York Times…), past participle (a retired general, elected president …), present

participle (falling star, the frightening robber…).

(b): The head: Head of a noun is often a noun itself, around which are

components helps to support the head in term of meaning and contribute to the

information of a noun phrase as a whole, also in a concord with the rest of the

sentence.

(c): Post-modification: All the items including: relative clause, non-finite clause,

prepositional phrase, adjective can be located behind a head noun for the role of

post-modification.

Example:

(1) The pupil, who I met yesterday, is my friend’s son.

(2): The teacher teaching us English this semester is my aunt.

(3) He takes a move to leave. (Fire and Fury by Michael Wolff)

(4) The book on the table is mine.

(5) Jerry would pay a call on the president elect. (Fire and Fury by Michael

Wolff)

From the examples above, it is possible to indicate that the post modifiers can be

both restrictive and non-restrictive. In case of restrictive post-modification, the head

noun can be identified only through post-modification, and in case of non-restrictive

post-modification, a head can be viewed as a part of speech that has been identified

independently.

There are sometimes cases where the head is omitted and the communication

context would help the readers or listeners to capture the meaning of the phrase.

Example: A small of well – wisher (Fire and Fury by Michael Wolff)

2.2.2. Noun phrase in Vietnamese

In Vietnamese, when a noun is used as some kinds of function in a sentence, it is

usually added to some other elements in order to form a phrase known as noun

18

phrase with a noun as the role of central part or a head.

The head lies in the middle of a phrase while modification is widely spread into

both sides around the head. The items preceding the head is called pre-modification

and the items following the head is known as post-modification.

Table 1: Vietnamese Grammar by Nguyễn Tài Cẩn (1998: 203)

Phần đầu Phần trung tâm Phần cuối

pre-modification head post-modification

Tất cả những cái chủ trương chính xác đó

Ba em học sinh kia

Tất cả những quả cam trong rổ

a) Pre-modification:

Cases where there is pre-modification only:

- Ba bát → Three bows

- Bốn bàn → Four tables

Cases where there is post- modification only:

- Bạn gái này! → This girl

- Táo đỏ → a red apple

Cases where there is pre-modification and post-modification only, the head is

skipped:

- Ba tái, hai chín, một gầu! → Hanoi Pho – three bowls of rare beef, two

bowls of cooked beef, one bowl of beef brisket

The head noun – bowl is skipped in Vietnamese in a certain

communication context when the listener and the speaker share the

knowledge and communication is effective without the head noun.

b) Post-modification:

- Post-modification is constituted by one word or phrase.

Example:

19

Một cuốn sách hay - an interesting book

Một cuốn sách rất hay – a very interesting book

Một quãng đường dài – a long distance

Một quãng đường khá dài – a rather long distance

- A clause can function as post-modification.

Example:

Căn nhà bố tôi vừa mua năm ngoái – the house my father bought last

year.

Bông hoa người yêu tôi mới tặng – the flower my boyfriend has just given

me

- Nouns and noun phrases are also used as post-modification.

Example:

Nhà phố - Street house

Bàn gỗ - Wooden table

Vườn nho - grape garden

- A demonstrative word functions as post-modification.

Sáng nay - this morning

Con tàu ấy - the ship

- Adjectives and adjective phrases used as post-modification.

Con voi to

An elephant big → a big elephant

- Verbs used as post-modification

Cô ca sĩ hát sáng nay

20

The singer who sang this morning

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Language features are often different across languages. Besides, languages

are influenced or dominated by different cultures, different world realities and

peculiar ways to express information in communication, translators therefore find it

difficult to gain the exact equivalence between words of one language and the

words of another. A complete match between languages seldom happens in

translation. Usually, one word in the source language text is translated by several

words in the receptor language or vice versa words in the source language text are

translated by a single word. In order to testify the above view, the researcher chose

the book “Fire and Fury”, collected 550 noun phrases in the Chapter 2 of the book.

From the collected data, I based on the relevant theories of translation, especially

Larson‟s translation strategies (1984) Meaning –Based Translation to categorize

and analyze three kinds of mismatches and cases of literal translation. Finally, the

researcher considered the findings, made conclusions, and drew out some

experiences and principles for the translator and students of the field in particular,

for teachers of English and English learners in general. The research method used to

conduct the research, object of the research, data sources, data collecting method,

data analysis technique will be discussed in this chapter.

3.1. Research question

In order to fulfill the aims of the study, the researcher attempted to address

the two following research questions:

1/ What are the typical mismatches in translating noun phrases in the book “Fire

and Fury”?

2/ How does the translator deal with these mismatches to achieve equivalents?

3.2. Research approach

The method of descriptive qualitative approach was resorted to make the

21

description and interpretation of the language of translation of the noun phrases in

the target text to find out the useful and practical implications for translators and

students of the area in particular; English teaching and learning in general. After

taking the typical examples of each kind of mismatch, the researcher made effort to

describe the surface structure and deep structure of the noun phrases in the source

target text and its version. The techniques used for the description of the source text

and target text are lexical items and situational and cultural context, which helps to

find out the senses of meaning in the original text and make the assessment of the

translation.

The assessment of the mismatches between the source language text and target

language text was based on the referred elements (language features, culture,

communication situation) with the theoretical support of the relevant theories.

The inductive method is used for the implementation of the study. From the

typical examples of English noun phrases taken from the book “Fire and Fury”, the

author based on the language features (figurative language, grammatical structure,

collocation, implicit meaning, explicit meaning, referential, organizational meaning)

as well as the differences in term of situational and cultural context (culture,

political system, world reality) between the two languages to conduct the

assessment of equivalent translation between the two versions in the light of

theories of translation equivalence and Larson‟s translation strategies, then draw out

some experiences and rules for the translators and English learners.

Typical examples:

ST: background of a mortal war of wills – with the media

TT: Bối cảnh một cuộc chiến tranh sống mái giữa các ý chí – với truyền thông

ST: the bare – bones transition team

TT: Nhóm chuyển giao hết sức đơn giản

It is not difficult to see the obvious mismatches in term of surface meaning in

the two versions. From theories of translation equivalence and Larson‟s translation

strategies, the author made the assessment of the translation and discovered how the

22

the translator deal with the inevitable differences between the two languages to gain

the equivalence in term of deep meaning. Consequently, expericences are drawn

out. The phrase mortal war means a war which is very dangerous to life. People

who take part in a mortal war are ready to face with their death. The edge between

death and life in such a war is very fragile. The words sống and mái in Vietnamese

refers to the sex sense of male and female. However, in this situational dimension,

the phrase sống mái can convey the similar meaning with the word mortal in the

source text, which is the best equivalent satisfy both the faithfulness and the interest

in Vietnamese culture in this case. In fact, some words carry figurative or

metaphorical meaning and they acquire symbolic meaning. Those cases require the

translator to make necessary adjustments in order to successfully transfer the

original flavor of the source text with the expression suitable with linguistic features

of the target readership to capture the content easily and comfortably.

Cases of literal translation manifest the importance of notion of equivalence in

translation as well as the higher priority of deep meaning than surface meaning in

Larson‟s translation strategies.

Typical examples:

ST: Washington insiders, or would be insiders, would have to come to him.

TT: Những kẻ trong cuộc ở Washington hay những kẻ sắp thành trong cuộc,

sẽ phải tới triều kiến ông.

The phrase in the receptor language seems not to be natural and cause the

target language text is not smooth and easy in a whole. The phrase shall be

translated “những kẻ sắp nhập cuộc”.

ST: the president –elect‟s lack of immediate focus on a White House structure

that could serve and protect him

TT: Việc tân tổng thống thiếu sự tập trung ngay lập tức vào cấu trúc Nhà

Trắng để phụng sự và bảo vệ mình

Structure of a house refers to its design and materials necessary to build it. Form

and parts of a house like floor, rooms, hall, stairs and so on are things related to the

23

structure of a house. The phrase White House Structure therefore forces readers to

think of the design of the famous building. However, the textual meaning of the

word structure in this case does not r;fer to this kind of sense but the personnel

mechanism of a new Trump Government. Accordingly, there is a big difference in

deep meaning between the source language text and the target language text though

the surface lexicon structure (surface meaning) in the two version are similar. The

target language text shall be “Việc tân tổng thống thiếu sự tập trung ngay lập tức

vào cơ cấu tổ chức Nhà Trắng để phụng sự và bảo vệ mình”.

Translators must be aware of the obvious existence of inevitable mismatches

and related concepts, which would partly support them to obtain the successful

translation that guarantees the criteria of faithfulness, readability and naturalness.

3.3. Research method

In order to investigate the mismatches in term of language features,

situational and cultural context between the two languages, the text book “Fire and

Fury” was chosen, the text is a kind of political prose. Within the master thesis, the

theories of translation equivalence and Larson‟s translation strategies basing on the

meaning-based method by Larson (1984) are the theoretical basis for the author to

make the translation assessment of the text in term of noun phrases. Due to the

length of the text and the frame of my thesis, chapter II is chosen to collect data for

my research. I took the observation of the whole chapter and read carefully with

more concrete observation and made the collection of 550 noun phrases in the

chapter II of the book “Fire and Fury” by Michael Wolff as well as their target

versions in Vietnamese translated by Tran Trong Hai Minh. Strategies in translation

would be regarded for the treatment of the linguistic situations where mismatches

exemplified for the holes between the two languages in term of language features,

communication situation and cultural context. Those kinds of hole need filling to gain

the translation equivalence. The basic theoretical concepts of meaning and lexical

choice in Larson (1984) Meaning –Based Translation, as referred above would be

24

very helpful for the analysis of the data.

3.4. Data collection

Data selection criteria: The source text is a text of political prose written by

Michael Wolff – a famous writer and a regular communist who has received

numerous awards for his work. The author chose the chapter II which talked about the

worry or partly surprised feeling of Trump‟s inner circle when they were trying to

support him in his new position as President of United State. The translator (Tran

Trong Hai Minh) is a journalist and a famous translator with many works (Trậm Điều,

Sợi dây thừng nghiệt ngã…). Noun phrases and their target versions which manifest

clear mismatches between the two languages in term of lexicon, grammatical structure

and cultural and situational context are the choices of the needed data.

In order to gain the needed data, the researcher based on the traditional grammar

and the concept of noun phrase for the identification of noun phrases in the source text,

read the original text thoroughly and collected 550 noun phrases. Of which, 267 cases

include post-modifiers, 285 cases have pre-modifiers only. The methods used in

collecting data were compiling, reading, and writing techniques. After that the

researcher read the collected noun phrases and their versions in target language text

carefully and seriously in order to get the needed data. Of 550 noun phrases, 105 cases

meet the requirements and scope of the study; nevertheless, the author took only 28

cases into the contrastive analysis due to the length of the thesis. Next, the chosen data

were categorized into different kinds of mismatch (mismatch of lexicon, mismatch of

grammatical structure, mismatch of culture and situational context). The representative

data were then analyzed in details to find out the ways that the translator deal with the

mismatches to get the idiomatic translation that meet the requirement of faithfulness,

readability and naturalness to the target language.

3.5. Data analysis

3.5.1. Categorizing

Data categorizing was taken following the collecting data step. Careful

reading and comprehensive reading helped the researcher to get the raw data which

25

were then categorized into relevant categories according to aims of the study. In this

step, relevant mismatches were identified, including: mismatches of language

features, mismatches of cultural and communication situation. The researcher based

on the relevant concepts and Larson‟s translation strategies and other relevant

theories to conduct the process of data categorization, which helped to find out the

ways that the translator deal with the differences between the two languages to get

the equivalents in the translation.

3.5.2. Classifying

The next step was data classification. Classification required a good and deep

understanding on the theories and concepts employed. The mismatches in term of

language features, communication situation and cultural context between the source

language text and the target language text were elaborated as data were classified

into categories that employ the theory and concepts of Meaning-Based Translation

by Larson (1984). Mismatches of language features happen at the range of lexicon

(relevant concepts including: implicit and explicit meaning, organizational meaning

and referential meaning, figurative meaning) and grammatical structure (breach of

language system and collocation clash). Mismatches of cultural and communication

situation happens due to different worlds of reality, different political systems,

different views of culture. This kind of mismatch was classified into three levels:

First, the source culture and the target culture do not own the same reality, the

translation was conducted in the light of original culture. Second, the source culture

and the target culture own the same reality, the translation was conducted in the

light of target culture in order to guarantee faithfulness and naturalness. Third, the

translation was unchanged (in case of untranslatable situation or nil equivalence).

Besides, the cases of literal translation were also identified in order to give more

support for the exemplification of the idiomatic translation.

3.5.3. Analyzing

Basing on the categories classified as well as deep and comprehensive

understanding of relevant theories and concepts, mismatches of different kinds as

26

referred were identified one by one according to the categorization. The occurrences

of each kind of mismatch were statistically presented in tables. The researcher tried

to make the information about the translation of the noun phrases clearer, and

clarified the problem. The data were interpreted in the correlation with the relevant

theories and concepts. Finally, the contrastive analysis was implemented at the level

of phrase and lexis to draw out the mismatches between the two language texts at

the range of lexicon, grammatical structures and situational and cultural context.

Many examples of noun phrase in the source language text and their target version

were analyzed and interpreted. The thesis concentrates on how the noun phrases are

expressed in Vietnamese equivalent. Implicit and explicit information, skipped

words, figurative meaning, breach of language system and changes in term of

surface structures are the key words indicating the ways that the translator used to

deal with the mismatches between the two languages and gain the equivalent

translation. The cases of literal translation were also referred and analyzed in the

analyzing phase, which strengthens the view point that idiomatic translation is

better than literal translation and the translation equivalence is always the

translator‟s target to pursue.

In order to avoid bias in collecting, categorizing data and analyzing data,

which helps to get the reliable findings, the researcher has strictly followed the aims

and objectives of the study as well as related theories and concepts (translation

equivalence, meaning-based translation strategies, communication and cultural

situation, referential meaning, figurative meaning, grammatical structure, surface

structure, deep structure and so on). Especially, a good and deep understanding on

the inevitable differences between the two languages in term of lexical item

(figurative meaning, implicit and explicit meaning), communication and cultural

situation (culture, situational context and world realities) and grammatical structure

must be required for a thorough analysis.

Typical examples showing the principles in collecting, categorizing data and

analyzing data.

- Mismatches of lexicon:

27

+ Difference of figurative sense of meaning:

ST: A chief of staff with history in Washington and federal government

TT: Một chánh văn phòng có kinh nghiệm về Washington và chính quyền liên bang

In term of concordance, a word will probably be translated in many ways as

the senses in which it is used Larson (1984: 147). Different ways give different

senses. The secondary meaning or the figurative meaning of the same lexicon item

in two languages is different or each language has its peculiar way to figure lexicon

meaning. The term history can be figured as experience while we rarely see the

cases where the term lịch sử in Vietnamese is figured as kinh nghiệm

+ Implicit information in the source language is made explicit in the target

language:

ST: A small of well – wisher

TT: nhóm nhỏ đến chúc mừng

The translator based on the situational context and pragmatic equivalence to

add more words and made the information explicit in the target language.

- Mismatches of grammatical structure

ST: A working-class kid originally from New Jersey and then Wisconsin, at

thirty two he made first and last run for elective office.

TT: Sinh ra trong gia đình lao động gốc ở New Jersey rồi sau đó chuyển tới

Wisconsin, ở tuổi ba mươi hai, ông chạy đua lần đầu và cũng là lần cuối trong một

cuộc bầu cử.

- Mismatches of cultural and situational context:

+ Difference in term of culture:

ST: his view of a man who, for more than a generation, had been at best a

clown prince among the rich and famous

TT: Quan điểm của mình về một người mà, trong suốt hơn một thế hệ, nhiều

nhất cũng chỉ là gã hề trong triều đình của giới giàu có

The phrase “triều đình” shows the mismatch of culture. The phrase has no

equivalent in the source text. The translator added the words to create the natural

translation which is close to target culture. This creative translation does not cause

28

any damage to the faithfulness of the text but an effective equivalent is established.

+ Difference in term of situational context

ST: The speaker of the House

TT: Chủ tịch Hạ viện

The House is a political term referring to one of the Legislative Entities in the

political system of America which is very different from that in Vietnam. It cannot

be literally translated into target language “nhà”. The problem sometimes comes

from the fact that source language text contains information which is not part of the

29

knowledge and experience of the target receptors.

CHAPTER 4

DESCRIPTION AND EVALUATION OF EQUIVALENT TRANSLATION

OF ENGLISH NOUN PHRASES

4.1. Data analysis

As mentioned above in my methodology part, I have chosen a text - book

“Fire and Fury”, The text is a kind of political prose. He wrote the text for the

interested readers to read. Within the master thesis, I only made the translation

quality assessment of the text only in term of noun phrases. Due to the length of the

text and the frame of my thesis, only the chapter II is chosen to collect data for my

research. I took the observation of the whole chapter and read carefully with more

concrete observation and made the collection of 550 noun phrases. Of which, 267

cases include post-modifiers, 285 cases have pre-modifiers only. The post-modifiers

are rather complex, ranked from phrases to finite, non-finite and verbless clauses.

However, I have learnt from other theses that the difficulties in translation of noun

phrases in term of structures (basing on structural differences of noun phrases in the

two languages: English and Vietnamese) have been investigated. I therefore decided

to apply the translation strategies basing on the meaning-based method by Larson

(1984) for the assessment of the equivalence of Noun phrases in the book “Fire and

Fury”. Strategies in translation would be regarded for the treatment of the linguistic

situations where mismatches exemplified for the holes between the two languages

in term of language features, communication situation and cultural context. Those

kinds of hole need filling to gain the equivalents. The basic theoretical concepts of

meaning and lexical choice in Larson (1984) Meaning –Based Translation, as

referred above would be very helpful for the analysis of the data.

Mismatches:

Translation is the process to transfer language entities from source language

text to their equivalents in the target language text. The translator bases on the form

30

of one language to discover the meaning, unpack the semantic components and

transfer meaning or equivalent information to the form of another language. Larson

(1984: 3) refers forms of one language as its surface structure (including actual

words, phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs etc.). The form of one language

therefore involves elements of grammatical, lexical, phonological structures of that

language). The meaning also called deep structure is the meaning need equivalently

transferring to the receptor language in its form. If every language shares the same

features in term of lexicon, grammar, structures or the ways in which information is

expressed in communication, there are nearly no controversial problems in the field

of translation. However, language features are different across languages, people of

different native languages use different ways to communicate, which depends on

culture, situational context and linguistic features in their own language.

Accordingly, translators face with many obstacles to convey the same information

as the original flavor of the source text. Within the frame of my thesis, I take the

analysis of three kinds of mismatch basing on the collected data in the Chapter II of

the book “Fire and Fury”, including mismatches of lexicon, grammatical structure,

situational and cultural context. The analysis also helps to find out the translation

strategies or kinds of translation that the translator used to overcome the

mismatches and gain the equivalent translation with the faithful, nearest natural and

smooth target language text as possible.

4.1.1. Mismatches of lexicon

Except the case where the source language and the receptor language are

closely related languages or they are in the same family language, there will be little

correspondence of form between the source language text and the target translation.

Each language has its own forms which have secondary and figurative meaning,

those meanings would bring complicated issues for the process of translation.

Languages have different ways to express information in communication, also

different patterns of figurative languages; moreover, each source language text has

its own special communication situations and is written in a specific historical

31

setting. Not every words or sense of meaning in the source texts is accordingly

translated into target text as stated in the concepts of implicit meaning and explicit

meaning referred above. And, also for complicated texts, when the translators may

not be equally fluent in the two languages (they would be more fluent in their

mother-tongue than the other), they always wish to produce an adequate translation

and mismatches in term of semantic, syntactic as well as cultural filter issues

encourage translators to drop some words or even phrases during the translation

process, or they can figure the meanings or the information in the situational

communication in the most adequate ways accepted by their native languages in

order that an equivalent translation of faithfulness, intelligibility and smoothness

would be reached. Idiomatic translation therefore happens and mismatches of

lexicon between the source language text and target language text is inevitable.

During the process of translation, implicit information in the source text must

sometimes be made explicit in the source text and vice versa the explicit

information in the source text also shall be made implicit in some certain cases.

Translators usually use the idiomatic method in order to achieve the natural forms

of the receptor language in term of both grammatical constructions and the choice

of lexical items. Accordingly, some extra words or senses of meaning shall be

added in the receptor language text to make it not like a translation. No exception

for the case of the English-Vietnamese translation of the Book “Fire and Fury”, the

translator has made the justifiable adjustments to deal with the gaps in term of

language features, communication situation and cultural features between the two

languages to gain the equivalent translation, which causes mismatches of lexicon in

the two versions.

Example 1:

ST: When some of the guests made a move to leave, Trump cajoled them to say

a little longer.

TT: Khi một số khách bắt đầu tỏ ý muốn ra về, Trump phỉnh phở để họ ở lại

thêm một chút.

32

The underlined words are not translated into the target text. However, the

translation is still adequate in term of readability and faithfulness. The surface

structure between the two texts are different, however the deep meaning is similar.

The translator has made an effective treatment of situational context and lexical

choice in his mother-tongue to give out the successful target text which makes the

readers feel comfortable while reading. The author of the source text is talking

about the situation that Trump invited his friend Rupert Murdoch to attend a party

held by him, however Trump‟s friend did not keep his promise and came late and

guests who looked forward to meeting Rupert were disappointed and wanted to

leave the party. The word “move” is made implicit in the target text. If the translator

applies the method of formal equivalence in this case, the receptor version would

not be plain. A dynamic equivalent translation is necessary because the thought of

the writer in the source language would be reflected not the words or forms of the

source text. (Larson 1984, P9) a variety of meaning can be comprehended from one

form or a group of forms may express the same meaning. The noun in the source

text literally refers to event but the noun in the target text refers to stative feeling.

Example 2:

ST: Murdoch, who, with his then wife, Wendi, had often socialized with

Jared and Ivanka, in the past made little effort to hind his lack of interest in Trump.

TT: Murdoch, cùng vợ trước của ông, Wendi thường giao du với Jack và

Ivanka, trước đây không hề che đậy việc ông chẳng chú ý gì tới Trump.

The underlined phrases are skipped. It seems that the translator ignored the

words subjectively. The information in the target text has slight difference in the

comparison with the source text. The author refers to the low level of interest in

Trump (lack of interest in Trump), but the translation conveys the meaning of no

interest at all. There is a skew in term of the surface meaning between the two

versions, however the deep meaning considered in a whole text is still equivalent.

The translator is clearly aware of communication situation as well as who the author

was and his purpose in writing so he could make an idiomatic translation justifiably

33

(a little effort - không hề che đậy; his lack of interest – chẳng chú ý tới).

Example 3:

Case 1:

ST: A stronger chief staff a stronger chief of staff is better than a weaker one.

TT: Một chánh văn phòng mạnh mẽ tốt hơn là một chánh văn phòng yếu ớt.

Case 2:

ST: a weaker sort of figure

TT: Một nhân vật có phần yếu ớt

In the two cases, the translator ignored the expression of comparative. He

may think that the expression should be made implicit in the receptor language in

order to avoid the wordy state in a whole and made the target text more readable

while the communicative value is still constituted faithfully. Every language has its

all grammatical forms which follow certain rules and these rules are different across

languages. Some elements are obligatory in this language but not obligatory in

others. The morpheme er in this case is the typical example of this feature.

Example 4:

Case 1:

ST: A chief of staff with history in Washington and federal government

TT: Một chánh văn phòng có kinh nghiệm về Washington và chính quyền

liên bang

In term of concordance, a word will probably be translated in many ways as

the senses in which it is used Larson (1984: 147). Different ways give different

senses, of course no complete concordance between the words of the source text

and the words of the target text is established because of mismatches of language

features. In this situation, the translator successfully established the equivalent in

the translation when making the transference of meaning of the word history into

the item of experience (kinh nghiệm) in the receptor language. The secondary

meaning or the figurative meaning of the same lexicon item in two languages is

different or each language has its peculiar way to figure lexicon meaning. The term

34

history can be figured as experience while we rarely see the cases where the term

lịch sử in Vietnamese is figured as kinh nghiệm. The term history appears nine

times in the Chapter two of the Book, however only in the above case it is figured in

term of experience. The translator has based on the situational context and made a

justifiable lexicon choice which helps the translation gain both the intelligibility for

the target readership and the equivalent in term of meaning.

Case 2:

ST: the president –elect‟s lack of immediate focus on a White House

structure that could serve and protect him.

TT: Việc tân tổng thống thiếu sự tập trung ngay lập tức vào cấu trúc Nhà

Trắng để phụng sự và bảo vệ mình.

Structure of a house refers to its design and materials necessary to build it.

Form and parts of a house like floor, rooms, hall, stairs and so on are things related

to the structure of a house. The phrase White House Structure therefore forces

readers to think of the design of the famous building. However, the textual meaning

of the word structure in this case does not refer to this kind of sense but the

personnel mechanism of a new Trump Government. Accordingly, there is a big

difference in deep meaning between the source language text and the target

language text though the surface lexicon structure (surface meaning) in the two

version are similar. The target language text shall be “Việc tân tổng thống thiếu sự

tập trung ngay lập tức vào cơ cấu tổ chức Nhà Trắng để phụng sự và bảo vệ mình”.

Example 5:

Case 1: ST: The flames of his intention to disregard rules regarding conflicts of

interest

TT: Nhấn mạnh thêm ý dịnh sẽ bất chất những luật lệ liên quan tới xung đột

lợi ích

Case 2: ST: a bit of theater

TT: Một khoảnh khắc đậm chất sân khấu

Case 3: ST: the bare –bones transition team

35

TT: Nhóm chuyển giao hết sức đơn giản

It is not difficult to see the obvious mismatches in term of surface meaning in

the two versions. In fact, some words carry figurative or metaphorical meaning and

they acquire symbolic meaning. Those cases require the translator to make

necessary adjustments in order to successfully transfer the original flavor of the

source text with the expression suitable with linguistic features of the target

readership to capture the content easily and comfortably.

Case 1: The flame is figuratively translated into “nhấn mạnh” not literally “thổi

bùng”. The figurative meaning of the word flame is the translator‟s justifiable

lexicon choice to pursue the thin thread throughout his work.

Case 2: Literally, the phrase is not clear and its meaning rather ambiguous, the

writing is abstract and the translator made an initiative analysis in term of text level

and linguistic level then produced additional information from level of reality and

the fact of matter so that an faithful and intelligible translation is reached (a bit of

theatre – một khoảnh khắc đậm chất sân khấu).

Case 3: The attribute in the source text is very different from that of source text in

term of modified content. Bare –bones refers to the barest essentials while the

attribute đơn giản refers to the sense of simple.

Example 6:

ST: A political background, Policy background, Legislative background

TT: xuất thân là giới chính trị, người làm chính sách, xuất thân

là dân lập pháp

ST: the only significant Silicon Valley

TT: Là tiếng nói quan trọng duy nhất ở thung lũng Silicon

The underlined words do not literally match with the original text but they

hold the primary position in the target text. One important aspect that translators

need pay much attention to when making lexical choices is the referential meaning.

The context in a whole would help the translator to make the implicit information

explicit in the target text. As we have seen features of languages are different in

36

term of lexical, grammar, collocation, construction, accordingly something is

implicit in source text but explicit in the target text and vice versa. In this case, the

translator based on subject of the sentence in the source text no one to add more

lexical items in the target text to make the meaning of the phrase clear and create

the equivalent.

4.1.2. Mismatches of grammatical structure

Mismatches of grammatical structure in the translation happens in cases

where the rules of language structures in term of norms, syntax or grammar are

violated during the process of translation in order to create the equivalent translation

as well as the readability and intelligibility for the target readers. Accordingly, the

target text has deviated from the norms or syntax or grammatical rules of the source

text. In fact, we have no guarantee that a noun in source language is best translated

by a noun in the target language. Translators therefore shall consider the skewing

between the grammar and the semantic categories Larson (1984:58). Mismatches of

grammatical structure can happen where one language is inclined to use verb with

some degree of frequency, another language may choose means of verbal noun to

express the same meaning. Certainly, where source language and target language

share the same priority in using the parts of speech is much easier than the cases

where one language uses mostly verbs while the other uses mostly nouns.

Example 1:

ST: Murdoch was hardly the only billionaire who had been dismissive of

Trump.

TT: Murdoch không phải là tỷ phú duy nhất coi thường Trump.

It is obvious that the underlined phrase has not been translated and omitted

from the translation. Language feature is different across languages. Tense is the

typical example of big gap between English and Vietnamese. The Vietnamese

system does not refer to perfect tense while talking about events in the past. In this

situation, the author has skipped the phrase “who had been”, of which the relative

pronoun „who‟ is also not translated. In translation, not all the meaning which is

37

communicated is stated overtly in the forms of the target language text. The explicit

information in the source text “who had been” is made implicit in the target text.

The relative pronoun „who‟ is a key word or necessary connector tool to make the

structure of the noun phrase tightly and meaningful, avoiding ambiguity in meaning.

However, it can be skipped in the target language text without any significant

changes in meaning or an adequate translation is still reached.

Example 2:

ST: After three marriages, Bannon lived his bachelor‟s life on Capital Hill in

a row house known as the Breitbart Embassy that doubled as Breitbart office – the

life of a messy party.

TT: Sau ba cuộc hôn nhân, Bannon sống cuộc đời độc thân ở Capital Hill

trong một căn nhà phố có tên gọi Breibart Embassy, dùng luôn làm văn phòng cho

Breitbart – cuộc đời như một bữa tiệc hỗn loạn.

Languages do not map one to one in words or ideas. The target version

therefore does not quite contain the full meaning of the original language‟s words in

some cases. In term of surface structure, the underlined words in the source text

constitute a noun phrase while its translation in the target text is a clause. Moreover,

the idea of comparison is added to in the target text, which helps to make the

meaning of the whole sentence intelligible. In this case, the phenomenon of breach

of language system and idiomatic translation must be more effective in term of

faithfulness and naturalness than a literal one.

Example 3:

ST: The otherworldly sense of Trump Tower helped obscure the fact that

few in thin ranks of Trump‟s inner circle, with their overnight responsibility for

assembling a government, had almost any relevant experience.

TT: …Cảm nhận lạ lùng về tòa tháp Trump làm lu mờ sự thật là rất ít người

trong nhóm nhỏ nhoi những người gần gũi với Trump, mà qua một đêm phải nhận lãnh

trách nhiệm thành lập một chính phủ, có bất cứ một kinh nghiệm nào thích hợp.

This is the typical example for the priority of noun in expression of the

38

source language and the priority of verb of the target language. The noun phrase in

the source language text with fact as a head and that-clause as modifier for the head

noun is rather complex. The subject of the that-clause has two preposition phrases

to modify, one which creates subordinate clause in the target text. The example

clearly shows the fact that, a certain complex amount of information can be grouped

in a noun phrase in the source language text, however it must be interpreted in a

complex sentence in target language text to guarantee a readable and natural

equivalent translation in target language.

Example 4:

ST: The campaign staff, now suddenly in a position to snag West Wing

jobs-career – and history-making jobs – had to see this odd, difficult, even

ridiculous, and on the surface of it, ill-equipped person in a new light.

TT: Đám nhân viên của chiến dịch tranh cử giờ đột ngột vào vị thế kiếm

được những công việc ở Cánh Tây – những công việc làm nên sự nghiệp hẳn hoi,

thậm trí là làm nên cả lịch sử - phải nhìn nhận chuyện này quả là lạ lùng, khó khăn,

thậm chí là lố bịch và rõ ràng, họ là những người không được trang bị tốt trong

hoàn cảnh mới.

In order to create the non-literal lexical equivalent, the translator needs to

unpack the meaning components of the noun phrase. The words are semantically

complex, it is necessary for the noun phrase to be translated into a clause with a

larger number of words. And the noun phrase in the source text is translated to a

clause in the target text.

Example 5:

ST: …Jeb Bush – royalist –all of them were now focused on the singular fact

that while he might be a peculiar figure, even an absurd-seeming one, he had been

elected president

TT: …những người trung thành với Jeb Bush – tất cả giờ tập trung vào một

sự thật nổi bật là dù ông có thể là một nhân vật kỳ quặc, thậm chí là một người có

vẻ ngớ ngẩn, nhưng ông đã được bầu làm tổng thống.

The noun phrase in the original text is rather complex with that – clause as

39

qualifier. There are two clauses and one phrase in the complex that- clause. We have

seen the popular phenomenon that relative clauses and embedded clauses played the

role of qualifier for the head noun, as English is a language which is inclined to the

usage of noun phrase. The noun phrase in the source text has been translated to a

complex sentence with one main clause and three subordinate clauses.

This is the typical example for the priority of noun in expression of the

source language and the priority of verb of the target language.

Example 6:

ST: A working-class kid originally from New Jersey and then Wisconsin,

at thirty two he made his first and last run for elective office…

TT: Sinh ra trong gia đình lao động gốc ở New Jersey rồi sau đó chuyển tới

Wisconsin, ở tuổi ba mươi ông chạy đua lần đầu và cũng là lần cuối trong bầu cử.

The case also shows the different features of the two languages in their

priority in term of part of speech used in the text. The bold words show the fact that

concept used in the text does not refer to form but only refer to meaning content.

The head noun Kid is explicit in the source language text and made implicit target

language text while the term of family is implicit in the source language and its

meaning contained the words kid originally as a whole. In order to uncover the

meaning of the group and create the natural equivalent in target language, the

translator has added some more words to transform language units from noun

phrase in the target text to the clauses in the source one. Mismatches of grammatical

structures or breach of language system is inevitable for a translation of natural

equivalent.

- Collocation clash:

ST: twinkle in his eyes

TT: Đôi mắt long lanh

ST: larceny in his soul

TT: Tâm hồn của kẻ ăn cắp

A literal translation in this case would probably cause the ambiguity and

40

distort the meaning. The translator‟s look for the natural way to communicate with

the target readership is a justifiable translation to get the idiomatic meaning. The

head nouns in the original text are posited in the attributive position to get the

idiom. Idioms are special collocation where words are fixed as combinations in a

whole and the meaning of the combination is not the same as lexical meaning of

each individual word (Larson 1984: 142). While the collocation or the combination

of words is different across languages, which leads to the collocation clash as

above. The translation must be very ambiguous for the target readership if the

source text is literally translated as “Long lanh trong đôi mắt của ông và sự ăn cắp

trong tâm hồn ông”.

4.1.3. Mismatches of situational and cultural context

Lexical choices will depend on various factors of the situation where

communication is presented, the translator shall therefore be aware of the meaning of

words conditioned by situational context (Larson 1984: P131). In fact, situational

context helps the translator to define the appropriate events, things or behaviors

referred in the message. The translator shall base on the spirit of the whole text to

unpack bundles of meanings and interpret the noun phrases with the most adequate

lexical choices in the receptor language. Concepts of three kinds of meaning:

referential meaning, organizational meaning and situational meaning referred as above

in the theoretical part would exemplify for the useful ways to deal with the mismatches

of situational context and gain the equivalent translation which is faithfully and

naturally nearest to the receptor language. The meanings must be understood and

translated in the light of situational context lexical items shall be looked at from the

point of view of the situational context (Larson 1984: P 421). The chapter talked about

the worry or partly surprised feeling of Trump‟s inner circle when they were trying to

support him in his new position as President of United State. The book‟s genre clearly

belongs to political prose and the differences in term of political system, geography,

and the culture of the two countries produces the mismatches, of which including nil-

equivalences (not translated) and idiomatic equivalent in the interest of target

41

readership.

Example 1:

ST: the campaign staff

TT: Nhân viên của chiến dịch tranh cử

The underlined phrase is not mentioned in the source text. The contextual

meaning permits the translator to add the phrase in order to fulfill the textual

meaning of the phrase. This is a kind of organizational meaning. It is signaled by

deictics, repletion, grouping and other features of languages in the grammatical

structure. The deictic for campaign has referred before in the text, and it is made

implicit in the above noun phrase, however it is made explicit by the translator

basing the process of organizing the textual meaning. The situational context or

referential meaning (the campaign for the President of United State taken by Trump

and other runners) helps the translator to make the translation of nhân viên của

chiến dịch tranh cử not literally nhân viên chiến dịch. The translator based on the

situational context in the original culture since no similar political campaign for

election happens in Vietnam.

Example 2:

ST: the Speaker of the House

TT: Chủ tịch Hạ viện

Example 3:

ST: Trump‟s shortfall of three million votes

TT: Việc Trump kém ba triệu phiếu phổ thông

The two cases shows the fact that knowledge bank of the original

readership is partly different from the knowledge bank of the target readership, or in

other words lack of sameness between the two languages in term of knowledge

bank of readership, which force the translator to make a good deal of information

explicit which is left implicit in the source language text by the original author

because his audience were already aware of it.

The House is a political term referring to one of the Legislative Entities in

42

the political system of America which is very different from that in Vietnam. It

cannot be literally translated into target language “nhà”. The problem sometimes

comes from the fact that source language text contains information which is not part

of the knowledge and experience of the target receptors. Moreover, capturing the

message equivalently transferred into the source text depends on the educational

level. The target readership‟s high educational level in the situational context of the

Book “Fire and Fury” would have little problem in term of intelligibility.

If the phrase three million votes is literally translated ba triệu phiếu, the

information is not insufficient and the translation may be ambiguous because there

are two kinds of votes in the Election of President in America.

Example 4:

ST: A tough guy

TT: Người cứng rắn

Guy in source language means a person of negative view but the translator

does not convey the same meaning as the original flavor. In this situation, the author

refers to Trump in a casual style, while he is considered in the translation with a

formal style. The author‟s social attitude to Trump is slightly changed in the

comparison with that of the translator. Maybe, it is a kind of cultural mismatch,

Trump is the President of the United State; however, American people can refer to

him with a casual style in a certain situation. But in Vietnam, the leader of a country

is always publically referred to with an imitate or formal style.

Example 5:

ST: His view of a man who, for more than a generation, had been at best a

clown prince among the rich and famous

TT: Quan điểm của mình về một người mà, trong suốt hơn một thế hệ,

nhiều nhất cũng chỉ là gã hề trong triều đình của giới giàu có

The underlined words “nhiều nhất” in the target text does not match with “at

best” in the source text. Both phrases are kinds of superlative structure but the

source text convey the quality superlative while quantity superlative is mentioned in

43

the target text. Besides the phrase “triều đình” shows the mismatch of culture. The

phrase has no equivalent in the source text. The translator added the words to create

the natural translation which is close to target culture. This creative translation does

not cause any damage to the faithfulness of the text but an effective equivalent is

established.

Example 6:

ST: background of a mortal war of wills – with the media

TT: Bối cảnh một cuộc chiến tranh sống mái giữa các ý chí - với truyền thông

The phrase mortal war means a war which is very dangerous to life. People

who take part in a mortal war are ready to face with their death. The edge between

death and life in such a war is very fragile. The words sống and mái in Vietnamese

refers to the sex sense of male and female. However, in this situational dimension,

the phrase sống mái can convey the similar meaning with the word mortal in the

source text, which is the best equivalent satisfy both the faithfulness and the interest

in Vietnamese culture in this case.

4.2. Cases of literal translation

Example 1:

ST: As the great and good and ambitious, as well as angry protesters and the

curious hoi polloi, began beating a path to next president‟s door……

TT: Vào lúc những người biểu tình phản đối tuyệt vời, tốt đẹp, tham vọng

và đầy giận dữ, cũng như đám dân chúng tò mò, bắt đầu mở ra con đường dẫn

vào chỗ ngài Tổng thống…..

It is a word by word translation and the target language text is wordy and

ambiguous. The translator shall base on situational context and referential meaning

to organize the general meaning for the whole phrase and make a justifiable

expression in target language.

Example 2:

ST: Washington insiders, or would be insiders, would have to come to him.

TT: Những kẻ trong cuộc ở Washington hay những kẻ sắp thành trong cuộc,

44

sẽ phải tới triều kiến ông.

The phrase in the receptor language seems not to be natural and cause the

target language text is not smooth and easy in a whole. The phrase shall be

translated “những kẻ sắp nhập cuộc”.

Example 3:

ST: All of whom invariably suffered from their own management defects –

Trump did not have a career‟s worth of political and government contacts to call on.

TT: Tất cả đều phải chịu đựng ở những mức độ khác nhau sai sót trong quản

trị của chính họ - Trump không có các mối liên lạc chính trị và trong chính quyền,

mang tính sự nghiệp, xứng đáng để dựa vào.

The target language text is not an adequate equivalent to the original. The

translation conveys the surface meaning not deep meaning, which causes the target

readership feel uncomfortable and confused to capture the original spirit because the

translation is very vague. An idiomatic translation as followed shall be more

justifiable “Tất cả đều phải chịu đựng những mức độ sai sót khác nhau trong công

tác quản trị của chính họ – Trump không hề có bất kỳ mối liên hệ gì về mặt chính trị

cũng như là chính quyền xứng đáng làm điểm tựa cho sự nghiệp của ông”.

Example 4:

ST: This was Trump‟s instant and convenient solution to the unforeseen

circumstance of suddenly being President.

TT: Đó là giải pháp ngay lập tức và thuận tiện của Trump cho tình thế không

lường trước là bỗng nhiên trở thành tổng thống.

The translation is not natural and near to the target language feature, it shall

be more idiomatically translated as “Đó là giải pháp ngay tức khắc và hợp lý mà

Trump đưa ra cho tình huống ông bất ngờ đắc cử ghế Tổng Thống”.

Example 5:

ST: a crude blackmail scheme involving prostitutes and videotaped sexual

acts pushing new boundaries of deviance

TT: Một âm mưu hăm dọa thô thiển, bao gồm gái điếm và các cảnh quan hệ

45

tình dục được ghi hình vượt xa những ranh giới về sự bậy bạ…

The translator‟s faithfulness to the original is determined by the degree to

which receptors comprehend the meaning (House, 1997: 9). The translation shall be

understood correctly and easily as the original. However, the above cases of literal

translation show that the translator did not establish the a match in relative ease of

comprehension between source and translation text, he depended too much on the

surface structure of the original and failed to transfer the deep meaning in the

natural and idiomatic way into target language, which makes the target readership

find the translation not intelligible and confused to capture the original spirit.

4.3 Discussion

The investigation of the noun phrases in the Chapter two of the Book “Fire

and Fury”, used for the assessment of equivalent translation of Noun phrases

according to meaning-based translation strategies shows the items as referred

above: 67 cases of lexicon mismatch, 18 cases of grammatical structure mismatch,

16 cases of situational and cultural mismatch and 6 cases of literal translation. No

absolute communication is quite possible, and it is very necessary to obtain natural

standard equivalence Nida (1975: 46). Mismatches in term of lexicon and

grammatical structure are conceivably produced to meet the demanding of natural

equivalence under the circumstances of different language features as well as

mismatches in term of situational and cultural context between the two languages.

Mismatches of lexicon are manifested at the following aspects: implicit and

explicit meaning, figurative meaning, referential meaning, organizational meaning

and situational meaning. Some referential meaning is implicit in source language

text and is made explicit in the target language text in order to convey the content of

the original message as a whole into the target language text in order to get the

nearest naturalness and intelligibility and avoid ambiguity for the target readership.

During the process of translation, the translator organized the information bits along

the thin thread of the book to find out organization meaning, then found words in

target language which could satisfy both faithful denotation of the original flavor

46

and the expression justifiable with the target language features for the interest of

target readership, some words or sense of meaning is skipped or added, which

caused lexicon mismatches in term of surface structure. Besides, the relationships

between President Trump and his inner circle, their social status, their attitude to the

Trump‟s suddenly being President were also deliberately considered when

translating the book as the phatic aspect, some more words are added to effectively

convey the meaning as a whole into the target text and make the translation sound

not like translation. The situational meaning is therefore indicated by the translator

with the choices of different lexicon forms. The bundles of meaning is unpacked to

find out the intention of the author or the original flavor, and then the translator

rendered the exact contextual meaning of the original which is acceptable and

comprehensible on the readership in term of both content and language in order to

guarantee that an equivalent translation is reached. Moreover, individual language

has its own way to figure meaning in communication. The same source domain is

referred to in two languages however it may be transferred to different target

domains. The translator has based on the situational communication and target

language features to be aware of figurative meaning and produce the faithful and

nearest natural translation. The mismatches in term of lexicon are accordingly

inevitable in translation.

Grammatical structure mismatch is a kind of inevitable loss in translation. It

occurs because of the divergent systems of the two languages. As referred above,

one language is inclined to use verbs while the other prefers nouns in

communication. The thesis has showed typical cases of noun phrases where were

converted to clauses or verb phrases in target language the text, which helped the

translator to gain intelligibility and interest for the target readership as well as the

natural equivalent. Cases of grammatical structure mismatch in the Thesis shows

the translator‟s justifiable adjustment to accommodate the translation to the nearest

level of target language features.

Cultural and situational mismatches show that no two languages share the

47

same social reality. The worlds in which different peoples live are distinct worlds

with different customs, habits, political systems, cultural concepts and so on.

People, events and things are different across cultures. For each culture, each

language, certain situational features are relevant of the selection of particular

textual item in text making. Situational context shows us the cause of things and

events as well as appropriate behavior and actions associated with the situation. The

collected data refer to political field so cultural and situational mismatches mostly

related to the terms and situation of political system in source languages. The

translator dealt with those kinds of mismatch at three levels: keeping the term intact,

converting the cultural and situational markers in target language text according to

the original culture and the other way according to the target culture.

4.4. The findings and implication

4.4.1. Findings

For the practical significance, translation strategies by Larson (1984) are

used to interpret the mismatches found during the investigation. According to

Larson, the original text must be translated idiomatically to obtain the nearest

equivalent translation.

Table 2: The summary of findings for mismatches are shown as the table below

Mismatches of Mismatches of Literal Mismatches of situational and cultural grammatical translation lexicon context structure

16 18 6 67

From the data collected and the analysis of the equivalent translation of the

noun phrases, I found that language features in English and Vietnamese are

different in term of figurative meaning, word collocation and grammatical

structures. Moreover, language is a kind of communication; the original text is a

political prose and the translator and target readers are living under a political

system and culture which are very different from the ones referred in the original

48

text. Some knowledge referred in the original text is therefore shared between the

two languages or communities while the other is not shared; sometimes the two

languages shared the same the situational context but often do not. Accordingly, the

two languages often do not map one to one in words or in idea. In order to produce

the faithful translation which is naturally nearest to the target language features for

the intelligibility, readability and interest; the translator has been very experientially

acute in dealing with the various complicated linguistic situation under the

circumstance of differences in term of culture and situational context. He has been

aware of the fact that meaning components are differently combined, divided and

grouped across the two languages and also mismatches in term of senses and

figurative senses of lexical items and made the justifiable adjustment by adding

more or skipping words and information when he found necessary to make changes,

which is clearly exemplified in the part of data analysis and the tables showing the

mismatches. The translator deliberately balanced the loss and gain during the

process of translation. He clearly understands where to accept the changes in

surface structure and ways of expression in cultural and situational context, to break

down the grammatical structure when converting the source language text into the

target language text.

550 noun phrases were detected in the Chapter II of the Book “Fire and Fury”,

the author considered 67 cases of mismatches of lexicon in term of surface structure.

The mismatches of surface structure are closely related to the cases of implicit in SL

and explicit in TL, figurative meaning, cultural mismatches, situational and

organizational meaning. However, one case of mismatch in deep structure (deep

meaning) has been pointed out (a White House structure – cấu trúc Nhà Trắng) – the context showed clearly in the example number 27th in the appendix part and the data

analysis part, which reflect the translator‟s failure to convey the original flavor to the

target language text as the translation should be cơ cấu tổ chức Nhà Trắng to avoid

ambiguity for the target readership. In the case of changes in deep meaning, the original

information can be distorted.

There are 16 cases of situational and cultural mismatch, of which including

49

four cases of cultural mismatch, eleven cases of situational mismatch. The translator

showed the flexible attitude to make the justifiable adjustment, which is clearly

illustrated in three cases stay intact, three cases translated in target culture and nine

cases still follow the style of source culture.

The number of 18 cases of mismatches of grammatical structure reflects

divergent system of the two languages. The English text shows the priority of noun

phrases while Vietnamese favors verbal expression. The noun phrase in English

bears bundles of meaning which need interpreting clearly, naturally and faithfully in

the target language text, changes in grammatical structure is accordingly inevitable.

According to Larson‟s translation strategies, translation is regarded as a

continuum from very literal, literal, modified literal, near idiomatic, idiomatic to

unduly free. However, only types of literal group and idiomatic group are found

from the collected data, including six cases of literal translation group and 99 cases

of idiomatic translation group (including 67 cases of mismatches of lexicon, 16

cases of mismatches of situational and cultural context and 18 cases mismatches of

grammatical structure).

The result reflects the fact that the translator is not able to perform the

strategy of idiomatic and natural translation absolutely during his translation

process. The occasional cases of literal translation are inevitable, which causes the

target readership to get troubles in capturing the original flavor clearly.

4.4.2. Implication

The research is useful for not only translators and translation students but also

teachers and learners of English.

Firstly, the study shows the universal truth of differences in language features,

especially in term of figurative meaning, situational meaning and cultural norms

between English and Vietnamese. The translation equivalence is very necessary for

translators or teachers and learners of English to capture the original flavor of source

language text in term of noun phrase in particular, and the whole text in general.

Secondly, the study puts stress on the notion that big holes or gap between the

50

two languages are showed in the range of language features and cultural and

situational context are inevitable in the translation of noun phrases. In order to

obtain the equivalence and create the legibility and comfortable feeling for intended

readers, changes in term of surface structures are necessary to solve the problems of

divergent language systems and mismatches of cultural norms.

Thirdly, the theoretical concepts in translation strategies by Larson (1984) such

as implicit meaning and explicit meaning, figurative senses of lexical items,

discovering meaning by grouping and contrast, words as bundles of meaning,

communication situation, culture, kinds of translation and so on, along with the

practical treatment of complex linguistic situation by the translator (which is clearly

addressed or interpreted in the thesis) would bring useful experiences for

translators, teachers and learners of English as follow:

English is spoken as native language in the countries where cultures, thinking,

political system, world reality and language features are very different from those in

Vietnamese. Its is very necessary for teachers and learners of English as well as the

translators to be aware of those kinds of gap to leave out the obstacles and gain their

expected results.

Besides, the strategies to deal with the obstacles caused by the differences in

term of culture and situational context must be flexible. It is better for the translator

to follow both trends: in the light of target culture and in the light of source culture

throughout his work. He can base on each specific case to decide whether to give

priority to source culture or target culture, even occasionally the words in source

text shall not be translated (those are also called untranslatable cases by theorists or

nil equivalence) – typical examples are shown clearly in the part of data analysis.

Moreover, the author of the original source text was writing to his/her intended

readers and it is an obvious fact that they share the knowledge bank of the original

culture and communication situation which has not known by target readership.

Hence, some information which is made implicit in the source language text needs

to be made explicit in the translation in order that target readers can capture the

51

deep meaning.

Furthermore, the two languages have their own ways to figure its language and

the way that lexical items are figured are different. Translators, teachers and

learners of English shall base on the original situational context to find out the

figurative meaning and capture the original flavor. Finally, dues to the differences

in term of parts of speech between the two languages; the English is inclined in

using noun phrase while Vietnamese has the priority of verbs in communication, the

52

breach of language system during the process of translation is inevitable.

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION

5.1. Results and significance of the study

I have completed the investigation of the equivalence of English noun phrases in

the book “Fire and Fury”. The investigation is conducted in relation to aspects of

lexicon, grammatical structure, and situation communication. Theoretical views as

well as the data collected in the book is the basis for my study to find out the

mismatches in term of the above aspects between the two languages, as well as the

importance of applying the theories of equivalence in the process of translation.

I started to analysis the data collected and tried to find mismatches in term of the

lexicon, grammatical structure, and situation communication as well as discover

how the translator conduct the treatment of mismatches and gain the equivalent

translation.

The data in both versions shows that Vietnamese and English have different

ways to figure language. From one source domain, the two languages may have

different target domains. Moreover, each language has its own way to express

information in communication. The analysis of the data also proves the fact that

many differences in term of surface structure happens due to some implicit

information in source language text is made explicit in the target text. The translator

has to resort to situational context and the author‟s attitude to what he would like to

convey to his intended readers to uncover the implicit meaning. In order to make the

translation sound not like a translation and for the target readers‟ interest and

intelligibility, some extra words or senses of meaning need skipping or adding.

Further, the result of the study also conceals the difference between the two

languages in term of their priority in using parts of speech in communication.

English has the favorite use of noun while Vietnamese is interested in using verbs.

Mismatch of grammatical structures is inevitable to gain equivalent translation

53

which satisfies both faithfulness and naturalness.

In addition, the study shows some cases of differences in term of situational and

cultural context which causes obstacles for the translator. I found three ways of

treatment of the referred differences. Firstly, he translates in the way that is nearest

to the target culture in order to create the similar response for the target readers to

the translation as in the original readers. Secondly, he kept the original cultural

flavor constant. Thirdly, some cases are untranslatable, the phrases are not

translated.

The principles of translation are inferred from the results and experiences drawn out

above:

+ Translators must be aware of the obvious existence of inevitable mismatches

and related concepts, which would partly support them to obtain the successful

translation that guarantees the criteria of faithfulness, readability and naturalness.

+ Due to the fact that the two languages do not share the same priority in using

parts of speech in the expression of information in communication as well as the

same way of lexical collocation, it is occasionally necessary for the translator to

violate the rules of original language structures in term of norm, syntax or grammar

during the process of translation in order to create the readability and intelligibility

for the target readers, which also helps to avoid ambiguity in meaning and get a

translation of faithfulness and naturalness.

+ The two languages have the different ways to figure the lexical meaning in

communication, the translator must base on the communication situation as well as

language features of the two languages to make a translation of faithfulness,

intelligibility and smoothness.

+ No two languages share the whole world of reality, culture and

communication situation, it depends on each case, the translator can make the

translation: in the light of original culture (in case where the target culture does not

own the same reality), in the light of target culture (in case where the target culture

owns the same reality), keep intact (in case of untranslated or nil equivalence).

54

+ Due to the differences between the two languages as referred above, the loss

and gain in translation is inevitable, it would be a wise decision for the translator to

pursue the strategy of keeping deep structure intact. The deep meaning must be

given higher priority over the surface meaning in term of changes, because he/she is

conveying information not language itself.

+ Finally, five cases of literal translation and the mismatches prove for the

viewpoint that idiomatic translation is the best choice in translation. The translator

must avoid both literal translation and duly free translation.

5.2. The limitation of the study

The data taken for the study comes from only one book referring to political

prose, mismatches found for the analysis is therefore not abundant, especially in

term of situational and cultural context.

The investigation of the mismatches and the treatment to gain dynamic

equivalent translation only taken in term of noun phrases, not the whole sentence,

hence the assessment is not comprehensible enough.

Through the analysis of the data, I found that being aware of the differences in

the way to figure language would be very important to leave off obstacles in

translation in the current fact that the two languages have their own ways to express

information. In other words, the phenomenon of figurative language is rather

popular in the two languages while the way to figure language is different across the

two languages. Unfortunately, due to the frame of the study, this kind of linguistic

aspect has not appropriately analysed.

5.3 Suggestions for further study

Further study on the topic should focus on other genres to guarantee that more

mismatches would be found and they will be systematically listed with a number of cases.

The meaning-based translation in term of lexicon, grammatical structure and

cultural context shall be conducted in a wider range (sentence, and the whole text).

Further study shall be conducted on the influence of the gap between the two

languages in term of figurative language on the faithful and naturalness of the

55

translation.

REFERENCES

1. Baker, Mona. (1992). In Other Words: A coursebook on Translation.

London: Routledge

2. Bell, Roger T. (1991). Translation and Translating Theory and Practice.

New York: Longman, coll.

3. Catford, J.C. (1965). A Linguistic Theory of Translation. London: Oxford

University Press.

4. Catford, J. (1995). A linguistic Theory of Translation. London. Oxford

University Press.

5. Diep, Q.B. (1998). Ngữ Pháp Tiếng Việt. Hanoi; Educational Publishing

House.

6. Foster, M. (1958). Translation from/in Farsi and English. Retrieved April,

2007, from http://www.parasa.ts.com/index.htm.

7. Ghazala, Hasan. (1995). Translation as problems and solutions. Syria: Dar

Elkalem.

8. Hattim, B & Munday, J. (2004) Translation – an advance resource book.

New York: Routledge.

9. Hoang, V.V. (1998). Bản Chất Và Chức Năng Của Quá Trình Danh Hóa

Trong Các Văn Bản Khoa Học Kỹ Thuật. Nội San ngoại ngữ số 2 -1998. University

of Foreign Study, Hanoi National University.

10. House, J. (1997). Translation Quality: A model Revisited. Tübingen: Narr

11. Le, H.T. (2008). Phê Bình Đánh Giá Dịch Thuật. Hanoi: Hanoi National

University Press.

12. Newmark, P. (1981). Approaches to Translation. Oxford and New York:

Pergamon Press.

13. Newmark, P. (1988). Approaches to Translation. London: Prentice Hall

International.

56

14. Newmark, P. (1988). A Textbook of Translation. New York: Prentice Hall.

15. Nida, E.A. (1964). Toward a science of translating. Leiden: E.J.Brill

16. Nida, Eugene A. (1975). Language structure and translation. Stanford:

Stanford University Press 17. Nida, E.A. & Taber, C.R. (1982). The theory and Practice of Translation (3rd

ed). Leiden: E.J.Brill.

18. Nguyen, T.C. (1998). Ngữ Pháp Tiếng Việt. Hanoi: Hanoi National

University Press.

19. Quirk, R &S. Gree. Baum (1973) A University Grammar of English. Essex:

Longman group Ltd.

20. Snell-Hornby, M. (1988). Translation Studies: An Integrated Approach.

57

Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

APPENDIX

The table manifesting the list of the mismatches of Lexicon

English (source text) Vietnamese (target text)

1. A small of well – wisher 1. nhóm nhỏ đến chúc mừng

2. a dazed quality to gathering 2. Một cảm giác choáng váng bao

trùm cuộc gặp

3. make a move to leave 3. Tỏ ý muốn ra về

4. Ivanka, in the past, made the 4. Không hề che đây

Little effort to hide

5. His lack of interest in Trump 5. Việc ông chẳng chú ý tới Trump

6. the party he was in more than one 6. Bữa tiệc mà ông có nhiều hơn một

way sorely late to lý do để tới muộn

7. career and history – making jobs 7. Những công việc làm nên sự

nghiệp hẳn hoi, thậm trí làm nên

cả lịch sử

8. ill-equipped person in a new light 8. Họ là những người không đƣợc

trang bị tốt trong hoàn cảnh mới

9. Khả năng tự kiểm soát sự khiêm 9. some modest self-control

tốn

10. Sự ngu dốt trên đủ các lĩnh vực 10. his wide-raging ignorance

11. Điều có thể gọi là nguyên lý bất 11. something of an outlaw

chấp cuộc chơi để chiến thắng prescription for winning

12. Vẻ bề ngoài đáng kính 12. a respect front

13. Sự lăng nhăng của họ 13. their brand of womanizing

14. Một trong những điều khiến cuộc 14. one of the thing that made life

đời hay ho worth living

15. ả nào ngon hơn vợ anh chứ 15. a better fuck than your wife

I

16. Theo một số bạn bè của ông 16. the estimation of some of his

friends

17. the bare –bones transition team 17. Nhóm chuyển giao hết sức đơn

giản

18. Văn phòng riêng của ông, nơi ông 18. his private office which he‟

sống và làm việc từ những năm occupied since the 1980s

1980

19. Bản năng của Trump sau thành 19. Trump‟s instinct in the face of his

công khó tin unlikely

20. Không phải là sự khiêm nhường 20. the opposite of humility

21. Đủ kiểu người tò mỏ 21. assorted gawkers

22. Sự thật là rất ít người trong nhóm 22. the fact that few in the thin ranks

of Trump‟s inner circle, with nhỏ nhoi những ngƣời gần gũi

với Trump, mà qua một đêm phải their overnight responsibility for

nhận lãnh trách nhiệm thành lập assembling a government, had

một chính phủ, có bát cứ một kinh almost any relevant experience

nghiệm nào thích hợp

23. Không ai xuất thân là giới chính 23. Nobody has an apolitical back

trị, ngƣời làm chính sách, xuất ground, policy background,

thân là nhà lập pháp, xuất thân là legislative background

dân lập pháp

24. Một ngành mang tính mạng lưới 24. a network business

25. Một ngành phụ thuộc vào bạn 25. a who- you – know business

quen biết ai

26. Một nỗ lực phút chót để tránh sự 26. a last-ditch bid to avoid hopeless

sỉ nhục tuyệt vọng humiliation

27. Việc tân tổng thống thiếu sự tập 27. the president –elect‟s lack of

trung ngay lập tức vào cấu trúc immediate focus on a White

Nhà Trắng để phụng sự và bảo vệ House structure that could serve

II

mình and protect him

28. Trump‟s billionaire circle 28. Giới tỷ phú thân mật của Trump

29. Larger-than-life chiefs have 29. Những nhân vật chánh văn

included Richard Nixon‟s H.R. phòng với cá tính và bản lĩnh áp

Haldeman and Alexander Haig…. đảo bao gồm Richard Nixon‟s

H.R. Haldeman and Alexander

Haig….…….

30. a chief of staff with history in 30. Một chánh văn phòng có kinh

Washington and federal nghiệm về Washington và Chính

quyền liên bang

31. Một chánh văn phòng mạnh mẽ tốt 31. A stronger chief staff is better

hơn là một chánh văn phòng yếu than a weaker one

ớt

32. Những ngƣời hầu cận, bạn bè 32. he had relied on longtime

thân thiết và gia đình ông retainers, friends, and family

33. Một công ty quỹ riêng 33. a discrete holding company

34. Với Trump việc ông bạn – một 34. Trump‟s perfect fantasy that his

bậc thầy về tổ chức biết bạn mình friend Tom – an organizational

chẳng hứng thú gì công việc whiz fully aware of his friend‟s

quản trị hằng ngày – đảm nhận lack of interest in day to day

management- would sign this on công việc điều hành Nhà Trắng

là một giấc mơ hoàn hảo to run the White House

35. Ngƣời dự bị của Trump 35. Trump‟s fallback

36. Sự ngỡ ngàng của tất cả mọi người 36. everybody‟s disbelieving looks

37. Một lời hứa ngầm về một chức vụ 37. the implicit promise of central

quan trọng job

38. Tay đâm thuê chém mướn đầy thù 38. the vengeful hatchet man in

hận đã loại Christie ra khỏi Christie’s aborted Trump

III

chính quyền Trump administration career

39. a kind of perfect sweet-revenge 39. Một câu chuyện báo thù ngọt ngào

story hoàn hảo

40. the heavy of the organization 40. Trụ cột của tổ chức

41. the weeks leading up to the 41. Những tuần lễ trƣớc cuộc bầu cử

election

42. He was proudly disorganized, 42. Ông về cơ bản là một người không

seemingly on the spectrum given biết tổ chức, có vẻ chỉ biết tập

what captured his single-minded trung vào vấn đề hiện tại duy

focus to the disregard of nhất nào thu hút được sự chú ý

everything else của ông và bất chấp mọi thứ khác.

43. the worst manager who ever lived 43. Nhà quản trị tồi nhất trong lịch sử

44. his bachelor‟s life on Capitol Hill 44. Đời độc thân ở Capitol Hill trong

in a row house known as the một căn nhà phố tên gọi Breitbart

Breitbart Embassy that doubled Embassy, dùng luôn làm văn

as Breitbart office phòng cho Breitbart

45. a job that included making the 45. Một công việc bao gồm nhiệm vụ

trains rung on time phải đảm bảo cho xe lửa chạy

đúng giờ

46. the only reasonable chief among 46. Chánh văn phòng hợp lý duy nhất

the contenders trong các ứng viên

47. a failed bid for Wisconsin state 47. Một nỗ lực thất bại để vào thượng

senate viện bang Wisconsin

48. an almost universal belief within 48. Long tin gần như trong toàn bộ

the party that Trump would go nội bộ đảng là Trump sẽ trở

down to ignominious defeat thành một thất bại ô nhục

49. a possible margin of victory 49. Yếu tố có thể xem là mang tính

định đoạy thắng bại

50. the same stories over and over 50. Những cậu chuyện được kể đi kể

IV

again lại

51. a coequal level 51. Một vị thế ngang hang

52. Priebus, even with the top, would 52. Priebus, ngay cả khi đảm nhận

be a weaker sort of figure chức vụ cao nhất, vẫn là một nhân

vật có phần yếu ớt.

53. a weaker sort of figure 53. Một nhân vật có phần yếu ớt

54. The traditional mold of most 54. Giống nhƣ hầu hết các cấp dƣới

Trump lieutenants over the years của Trump trong nhiều năm qua

55. various others 55. Nhiều chánh văn phòng khác

56. the nature of Trump’s particular 56. Bản chất của tinh thần bán hàng

salesmanship rất đặc biệt nơi Trump

57. the flames of his intention to 57. Nhấn mạnh thêm ý dịnh sẽ bất

disregard rules regarding conflicts chất những luật lệ liên quan tới

of interest xung đột lợi ích

58. a bit of theater 58. Một khoảnh khắc đậm chất sân

khấu

59. Nỗ lực ghê gớm ông đã thực hiện 59. the vast efforts that had been

để làm được điều bất khả kháng made to do the impossible

ra sao

60. Một bản báo cáo rất nguy hại 60. a damaging report

61. Một người thắng cử bất ngờ 61. an unlikely election winner

62. Trước khi Trump nhậm chức tổng 62. the verge of Trump‟s ascendancy

thống to the presidency

63. Một lập trường trung gian 63. ..it is hard to fathom a middle

ground

64. Một nghịch lý lạ lùng của hai câu 64. the novel paradox of two

chuyện không đáng tin thống trị unreliable narrators dominating

đời sống dư luận Mỹ American public life

65. Bộ khung mà truyền thông chọn 65. the frame the media has chosen to

V

lựa để đón nhận embrace

66. It will be the greatest jobs 66. Công trình vĩ đại nhất mà Chúa

producer that God ever created từng tạo ra

67. a son of bitch who knows 67. Một thằng chết tiệt hiểu được

Washington Washington ấy

The table manifesting the list of the mismatches of situational and cultural

context

English (source text) Vietnamese (target text)

1. his view of a man who, for more 1. Quan điểm của mình về một

than a generation, had been at best người mà, trong suốt hơn một

a clown prince among the rich thế hệ, nhiều nhất cũng chỉ là gã

hề trong triều đình của giới and famous

giàu có

2. a position to snag a West Wing 2. Vị thế kiếm được những công

việc ở Cánh Tây jobs

3. a tough guy 3. Ngƣời cứng rắn

4. a big warm-hearted monkey 4. Một con khỉ với trái tim ấm áp

5. what was gleefully called by 5. Điều mà những người trong

insiders the “perp walk” cuộc khoái trá gọi là “giải phạm

thị chúng”

6. The speaker of the House 6. Chủ tịch Hạ viện

7. The Bridgegate 7. Vụ bê bối Bridgegate

8. Transmogrification of Trump 8. Sự biến hóa như có phép lạ của

from joke candidate, to whisper Trump từ một trò đùa tếu thành

for disaffected demographic, to ứng cử viên, người tâm sự nhỏ

risible nominee, to rent-in-the- với một nhóm nhân khẩu học

fabric-of-time president-elect đang oán giận, kẻ đƣợc đề cử lố

VI

bịch rồi Tổng thống đắc cử

quay cuồng vá víu.

9. the Billy Bush tape 9. Vụ băng ghi âm Billy Bush

10. Trump‟s shortfall of three million 10. Việc Trump kém ba triệu phiếu

votes phổ thông

11. the swamp 11. Đầm lầy Wahsington

12. the background of a mortal war 12. Bối cảnh một cuộc chiến tranh

of wills – with the media sống mái giữa các ý chí - với

truyền thông

13. Chương trình truyền hình 13. Celebrity Apprentice

Celebrity Apprentice

14. Tiếng nói không thể tranh cãi undisputed voice of 14. the

của chủ nghĩa Trump ở nhà Trumpism in the White House

Trắng

15. Nhân viên của chiến dịch tranh 15. The campaign staff

cử

16. Một con khỉ với trái tim ấm áp 16. He was “a big warm – hearted

monkey” said Bannon, with

rather faint praise.

The content indicates the cases of the mismatches of grammatical structure

Example 1:

ST: The campaign staff, now suddenly in a position to snag West Wing jobs

– career – and history – making jobs – had to see this odd, difficult even ridiculous,

and, on the surface of it, ill-equipped person in a new light.

TT: Đám nhân viên của chiến dịch tranh cử giờ đột ngột ở vào vị thế chiếm

được những công việc ở Cánh Tây – những công việc làm nên sự nghiệp hẳn hoi -

VII

thậm chí là làm nên cả lịch sử - phải nhìn nhận lại chuyện này quả là lạ lùng, khó

khăn, thậm chí là lố bịch và rõ ràng, họ là những người không được trang bị tốt

trong hoàn cảnh mới.

Example 2:

ST:…all of them were no focused on the singular fact that while he might be

a peculiar figure, even an absurd-seeming one, he had been elected president.

TT:… tất cả giờ tập trung vào một sự thật nổi bật là dù ông có thể là một

nhân vật kỳ quặc, thậm chí là một người có vẻ ngớ ngẩn, nhưng ông đã được bầu

làm tổng thống.

Example 3:

ST: ……Trump, who had campaigned on his deal-making skills, was, with

his inattention to details.

TT: …Trump, người đã vận động dựa trên những kỹ năng thương lượng làm

ăn của mình, do thiếu chú ý vào chi tiết.

Example 4:

ST: … Pier Morgan - the British newspaper man and ill-fated CNN anchor

who had appeared on Celebrity Appentice and stayed a loyal Trump Friend – said it

was all in Trump‟s book.

TT: Pier Morgan – nhà báo người Anh và người dẫn chương trình truyền

hình xấu số của kênh CNN từng xuất hiện trong chương trình Celebrity và vẫn là

một người bạn trung thành của Trump nói tất cả đều có trong cuốn sách của Trump.

Example 5:

ST: The other wordy sense of trump Tower helped obscure the fact that few

in the thin ranks of Trump‟s inner circle, with their overnight responsibility for

assembling a government, had almost any relevant experience.

TT: Cảm nhận lạ lùng về Tòa tháp Trump làm lu mờ đi sự thật là rất ít

người trong nhóm nhỏ nhoi những người gần gũi với Trump, mà qua một đêm

phải nhận lãnh trách nhiệm thành lập một chính phủ, có bát cứ một kinh

VIII

nghiệm nào thích hợp.

Example 6:

ST: He tried to impress on Trump the ferocity of opposition that would greet him.

TT: Ông cố gắng gây ấn tượng với Trump về sự tàn bạo của phe đối lập sắp

sửa chào đón ông.

Example 7:

ST: And you need a son of a bitch as your chief of staff.

TT: Và anh cần một thằng chết tiệt hiểu được Washington ấy.

Example 8:

ST: It was his daughter in law who held the real influence demands his due,

who delivered the blow

TT: Chính con dâu ông là người giúp tạo ra ảnh hưởng thực sự trong đội ngũ

của Trump, người đã ra đòn quyết định.

Example 9:

ST: Trump had labeled Bannon a flatterer for his certainty that Trump

would win.

TT: Trump gọi Bannon là kẻ bỡ đợ do ông này chắc chắn rằng Trump sẽ thắng.

Example 10:

ST: After three marriages, Bannon lived his bachelor‟s life on Capital Hill in a

row house known as Breitbart Embassy that doubled as Breitbart office - the life of

messy party.

TT: Sau ba cuộc hôn nhân, Bannon sống đời độc thân ở Capital Hill trong

một căn nhà phố có tên gọi Breitbart Embassy, dùng luôn làm văn phòng cho

Breitbart - cuộc đời như một bữa tiệc hỗn loạn.

Example 11:

ST: A working-class kid originally from New Jersey and then Wisconsin, at

thirty two he made first and last run for elective office.

TT: Sinh ra trong gia đình lao động gốc ở New Jersey rồi sau đó chuyển tới

Wisconsin, ở tuổi ba mươi hai, ông chạy đua lần đầu và cũng là lần cuối trong một

IX

cuộc bầu cử.

Example 12:

ST: … and his association with Wisconsin governor Scott Walker, arsing

Republican star (and brief – very brief - the 2016 front runner).

TT: và mối quan hệ của ông với thống đốc Wisconsin – Scott Walker, một

ngôi sao Cộng hòa đang lên (là người mà chỉ trong một thời gian ngắn – rất ngắn) -

đã dẫn đầu cuộc đua năm 2016.

Example 13:

ST: After the shock of it, he immediately seemed to rewrite himself as the

inevitable president.

TT: Sau cú sốc, ông ngay lập tức tự sang tác lại bản thân, ông tất nhiên phải

làm tổng thống.

Example 14:

ST: It was nearly incomprehensible to him that the same people – that is, the

media- who had violently criticized him for saying he might dispute the election result.

TT: Ông gần như không thể hiểu được rằng cùng những con người đó - tức

giới truyền thông đó những kẻ đã chỉ trích ông gay gắt vì nói ông có thể sẽ phản đối

kết quả cuộc bầu cử.

Example 15:

ST: The calumny was angry, bitter, resentful, ever a casting out and closing

of the iron door.

TT: Sự vu khống thì giận giữ, chua cay, tức tối, là chê bai không tiếc lời và

đóng chặt mọi cánh cửa.

Example 16:

ST: …sexual acts including new boundaries of deviance (including “golden

showers” ) with prostitutes …..

TT: …các cảnh quan hệ tình dục được ghi hình vượt xa những ranh giới về

về cư xử bậy bạ (bao gồm “tắm bằng vòi sen vàng”) …..

Example 17:

X

ST: …everything the man does is, by default, unconstitutional or an abuse of power.

TT: …bất kỳ điều gì người đàn ông đó làm đều mặc nhiên bị coi là vi hiến

hoặc lạm dụng quyền lực.

Example 18:

ST: Each represented, for the other side, a wholly discredited “fake” version of

reality.

TT: Mỗi phía trong mắt phía kia, đều đại diện cho phiên bản giả mạo hoàn

XI

toàn không đáng tin cậy của thực tại.