Rationale
Language is an essential communication tool used for various purposes, including sharing information, expressing opinions, and conveying emotions It enables individuals to articulate their values and provide insights into their perspectives on the world Additionally, language allows speakers and writers to emphasize specific information through vocal modulation and to highlight the qualities of objects and actions.
The Appraisal model, developed by Martin and White (2005) as part of Systemic Functional Linguistics, provides a framework for understanding communicative intents through three key categories: Attitude, Engagement, and Graduation Attitude allows speakers and writers to express their feelings and influence the audience's evaluations Engagement focuses on the speaker's or writer's knowledge and beliefs while positioning their voice in relation to other perspectives Finally, Graduation addresses how speakers and writers can intensify or soften their assertions, thereby clarifying or obscuring their semantic meanings.
These three major categories of meaning separate from one another, but they download by : skknchat@gmail.com
The Appraisal framework by Martin and White (2005) categorizes Attitude into three components: positive and negative feelings (effect), attitudes towards behaviors (judgment), and evaluations of phenomena (appreciation) Engagement adds depth by incorporating a diverse range of prior utterances, viewpoints, and anticipated responses, creating a heteroglossic context Graduation, which refers to the up-scaling and down-scaling of feelings, is closely related to both Attitude and Engagement in terms of intensity Gradability is a fundamental aspect of attitudinal meanings, allowing for varying degrees of affect, judgment, and appreciation Additionally, gradability plays a crucial role in the Engagement system, reflecting the speaker or writer's intensity and investment in their statements Thus, Attitude and Engagement can be viewed as domains of Graduation, differentiated by the types of meanings they scale.
In Martin and White's typology (2005, p 137), Graduation is categorized along two axes of scalability: intensity or amount, and prototypicality and precision The first axis involves scalar assessments of qualities, processes, and verbal modalities, termed Intensification, while the second axis focuses on the grading of entities based on their prototypical characteristics.
Graduation is essential in assessing the intensity of feelings, conceptualized as Force From an experiential viewpoint, it involves adjusting the strength of boundaries between categories, which are not strictly scalable but can be sharpened or softened, recognized as Focus Since Focus pertains to experiential categories, it directly relates to attitudinal assessment influenced by the specific semantics of the graduated category.
There is no doubt that if speakers or writers do not grasp the nature of download by : skknchat@gmail.com
Graduation plays a crucial role in discourse, as highlighted by Benzinger (1971), who argues that listeners often struggle to grasp the full significance of a speaker's message This limitation arises because speakers may find it challenging to convey varying degrees of meaning without employing intensification techniques Consequently, the inability to effectively express their intended messages can hinder speakers from achieving their desired communicative goals.
This thesis centers on the concept of intensity within the framework of Appraisal, specifically examining how speakers and writers express their assessments through intensification Rather than providing a comprehensive overview of Appraisal or Graduation, the focus is on the nuanced ways in which intensity shapes evaluative language.
[1] I think that in both our interests it would be extremely undesirable that matters should be so left at this stage (MP_E, p.116)
[2] He had heard on Forsyte ‘Change much comment, much rather doubtful praise of this house (MP_E, p 218)
[3] A dumb and grumbling anger swelled his bosom (MP_E, p 32)
[4] It had been forgotten that love is no hot-house flower (MP_E, p 98)
[5] As for themselves, to sit hour after hour, dead tired (MP_E, p 130)
[6] He could not hear Bosinney entreating, entreating, always entreating (MP_E, p 141)
The cases of intensification examined here differ from traditional views held by structural linguists and grammarians Specifically, the signals for intensification, such as adverbs in examples [1], [2], [5], and [6], belong to the lexico-grammatical class of isolating, functioning solely to indicate intensity levels (Martin & White, 2005, p 141) In contrast, example [3] features a verb, while [4] presents a phrase Unlike previous linguistic discussions, which do not recognize verbs, phrases, or clauses as signals for intensification, this study introduces the concept of intensification through infusing This approach suggests that there is no distinct lexical form for indicating scaling; instead, the items themselves inherently convey a sense of up-scaling or down-scaling, classified as lexico-grammatical infusing (Martin & White, 2005, p 141).
The diverse expressions of intensification stem from the functional approach to language proposed by Martin and White (2005), which prioritizes meaning in context This approach emphasizes that meaning shapes language forms, influencing the various manifestations of intensification Despite this, the representation of intensification in English literary discourse remains underexplored, and the transfer of its meaning into Vietnamese has not been adequately addressed.
Clearly, changes or shifts are very likely when rendering forms of intensification into Vietnamese Let’s consider the following examples.
[7] I think that in both our interests it would be extremely undesirable that matters should be so left at this stage (MP_E, p 116)
Tôi tin vì quyền lợi của hai chúng ta, tôi thiết tha mong rằng công việc không bị gián đoạn ở đây (MP_V, p 229)
[8] His face was perfectly round (MS_E, p 70)
Gương mặt anh tròn trịa (MS_V, p 19)
The translation of intensification elements from English to Vietnamese reveals significant changes in both vocabulary and structure, highlighting the need for equivalent effects in translation, as emphasized by Nida.
In the process of translating, especially in 1964, it is essential for the translator to implement restructuring within the lexico-grammar of the target text This necessity for 'shifts' highlights the unavoidable adjustments required to achieve a natural and fluid translation.
The category of intensification within the framework of Graduation remains underexplored, as many language users may be unaware of its existence in discourse and its significance for effective communication This oversight can lead to a lack of diversity in language forms, hindering the ability of speakers and writers to convey their messages effectively Furthermore, the roles and functions of evaluative language are often not fully understood, resulting in a neglect of expressions that reflect speakers' or writers' attitudes and feelings Consequently, this limitation restricts the richness of communication and the potential for conveying nuanced meanings.
In the realm of English language learning and translation, learners often overlook the differences in word order between languages, particularly between English and Vietnamese While English is an inflectional language that leans towards analytic structures, Vietnamese is characterized as an isolating language, leading to translation shifts and negative language transfers Consequently, Vietnamese learners of English may struggle with accurately conveying meaning from the source language to the target text, resulting in translation errors Therefore, understanding these linguistic variations is crucial for both language learners and translators.
Despite numerous studies on Appraisal theory, research on Graduation, particularly intensification in English literary discourse and its translation into Vietnamese, remains limited This thesis focuses on the language of Graduation, emphasizing intensification from a translation perspective It aims to explore how intensification operates in English literary texts, the linguistic tools that convey this meaning, and how these concepts are translated into Vietnamese Gaining insight into the functioning of intensification in English and its translation is essential for enhancing communication between English and Vietnamese, ultimately aiding in the effective manipulation of this linguistic category.
Graduation in English Literary Discourse through download by : skknchat@gmail.com
6 the Lens of Translation” has been chosen as the topic for my doctoral thesis.
Aims and Objectives
Aims
This study investigates the language of graduation in English literary discourse, focusing on the concept of intensification as defined by the Appraisal framework of Martin and White (2005) It compares various expressions of intensification to identify preferred sub-groups in this context Additionally, the research explores how English intensification is translated into Vietnamese, examining the strategies employed in this process The findings aim to enhance the understanding of intensification in literary language for both learners and researchers, with implications for language teaching and translation practices.
Objectives
This study aims to investigate the linguistic expressions of intensification as graduation in English literary discourse, analyze the shifts in intensity when translating isolating intensification into Vietnamese, and identify the common strategies used in the translation process from English to Vietnamese.
Research Questions 6 1.4 Scope of the Research
The research attempts to answer the following questions:
1 What are the linguistic realizations of intensification as graduation in English
2 How are the realizations of isolating intensification rendered into Vietnamese?
3 What strategies have been adopted in the Vietnamese translation of the English realizations of isolating intensification?
In the Language of Appraisal by Martin and White (2005), Graduation is prescribed as comprising of Focus and Force with the latter being subdivided into
This article explores the concept of intensification within the framework of Graduation in English literary discourse, while intentionally omitting other aspects such as Focus and Quantification of Force.
The analysis of intensification in literature presents challenges due to the overwhelming amount of data, leading the researcher to focus exclusively on isolating intensification, which is expressed through comparative and superlative constructions This selective approach allows for a more manageable examination of how intensification is translated The study employs translation models by Nida (2004), Vinay and Darbelnet (2004), and Munday (2012) to analyze the translation of intensification expressions into Vietnamese and the strategies used in this process Specifically, Nida's principles of correspondence and Munday's adjustments of intensity are utilized to assess the transfer of isolating intensification into Vietnamese, either fully or partially Additionally, Vinay and Darbelnet's translation methodology provides valuable insights into the strategies employed in conveying the meaning of intensification in the target language.
The study focuses on the language of intensification found in critical and socialist realism literature from the mid-18th to mid-19th centuries, highlighting key works such as Thackeray's "Vanity Fair" (1847), Brontë's "Wuthering Heights" (1847), Galsworthy's "The Man of Property" (1906), and Maugham's "The Moon and Sixpence" (1919) The research also includes Vietnamese translations: "Hội chợ phù hoa" by Trần Kiệm (2006), "Đỉnh gió hú" by Nguyễn Vân Hà (2018), "Người tư hữu" by Hoàng Túy and Cảnh Lâm (1986), and "Mặt trăng và đồng sáu xu" by Nguyễn Thành Thống (1987) These translations serve as data sources for analyzing the rendering of intensification in Vietnamese and the corresponding translation strategies employed.
Justification for the Research
This thesis explores the linguistic expressions of Intensification within the Appraisal framework by Martin and White (2005), focusing on English literary discourse characterized by varying intensification levels It examines how translation illuminates the nuances of intensification, highlighting the translator's role in achieving communicative equivalence through necessary translation shifts This research serves as a valuable resource for language learners and researchers aiming to enhance their understanding of language use across diverse communicative contexts The thesis contributes to the field in three key areas.
This thesis builds on Martin and White's (2005) Appraisal model, specifically focusing on Intensification as Graduation It expands the category of intensification into several sub-types, supported by examples from authentic literary sources By exploring intensification through various stylistic devices, this work highlights the nuanced application of intensification across different linguistic ranks.
Within the functional approach, the realisation for intensification is more of a diversiform compared with that according to structural linguists and grammarians.
This thesis examines intensification signals through various linguistic elements, including adjectives, adverbs, verbs, and nouns, as well as figurative phrases like metaphors, similes, hyperboles, and repetitions It provides an in-depth analysis of each sub-type, offering a clearer understanding of how lexical-grammatical categories convey evaluative scaling The findings contribute valuable insights to the Appraisal theory proposed by Martin and White (2005).
This thesis integrates the linguistic model of Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG) with translation studies to explore how meaning, specifically intensification, is expressed in literary discourse through lexico-grammar By employing translation as a heuristic tool, the research analyzes how translators interpret and recode the meaning of intensification in their target language (L1) Additionally, it highlights the interpersonal meaning established between the translator and the author through the text, underscoring the significance of cross-disciplinary research and its potential for further exploration across various linguistic fields.
The thesis offers valuable bilingual data that enhances the understanding of intensification and its translation into Vietnamese This resource is beneficial for further linguistic research and translation studies, making it a useful tool for English teaching and translation practice.
Working Definitions
Appraisal refers to the method of examining how language is utilized to evaluate situations, express viewpoints, create textual identities, and navigate interpersonal dynamics and relationships (White, 2001) It is recognized as one of the three primary discourse semantic resources that shape interpersonal meaning (Martin & White, 2005).
Graduation is a key concept in Appraisal theory, emphasizing the importance of scaling and grading in communication It reflects the intensity of the speaker's emotions and the clarity with which an item represents a value relationship, as highlighted by White (2001) and Martin & White (2005).
Intensification refers to the assessment of the degree of intensity of qualities and processes, as defined by Martin and White (2005) It is categorized into two lexico-grammatical classes: 'isolating' and 'infusing.' Isolating items serve as modifiers for adverbs or adjectives, while infusing items lack a separate lexical form, with scaling being an inherent aspect of a single term's meaning In the case of modifiers, the lexical form of intensifiers is typically adverbs Conversely, infusing intensification can manifest through various function words, including nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs.
(2005, p 144) state the degree of intensity of infusing intensification as “individual terms in a sequence of semantically related terms contrast in degree of intensity with the other members of that sequence”.
Literary Discourse is any form of written or spoken language communication reflecting human behaviours, expressions of thought through language in genres of literature such as poems, plays, novels, etc.
The novel is a lengthy genre of fiction characterized by its narrative structure, complexity, and organized plot This versatile form allows for the exploration of multiple characters and is continually adapted and redefined by the storyteller.
Organization of the Research
This thesis is organized into seven chapters, with Chapter One offering a comprehensive introduction that outlines the rationale behind the chosen research topic, as well as the study's aims and objectives The scope of the research is also detailed in this initial chapter.
This chapter outlines the research questions and highlights the significance of the study, emphasizing its contributions to the thesis Additionally, it provides an organized structure of the research and includes working definitions to enhance clarity.
Chapter Two examines previous research relevant to the thesis, establishing the theoretical foundations necessary for the study It emphasizes Systemic Functional Linguistics, particularly the significance of meaning in context, and explores the concept of intensification as graduation, as defined by Martin and White (2005), through the lens of Halliday's SFL (2004) The chapter also connects linguistic theory with translation, reviewing the concept of translation from multiple perspectives and highlighting the critical role of meaning and equivalence in this process Furthermore, it presents a linguistic model of translation and discusses strategies for effectively conveying intensification in Vietnamese.
Chapter Three outlines the research methodology for the thesis, detailing the research design that serves as the framework for data collection and analysis It specifies the methods employed for gathering and processing data, along with the procedures for analyzing that data The chapter concludes with a discussion on the validity and reliability of the research findings.
Chapter Four explores the research findings on intensification as a form of graduation within English literary discourse, providing a comprehensive analysis of its manifestations in this genre It also categorizes and distributes these realizations throughout the research sample, offering detailed descriptions and discussions of their occurrences.
Chapter Five explores the translation of isolating intensification into Vietnamese, highlighting how its nuanced meanings are effectively conveyed through this linguistic process.
Chapter Six examines the strategies implemented in translating isolating intensification from English literary discourse into Vietnamese by skknchat@gmail.com Chapter Seven concludes the study with a summary of key research findings, highlighting implications for English teaching and learning, as well as translation practices Additionally, it discusses the thesis's contributions to knowledge, acknowledges the study's limitations, and offers suggestions for future research.
Chapter Summary
This chapter outlines the study's rationale, detailing the reasons for selecting the topic and presenting research questions aligned with the thesis's aims and objectives It defines the study's scope and highlights the theoretical, methodological, and practical contributions of the thesis Additionally, the chapter organizes the thesis to give readers a clear understanding of its overall structure.
Chapter Two LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
This chapter reviews relevant literature and theoretical foundations essential for the research, focusing on appraisal, graduation, and intensification within the context of translation It includes an overview of Systemic Functional Linguistics and Appraisal Theory, emphasizing the concepts of intensification and graduation Additionally, it discusses key translation aspects such as equivalence, meaning, and translation strategies.
Review of Previous Studies
Appraisal
Appraisal, developed by Martin and White along with their colleagues in the 1990s and 2000s, is a comprehensive evaluation model that has been explored in various studies (e.g., Iedema, Feez & White, 1994; Martin, 1995b, 1995c; Christie & Martin, 1997; Martin, 1997; Coffin, 1997; Eggins & Slade, 1997; White, 1998; Martin, 2000a; White, 2000; Martin & Rose, 2003).
In 2002 and 2003, research by Martin and White highlighted the semantics of affect, emphasizing language's ability to convey various emotions and their intensities This concept aligns with Ochs's earlier work from 1989, which introduced the potential of language to express emotional nuances.
In Sydney, a group of functional linguists pioneered a framework for evaluative language in discourse, focusing on its significance in various narrative genres Their early research explored the impact of evaluation, highlighting its crucial role in shaping narratives and enhancing understanding within communicative contexts.
Prior to the introduction of the Appraisal framework by Martin and White in 2005, substantial research had been conducted on the evaluative functions of language across various contexts, including narrative responses in secondary education, creative arts and media discourse, popular science, and casual conversation This body of work, spanning from 1997 to 1998, laid the groundwork for understanding how language conveys evaluations and meanings in diverse communicative settings.
Jakobson (1960) identifies six elements of communication—context, message, sender, receiver, channel, and code—that correspond to six functions of language The referential function conveys contextual information, while the poetic function emphasizes the message itself The emotive function expresses the speaker's attitude, and the conative function focuses on grammatical expressions directed at the receiver The phatic function facilitates interaction, and the metalinguistic function ensures mutual understanding of the code used Additionally, Hayakawa (1972) explores evaluation through judgment, and Labov (1972) highlights linguistic elements like intensifiers and comparators that play a role in language evaluation.
In 1972, intensifiers were categorized into three semantic classes—emphasizers, amplifiers, and downtoners—each indicating varying levels of intensity Lemke (1998) further investigates the resources of attitudinal meaning within texts, focusing on their evaluative semantics.
The concept of evaluation in linguistics varies among researchers, with Hunston and Thompson (2000) defining it as the expression of a speaker or writer's stance, viewpoint, or feelings towards entities or propositions Other linguists categorize these linguistic resources differently, referring to them as attitude (Halliday, 1994), epistemic modality (Hyland, 1998), appraisal (Martin, 1997; White, 2003; Martin & Rose, 2003; Martin & White, 2005), and stance (Biber & Finegan, 1988; Hyland, 1999, 2005).
Hyland (2005) emphasizes that evaluation should be understood as a socially situated act within a specific disciplinary or institutional context Furthermore, evaluation is analyzed through a multi-dimensional perspective, as outlined by Biber and colleagues (1995, 1994, 1998).
Martin (2000a, as cited in Martin, 2003) expands on the concept of Appraisal within the framework of Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), highlighting its connection to interpersonal resources and emotions, similar to Ochs (1989) This exploration reveals that the social function of these resources extends beyond mere emotional expression to include community construction Martin (2000b, p 144) points out that previous SFL studies on interpersonal meaning have inadequately captured “the semantics of evaluation,” which encompasses the feelings, judgments, and values of interlocutors regarding their experiences (as cited in Vo, 2011, p 28) Consequently, the Appraisal theory was developed, with the term "appraisal" being adopted to describe the language of evaluation, as articulated by Martin (1997, 2000a), Martin and Rose (2003), and Martin and White (2005).
Appraisal theory has been extensively utilized in various studies, particularly in written discourse, focusing on the concepts of Attitude and Engagement (Hood, 2004; Hyland, 2005; Vo, 2011; Khoo, Nourbakhsh & Na, 2012) Specifically, Hood (2004) employs this theory to examine academic texts, exploring how interpersonal resources and evaluative meanings interact within these texts Her research highlights the significance of stance and positioning in relation to values and voices, demonstrating how Appraisal theory effectively elucidates the construction of evaluative stance and interpersonal positioning, particularly through the lens of hedging in academic writing.
Hyland (2005) explores the concepts of stance and engagement in academic discourse, highlighting how stance reflects a writer's self-expression, judgments, and attitudes towards their propositions Engagement serves as a tool for writers to connect with their readers, emphasizing the importance of evidentiality, affect, and presence Evidentiality indicates a writer's commitment to the reliability of their claims, affect reveals emotions and beliefs, and presence denotes the writer's active involvement Stance comprises four elements: hedges, which indicate uncertainty; boosters, which express certainty; attitude markers, which convey emotional responses; and self-mentions, which provide personal insights The study establishes a relationship between stance and engagement, positioning stance as researcher-oriented and engagement as participant-oriented, thus encouraging writers to consider their audience's perspectives and objections in their discourse (Hyland, 2005).
182) Interestingly, the author shows that stance and engagement can overlap because both facilitate the interpersonal dimension of discourse.
Thompson (2008) highlights the significance of Martin's Appraisal model in enhancing the understanding of interpersonal meanings within Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), addressing gaps in previous explorations He emphasizes that "Appraisal analysis can provide an economical handle on central aspects of meaning in text which other forms of analysis would not be able to capture" (Thompson, 2008, p 174), underscoring its value in analyzing attitudinal systems.
In her 2011 study, Vo utilizes Martin and White’s framework from 2005 to analyze the system of journalistic voices in English and Vietnamese Business Hard News Reporting She adapts the framework to focus on three attitudinal sub-categories: judgement, affect, and appreciation, while also examining the values of engagement and graduation The research categorizes three types of voices, including values of entertain (such as may, should, it seems), isolating intensification (like somewhat, slightly, extremely), and infused intensification Through this analysis, the study effectively identifies and classifies the distinct journalistic voices present in the reporting.
‘voices’ operating in the news texts and compares journalistic voices in English and Vietnamese Business Hard News via a corpus analysis. download by : skknchat@gmail.com
The Appraisal framework by Martin and White (2005), rooted in Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), focuses on attitudinal meanings that facilitate empathy, align values, and express personal tastes, encompassing concepts like hedging, evidentiality, and intensity This theory categorizes meanings into three main subgroups: affect, judgment, and appreciation, while also organizing additional meanings into engagement and graduation.
(2005) elaborates on the notion of interpersonal meaning observing how social relationships are construed and negotiated Appraisal looks at discourse semantics where attitude is also realized across grammatical boundaries.
The appraisal model, rooted in Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), is significant for analyzing language across diverse discourses However, it primarily offers a macro-level perspective, often overlooking the finer details within the sub-category of intensification Linguists tend to present the overall system without delving into the specifics of intensification, which limits a comprehensive understanding of this aspect.
Graduation
Graduation is a key component of the Appraisal theory proposed by Martin and White (2005), alongside Attitude and Engagement While Attitude and Engagement have been extensively studied across various discourse levels, research specifically focusing on graduation remains limited This article highlights several studies that explore the role of graduation in different linguistic contexts.
Hood (2004) significantly enhances the linguistic theoretical model of appraisal by expanding the system of graduation and emphasizing the importance of grading non-attitudinal meanings in shaping attitudes She introduces the term "intensity" to describe the grading of an attitude's force as a quality and formulates a system network for grading attitudinal meanings: Graduation {Force {Intensity = grading as a quality}}, a concept influenced by Martin and White (2005) Hood asserts that gradability is inherent in all attitudinal meanings and explores how the model of graduation has evolved, loosening its dimensions of extent in both time and space Additionally, she discusses the concept of enrichment, introduced by Martin (1997, 2000), as the infusion of values into a process, which extends to the grading of a process through the addition of manner meanings In terms of engagement, Hood highlights discourse semantics, noting how it creates space for diverse voices in texts, distinguishing between aligning and dis-aligning Various resources are utilized to encode modality, negation, contrast, and to express both positive and negative attitudes while grading attitudinal and non-attitudinal resources.
Hood (2004) emphasizes the significance of graduation in expressing attitudes through attitudinal meaning, while Martin and White (2005) clearly differentiate between graduation and attitude This distinction suggests that while graduation is related to attitude, understanding attitude is essential for achieving graduation Furthermore, there is a need for more focused attention on the aspect of intensifying force in this context.
On the basis of combining between the theory of Appraisal by Martin and White
In his 2013 work, Conway introduces a fresh perspective on graduation, categorizing it into three sub-groups: type, manner, and volume The "type" encompasses quantification, involving both scaling through size, weight, and number, as well as intensification, which highlights the prominence of qualities or processes "Manner" signifies the realization of intensification through isolation, distinct from expressions of attitude, while "infusion" indicates a lack of separate lexical forms to express up-scaling or down-scaling Additionally, it serves as a signal for repetition, which can either be exact or involve semantically related lexis, and includes lexical metaphor that adjusts the intensity of evaluation.
(2013, p 78), reflects the degree of up-scaling or down-scaling of the intensity or download by : skknchat@gmail.com
The concept of force quantity is significant, especially in contexts where scaling is not applicable, as it is regarded as a median The distinctions in terminology and their implications highlight differences between the frameworks of Conway (2013) and Martin and White (2005) Martin and White's (2005) terminology is arguably more accessible, which contributes to its selection as the theoretical framework for this study However, this thesis will explore the language of intensification in greater depth than what is outlined by Martin and White (2005).
Vo (2011) exploits the system of journalistic voices in English and Vietnamese Business Hard News Reporting following the framework of Martin and White
In a 2005 study, graduation is analyzed and categorized within news texts, comparing it to the journalistic voices of Attitude and Engagement in both English and Vietnamese Business Hard News through a corpus analysis The research highlights that graduation primarily functions through the axis force, which involves intensification and quantification However, it notes that certain sub-types of intensification, such as metaphor, simile, and hyperbole, remain underexplored.
Intensification
Appraisal, particularly its sub-category of intensification related to up-scaling and down-scaling, has historical roots that date back to the studies conducted by structural linguists and grammaticians from the 1950s to the 1990s Notable figures in this field include Francis, Greenbaum, and Quirk, who examined intensification through the lens of grammar, categorizing it under terms like qualifiers, adverbs of degree, and intensifiers Their research has laid the groundwork for understanding how language can be intensified, contributing to the evolution of modern grammar.
Qualifiers are crucial terms that indicate the intensity of adjectives and adverbs, reflecting the degree of their meanings (Francis, 1958; Benzinger, 1971) According to Francis (1958), qualifiers function distinctly from adverbs that also express degree, highlighting their unique role in language structure.
In the study of adverbs of degree and intensifiers, Alexander (1988) differentiates between the two, while Greenbaum (1970) and others consider them synonymous Francis (1958) identifies various qualifiers such as very, quite, and somewhat, noting that most can replace other adverbs in verb positions, with exceptions like pretty and mighty Unlike Alexander, Benzinger (1971) classifies qualifiers, categorizing them into three groups: the first group includes commonly used terms like awfully and extremely; the second group features moderately used qualifiers such as mighty and pretty; and the third group consists of rarely used expressions found mainly in colloquial speech, including considerable and jolly.
Other linguists and researchers adopt the term intensifiers as adverbs Greenbaum
(1970, pp 23-24) defines intensifiers as degree intensifying markers such as badly,
Intensifiers such as "very much," "greatly," "entirely," "utterly," and "completely" enhance the impact of verbs, serving to emphasize their meaning (Benzinger, 1971; Quirk et al., 1972, 1985) Benzinger (1971) differentiates between intensifiers, which amplify meaning, and downtoners, which diminish it, while Quirk et al (1985) argue that intensifiers can also encompass downtoners They note that intensification is primarily achieved through adverbs, but can also occur through noun phrases and prepositional phrases (Quirk et al., 1985).
Intensifiers, as discussed by Biber et al (1999), play a more limited role compared to those identified by Quirk et al (1972, 1985), as they specifically pertain to adverbs that modify the intensity of expressions.
Quirk et al (1972; 1985) discuss the use of downtoning adverbs of degree, while Bolinger (1972) categorizes intensifiers into four classes based on their position on a scale These classes include boosters like "more" and "most" for the upper scale, compromisers such as "rather" and "fairly" for the middle, diminishers like "less" and "least" for the lower end, and minimizers such as "a bit" for the lowest scale.
In 1988, various intensifiers such as "very," "so," "extremely," and "absolutely" emerged as key adverbs that enhance the meaning of gradable adjectives and adverbs, and sometimes even verbs These intensifiers, including "particularly," "really," "terribly," and "utterly," serve to emphasize the degree of an attribute or action, enriching the language and expression in communication.
(1988), Richards et al (1992) mention intensifiers as adverbs used to modify gradable adjectives, adverbs, verbs or ed-participles.
Linguists and researchers agree that intensifiers enhance meaning on an intensity scale, with Benzinger (1971) noting they "heighten and strengthen meaning" measurable by a semantic differential scale Bolinger (1972) describes intensifiers as devices that scale qualities up or down, while Quirk et al (1985) assert they indicate points on an intensity scale, which can be low or high Biber et al (1999) differentiate between amplifiers that increase quality and diminishers that decrease it Benzinger's (1971) broader definition includes various linguistic expressions as intensifiers, emphasizing that some signals are easily recognizable while others are subtle and context-dependent He identifies fifteen devices for signaling intensification, such as qualifiers, hyperbole, and repetition, which serve to clarify meaning rather than express the speaker's attitude Bolinger (1972) highlights the close relationship between degree words and intensifiers, focusing on their role in modifying adjectives and adverbs, while Backlund (1973) views adverbs of degree as intensifiers based on a semantic scale of rising degree.
Biber et al (1999) and Bolinger (1972) discuss adverbs of degree that scale qualities, while Alexander (1988) identifies various adverbs that indicate 'to what extent.' These include terms such as almost, altogether, barely, a bit, enough, fairly, hardly, nearly, quite, rather, somewhat, and too, which can modify adjectives, adverbs, verbs, and nouns.
Hoye (1997) highlights the reinforcement of modal adverbs, which emphasize and intensify the modal values of their corresponding modal verbs within sentences These functions are categorized into three types: emphasizers, which enhance the modality; intensifiers, which indicate varying degrees of intensity in the modal attitude; and focusing subjuncts, which direct attention to specific parts of the sentence, particularly the modal verb While the author examines the role of judgment, it remains confined to the realm of modality rather than extending to attitude evaluation.
Intensifiers, as detailed by Quirk et al (1972; 1985), encompass both intensifying adverbs and adjectives, serving to heighten or lower the impact of certain elements within a sentence These linguistic tools influence the strength of predicates either partially or entirely, highlighting their significant role in sentence construction Despite their comprehensive analysis, Quirk et al acknowledge variations in the understanding of intensifiers, indicating a nuanced perspective on this category of words.
In their earlier work, Quirk et al (1972) categorized intensifiers into three subgroups: emphasizers, amplifiers, and downtoners Emphasizers serve to reinforce the force of the words they modify, while Quirk et al (1985) revised this classification, defining intensifiers as subjuncts that include only amplifiers and downtoners, excluding emphasizers In English grammar, intensifiers enhance the degree of certainty or force of a word or sentence, with emphasizers functioning as attitudinal and style disjuncts that affirm the truth of the statement Quirk et al (1972) identified various emphasizers such as "certainly" and "really," which emphasize specific parts of communication, although their impact can sometimes extend to the entire statement By 1985, emphasizers were recognized as a subclass of subjuncts that reinforce the truth value of clauses without needing the emphasized constituent to be gradable While most emphasizers fall outside gradability, intensifiers typically reside within it, yet both can modify a range of word classes, including adjectives, adverbs, verbs, and noun phrases.
In 1985, Martin and White (2005) discussed the role of compromisers in language, highlighting quantifiers such as "kind of," "sort of," "quite," "rather," "more," and "less." These terms serve to modify or soften statements, illustrating the nuanced use of language in communication.
While many authors acknowledge the intensity scale of intensifiers and their semantic functions, they often impose strict grammatical rules on their usage Intensifiers primarily serve to modify specific parts of speech, enhancing the overall force of utterances Typically, these intensifiers manifest as adverbs or degree adverbs acting as modifiers, with no recognized instances of intensifiers functioning as nouns or verbs Furthermore, intensifiers that appear as adverbs or adjectives without a modifying role are generally not accepted In contrast, the Appraisal theory proposed by Martin and White (2005) offers a different perspective on the language of intensification within the Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) framework.
Halliday and his colleagues expanded on the concept of intensification in language, emphasizing that the meaning shapes the forms used This expansion introduces a variety of signals for intensification, which include lexical intensifiers, absolute value intensifiers, exclamatory intensifiers, and those used in rhetorical devices Additionally, linguists like Benzinger contribute to this understanding of intensification in language.
Intensification as Graduation and Translation 29 2.2 Theoretical Background
Prominent researchers and translation theorists, including Catford, Nida and Taber, Newmark, and Vinay and Darbelnet, have significantly advanced the field of translation studies Their work focuses on essential concepts such as translation shifts, translation equivalence, and various methods or universal strategies of translation.
Catford (1965) presents a model of translation shifts across various levels and categories, which has informed both applied and theoretical research, such as Le's (2014) analysis of nominalisations as grammatical metaphors in Vietnamese translations of official texts Le's thesis investigates the translation shifts of nominals ending in -ATION and -MENT in ADB and WB texts into Vietnamese, utilizing Catford's model Meanwhile, Nida and Taber (1969, 2004) examine shifts through the lens of meaning, asserting that lexical changes lead to alterations in meaning Additionally, Vinay and Darbelnet (1995, 2004) propose two primary translation strategies encompassing seven procedures, with transposition classified as a structural shift according to Catford's framework.
(1965, 2004), and modulation as a change of semantics, a variation of the form of the message Toury (2004) observes ‘laws of translation’ as explicitation, simplification, implicitation or complexification.
Vo (2011) examined the translation of English adverbs in Harry Potter into Vietnamese, utilizing six translation strategies, five of which are derived from Vinay and Darbelnet (1958, 2004) These strategies include direct borrowing, loan translation, literal translation, transposition, modulation, along with an added strategy of free translation Despite this, the study did not address the aspects of translation universals involved in the translation process Munday (2012) noted that the theory of appraisal has seldom been applied in translation analysis, prompting him to use it as a framework for his research Through his investigation of attitude in translation, Munday (2012, p 31) identified a “loss of intensity of affect and a move to implicitation of attitude through paraphrase, generalization, and omission” in the target language versions While he observed transformations of intensity in the target texts, he did not explore the specific translation strategies employed during the translation process.
In his 2015 study, Munday explores graduation as a key factor in the positioning of translators and interpreters, highlighting how the choice of reporting verbs can influence the degree of attitudinal meaning and engagement He emphasizes that the use of intensification directly affects the positioning of both the writer and the reader.
According to Martin and White (2005), upscaling of attitude often portrays the speaker or writer as highly committed to their value position, effectively persuading the reader to adopt that same stance Furthermore, the researcher emphasizes that translators should refrain from altering the original text, as they have less personal investment in its content.
Munday (2015) utilizes the appraisal theory developed by Martin and White (2005) to analyze translation, building upon previous findings.
Munday (2012) investigates how engagement and graduation resources influence translator and interpreter positioning, particularly through the translation of reporting verbs for engagement and the use of intensification for graduation The study highlights that linguistic shifts in translation significantly affect the speaker's positioning and can motivate the reader's response While the theory of appraisal has been utilized by linguists and researchers, Munday suggests that it requires further examination and development within the context of discourse semantics (Iedema et al., 1994; Christie & Martin, 1997; White, 1998).
In Vietnam, research on translation from this perspective remains limited, with notable studies on translation quality assessment conducted by Lê Thị Mỹ Hạnh (2009), Cao Huyền Trang (2013), Phạm Thị Thuỷ (2015), and Triệu Thu Hằng (2015) Lê Hùng Tiến has significantly advanced the field through various works on English-Vietnamese translation theory and practice, including assessments of translation quality and models for literary translation evaluation His research addresses key theoretical issues such as equivalence and the status of translation quality in Vietnam Tiến also proposes translation assessment models based on the frameworks of Reiss (1973), Koller (1974), and Nord (1991, 1997, 2005) While these studies do not form the core theoretical foundation for my thesis, they provide valuable insights that enhance the analysis of intensification meaning in English translation.
Previous studies provide a crucial foundation for this research, highlighting the need for further exploration into the category of intensification as graduation in translation Investigating how to render the language of intensification into Vietnamese is vital for connecting the fields of evaluative language and translation studies.
Systemic Functional Linguistics 32 1 An Overview of Systemic Functional Linguistics
2.2.1.1 An Overview of Systemic Functional Linguistics
Systemic Functional Grammar, developed by Halliday and his followers in the 1960s, is a functional approach to language that emphasizes the role of context in understanding meaning Influenced by linguists like Malinowski and Firth, this framework highlights the importance of the 'context of situation' as essential for comprehending utterances, as articulated by Malinowski in 1935.
A sentence is not a self-sufficient unit of speech; like a single word, it derives meaning from its context Typically, a sentence gains significance through its relationship with other sentences, forming part of a larger meaningful whole In linguistics, it is beneficial to expand the concept of context to include not just spoken words, but also facial expressions, gestures, bodily activities, the group of people involved in communication, and the surrounding environment.
Firth (1935) aligns with Malinowski's perspective on the 'context of situation' in linguistic studies, emphasizing that meaning is central to linguistics Caffarel (2010) supports this view, asserting that in Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), grammar cannot be studied in isolation from meaning The interpretation of meanings derived from grammar is inherently linked to the specific contexts in which they are produced.
During the 1930s and 1940s, linguist Leonard Bloomfield focused on advancing the field of linguistics in the United States by promoting a structural approach to language development, amidst the diverse methodologies explored by various linguists.
Halliday emphasizes the importance of studying language through meaning, contrasting with Chomsky's view that syntax exists independently of function and meaning While Chomsky, a proponent of Transformational Generative Grammar, prioritizes syntactic structures, Halliday argues that function and meaning play a crucial role in shaping form Adopting a functional approach, Halliday suggests that language is fundamentally designed around the functional components of meaning and its practical usage.
1985), and more specifically, for realizing how it makes meaning in context (Halliday, 1978, 1994, 1996; Halliday & Hasan, 1985; Halliday & Matthiessen,
Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) is highlighted as a valuable tool for understanding meaning across different languages (Caffarel et al., 2004) This approach emphasizes the significance of language functions, focusing on the purposes of language use rather than merely its structural aspects (Matthiessen, 1999, 2004).
Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) emphasizes paradigmatic relations, focusing on how language elements can be substituted within specific contexts In contrast, Transformational-Generative Grammar (TGG) primarily examines the syntagmatic relations that dictate the order of language components Each language element in SFL is viewed as part of a comprehensive linguistic system.
Halliday (1985) presents a systemic theory that emphasizes meaning as a series of choices, where each selection opens up further options in different contexts According to Halliday and Hasan (1989), the context of situation in Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) encompasses three key aspects: Field, which pertains to the subject matter; Tenor, which involves the participants and their relationships; and Mode, which refers to the role of language in the interaction Eggins (1994) elaborates on these concepts, highlighting their significance in understanding communication dynamics.
Language functions as a semiotic system, where the act of communication involves creating meaning through selective choices When individuals express themselves, their words gain significance by being interpreted in relation to the unspoken possibilities that exist within the context.
The study of language through meaning is essential, as highlighted by Matthiessen and Halliday (1997) It is crucial to explore the various sets of meanings expressed through functions These functions serve as the foundation for the nuances of appraisal in Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), ultimately shaping the language forms used in appraisal.
2.2.1.2 Meaning in Systemic Functional Linguistics
The core principle of Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG) or Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) revolves around the 'context of situation,' highlighting that meaning is shaped by specific contexts According to Halliday (1985), the way language is utilized plays a crucial role in constructing meaning within these contexts.
1978, 1994, 1996; Halliday & Hasan, 1985; Halliday & Matthiessen, 1999, 2004) To functional grammar approach, the study of meaning is the nature of linguistics What is more, it is meaning which will create form (Sadighi & Bavali, 2008).
Eggins (1994) presents a model illustrating the levels or strata of language, emphasizing that Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) views language as a complex semiotic system This model encompasses various levels, including phonology and graphology, as well as lexicogrammar and discourse semantics, which correspond to sounds, writings, wordings, and meanings.
Halliday and Matthiessen (1999, 2004) emphasize that the semantic system of a language encompasses all meanings conveyed through grammar and vocabulary, referred to as lexicogrammar This system is expressed through wordings—grammatical sequences that can be transformed into sound or writing Language serves as a resource for creating meanings, with grammar facilitating this process through wordings (Sadighi & Bavali, 2008) Furthermore, language not only reflects human experiences but also enables interactions with others (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004) Consequently, grammar interacts with elements beyond language, shaping experiences and enacting social processes, ultimately transforming meaning into the semantic stratum and further into wording in the lexicogrammar stratum.
35 discourse semantics grammar and lexis phonology and graphology
Figure 2.1 Levels or Strata of Language (from Eggins, 1994)
Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) introduces the concept of 'Metafunctions' to encapsulate the comprehensive meaning of language The ideational metafunction, which reflects human experiences of the world, consists of two components: experiential and logical In contrast, the interpersonal metafunction pertains to language as a means of enacting personal and social relationships Additionally, the textual metafunction relates to the organization of discourse, establishing cohesion and flow within texts According to Halliday and Matthiessen (2004), the grammar of clauses represents processes that encompass various actions and states, categorized into six types: Material, Mental, Relational, Behavioral, Verbal, and Existential processes Each of these processes involves three elements: Participant, Process, and Circumstance When a clause functions as a proposition, it serves to inform, question, command, offer, or express attitudes towards the subject matter and the audience, forming what is known as an exchange, which consists of four key constituents.
The clause, referred to as a message, serves to connect the functions of construing experiences and enacting interpersonal relations It is composed of two essential sub-functions: the Theme and the Rheme structure, which work together to convey meaning effectively Understanding the roles of the Subject, Finite, Predicator, and Complement within this framework is crucial for grasping how clauses function in communication.
Appraisal in Systemic Functional Linguistics 38 1 Overview
Halliday (1979) comments nature of interpersonal meaning in a particular relation to appraisal analysis, as follows:
The interpersonal component of meaning involves the speaker's active role in shaping the communication context, reflecting their perspective and the dynamics of speech roles This type of meaning is complex and cannot be easily broken down into separate elements; rather, it is intricately woven throughout the discourse The essence of this interpersonal meaning is its cumulative effect, which we will refer to as 'prosodic,' as it permeates the entire exchange, enhancing the overall meaning.
Halliday's (1994) concept of interpersonal meaning emphasizes interaction rather than emotions According to Martin and White (2005, p 33), the Appraisal resource in discourse semantics functions in conjunction with two other interpersonal systems, focusing on negotiation.
The approach enhances appraisal by emphasizing the interactive dimensions of discourse, including speech functions and exchange structures Additionally, it incorporates non-gradable resources to effectively negotiate tenor relations.
Thompson (2008) emphasizes that Appraisal is understood not just as a personal meaning-making process but also as an interpersonal interaction, challenging traditional views O'Donnell (2012) supports this by highlighting that Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) focuses on language use within social contexts to achieve specific interaction goals rather than merely viewing language as a cognitive process This connection between SFL and Appraisal suggests that the interpersonal nuances in Appraisal play a crucial role in shaping social relationships.
As mentioned by Martin (1997, 2000); White (2002, 2003); Martin and White
In 2005, the term "Appraisal" emerged as a key component in developing interpersonal meaning, one of the three modes of meaning, known as 'METAFUNCTIONS.' This concept is a fundamental aspect of the multi-perspectival model of Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) as proposed by Halliday and further explored by scholars such as Halliday and Matthiessen, Martin, and Eggins The modes of meaning play a crucial role in understanding communication dynamics.
Language serves as a resource for mapping ideational, interpersonal, and textual meanings in every act of communication (White & Martin, 2005) Ideational meaning allows language to represent human experiences, while interpersonal meaning facilitates the enactment of personal and social relationships, reflecting how individuals interact and share emotions Textual meaning organizes these experiences and relationships into coherent texts, ensuring effective communication.
Figure 2.2 Ideational, Interpersonal, and Textual Metafunctions
Language strata play a crucial role in Appraisal, which is based on three coding cycles: phonology and graphology, grammar and lexis, and discourse semantics Phonology pertains to spoken language, organizing phonemes into syllables with rhythm and intonation, while graphology relates to written language, structuring letters into sentences The second level, lexicogrammar, transforms phonological and graphological patterns into words and structures Finally, discourse semantics encompasses meanings that extend beyond individual clauses, integrating all aspects of discourse organization According to Martin and White (2005), Appraisal serves as a resource for meaning within discourse semantics, justified by three factors: the realization of attitudes throughout discourse phases, the expression of attitudes across various grammatical categories, and the concept of grammatical metaphor.
The third lens in Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) emphasizes the interplay between system and structure as complementary aspects of meaning potential According to Halliday, system networks illustrate paradigmatic relations that can be arranged on a scale from low to high or vice versa Appraisal semantics enables us to categorize certain systems as scaled, where values are positioned along a continuous spectrum ranging from 'low' to 'high,' with various values, such as 'contented,' existing between these extremes.
The emotional spectrum ranges from contentment to ecstasy, indicating varying intensities of happiness, with low, median, and high values representing different levels of joy According to Halliday (1979), there is a connection between types of structures and their meanings: ideational meaning aligns with particulate structure, interpersonal meaning with prosodic structure, and textual meaning with periodic structure (Martin, 1995, 1996) Prosodic structure is expressed through three forms—saturation, intensification, and domination—enhancing our understanding of how appraisal functions in communication.
Appraisal is a key component of discourse semantics that focuses on interpersonal meaning, encompassing three interconnected domains: Attitude, Engagement, and Graduation These domains, while related, are distinct from each other, as depicted in Figure 2.3 Each domain plays a crucial role in the appraisal process and will be explored individually.
Attitude encompasses human emotions, reflecting our emotional responses, behavior judgments, and evaluations of various aspects of life (Martin & White, 2005, p 35) It is categorized into three primary groups: affect, judgment, and appreciation, each representing different dimensions of our emotional experiences.
Emotional reactions encompass feelings like happiness, sadness, confidence, and anxiety, while judgment reflects attitudes toward behaviors that may be admired or criticized (Martin & White, 2005) These judgments can be categorized into two main groups: 'social esteem' and others that highlight different aspects of societal perception.
‘social sanction’ Appreciation , on the other hand, construes an evaluation of things, and is divided into three sub-groups named ‘reaction’ - showing affection,
Composition pertains to perception, while valuation is linked to cognition As noted by Martin and White, judgment transforms feelings into behavioral proposals, guiding our actions, whereas appreciation reshapes feelings into assessments of value, determining the worth of objects or experiences.
(2005, p 45) Briefly, affect is a resource for indicating emotions and feelings, judgement for evaluating human behaviour, and appreciation for assessing things.
Engagement involves addressing diverse sourcing attitudes and opinions within discourse Key resources for effective engagement include projection, modality, polarity, and concession, which position the speaker or writer relative to the referenced value and anticipated audience responses This concept is further categorized under two headings: 'heterogloss' and 'monogloss,' highlighting the importance of varying voices in communication.
Graduation enhances grading by intensifying emotions, linking gradability to attitudes that influence the strength of evaluations, such as "very sad" or "startlingly original." It comprises two key sub-domains: the gradable resource known as ‘Force,’ which modifies value through intensification, comparatives, superlatives, metaphors, and repetition, and the non-gradable resource labeled ‘Focus,’ which fine-tunes the boundaries between categories to either sharpen or soften distinctions.
Figure 2.3 An Overview of Appraisal Resources (Martin & White, 2005, p 38)
In the section that follows, the domain of Graduation will be under discussion in more depth.
2.2.2.3 Graduation in Appraisal in English
Intensification and Word Classes in Vietnamese
Diệp Quang Ban (1998) notes that Vietnamese words possess meanings that align with both grammatical and lexical categories In contrast to English, Vietnamese is characterized as isolating and monosyllabic, with each word representing a distinct sound and lacking inflections Consequently, the recognition of Vietnamese words is determined by three key criteria: generalized meaning, potential for combination, and syntactic functions.
Each word class contributes distinct meanings that help differentiate them from one another Nouns indicate specific entities, verbs denote actions, and adjectives describe the qualities of those entities.
Vietnamese words maintain a consistent form and can combine with other words to signal their usage For instance, adjectives can follow modifiers such as "rất" or "quá," while "lắm" or "quá" can precede them Additionally, the word "hành động" serves dual functions as both a noun and a verb; as a noun, it can be preceded by quantifiers like "những," and as a verb, it typically includes "đã" to indicate the timing of the action.
The third criterion of syntactic function is reflected in the constituent elements of sentences, including the subject, predicate, and complement Nouns, verbs, and adjectives can represent both the subject and complement This criterion plays a crucial role in establishing word order within phrases and clauses.
Identifying words within phrases or clauses relies on specific criteria, with the second criterion being fundamental for establishing phrases This criterion governs the rules of word order, particularly evident in the use of verbs and adjectives For instance, words like "rất," "hơi," and "khí" cannot precede action verbs in verb phrases, such as "rất chạy" or "hơi đi," but can precede adjectives in phrases like "rất vui" or "hơi buồn." Similarly, "lắm" or "quá" do not follow action verbs but can follow state verbs or verbs expressing feelings, as seen in examples like "thương quá" or "nghĩ ngợi quá." Additionally, "quá" can precede these verbs, while "lắm" cannot form similar combinations, as illustrated by incorrect phrases like "lắm nể" or "lắm thương." Furthermore, frequency words such as "thường," "hay," and "hiếm" can precede verbs, demonstrating the nuanced rules of word placement in the language.
Adjectives in Vietnamese can be identified when combined with the word "rất" or when they precede an adjective phrase, as seen in examples like "rất Việt Nam" and "tác phong rất công nhân" (Diệp Quang Ban, 1998, p 19) However, unmarked adjectives cannot combine with "rất," nor can they pair with "hơi" or "khí," such as in "rất công," "rất tư," and "rất chung." Additionally, modifiers like "rất," "tuyệt," "cực kì," "hơi," "khí," and "quá" can precede adjectives, while "lắm," "quá," "cực kì," "cực," "tuyệt," and "quá" can follow them to create adjective phrases, exemplified by "đẹp lắm," "đẹp cực kì," "đẹp tuyệt," and "đẹp quá" (Diệp Quang Ban, 2006, p 104).
Translation and Issues in Translation
Translation has been defined in various ways by different scholars Saussure's insights into the linguistic aspects of translation lay the groundwork for understanding the significance of signs, while Jakobson (2004, pp 113-114) further develops these concepts, emphasizing the complexities involved in the translation process.
Translation can be categorized into three types: (i) intralingual translation, which involves rewording within the same language; (ii) interlingual translation, which refers to translating verbal signs from one language to another; and (iii) intersemiotic translation, which interprets verbal signs through nonverbal sign systems Furthermore, translation is described as substituting entire messages in one language for equivalent messages in another language.
Translation is the process of converting written text from a source language (SL) into a target language (TL), as defined by Jakobson and further elaborated by Catford, who describes it as replacing textual material in one language with equivalent material in another Catford emphasizes that not all elements of the source text are translated, leading to necessary changes in the replacement process Newmark characterizes translation as a craft aimed at conveying the same message across languages The essence of translation lies in accurately rendering meaning from SL to TL, requiring translators to consider both the form and content of the languages involved Nida and Taber highlight that effective translation seeks to reproduce the closest natural equivalent of the source message, prioritizing meaning and style.
Likewise, Bassnett (2002) describes translation, as follows:
Translation encompasses much more than simply substituting words and grammar from one language to another When a translator departs from strict linguistic equivalence, challenges arise in defining the precise level of equivalence that is intended.
Translation involves more than just reproducing the source text; it requires grammatical and lexical adjustments while ensuring linguistic equivalence Nida and Taber (1969, 2003) propose a three-stage translation system: analysis, transfer, and restructuring, with transfer being the central focus of the process that encompasses both semantic and structural adjustments.
Figure 2.6 Three-stage System of Translation (Nida & Taber, 1969, p 33)
Translation involves converting a source language (SL) text into a target language (TL) text while ensuring that the original meaning is fully preserved and effectively communicated in the new language.
2.2.4.2 Translation in Relation to Linguistic Theory
Munday (2001) highlights the linguistic approach to translation as articulated by Catford (1965), which is rooted in the linguistic models of Firth and Halliday This approach emphasizes understanding language through its contextual functions across various levels, including phonology, graphology, grammar, and lexis, as well as different ranks such as sentence, clause, group, and word.
Translation, as defined by Catford (1965), is the process of substituting a text in one language for a text in another, highlighting the necessity for a translation theory to be grounded in a theory of language He presents a diagram illustrating the extralinguistic levels, which include medium-substance (phonic and graphic) and situational context Additionally, the internal levels of language encompass medium or form, such as phonology and graphology, alongside formal levels identified by Halliday, which consist of grammar and lexis The interplay between grammar/lexis and situational context emphasizes the importance of contextual meaning in the translation process.
Context is the interlevel relating grammar/lexis and situation, symbolled by the dashed line on the right of the diagram.
Figure 2.7 Levels of medium-substance (Catford, 1965, p 3)
Linguistic theory categorizes grammar into four fundamental components: unit, structure, class, and system A unit represents a segment of language that exhibits a specific pattern, such as a sentence, which encompasses one or more clauses and ranks higher than a clause Each clause is further composed of groups, making it a higher-ranking unit than the group Structure refers to the systematic arrangement of these elements, while class identifies a group of unit members based on their functions within the higher-ranking structure For example, the class of phonemes is defined by their roles in the structure of the next unit above them.
59 syllable Thus, the members of the unit phoneme in syllable structure constitute the class ‘initial consonant’.
The rank scale in grammar and phonology organizes linguistic units hierarchically, with a five-unit hierarchy ranging from sentence to morpheme This structure indicates that a sentence comprises one or more clauses, each clause contains one or more groups, a group consists of one or more words, and a word is made up of one or more morphemes According to Catford (1965), each unit at a given rank includes one or more units from the rank below, while also functioning within the structure of the rank above Thus, understanding rank and rank scale is crucial in both theoretical linguistics and translation theory.
Meaning is a property of a language and has a vital role in translation (Catford,
1965) In Catford’s terms, a translation must have “the same meaning as the original”, that is the sameness in meaning does not reach is a failure in rendering a
SL text into TL text when “a SL text has a SL meaning, and a TL text has a TL meaning” (ibid, p 35).
In English, meaning is constructed from morphemes to words, phrases, clauses, and sentences, allowing for changes in word forms Conversely, Vietnamese is an isolating language where word forms remain unchanged Therefore, translators must be mindful of this linguistic characteristic when converting English texts into Vietnamese.
Understanding meaning involves recognizing various types, primarily denotation and connotation Denotation refers to the core meaning of a lexical item, while connotation encompasses the emotions and attitudes associated with it These meanings fall under semantics, which is crucial for translation analysis Additionally, considering meaning in context, or meaning in use, is essential as it pertains to the pragmatic aspect of meaning and relates to cohesion within texts In summary, grasping these meanings enables translators to thoroughly comprehend the source language (SL) text and identify suitable equivalents in the target language (TL) text.
According to Catford (1968), the primary challenge in translation is identifying "TL translation equivalents." Therefore, a crucial objective of translation theory is to clarify the "nature and conditions of translation equivalence."
Translation, as defined by Jakobson (2004, p 114), is the process of converting messages between two different languages, where the focus is on conveying entire messages rather than individual code units This involves the translator's task of recoding and effectively transmitting the original message from the source language (SL) into the target language (TL).
Translation equivalence is an "empirical phenomenon" that can be observed by comparing source language (SL) and target language (TL) texts across various levels, including phonology, grammar, and lexis, as noted by Catford (1965) This equivalence can manifest in different forms, such as sentence-to-sentence or word-to-word comparisons In contrast, Reiss (1977; 1989) emphasizes that equivalence should be viewed in terms of entire texts rather than isolated words or sentences, highlighting the importance of effective communication Similarly, Nida and Taber (2003) advocate for focusing on the overall meaning of a text, suggesting that significant deviations from formal structures can be not only acceptable but also beneficial in the translation process.
Catford further elaborated the concept of equivalence, showing the key differences between the formal correspondence and textual equivalence These are understood, as follows: