1.1.2.2. Knowledge of the foreign language
The simple mastery of the language's lexis and syntax, however
excellent it may be, is not sufficient to be able to translate (Schleiermacher,
1999, p. 15). The translator is not always expected to translate from
the foreign language. He might well be asked to translate into
it. This entails that he should be as competent as possible in this
language in order to be able to effectively and appropriately write in it. This
belief is also shared by Darbelnet (1966).
Understanding appears as a quite complex task because of the
differences between languages in terms of concepts and, of course, forms. Hatim
and Mason (1990) further explain the difficulty of the understanding process in
the following words:
"[...] it is erroneous to assume that the meaning of a
sentence or a text is composed of the sum of the meanings of the individual
lexical items, so that any attempt to translate at this level is
bound to miss important elements of meaning."
(pp. 5-6)
Many subtle language-specific elements determine the meaning
and render understanding even more complex. Word order, sentence length, ways
of presenting information, stylistic features and meaning carried by specific
sound combinations, are but a few examples.
The already mentioned Mounin's belief (1962) that a translator
should be more than a good linguist makes sense when we know that the
translator has to analyse the text to be translated in a way comparable to that
of a linguist. Literary translation, in particular, offers a wide range of
illustrations. Hence, it strongly shows how a translator's linguistic knowledge
should act. This is due to the fact that the very specificity of literature,
and especially poetry, is, as is well known, language-based. The value of a
text may lie in the ambiguity of its discourse, in the individuality of its
style, in the rhythm underlying the choice of its structures, in the music of
the words, in its cohesion and coherence, and the list remains open.
1.1.2.3. Textual knowledge
In order to be able not to overlook these text features,
Christiane Nord (1999) talks about "translational text competence i.e.
what
translators should know about texts". She explains that
this competence includes:
(a) a profound knowledge of how textual communication works;
(b) a good text-production proficiency in the target
linguaculture (linguistic and cultural system);
(c) a good text-analytical proficiency in the source
linguaculture; and
(d) the ability to compare the norms and conventions of
textuality of the source and the target linguacultures (contrastive text
competence). Nord (1999) explains at this level that:
- competence (a) includes aspects of textual
communication. These include skills like text production for specific
purposes and specific addressees, text analysis, and strategies and techniques
of information retrieval.
- and competence (b) is linked to the ability of expression.
It includes the ability to use rhetorical devices. These are used to achieve
specific communicative purposes, like re-writing, re-phrasing, summarizing ,
and producing texts for other purposes. Converting figures, tables, schematic
representations into text, producing written texts on the basis of oral
information, and revising deficient texts are other activities contained in
competence (b).
| 
