On the Application of the Cohesion Theory in Text Translation

Mengdi Zhang

【Abstract】Based on the translation of E. B. Whites essay ‘Death of a Pig ， the essay attempts to analyze the strategies employed to achieve cohesion and conjunction in the target text and emphasizes that in order to reflect the language style of the source text， the translator should use corresponding strategies to ensure the translation is cohesive.

【Key words】grammatical cohesion； lexical cohesion； Death of a Pig

1. Introduction

E. B. Whites essay ‘Death of a Pig was published in the No.181 volume of The Atlantic. The principle themes of that essay are death and the vulnerability of life. In the article， White described how he spent a few days with his ailing pig. During the time， his attitude towards the pig changed from viewing it just as a later feast to regarding it as a friend. The text is characterized by authors creative， carefully choice of words. Also， as the source text used many devices to achieve cohesion， the subject of this essay will concern the strategies used to achieve the same cohesive effect in translation and to reproduce in the translation the unique language style of the source text..

2. Grammatical Cohesion

According to Halliday and Hasan， “the concept of cohesion is a semantic one； it refers to the relations of meaning that exists within the text， and that define it as a text.” They divide cohesion into two main categories， i.e.， grammatical cohesion （including reference， substitution， ellipsis and conjunction） and lexical cohesion.

Chinese and English belong to two totally different language systems， i.e.， Indo-European and Sino-Tibetan respectively. The most distinctive difference in linguistics is that “English emphasizes hypotaxis… while Chinese emphasizes parataxis”. Chinese prefers to “simply put two sentences side-by-side with no obvious cohesive link” while English prefers to “places one clause in subordination to the other and makes the nature of the link clear through a cohesive device”. Consequently， the frequency of the use of cohesive devices is different in the two languages. Thus， in the process of translation， the translator made some adjustments in order to achieve cohesion in target translation.

2.1 Reference

References are used to avoid repetition and the reader can retrieve what the reference is referring to from a particular thing that has been mentioned before. The continuity of reference contributes to the cohesion of a text. One distinctive difference between English and Chinese in terms of the use of cohesive devices is referencing， especially the use of pronouns. English heavily uses pronominal reference， especially personal reference to refer back to the participant. While in Chinese， as Baker points out， “pronouns are hardly ever used in Chinese， once a participant is introduced， continuity of reference is signaled by omitting the subjects of the following clauses”. For example：

[1a] Irving says roll him over on his back and give him two ounces of castor oil or sweet oil， and if that doesn't do the trick give him an injection of soapy water.

[1b] 亨利說，讓豬仰面躺著，先灌兩盎司的篦麻油或橄欖油，要是那不管用，再打一針肥皂水。

In the sentence， the author used the word “him” three times to refer back to the pig. But in the translation， second and the third reference items are omitted to suit the norms of Chinese because the subject “pig” is mentioned before. Although in the translation， the source of cohesion is not explicit， it is more natural in Chinese and the target reader can instantly know that “two ounces of oil” and “an injection of soapy water” is given to the pig， thus the text is still cohesive.

2.2 Conjunction

The function of conjunction is to express the links of logical relations in the text. It helps the reader to link what has been said before and what will follow. The use of conjunction also differs in Chinese and English. As Baker mentioned， “Chinese prefer to use simpler and shorter structures and to mark the relations between these structures explicitly where necessary.” The challenge is to correctly interpret the semantic relations between segments of information linked by conjunctive words and to reproduce such relations in the translation， while at the same time trying to achieve naturalness in the target text. Moreover， as conjunctive relations are often strengthened in translation， sometimes conjunctions are added to the translation. For example：

[2a] I spent several days and nights in mid-September with an ailing pig and I feel driven to account for this stretch of time， more particularly since the pig died at last， and I lived， and things might easily have gone the other way round and none left to do the accounting.

[2b]九月中旬，我和一只罹病的豬共度了數(shù)日；我感到我必須把這段時日的經歷寫出來，特別是最終豬死了，而我卻還活著；事情本來很可能是倒過來的，要真是那樣的話，就不可能有任何的記敘了。

In this sentence， White used the conjunctive word “and” three times to form the structure of this sentence， while in translation， the sentence needs to be broken down into shorter structures and punctuations need to be used to link each chunk of information. Thus， in the translation， the above sentence is divided into three smaller segments. Also in this sentence， the first and third conjunctive word “and” function as a cohesive relation according to Halliday and Hasan， so the word “and” indicates that there is a semantic relation between the phrases linked by the conjunctive word. When the author says “the pig died and I lived”， he actually proposed a contrast. According to the text， it is because of this contrast that the author thinks “feel driven to account for this stretch of time”. Therefore， the first “and” is translated as “而”. The third “and” is translated as “要真是那樣的話” to strengthen the hypothesis “that the thing may go the other way round”.

3. Lexical Cohesion

Baker states that “Lexical cohesion refers to the role played by the selection of vocabulary in organizing relations within a text.” According to Halliday and Hasan， lexical cohesion can be further divided into reiteration and collocation. Collocation concerns the association of lexical items and their relations. The associations of these items ensure the consistency of the topic. They states that the relationship between lexical items not only includes synonyms， superordinates， but also includes same order series， part to a whole， etc. Words that have semantic relationship with each other can occur across sentence boundaries and they can form a cohesive chain， and cohesive chains contribute to textual cohesion. Therefore， it is important and challenging for the translator to recognize the lexical network and choose appropriate words to reflect the cohesive chain in the translation. For example：

[3a] It is a tragedy enacted on most farms with perfect fidelity to the original script. The murder， being premeditated， is in the first degree but is quick and skillful， and the smoked bacon and ham provide a ceremonial ending whose fitness is seldom questioned.

[3b] 這是大部分農莊都按原始劇本一板一眼地上演的一種悲劇。這種謀殺，因為是早有預謀，夠得上一級罪愆，屠刀下去，迅疾而干脆利落，最終以煙熏火腿而隆重謝幕，從來就沒有人對此種行為存有過任何疑問。

In the text， the scheme of keeping a pig is compared to a tragic drama which has a classical outline. In the text， words like “tragedy…original script…enact…ending…actor…whole performance… role…prop” “悲劇……原始劇本……上演……謝幕……演員……整場演出……角色……道具” are the chains of collocational cohesion. Any reader who has knowledge of drama can intuitively recognize that those lexical items are associated with each other. They are highly possible to co-occur in context when the topic is about drama. The co-occurrence of these words achieved cohesion not because the relations between each word but through the lexical chains they form. Therefore， when translating the phrase “Ceremonial ending”， a word-for-word approach to translate is as “儀式性的結束”cannot be adopted as the text meaning of the phrase in this discourse is determined by other members of the chain. The meaning of the phrase is unique to this specific lexical environment. Therefore， the phrase should be considered as a phrase used to describe a part of the drama in this text. Thus， “ending” is translated as “謝幕”，a word which is used to describe especially the end of a drama in Chinese， instead of “結束”， a general word which can be used to describe the ending of anything. If here the “ending” is not translated into a word which is associated with drama， the collocational chains may get disrupted. Although it will not hamper the readability of the text， proper lexical choices will help to produce a more cohesive translation.

3.1 Collocation

The text is written according to the real experience of the author. The author empathized the death of the pig made him feel the transient of life. The theme of the text is solemn and the author used creative language， including some idioms and marked collocations to impress readers. As Be?joint pointed out， “If an encoder chooses a prefabricated form， the receiver will consciously or unconsciously concentrate on the subject matter， but if unexpected forms are chosen， then the attention of the receiver will be drawn towards the form as well as the content”. Thus， the translator should also choose appropriate words to reflect the language style of the source text.

In the text， after the author saw the death of the pig， he said “I went back up to the house and to bed， and cried internally– deep hemorrhagic in tears”. Here， “cried internally-deep hemorrhagic in tears” is obviously a marked collocation. It seems that the author just put words from totally different ranges together， but actually it is a mimic of what the vet said before about the disease that the pig might have： “to indicate erysipelas they would have to be deep hemorrhagic infarcts”. When he heard the phrase “deep hemorrhagic infarcts” [深部位出血性梗塞]， the author was scared. He was certain that he has the same disease as the pig because he had been close with the pig. He empathized with the pig as the pigs imbalance and disease had become his. When translating the marked collocation mentioned above， a word-for-word phrase is used to create a similarly marked effect in Chinese as “深部位出血性哭泣” [deep hemorrhagic cry]. On the one hand， it is a simple repetition of the phrase “deep hemorrhagic” in order to add something new. It can remind readers of what has been mentioned before， which contributes to the cohesion of the text. On the other hand， “cried internally– deep hemorrhagic in tears” also indicates the authors deep sorrow for the pig. The tears did not flow down his cheek but he cried in the depth of his heart， just as it is the inwards of the pig which had caused its death.

In addition， in the sentence “from then until the time of his death I held the pig steadily in the bowl of my mind”， “in the bowl of my mind” is also a marked collocation， but it is not so marked as the last example. From the context we know that the issue of the pig has become the priority in the authors life. The task of helping the pig became a strong obsession. Thus， the author said he held the pig “in the bowl of my mind” to express the importance status of the pig. As the author main purpose of using this collocation here is to stress the importance of the pig but not to deliberately create a repetitive effect and impress the reader as the last example， this phrase is translated as “內心深處”[in the depth of my heart]， which is an unmarked collocation in Chinese， which is used to stress the important status of something. This is because if a literal translation of the phrase is adopted， the target reader would find the phrase very marked in Chinese， which would distract and confuse the readers. Such “unnatural collocation will flaw the target text”and the readers will not feel that the translation flows. The translator “will be ‘caught…by his unacceptable or improbable collocations”.

4. Conclusion

It is inevitably that loss incurs when translating the authors creative language. In order to compensate such loss， translator should at first thoroughly analyze and correctly interpret the source text and use corresponding strategies to ensure the translation is cohesive and the language style of the source text is reflected.

References：

[1]Halliday，M.A.K.and R Hasan.Cohesion in English[M].London and New York：Longman，1976.

[2]王力.中國語法理論（下冊）[M].北京：中華書局.1954.

[3]Fawcett，P.D.Translation and Language：Linguistic theories explained[M].Manchester：St.Jerome，1997.

[4]Baker，M.In Other Words：A coursebook on translation[M].London and New York：Routledge，1992.

[5]Chen，W.Explication of Connectives in Translated Chinese –A Corpus-based Study[D].Manchester：Center for Translation & Intercultural Studies，University of Manchester，2006.

[6]Be?joint，H.Modern Lexicography：An introduction[M].Oxford：Oxford University Press，2000.

[7]Hoey，M.Patterns of Lexis in Text[M].Oxford：Oxford University Press，1991.

[8]Hatim，B and Ian M.Discourse and the Translator[M].London： Longman，1990.

[9]Newmark，P.Approaches to Translation[M].Oxford：Pergamon， 1981.

[10]White，E.B.‘Death of a Pig[J].The Atlantic，1984，181（1）： 28–33.

作者簡介：張萌荻（1990-），女，四川樂山人，成都理工大學工程技術學院助教，主要研究方向：翻譯學，英語教學。