The history of development the science of translation in the countries of studied language

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Introduction

Translation Studies as an academic discipline highlights the history of translation and translation theory. Translation is the process of transferring text from one language into another. And do we know everything about translation? Do we know about history of translation study? About how the theory of translation was developed and how it came to us?

The history of translation - is an academic discipline designed to provide the necessary information on how this art of sending information from one language to another was evolved over time. When we discus history of translation we must think of the theories and names that emerged at its different periods. Actually, each era characterized by exact changes in translation history, but these differ from one to one more. Translation played and plays an input role in the growth of world culture. It is ordinary to think of culture as general and totally separate. If we start to look at the impact of fictional translation, the option of communication clear of anything so restricted by geographic part is clear.

The authors which concerns in their works the theme of my thesis are: I.A. Chistovich, Gorbovskii N.K., Semenec O.E., Panasev A.N., Komissarov V.N., А.V. Fedorov, E.A. Sorokin, L.S. Barkhudarova, V. Vinogradov, G.R. Gachechiladze, Yu. D. Levin, Y.I. Retsker, L.A. Chernyakhovskaya, P.D. Schweitzer, B. Shore, E.G. Etkind; among foreign - J. Catford, Kelly L.I. Left, A. Neubert, P. Newmark, M. Snell-Hornby, J. Steiner, T.R. Steiner, John Holmes

According to V.N. Komissarov, "translated facing different cultures, different personalities, different mindset, different literature, different ages, different levels of development, different traditions and Installations" [1, p. 23].

Before discussing the experience of translation and the history of interpreting teachings, I will give a quote from a well-known theorists and historiographers of European translation of Henri Van Hoof, he begins his book with the history of translation in Western Europe: "If you want to write the story about a translation you must be ready to answer a number of questions: when a translation was appeared? Why we do translate? Is it always translated the same way? Have a history of translation favorable periods? The list of questions could go on. In other words the field of activity - extensive. Indeed the study of the theory of translation to studying the history of the world, the history of civilization, but through the prism of translation and the only difference is that the history of translation does not have the continuity of history on the contrary it reveals a lot of blind spots - both in time and in space. [2, p. 7].

N.K. Garbovsky gave a brief overview of the definitions of "translation", which at one time were given to A.V. Fedorov, A.D. Schweitzer, M. Lederer, J.I. Retskerom, V.S. Vinogradov, R.K. Mignard-Belorucheva, L.S. Barkhudarova and concluded that "any definition of translation, if we want to give it a concise form, will suffer certain one-sidedness.

Also complex phenomenon, it is too contradictory interpretations too ambiguous attitude to it with pleasure consuming the society "[3, p. 12].

Translation as an object, we study the theory of translation, according to N.K. Garbovsky can have the following definition: "Translation - a social communicative function of mediation between people using different language systems, which is realized in the course of psycho-physical activities for bilingual reflection of reality on the basis of his individual abilities of the interpreter, the transition from one semiotic system to another in order to equivalent, i.e., fullest, but always partial, transfer of meanings contained in the initial message from one communicant to another "[3, p. 214].

The development of world society from the viewpoint of translation reveals a stable movement of thoughts and forms of cultures regularly absorbing new influences for the reason that of the labor of translators. It dispels the supposition that the whole thing starts in the West and undermines thought of rigid limitations among East and West. India, China, Iraq and Spain have in different ways wrought European society. India formed ties by means of the Mediterranean in the sixth century BC and medical theories which were created by Greek thinkers similar to Plato and Galen originated from India.

In ninth and tenth century Baghdad the technical and theoretical works of Ancient Greece translated into Arabic and this knowledge increase to Europe via Spain which was almost a Muslim nation from the near the beginning eighth century for four hundred years. In ancient times translator was apparent as an artist copying the unique works while he had to memorize the unique text and the reader. In 1791 there was already mentioned book by A. Tytler in which he proclaimed the following principles on which should based the translator:

Translation should convey the idea of completely original;

- To keep the manner and style of the original;

- To be as slim as the original. [4, p. 66].

A.B. Fedorov:

"Translation is seen primarily as a product of a voice in its relation to the original and due to the nature of the two languages and with membership of the material to the different genre categories" [5, p. 14].

A.D. Schweitzer

"The translation can be defined as: one-way and two-phase process and intercultural communication in which on the basis subjected to target (" to language "), the analysis of the primary text creates a secondary text (metatext), which replaces the primary in a different language and cultural environment ... Process characterized by the installation of the transmission of the communicative effect of the primary text partly modifiable differences between the two languages, two cultures and two communicative situations "[6, p. 75].

During this period, translation theorists concerned mainly the problem of how to convey the spirit of another language of the original text.

The developments of translation in the western world are different than in Arab world, as each country knew some incidents that led to the appearance of some theories. So, what were the major changes that noticed translation history in both West and the Arab world? Thoughts and concepts from the East particularly India China and Iraq influenced on the Western civilization since early as 6 century B.C. when buy and sell ties were first recognized among India and the Mediterranean countries. In Arabic translations an important function played the translation of the Holy Koran.

Nowadays, translation study in progress to taking another stage, which is more mechanical. The discovery of the internet, also with the new technological developments in communication and digital resources, developed cultural relations among nations. This leads translators to look for ways to manage by these changes and to seem for more useful techniques that allow them to translate more and waste less.

Steiner also highlights four periods in the history of translation, and the boundaries between them by their own admission not absolute.

The first period begins with a discussion of Cicero about how he translated, or rather did not translate speech of Greek speakers Eschines and Demostfenes, and the work of Horace's "Poetic Art" and ends with commentary by Friedrich Holderlin, German poet began in XJX., To his own translations of Sophocles (1804 ). In practice this period serves as a translation material for analysis and some conclusions. Steiner admits that in this very extensive historical period (18th century!) It was written many bright pages in the history of translation, however, despite this; this period is characterized by a pronounced empiricism.

The second period Steiner calls the stage of theory and hermeneutic findings. Its beginning Steiner connects with the names of Alexander Fraser Tytler, author of an essay on the principles of translation (Tytler Alexander Fraser. Essay on the Principles of Translation), published in London in 1792, and Friedrich Schleiermacher, whose work on the translation of (Schleiermacher Friedrich. Ueber die verschiedenen Methoden des Uebersetzens) appeared in 1813

The third period, modern, begins in the 40s. the advent of the first papers about the theory of machine translation. The beginning of this period Steiner connects with the names of Russian and Czech scientists who, having inherited in his opinion the idea of formalism, tried to apply linguistic theory and statistical methods to the study of translation. During this period attempts are being made to establish a correspondence between the logic and formal models of language translation. The period is marked by intense scientific Researches in the field of translation. It turns out a lot of articles about the translation. Appearance on the theory of translation A. Fedorov, R.A. Brower, William Arrowsmith, etc. Interpreters' professionals create their organization and begin to publish their own magazines. According to Steiner this period to some extent continues to this day: a logical approach, built on oppositions as well as literary, semantic and comparative methods, emerging and developed in the 40's and 50's. XX century, and have been successfully used at the moment (to keep in mind that Steiner's book came out in 1975). But since the early 60s. Finding the focus in the field of translation theory is somewhat displaced and a new, fourth, period.

Beginning of the fourth period Steiner connects with the "discovery" of the article translated by Walter Benjamin (Benjamin Walter. Die Aufgrabe des Uebersetzers), published in 1923 and which is a preface to the translation C. Baudelaire, as well as the popularity of existentialist ideas of Martin Heidegger and Hans -Georg Gadamer. A new direction he defines as hermeneutic. A period of almost metaphysical Researches in the field of translation and interpretation, fading hopes for the possibility of automatic translation, runs to "universalists" with "relativists."[7, p. 224].

In my Diploma Thesis I would like to make a search about the development of translation study in Canada. In many ways, Canada looks and feels like America. Their big, extensive cities, sports stadiums, shopping malls, and the same unique sense of liberty and originality found all through the U.S. But when we speak about translation, it is a total different world. The reason is simple: in Canada there are two official languages, French and English. And also I'm going to consider and make some analysis about these two countries, about how the translation study developed till today and what a difference between these two countries?

The work of Eu.Nida - this is the first serious attempt to develop a proper linguistic approach to translation issues. Back in 1959, in the article "Principles of translation as an example of the Bible" Eu.Nida clearly postulated that the bases of the translation are the main characteristics of language systems, namely:

1) the systematic linguistic signs;

2) the arbitrariness of the sign in relation to the called subject;

3) the arbitrary division of reality language and speech marks;

4) the difference in how different languages organize signs into meaningful;

Also I would like to make some research about the universities which train interpreters, and compare them.

The history of translation in Canada can be divided into two stages: the first stage begins with the colonization of North America by French, and the second - from the giving of New France to the British. Currently in Canada clearly separated four speciality of translation: an interprieter, interpreter of conferences (interprete de conference), a court interpreter (interprete judiciaire) and terminology interpreter (terminologue).

Theoretical importance: is to learn more about the history of translation from ancient times to the present day. Acquainted with the professional schools of translation in the countries of studied language

Practical significance: the practical importance of my work is presented in the form of specialized schools of translation. In the third chapter, I'm going to elaborate about the training of translators in the countries of studied language

Topicality: in order to develop the theory of translation and send it in the right direction, we need to know the history of formation the translation, because for a bright future is always necessary to know the past, for the further development of translation for improvement. Everything has a story and every story is an integral part of something.

Methods of research: Historical and typology, in my diploma paper I review the stages of formation of translation studies from the ancient times, the middle ages and in modern times

The purpose of this work: to get acquainted with the development of Translation science in the countries of studied language

Objectives:

1) to learn the history of translation from the ancient times, while considering the development of translation studies in Europe and Arabic world;

2) to learn more about the history of translation studies in Canada and USA and compare them;

3) to learn more about the prospects of the theory of translation development;

4) to learn more about the schools, colleges and universities in the countries of studied language which train the interpreters.

Structure of diploma paper: My diploma paper consists of the three parts, which are describes the translation studies development. In the first part I'm going to consider the translation appearance and development in ancient Greek and ancient Egypt. The second part describes the translation development in the middle ages up to present in the countries of studied language such as Canada, USA and England. And the last third part consists of the information about vocation schools and universities in these countries.

1. History of development the translation studies in Ancient times

1.1 Translations into Greek and their specifics

The ancient Romans were not much different from the Greeks in their confidence in the perfection of their language and their culture, and accordingly, in disregard of the languages and cultures of other nations. Only the Greek culture was recognized by them as a role model. Everything else that does not belong to the Hellenistic and Roman civilizations it was considered barbaric. Why then was translated into the languages with the great barbarian? Greek culture is the same, recorded in texts and was known to the Romans from primary sources: an educated Roman possession of the Greek language was a natural. Desire to enlighten the people of the Romans, apparently, was not. Accordingly, the translation from Greek into Latin, is unnecessary, as the language of barbarian, and even more so. Translation thus fell into the category of secondary activity that does not require great intellectual abilities, in any case, is not comparable to the literary work and the art of oratory.

Hence the neglect of the Romans to the translation and the translator. Public recognition of the profession and respect for it due solely to the degree of its necessity - either real or fictional - for the life of society. In ancient Carthage, where probably none of the language is not able to take a dominant position like Latin and Greek in Rome or Greece the translators were needed not only to ensure the "intercultural communication" multilingual and multicultural nation, but also to manage the people.

In ancient Rome the Latin language was dominated. At the same time, Greek literature, Greek verbal creativity in general, was the subject of admiration for the Romans and a role model. Write like the great Greek masters, and can whine and beat them in the art of rhetoric - that many Roman orators and writers have seen evidence of self-mastery. For Cicero, as for many of his contemporaries - poets and orators, the translation was a kind of minor literary work. Translation - is primarily exercise that helps to the development of eloquence. In one of his treatises on oratory Cicero writes that in adolescence often practiced eloquence, trying to rephrase in a more precise and beautiful expressions of what was said in the lofty speeches or written in beautiful poetry.

However, he quickly realized that this was an exercise in imitation of useless and even harmful, because it is either repeat those expressions, which is the text of the originals to be copied or used the forms which gave way to expressions of the original: "Expressions most apt and yet the most beautiful and the most successful - he wrote - were already anticipated or Enniem if I practiced in verse or Gracchus, if it was his voice I took a sample." And then he came up with another exercise, translation. Cicero decided to place the burden of Greek speech the best speakers. "From reading them I hated the benefits that transferring the Latin read in Greek, I had to not only take the best of common words, but also on the model of the original coin some new words for us, if only they were to the place. "

Characterizing distinctive features of Ancient Greek literature, often note that it - only from literatures of Europe, developing independently, without direct use of other literatures. Though east elements also got into it, however there was it an oral, "folklore" way. Promoted a similar state of affairs and notorious cultural arrogance of the Greeks considering all of strangers as "barbarians" and respectively contemptuously belonging to their languages. For the specified reasons the Greek literature of the classical period (the V-IV centuries BC) at all I didn't know a literary translation. Certainly, for the intercourses with other people were necessary carrying out information and communicative translation (historian Herodotus who has visited in the V century BC Egypt, Phoenicia and Babylon remind of them; the military leader of the IV century BC Xenophon participating in the well-known retreat of the Greek mercenaries through the huge territory of the Persian state, and other sources). However Greeks and the representatives of other people knowing Greek carried out this function not.

After Alexander the Great aggressive campaigns in the last third of the IV century BC and disintegration after his death of the huge power created by it a number of the new states at the head of which there were Alexander's former associates and their descendants (Egypt, Syria, Pergamum, etc.) was formed . These states in which a peculiar crossing of the Greek and east elements was observed, began to call Hellenistic, and the entire period from Alexander the Great before establishment over them the Roman sovereignty - a Hellenism era, i.e. distributions of the Hellenic (Greek) culture in the countries won by Macedonians. Greek gained a most wide circulation, having turned into a universal remedy of communication, and kept the positions and after both Greece, and the Hellenistic states lost political independence and got under the power of Rome. The well-known Roman speaker Mark Tully Cicero characterized this role of Greek in the following words: "If who can think that the smaller advantage of glory when it is written in Greek, instead of Latin, strongly it is mistaken because in Greek read almost all over the world, language Latin is widespread in the only limits, small as you know".

Especially it should be noted the translation intended for representatives of Judaic Diaspora in Alexandria Egypt. Despite quite tense relations with the Greek population of the city, which results there were frequent conflicts, her many representatives Hellenize so that practically lost knowledge of Hebrew language. There was a need of creation of the Greek version of the Scripts of Jews (in Christian tradition it is called as the Old Testament), as was made in the III century BC [8, p. 22].

Later, in the II century BC, the book of knowledge of Jesus, son Sirakhov was translated into Greek", also attached to a bible canon ". Her author the Jewish scribe Jesus Ben-Emazar Ben Sira is considered, and the translator - the grandson of the last bearing the same name. Having arrived to Egypt and having remained in Alexandria, it found the compatriots strongly Hellenize and therefore, by own words, spent much trouble, "to finish the book and to publish it for what in the foreign land wish to study". Thus, summing up our consideration, it is possible to notice the following: at rather large number of translations into Ancient Greek language, antiquity didn't know actually Greek translational tradition. Any theoretical reasoning on translation was absent, and very brisk lexicographic work developed during the Hellenistic era (dictionaries of difficult and outdated words, dialect and etymological dictionaries etc.), was exclusively monolingual. Among the largest figures of the Roman literature of the considered era, made the significant contribution to translation development, it is necessary to call names of poet-lyric poet Katull and glorified speaker Cicero.

Guy Valery Katull (about 54 BC died) became history of translation first of all thanks to a reconstruction in Latin of the well-known poem of the poetess of Sapfo "That to me it seems equal to god" and elegies of the poet of the Alexandria era of Callimach "Berenika's Hair". In the first case of feeling of the author are translated by Katull to own experiences. While the first three stanzas follow the original, the fourth is replaced with an independent quatrain in which the poet reflects on himself and the way of life. As for Callimachus the accuracy of his translation admits researchers absolutely unusual to the Roman art practice and almost the only proof of existence it the adequate translation keeping not only a plot, but also ritm-syntactic movement of the original. [9, p. 27].

The greatest Roman speaker, "god of eloquence" Mark Tully Cicero (106 -- 43 BC) took up the problems of translation during all the life, since youthful years, preparing itself for future activity, became, by own words, to shift with Greek speeches of the best speakers, and up to mature years when, after establishment of dictatorship of Caesar, drawing up and translate philosophical dialogues became Cicero's main business. On the other hand, the Roman speaker left a number of reasoning on the principles and receptions of translation of the foreign-language text which played a big role in further development of the theory and practice of translation. According to the contents the translational heritage left by it also is very various: besides two speeches of the Athenian speakers - Eskhina and Demosfen, Cicero Latin versions of the astronomical poem of the Alexandria poet Arat, "Domestic tyranny" (Oeconomicus) of Xenophon, Platon's separate dialogues belonged. Besides, in Cicero's compositions the set of the quotes translated to them from the Greek authors meets [10, p. 104].

Cicero first of all distinguished enrichment of translating language and its lexicon from the most important problems of the last. Remembering the youthful occupations, he noted: "Translation on Latin written in Greek, I had to not only take best of common words, but also on a sample of the original to mint some words new to us if only they were to a place" [10, p.104]. Further it carried out a lot of work on creation equivalent Greek the Latin terms. Under the certificate of historian Plutarch who has written the biography of Cicero, exactly the last entered for the first time names for such concepts as "representation", "consent", "perception" etc., using, in particular, the principles of metaphorical translation. Need for work of this sort, according to Cicero, was caused first of all by that a lot of things Romans couldn't share with compatriots the knowledge acquired at Greeks as opportunities to translation the received data in the native language were deprived.

Not less attention was paid by Cicero and to other applied aspect of a literary translation - to enrichment of accepting literature and replenishment by its new genres. So, having addressed to a reconstruction in Latin Platon, Cicero's dialogues I laid the foundation for the Roman philosophical prose. And, translating, for example, dialogue "Timey", he wanted to use the last for creation of own philosophical work. At last, occupations by translation were for Cicero one of the most effective ways to develop and grind own style, i.e. had the pronounced educational and pedagogical focus which has remained in the Roman culture further.

In the theoretical judgments Cicero, recognizing possibility of double translation of the original - literal and reproducing not words, and force, obviously I preferred the second way. Speaking about a method to which it followed at creation of Latin versions of speeches of Eskhin and Demosfen, Cicero notes that, having kept their thoughts and a form it adapted words and turns for own language. "I believed, - the author sums up the reasoning, - that the reader should expect from me not calculation, and weighing of words. As I hope, in these speeches I kept all their advantages, i.e. thoughts, turns, an order of an arrangement, the word I coordinated among themselves so that it didn't contradict our custom, - so if not all of them are translated with Greek, are trimmed in the same way" [11, p. 22].

At the same time the choice of this or that way of translation of the Greek text at Cicero could vary. So, for example, the majority of the educational translation executed in young years the versions of philosophical dialogues of Platon created subsequently differ a bigger liberty in relation to the original, than. On the other hand, living several centuries after the translator of the Bible on Latin Iyeron considering Cicero as the opponent of literality specified nevertheless that the translation which hasn't reached us of work of Xenophon was executed literally, and noted in this regard shortcomings of language inherent in last and style [12, p. 122].

The picture of translational activity of the last centuries of existence of the Roman Empire is rather various. The most visible poet of the IV century Detsim Magn Avsony (about 310-395) who has left some translation of the Greek authors which rather fully translate the corresponding originals addressed to it. From prose translations it is possible to mention the Greek novels of the III-IV centuries AD: "Alexander's acts" Alexander the Great (in the Middle Ages was which hero it is work enjoyed wide popularity and it was translated into many languages), and "History Apollonia, the Tirsky king". On the other hand, gain distribution and various translational mystifications. In this case to work translated character as it took place, for example, in relating to the III-IV centuries to the collection of fables "Romul" which was issued in the preface for the translation of fables of Aesop though leaned only on Latin sources could be attributed intentionally. At the same time the translation history on Latin of the monuments which have been really connected to some extent with the Greek originals, could be supplemented with details of obviously invented character. Exactly so business with two works of narrative literature of the III-IV centuries AD - "The diary of Trojan war" and "History of falling of Troy" was. About the first it was reported that it was originally written in Phoenician language by a certain Diktis - the participant of a Trojan campaign, found in its grave at emperor Neron and translated on an order of the last on Greek, and then a certain Lutsy Septimy - into Latin.

The manuscript of the second work was found allegedly in Athens by the known historian of the I century BC Kornely Nepot who translated it into Latin, nothing was changed.

Boetsy became as though a connecting link between antiquity and the Middle Ages, translating into Latin such works of the Greek authors as Aristotle's logical works "About interpretation" ("Hermeneutics") and "Categories" with Porfiry's "Introduction", Euclid's first four books (though without proofs) and "Arithmetics bases" Nikomakh (the last version represented retelling), having supplied them with the comments which have had enormous impact on further development of philosophical thought in Western Europe. It is characteristic that, formulating the principles by which it was guided in the work, Boetsy considered necessary first of all resolutely to keep separate from tradition of the free address prevailing in the Roman antiquity with the original: "I am afraid that I will assume fault "the faithful translator" (in the original - fidus interpres, i.e. hint on the statement of Horace mentioned above. - L.N.X.) because of translation the text … word for word. The reason for that that in works in which looks for knowledge of things, the graceful beauty of speech, instead of the truth which has undergone to distortions" has to be expressed not. [13, p. 64].

As it was already marked, theoretically for the Middle Ages promotion on the foreground of three "sacred" languages (hebrew, ancient greek and latin), opposed "vulgar", it was characteristic. Alive of New Europe to languages. The actual life, however, has brought essential corrective amendments in the specified diagram. Hebrew language was initially alien to vast majority of the Christian world, and its knowledge during this period (as, however and later) always was destiny of the few.

The number knowing the Greek language in the countries of the Western Europe also remains during Middle Ages (unlike an antique epoch) insignificant to that estrangement between Catholic and orthodox churches to no small degree assisted, come to the end in 1054 the open break. Reflection of a similar state of affairs became a known saying: « Graecum est, non legitur "(" It is Greek it is not read »). Thus, unconditional superiority in hierarchy of languages undividedly belonged to Latin.

1.2 Translation in the Arabic world

The origin of the ancient Egypt state dates back to about 3000 BC. e. Traditionally, it is customary to distinguish the era of the Early Kingdom, also called tin period when the country's capital was the city of Tin (2950-2640. BC. E.), the Old Kingdom (2640-2160. BC. E.), The first translation period (2160-2134 BC. e.), the Middle Kingdom (2134-1785. BC. e.), the second transitional period (1785-1551 BC. e.) New Kingdom (1552 - 1070's. BCE. e.) Late period (1070-343 years. BC. e.). With 343 by 332 years. BC. e. Egypt was ruled by the Persians, and then was conquered by Alexander the Great, and it is becoming a dynasty of the Ptolemies, the founder of which was one of the companions of Alexander the Great, and in 30 BC. e. falls prey to the Romans.

During its long history the Egyptians have repeatedly come in contact with other people, which, of course, imply the presence of interpreters. The mention of the "bosses" and "leaders" of the latter occurring in the texts are related to the times of the Old and Middle Kingdom, forcing researchers to believe that by this time in the country there is not only the individual translators, but also organized on the basis of professional translators who probably composed in the imperial office or at the temples. This is evident in the text are written in the era of the Old and Middle Kingdom, the word traditionally interpreted as "c" - "translator" and used in combinations decrypted by researchers as the "chief translators" and "Head of translators."

The important role for development of translational business was played by relationship of Egypt with the countries and the people such as: Assyrians, Hetts, Babylonians etc. which, mainly, took place during an era of the New kingdom. There are special schools of copyists where among other subjects of pupils trained also in foreign languages. As in the II millennium BC international language of the Lobby of Asia was akkad - language of the ancient population of Mesopotamia and Assyria, diplomatic correspondence of the Egyptian Pharaohs with governors of the adjacent states was carried out on it.

The archive relating to the XIV century BC containing about 400 letters, written by a cuneiform writing and addressed to lords of Egypt remained. It was found at excavation near Amarn's Egypt settlement (from where Tel-el-Amarn name archive). In turn, about the Turkish village Bogaz archeologists found archive of hett's kings where are available written by a cuneiform writing on-Akkad letters of the Egyptian Pharaohs. It is clear that similar diplomatic activity demanded existence of enough of the qualified translational shots, capable to correspond with foreign governors. As these Tel-el-Amarn of archive testifies, ancient Egyptians had the special texts serving as grants at training in akkad language and a cuneiform writing.

In the period of board of the Pharaoh Ramses II (XIII century BC) about 1280 the contract with hetts tsar Hattusilis was signed. Originally made in akkad language, it was delivered to Ramses, edited by the last, again translated on akkad and sent to the hetts king. As both options remained, scientists carried out checking of akkad and Egyptian texts and came to a conclusion that at identity of the contents the Egyptian option differs a bigger detail. Sources not only mention presence of Ancient Egypt translators (about them it is spoken, for example, in letters of the Babylon governors to the Egypt Pharaohs where it is noted that these translators went to Babylon, obviously, as a part of diplomatic missions). Under the certificate living in the V century BC of "the father of history" - the Greek author Herodotus who has visited Egypt, they made the separate caste taking a place between dealers and helmsmen (though reliability of provided information and isn't confirmed by other certificates).

Besides akkad as show these Tel-el-Amarn of archive, Ancient Egyptian translators knew also other languages (for example, hetts and hurrits). Especially it should be noted existence already to the middle of the I millennium BC translators from Greek thanks to whom Herodotus mentioned above could talk to Egyptians. Importance of Egyptian Greek translations significantly grew after a gain of Egypt Alexander the Great when Greek is approved as the state. As the overwhelming part of local population didn't own it, for successful functioning of government translators were required, and many important documents were created in two languages. Most known of such bilings is the Rozetsky stone which text belongs to 196 BC. Existence of transfer helped the French scientist F.Shampolyon investigating it to begin interpretation of Ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs.

Rather interestingly to note that in the XIV-XIII centuries BC sources recorded data on the specific translator - the priest Ankhurmes who, despite the initial poverty, managed to become the translator knowing many languages. At last, it is possible to point existence in Ancient Egypt and so-called "chronological" translation, i.e. translation of texts from more ancient forms of language to later. It was connected both with evolution of the language, and with change of system of writing - replacement of hieroglyphs with the demotic letter [14, p. 18].

So business, for example, with one of the largest monuments of Ancient Egyptian literature - "The book dead" was.

Thus, existence in Ancient Egypt at various stages of its existence of rather intensive translational activity isn't subject to doubt, but, apparently from the material given above, it in absolute majority of cases carried out information and communicative tasks. Existence of a literary translation in an Ancient Egyptian civilization isn't established though separate observations were made about possibility of any contacts with foreign-language literatures.

1.3 World religions and translation development

It is known that specific feature of the Christian doctrine is the continuity with Hebrew religion - a Judaism which Sacred Book was included into the Christian Bible under a name of the Old Testament. Genre and style features of works entering here differ a big variety as the antiquated canon developed throughout nearly one thousand years - approximately in the XII-II centuries BC. The question of creation of the Greek version of the bible text arose in the III century BC among the Alexandria Jews and as it was noted above, was connected with that circumstance that the knowledge of Hebrew language among the last by this time became a rarity. It should be noted that reasons of religious promotion in this case probably didn't play a crucial role as a whole the missionary orientation for a Judaism is uncharacteristic. At the same time the legend which has arisen round this translation, clearly testifies to aspiration to give to creation of the Greek text of the Bible the character which is going beyond purely intra Judaic affairs, having attributed an initiative of its emergence to the king of the Hellenistic Egypt Ptolemaeus II Filadelf ruling the country in 285-246 BC which allegedly, having learned about existence of the wise book containing Judaic laws, addressed to Judaic high priest Eleazar with the letter where it was spoken: "Wishing to make pleasant to all Jews living on the earth, I decided to start the translation of your law and, having translated it from the Jewish language on Greek, to place this book in the library. Therefore you will arrive well if you choose on six aged husbands from each knee who owing to duration of the occupations by laws are highly experienced in them and could translate in accuracy it. I believe to gain to myself this business the greatest glory" [15, p. 10].

Further the legend narrates that from each of 12 of "Izrailev's knees" was selected on six scientific translators who have arrived to Egypt. Placed on Farose's island, they were deprived of opportunity to communicate with each other but when after completion of work of the manuscript compared, it appeared that all transfers coincided word for word. The created version began to be called later as Septuagint (lat. septuaginta - "seventy"), or translation (figure 72 underwent rounding). It is considered that it included the first part of the Scriptus - Moiseevo's Pentateuch, and all work on the translation of the Judaic Bible was complete by the end of the II century BC.

Septuagint's researchers noted that level and style of transfer of separate parts of the original are very various - from literal reproduction to a paraphrase. Are observed in it and certain deviations from the original caused by a dissimilarity of language systems and cultural tradition.

After Christianity emergence Septuaginta was a part of the Greek Bible as the Old Testament, and was considered so vaticinal, as well as the Jewish original. However in Judaic circles by the first centuries of our era the belief that this version too departs from the original began to extend. Apparently, besides some raid of antique outlook really being present at Septuaginta, played a role and desire to have own Greek text differing from the Christian. Result was emergence in the II century AD translation of Aquila behind which the reputation of the extremely was consolidated, and the II-III centuries of translation of Simmakh relating to a boundary who as it is considered, was characterized by bigger freedom in relation to the original and was guided by norms of translating (Greek) language at preservation as a whole sense of the original. Feodotion's version probably also created in the II century is known also. And rather representing Septuagint's processing. However, it is possible to judge quality of the mentioned translation only by very insignificant fragments and responses of ancient authors as in a full look they didn't reach us. As it is represented, the reason of their loss consisted that the Christian version always there was Septuaginta, and Greek ceased to be used further by Jews, having given way in a synagogue to Hebrew language [16, p. 48].

In the III century AD one of fathers of church - Origen Aleksandr (185? -- 254? ) I compared the Greek versions which were available at its order to the Jewish original and I arranged them in the form of vertical columns - the original text, its transcription the Greek letters and existing translation [16, p. 50]. Later, in the IV century, there were also other editions - Lukiana in Antiokhy and bishop Genzikhy (Isikhy) in Alexandria, gained distribution in different parts of the Christian world.

With propagation of Christianity in territory of Roman empire there was a question on creation of its Latin version. And, if in case of with the Greek translation it was a question only about a reconstruction of an antiquated canon (as originals of books of the New testament have been written it is Greek though already in an antiquity came out with assumptions about initial army editions of some of them), it was necessary to translate here both parts of the Bible. The first variant of the latin Scriptus as assume, was created in the II century by Christians of North Africa and further became known under Italia's name.

However, despite recognition from such large Christian thinkers as Tertullian, Kiprian and Augustine, the text of the called version quite strongly dispersed in a number of the moments from the original, but also, its various manuscripts contained essential different interpretations - circumstance, not only the extremely undesirable, but also directly dangerous to unity of belief. Especially strongly need of creation of the initial Bible in Latin began to be felt in the IV century when the Christianity was approved in the Roman Empire as the state religion.

According to the decision of the head of Catholic Church of that time - father Damasy performance of the specified task was entrusted to Evsevy Sofrony Iyeronim (340 -- 420 ) to which, by own words, it was necessary to reconsider works of the predecessors and to correct that "was badly translated by bad translators, it is even worse corrected by self-confident ignoramuses and it is added or changed by dozing copyists" [16, p. 37].

Work of predecessors did not satisfy the founder of a new version first of all they saw frequently only a surface of the text, instead of its depth. Therefore books of the Scriptus appear in translations much heavier and much less elegant, rather than in the original, representing the sample of high poetry. In connection with noted instant Ieronym specifies a dilemma facing the translator: in fact the literal translation leads to absurdity, and the deviation compelled by indispensability from it is represented infringement of duties of the translator. For the answer to a question, to what way all the same preferred itself Ieronym, researchers address usually to written by it « to the Letter to Pamahiya about the best way of translation » where, characterizing the translational activity (and besides the Bible feather of Ieronym possessed Latin versions of historical work of church historian Evsevija, compositions Origen, theological work Didim), the author emphasized, that, following precepts antique classics (Ciero, Goraciy, Terenciy, Plavta, Ceceliy), it always asked not a speak a word, and an idea - always, except for the Scriptus, « where also the word order is secret ». Differently, from the point of view of Ieronym, it is so high appreciaed it principles antique Roman translational tradition do not approach for a reconstruction of Word God (we shall remind, that sacral texts were not included at all into a field of activity of the Roman translators). Therefore Ieronym challenges not only notorious Akvil, whose literalism meant a virtual extinction of the original, but also those.

However Ieronym well understood, that, despite of all the reasons resulted by it, hardly it will manage to avoid attacks of opponents. « Who from scientists or ignoramuses, - wrote it to daddy Damasiju, - having taken in hands this work and having detected in it already from the first pages of a divergence with the habitual text, that I have dared something will not fall upon me with accusations of a deceit and sacrilege to add, change or correct in old books » [17, p. 12-13].

Avrely Augustine (354-430) noting need of profound knowledge of languages in which originals of Shabby and New Precepts, and also abilities to clear up "dark" (i.e. difficult to understanding) original places "light" were written concerned a problem of translation of the bible text in the theological treatise "About Christian Science" and one of the largest thinkers of a late antique era. Augustine stopped and on such questions, as existence at words of the different values complicating the correct understanding, archaic lexicon, idioms, and realities (names of these or those concrete things, animals, plants, household items, etc.).

The importance is allocated by the author for the principle of comparison of different versions, and points to the advantage brought by literal translations as the last at all the mistakes are more exact by transfer of the original. However unlike Iyeronim Augustine wasn't engaged in translational activity, and his theoretical reflections belonged rather to (interpretation) of bible texts, than translation in the true sense words.

At the same time, alongside with Latin, during this or that period enough key role could play and other languages. The example Old French which has received very wide international propagation not only in England (where after Norman gains is characteristic in this respect and down to the end of XIV century it borrowed dominant positions), but also in other countries. On it writings of Marco Polo and Rustichelo, creating the known book about wanderings the Venetian merchant; it the Florentine lawyer and diplomat Brunetto Latin at a writing of encyclopaedic work « the Book of treasures », including, that used this language - « the most pleasant and the most widespread among people » [18, p.122]. It is natural, that Old French often acted and in a role initial while translating "fiction" - works where it was a question of military feats, battles.

2. History of the translation studies development in middle Ages till today

2.1 History of translation studies development

Let's return to the first and most difficult question of that were put Van Hoof, namely when there was a translation. Certainly, it is hardly possibly to give the exact answer to this question, after all the history of translation is faltering not only in time, but also in space. That fact that we find historical documents, testifying to translational activity in an extreme antiquity in any one corner of the world, doesn't give the sufficient grounds to claim that translation didn't exist even earlier in the other end of the world, but about it didn't remain the certificates. With a known share of confidence it is possible to claim only that translation arose in an extreme antiquity, how there was a need for communication between the people, tribes or still any ethnic groups speaking different languages. Thus, the question of emergence of translation is directly connected with a question of emergence of languages of the world.

Deliberations of the hypothesis and practice of translation arrive back into antiquity and show unusual continuities. The difference that had been strained by the ancient Greeks among metaphase ("literal" translation) and paraphrase adopted by English translator John Dryden (1631-1700), he represented translation like the sensible mixture of these two modes of phraseology selecting, in the target language, "counterparts", or equivalents, designed for the terminology used in the source language:

When (words) come into view... literally elegant, it was damage to the author that they should be misrepresented. But while... what is gorgeous in one [language] is often barbarous, nay occasionally garbage, in another, it would be difficult to limit a translator to the slim range of his author's words: it is sufficient if he took out some appearance which does not vitiate the wisdom.

Dryden cautioned, on the other hand, alongside the license of "imitation", i.e. of personalized translation: "When a painter copies from the life... he has no benefit to alter features and lineaments..."

This universal formulation of the concept of translation -- equivalence -- is possibly as sufficient as any that has been projected ever since Cicero and Horace, in first-century-BCE Rome, notably and literally cautioned alongside translating "word for word" (verbum pro verbo).

In spite of irregular hypothetical diversities, the definite practice of translators has scarcely changed since antiquity. Except for some severe metaphrases in the early Christian period and the Middle Ages, and adapters in a variety of periods (especially pre-Classical Rome, and the 18th century), translators have normally shown prudent flexibility in seeking equivalents -- "literal" where possible, paraphrastic where essential -- for the unique significance and other crucial "values" (e.g., style, verse form, concordance with musical accessory or, in films, with speech articulator movements) as unwavering from situation.

Generally, translators have required to conserve the context it by reproducing the source order of seems, and therefore word order -- when it is needed reinterprets the definite grammatical construction. The grammatical differences between "fixed-word-order" languages (e.g., English, French, and German) and "free-word-order" languages (e.g., Greek, Latin, Polish, and Russian) have been no obstruction in this observe. When an objective language has lacked conditions that are establish in a source language, translators have borrowed them, thus inspiring the target language. Thanks in huge measure to the exchange of calques and loanwords between languages, and to their import from other languages, there are few concepts that are "untranslatable" in the middle of the current European languages.