Contrastive terminology: semitic, anglo-germanic and latin concept building through complex terms. (avoiding one-way method procedures in translation

This paper aims to present a contrastive approach between three different ways of building concepts after proving the similar syntactic possibilities that coexist in terms. However, from the semantic point of view we can see that each language family has a different distribution in meaning. But the most important point we try to show is that the differences found in the psychological process when communicating concepts should guide the translator and the terminologist in the target text production and the terminology planning process. Differences between languages in the information transmission process are due to the different roles the different types of knowledge play. We distinguish here the analytic-descriptive knowledge and the analogical knowledge among others. We also state that none of them is the best when determining the correctness of a term, but there has to be adequacy criteria in the selection process. This concept building or term building success is important when looking at the linguistic map of the information society.

Finnish Kullervo and chinese martial arts stories

Introduction: There are many important Finnish plays but, due to language barrier, Finnish drama is seldom exported, particularly to Hong Kong and China.. Objective: To find out differences in mentality between the Finnish and Chinese peoples by comparing the partially localized Chinese translation of Aleksis Kivi’s tragedy, Kullervo, with genuine Chinese martial arts literature. Methodology: 1. Chapman Chen has translated the Finnish classic, Kullervo, directly from Finnish into Chinese and published it in 2005. 2. In Chen’s Chinese translation, cultural markers are domesticated. On the other hand, values, characterization, plot, and rhythm remain unchanged. 3. According to Gideon Tory, the translator has to strike a golden mean between the norms of the source language and the target language. 4. Lau Tingci lists and explicates the essential components of martial arts drama. 5. According to Ehrnrooth’s “Mentality”, equality is the most important value in Finnish culture. Findings: i. Finland emphasizes independence while China emphasizes bilateral relationships. ii. The Finnish people loves freedom, but Gai Sizung argues that the Chinese people is slavish. iii. Finns are mature while many Chinese are, according to Sun Lung-kee (“The Deep Structure of Chinese Culture”; “The Deep Structure of Chinese Sexuality”), fixated at the oral and anal stages. iv. Finnish society highly values equality while Chinese interpersonal relationships are extremely complicated and hierachical. If Kullervo were a genuine Chinese kungfu story, the plot would be much more convoluted. Conclusion: The differences between Finnish and Chinese mentalities are so significant that partially localized or adapted Chinese translations of Finnish drama may still be able to introduce Finnish culture to the Chinese audience.

Telling stories of culture through literature

Grounded on Raymond Williams‘s definition of knowable community as a cultural tool to analyse literary texts, the essay reads the texts D.H.Lawrence wrote while travelling in the Mediterranean (Twilight in Italy, Sea and Sardinia and Etruscan Places) as knowable communities, bringing to the discussion the wide importance of literature not only as an object for aesthetic or textual readings, but also as a signifying practice which tells stories of culture. Departing from some considerations regarding the historical development of the relationship between literature and culture, the essay analyses the ways D. H. Lawrence constructed maps of meaning, where the readers, in a dynamic relation with the texts, apprehend experiences, structures and feelings; putting into perspective Williams‘s theory of culture as a whole way of life, it also analyses the ways the author communicates and organizes these experiences, creating a space of communication and operating at different levels of reality: on the one hand, the reality of the whole way of Italian life, and, on the other hand, the reality of the reader who aspires to make sense and to create an interpretative context where all the information is put, and, also, the reality of the writer in the poetic act of writing. To read these travel writings as knowable communities is to understand them as a form that invents a community with no other existence but that of the literary text. The cultural construction we find in these texts is the result of the selection, and interpretation done by D.H.Lawrence, as well as the product of the author‘s enunciative positions, and of his epistemological and ontological filigrees of existence, structured by the conditions of possibility. In the rearticulation of the text, of the writer and of the reader, in a dynamic and shared process of discursive alliances, we understand that Lawrence tells stories of the Mediterranean through his literary art.