Jakobson discusses his three different natures of translation: intralingual translation, interlingual translation, and intersemiotic translation. He further explains his notion of intralingual translation by explaining the concepts of a bachelor and celibate. Both are considered to be unmarried men; however, while all celibates can be considered bachelors, not all bachelors are celibate. We phrase these code-units to help others understand the meaning of another code-unit. Jakobson then claims that there can never be a full equivalence for code-units when using interlingual translation, or “interpretation of verbal signs by means of some other language.” Therefore, it is noted that we are required to translate the entire meaning because a simple code-unit cannot possibly suffice. If this is true, then does a bilingual dictionary every accurately serve its function if only single-code unit translations are provided? Or is it always necessary to provide more background into the interpretation of the word? For example, wordreference.com provides explanations of each translated term that would be appropriate in different situations or parts of a sentence.
My name is Kendall Hughes and I am a senior at Bucknell University. I am a Psychology and Sociology major. I have taken French courses since my freshman year of high school. I also lived abroad in Germany for two years. I am interested in translation studies because I would like to further understand culture differences and how language can contribute to a barrier of understanding among people. View all posts by Kendall Hughes