Cross-Cultural Communication
An Examination of the Errors Committed by Iranian MA Students in their Translation of Advertisement Slogans Based on Keshavarz’s Taxonomy of Errors
Abstract
The present work is an attempt to reveal the nature of translating advertisement slogans over two different cultures by investigating the errors that will occur by Iranian MA translation students in translating a corpus of advertisements from English into Persian and vice versa. The sample of this study consisted of sixty MA students of translation studies who were randomly selected from three Azad university branches (Fars Science and Research branch, Tehran Science and Research and Bandar Abbas Azad University). The instruments used for data collection included a questionnaire consisted of eight advertising slogans in English and seven in Persian for products that were internationally marketed. The statistical procedure to analyze the data was Chi-square procedure to illustrate the frequency and percentage of errors occurrence. The results demonstrated that the ratio of wrong answers in the two languages is not the same. Generally, participants committed more errors in the translation of the Persian advertisement slogans comparing to English ones. Most errors participants committed in Persian translation slogans were related to grammatical and lexical interferences and most errors participants committed in English translation slogans were related to misunderstanding and misinterpretation of semantic and pragmatic aspects of the slogans.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Bassnett, S. (1993). Engendering anew: Translation and cultural politics. In Coulthard and Odber de Baubeta, 1996a, 53-66.
Brown, D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching (4th ed.). New York: Pearson Longman.
Catford, J. C. (1965). A linguistic theory of translation: An essay in applied linguistics. London: Oxford University Press.
Cheng, M., & Zhang, L. (2004). Advertisement in English translation skills. Jinan, China: Shandong University Press.
Cook, G. (2001). The discourse of advertising (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
Concise Oxford Dictionary. (1995). London: Oxford University Press.
Corder, S. P. (1967). The significance of learner’s errors. IRAL, 5, 161-170.
Cuddon, J. A. (1999). The penguin dictionary of literary terms and literary theory. London: Penguin Books Ltd.
Ding, X. (2003). Stylistic features of the advertising slogan. Retrieved 2014, January 10 from http://www.translationdirectory.com/article49.htm
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fuentes, L., A., & Kelly, D. (2000). The translator as mediator in Advertising Spanish Products in English-Speaking Markets. In A. Beeby et al. (Eds.). (2000). Investigating Translation (pp.235-242). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Gass, S., & Selinker, L. (1994). Second language acquisition: An introductory course. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Gditawi, F., Noah, M., & Abdul Ghani, Q. (2011).The relationship between motivation and learning reading and writing in sixth graders in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. Journal of Islamic and Arabic Education, 3(1), 13-28.
Guillard, M. (1998). Translating Ads. Paris: Harmattan.
Hatim, B. (2001). Communication across cultures-translation theory and contrastive text linguistics. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Hendrickson, J. M. (1979). Evaluating spontaneous communication through systematic error analysis. Foreign Language Annals, 12(5), 357-64.
Holmes, J. S. (1972). The name and nature of translation studies. In L. Venuti (Ed.), The translation studies reader (pp.172-185). New York: Routledge.
Holz-Manttari, J. (1984). Translatorisches ha ndeln: Theorie und method. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.
House, J. (1997). Translation quality assessment: A model revisited. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Hurtado, A. A. (1995). La didáctica de la traducción. Evolución y estado actual. X Perspectivas de la Traducción (P. Fernández, Trans., pp.49-74). Valladolid, Universidad de Valladolid.
Keshavarz, M. H. (1993). Contrastive analysis and error analysis. Tehran: Rahnama Publication.
Koller, W. (1979/1989). Equivalence in translation theory. In A. Chesterman (Ed.), Readings in translation theory (pp.99-104). Helsinki: OyFinnLectura Ab.
Kuperman, A., Nadimi S., Oliver S., Ozin, G. A., Garces, J. M., & Olken, M. M. (1993). Non-aqueous synthesis of giant crystals of zeolites and molecular sieves. Nature, 365, 239.
Miremadi, A. (1996). Theories of translation and interpretation. Tehran: SAMT.
Mooij, M. (1994). Translating advertising: Painting the tip of an iceberg (pp.179-98). London and New York: Routledge.
Myers, G. (1997). Words in Ads. London: Arnold.
Nida, E. A. (1964). Towards a science of translating. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Nida, E. A. (2001). The science of translation-problems and methods. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Nida, E. A., & Taber, C. R. (1974). The theory and practice of translation., Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Nomura, M. (2000). Redação de textos de diferentes tipologias: Critérios de produção de texto.
Nord, C. (1991). Scopos, loyalty and translational conventions. Target, 3(1), 91-109.
Nord, C. (1997). A functional typology of translation. Scope and Skopos in translation. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins.
Reiss, K. (1993). Translation criticism: Potentials and limitations (E. F. Rhodes, Trans.). Manchester: St Jerome and American Bible Society.
Rodríguez, M. C. V. (2007). A complex mode of screen translation: The case of advertisements on Spanish television. Linguistica Antverpiensia, (6), 277-294.
Shakir, A. (1995). The translation of advertisements: Registeral and schematic contraints. In Meta, XL, 1.
Sidiropoulous, M. (1998). Offensive language in English-Greek translation. Perspectives, 6(2). 183-199
Tatilon, C. (1990). Le texte publicitaire: Traduction ou adaptation. Meta, 35(1).
Venuti, L. (1998). The scandals of translation. Towards an ethics of difference. London: Routledge.
Vermeer, H. J. (2000). Skopos and commission in translational action. In A. Chesterman (Ed.), Readings in translation (pp.173-187). Finn Lectura, Helsinki, Finland.
Williams, M. (2005). Translation quality assessment: An argumentation-centred approach. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3968/9114
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2017 Gholam Reza Parvizi, Mahdieh Shafipour, Jafar Mashayekh
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Share us to: 
Remind
We are currently accepting submissions via email only.
The registration and online submission functions have been disabled.
Please send your manuscripts to ccc@cscanada.net，or ccc@cscanada.org for consideration. We look forward to receiving your work.
Articles published in Cross-Cultural Communication are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC-BY).
CROSS-CULTURAL COMMUNICATION Editorial Office
Address: 1055 Rue Lucien-L'Allier, Unit #772, Montreal, QC H3G 3C4, Canada.
Telephone: 1-514-558 6138
Website: Http://www.cscanada.net; Http://www.cscanada.org
E-mail:caooc@hotmail.com; office@cscanada.net
Copyright © Canadian Academy of Oriental and Occidental Culture 
