Author :
Abstract
Bu makalede, cümle öğeleri ve kendi arasında soyut ve somut anlam ilişkileri kurmaya yarayan edatların sebep olduğu dilsel ve anlamsal aktarım sorunları ele alınmıştır. Çevirinin temel görevlerinden ve aynı zamanda zorluklarından biri, çevrilecek nesnelerdeki anlam belirsizliğini giderme işidir. Edat çevirilerinde karşılaşılabilecek anlam belirsizliği sorunu edatların çokanlamlı yapılarından kaynaklanmaktadır. Bu durumda, birbirinden farklı iki dil olan Türkçe ve İngilizce dillerinde sıklıkla kullanılan edatların çevirisi söz konusu olduğunda, çevirmen nasıl bir yol izlemelidir? Hangi tür edatlar yetersiz çevrilmektedir? Edat çevirileri sırasında ne tür hatalar yapılmaktadır? Dilsel, kültürel ve bilişsel faktörlerden hangisi edat çevirisiyle ilgili kararları en çok etkilemektedir? Bu çalışmanın amacı, edat çevirileri yapılırken karşılaşılan bu tür sorunlara ışık tutmak olacaktır. Çalışma kapsamında ayrıca, edatların kullanım amacı ve işlevi doğrultusunda anlam aktarımına nasıl yön verdiği tartışılmıştır.
Keywords
Abstract
This paper is part of the research into the study of linguistic and semantic translation problems caused by prepositions, the function of which is known to establish a concrete and abstract relation of semantic compatibility with and between the other lexical items within and across the sentence. One of the primary duties and hurdles of translation is to remove the ambiguity in what is to be translated. The problem of ambiguity to be faced about translating prepositions stems from the polysemous structures of prepositions. In this case, where the translation of the often-used prepositions in two different languages, say, Turkish and English, is at stake, what strategy ought the translator to follow? What kinds of prepositions are rendered inadequately? What kinds of translational mistakes are expected in translating prepositions? Of the linguistic, cultural or personal competence factors, which one is expected to influence the most the translational decisions with regards to prepositions? The aim of this paper is to shed light on these kinds of problems likely to be encountered when translating prepositions. In this scope, besides, how prepositions might dominate the meaning transfer in line with the intended use and function of prepositions will be under discussion.
Keywords
- Aksan, D. (1979). Her yönüyle dil: ana çizgileriyle dilbilim. TDK Yay. 2. Baskı. Ankara.
- Armstrong, N. (2005). Translation, linguistics, culture: a French English handbook. Multilingual Matters LTD.
- Austermühl, F. (2001). Electronic tools for translators: translation practices explained. St Jerome Publishing. 170.
- Ballesteros, L. ve Croft,B. (1998). Resolving Ambiguity For Cross-Language. Cambridge University Press
- Bayrav, S.(1969). Yapısal Dilbilim. İstanbul Üniversitesi Yay. 1436. 4-5.
- Berk, L. (1999). English syntax: from word to discourse. Oxford University Pres.
- Cadiot, P. (2002). “Schematics and motifs in the semantics of preposition”. (Yay. haz.) S. Feigenbaum ve D. Kurzon. Prepositions in their syntactic, semantic and pragmatic context içinde. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 41-57. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.50.03cad
- Carter, R. ve McCarthy, M. (2006). Cambridge grammar of English. Cambridge University Press. 462.
- Catford, J.C (1965). A linguistic theory of translation: an essay in applied linguistics. OUP.
- Catford, J.C. (2000). “Translation Shifts. Lawrence”, V. (Yay.haz.). The translation studies reader içinde. London:Routledge.141-147.
- Dahlmeier, D., Schultz, T. ve Ng, Hwee T. (06.08.2009). “Joint learning of preposition senses and semantic roles of prepositional phrases”. Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 450–458, Singapore.
- Dizier, P. Saint (2006). “Introduction to the syntax and semantics of prepositions”. (Yay. haz.) Dizier, P. Saint Syntax and Semantics of Prepositions içinde. 29. Toulouse.
- Eduskun, H. (1985). Türk dilbilgisi. Remzi Kitapevi.
- Efendioğlu, S. (2006): “Cümle menşeli edatlar (prepositions originated from sentence)”. A. Ü. Türkiyat Araştırmaları Enstitüsü Dergisi. 31. Erzurum.
- Erguvanlı, Eser E. (1984). “The function of worf order in Turkish Grammar”. University of California Publications: Linguistics.106. 12-13.
- Fowler, H.W. (2009). A dictionary of modern English usage. Oxford Press.
- Gasset, J. Ortega y (2000). The Misery and Splendor of Translation. (Yay.haz.) Venuti L.
- Geoffrey, N. Leech. (2006). A glossary of English grammar. Edingburg University Press.
- Geograffy, N. Leech ve Svartvik, J. (2002). A communicative grammar of English.3. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
- Göktürk, A. (1994). Çeviri: dillerin dili. Yapı Kredi Yayınları. ISBN:978-975-363-295-9
- Greenbaum, S. ve Quirk, R. (1988) A university grammar of English. Longman.
- Grubic, B.(13.11.2004). Those problematic english prepositions. CFI-BACI Conference.
- Guillaume, G. (1984) : Foundations for a science of language. John Benjamins Publishing Company:Amsterdam / Philadelphia. 31.
- Hacıeminoğlu, N. (1992) Türk dilinde edatlar. MEB. Yay.
- Hendricks, M. (2010). “Consciousness-raising and prepositions”. English teaching forum içinde 48 (2). 24-29.
- Hutchins, W. John. ve Somers, H. L. (1992). An introduction to machine translation. Academic Press Limited: London. (ISBN: 0-12-362830-X)
- Jackendoff, R. (1973). Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge. MIT Press.
- Jackendoff, R. (1983). Semantics and cognition. MIT Press: Cambridge.
- Jackendoff, R. (1987). “The status of thematic relations in linguistic theory”. Linguistic inquiry içinde. 18(3). 369-411.MIT Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4178548
- Korkmaz, Z. (2003). Gramer terimleri sözlüğü. Ankara: TDK Yayınları.
- Lebas, F. (2002). “The theoretical status of prepositions: the case of the prospective use of “in”. Feigenbaum, S. ve Kurzon”, D. (Yay. haz.) Prepositions in their syntactic, semantic and pragmatic Context içinde .Typological Studies in Language (TSL) 50.
- Leonard, T. (2000). Towards a cognitive semantics. Concept structuring systems.2. MIT Press: Boston.
- Lewis, G.L.(1967). Turkish Grammar. Oxford University Press: Oxford. 28-40.
- Lindstormberg, S. (2010). English prepositions explained. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
- Luraghi,S. (1984): “On the meaning of prepositions and cases: the expression of semantic roles in Ancient Greek”. Studies in Language Companion Series (SLCS). John Benjamins Publishing Company
- M. O'Dowd, E. (1998). Prepositions and particles in English: a discourse-functional account. OUP.16-19. ISBN-13: 978-0195111026.
- Martinet, A. (1962). A functional view of language. Oxford.
- Martinet, A. (1998). İşlevsel genel dilbilim, çev: Berke Vardar. İstanbul: Multilingual.
- O’Hara T. ve Wiebe, J. (2003). “Preposition semantic classification via penn treebank and framenet”. Proceedings of the Seventh Conference on Natural Language Learning at HLT-NAACL. 4, 79-76.
- Palmer, F.R. (1976). “Semantics: A new outline”. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500007387
- Polinsky, M. (1995). “Non-terms in complex predicates: from incorporation to reanalysis. (Yay. haz.) Clifford, S.B., Dziwirek K. ve Gerdts D. Grammatical relations: theoretical approaches to empirical questions”, 359–390. Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
- Pullum, G. K. ve Huddleston, R. (2005) A student’s introduction to the English Grammar. chapter: 7. CambridgeUniversity Press.
- Radford, A. (1997). Syntactic theory and the structure of English: a minimalist approach. Cambridge. ISBN: 9780521477079
- Radford, A. , Atkinson, M. ve Britain, D. (1999) “Linguistics: An introduction. Cambridge.
- Saussure, F. (1959) De course in general linguistics. London: Duckworth.119.
- Talmy, L. (1983). “How language structures space”. Herbert L. PickJr. ve Linda P. Acredolo (Yay. haz.) Spatial orientation: theory, research, and application içinde. New York: Plenum Press, 225–282.
- Talmy, L. (1985). “Lexicalization patterns: semantic structure in lexical form”. (Yay. haz.) Shopen, T. Language typology and syntactic description. Cilt 3, Grammatical categories and the lexicon içinde. Cambridge, 57-149.
- Talmy, L. (2000). “Towards a cognitive semantics”. 2. Boston:MIT Press. The Translation Studies Reader içinde. London: Routledge. 49 -65.
- Toury, G . (1980). In search of a theory of translation. Tel Aviv University.
- Tyler, A. ve Evans, V. (2001). “Reconsidering prepositional polysemy networks: the case of over”. (Yay. haz.) Linguistic Society of America Language içinde. 77(4):724-765. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2001.0250
- Tyler, A. ve Evans, V. (2003). The semantics of English prepositions: spatial scenes, cognition and the experiential basis of meaning. New York ve Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Zwarts, J. (1997). Lexical and functional properties of prepositions ( Lexicalische und grammatische eignschafen prapositionaler elemente). Tübingen, Max Niemeyer Verlag. Series:Linguistische Arbeiten. 371.
