A Relevance Theory Perspective

AFRICA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF PROFESSIONAL STUDIES Translating the Metaphorical Uses of Φῶς ‘light’ in Lugbarati: A Relevance Theory Perspective By Andy Anguandia Alo Gradué en Pédagogie Appliquée - French-Latin; Licencié Agrégé en Pédagogie Appliquée – French; MA - Translation Studies A Dissertation submitted to Africa International University, School of Professional Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Translation Studies Approved: Supervisor ……………………………………. Prof. Regina Blass Second Reader ……………………………….. Dr Maik Gibson External Reader ……………………………… Dr Gene L. Green June 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS………………………………………………………… ii DECLARATION………………………………………………………………… v ABSTRACT……………………………………………………………………… vi DEDICATION…………………………………………………………………… vii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………….……... viii ABBREVIATIONS………………………………………………………………. ix LIST OF FIGURES, GRAPHS, AND TABLES………………………………… xi Chapter 1 GENERAL INTRODUCTION 1.1 Research Problem……………………………….……..…………..…..... 1 1.1.1 Translation of Biblical Metaphor in Lugbara Language ………… 1 1.1.2 Choice of the Biblical Metaphorical Use of φῶς ……….………… 7 1.2 Research Questions……………………………………………………….. 10 1.3 Purpose of the Study……………………………………………………... 11 1.4 Hypothesis……………………………………………………..…………. 11 1.5 Methodology…………………………………………..………………… 14 1.5.1 Theoretical Framework …………………………..…………….. 14 1.5.2 Treatment of Field Data ……………………………..…………. 15 1.5.3 Complementary Approaches ……………………………………... 16 1.6 Delimitations……………………………………………………………. 17 1.7 Contributions…………………………………………………………… 17 1.8 Overview………………………………………………………………... 19 Chapter 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ON METAPHOR 2.1 Metaphor: A Universal Linguistic and Cognitive Phenomenon….……. 20 2.2 Metaphor Theories……………………………..…….……….………… 22 2.2.1 Comparison and Similarity Theory ...……………..…………….. 22 2.2.2 Interaction Theory ….………………………………..…………. 26 2.2.3 Conceptual Metaphor Theory ……………………..……..…….. 28 2.2.4 Blending Theory ……..…………………………..…………….. 31 2.2.5 Conclusion: The Rationale for using RT ………………………… 36 2.3 Biblical Metaphors and Translation …………………………..……….. 37 2.3.1 Introduction …………………………………………………… 37 2.3.2 Studies on the Translation of Metaphor ……………………….. 39 2.3.3 Translation Principles.. …………………………………………. 43 2.3.4 Conclusion: Biblical Metaphor and Translation……………….. 47 2.4 Conclusion: Literature Review on Metaphor ………..…………………... 47 Chapter 3 A BRIEF SURVEY OF RELEVANCE THEORY (RT) 3.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………. 49 3.2 Relevance Theory (RT).......................................................................…... 50 3.2.1 Pre-Relevance Theory Period .………………………………….. 50 3.2.1.1 The Code Model……………………………… …………….……..… 50 3.2.1.2 Implicature and Grice’s Maxims of Conversation …………….. 50 3.2.2 Relevance Theory and Context…………………………………. …... 53 ii 3.2.3 Relevance Theory and Communication …………………..……. 55 3.2.4 Explicature and Implicature…….… ………….…………………. 56 3.2.5 The Relevance-theoretic Comprehension Procedure ………..… 57 3.3 Lexical Pragmatics……………….……………….……….…………….. 58 3.3.1 Introduction: Importance of Lexical Pragmatics for Biblical Concepts …………………………………………..……. 58 3.3.2 Narrowing and Broadening of Concepts……..……………………. 60 3.4 Metaphor in Relevance Theory....……………….……….…………….. 63 3.5 Metarepresentation in Relevance Theory……….……….…………….. 66 3.6 Translation of Metaphor in Relevance Theory….……….…………….. 70 3.7 Conclusions on Brief Survey of RT…………………………………….. 71 (IN ISAIAH (8:23-9:6 אוֹר Chapter 4 METAPHORICAL USE OF AND METAPHORICAL USE OF φῶς IN MATTHEW (4:12-17) 4.1 Introduction.................................................................................................. 74 in Isaiah 8:23-9:6.......................................... 74 אוֹר The Metaphorical Use of 4.2 4.2.1 Issues concerning Isaiah ................................................................ 74 in Dictionaries and Lexica ............. 77 אוֹר Biblical Hebrew Concept 4.2.2 4.2.3 ‘Light’ and Sources of Light in AΝΕ Worldviews ........................ 81 and Sources of Light in Israel ..................................... 89 (אוֹר) Light 4.2.4 and Sources of Light in Isaiah .................................... 93 (אוֹר) Light 4.2.5 in Isaiah 8:23-9:6 ........................................................ 96 (אוֹר) Light 4.2.6 4.2.7 Conclusion ..................................................................................... 108 4.3 The Metaphorical Use of φῶς in Matthew 4:12-17..................................... 109 4.3.1 Introduction ................................................................................... 109 φῶς in the Jewish/אוֹר Metaphorical Use of 4.3.2 Apocalyptic Literature ….…… 109 in the Dead Sea Scrolls ......................... 115 אור Metaphorical Use of 4.3.3 4.3.4 The Use of the OT in the NT ………………………...………….. 119 φῶς125/אוֹר Matthew’s Re-interpretation of the Metaphorical Use of 4.3.5 φῶς in Isa (9:1)) and Matt (4:16)…. 141/ אוֹר Conclusion: Metaphorical Use of 4.4 Chapter 5 FIELD TRANSLATION OF THE METAPHORICAL USE OF ‘LIGHT’ IN LUGBARATI 5.1 Introduction………………………………………………………........... 144 5.2 The Lugbara language……………………………………………….….. 147 5.2.1 Language Family ………...……………………………………… 147 5.2.2 Concept LIGHT in Lugbarati ……………..…………………….. 148 5.3 Field Research methodology………….………………………………….. 153 5.3.1 Survey Design …………………………………………………... 153 5.3.2 Population and Sample ………………………………………….. 155 5.3.3 Instrumentation ….………………………………………………. 159 5.3.4 Variables in the Study …………………………………………… 162 5.3.5 Validity …………………………………………………………. 163 iii 5.4 The treatment of Field Data……………………….…………………….. 164 5.4.1 Percentages and Ratios ………………….………………………. 164 5.4.2 Other Potential Factors Affecting the Choice of Expressions ..... 168 5.4.3 Correlation of Literal versus Metaphorical Use of ‘light’ and Choice of Expressions in Lugbarati………………………… .......... 179 5.5 Conclusion……………………………………...……………………….. 184 AND φῶς IN LUGBARATI אוֹר Chapter 6 THE TRANSLATION OF BASED ON THE FIELD RESEARCH RESULT 6.1 Introduction ................................................................................................ 185 6.2 Relevance of the Distinction Literal versus Metaphorical Use of Expression for Translation: Case of ÀCI versus DÌZÀ ........................... 188 6.3 Cases of Translation and Distinction of Literal & Metaphorical Use…..... 193 6.4 Application of Translation Principles to ÀCI versus DÌZÀ....................... 198 6.5 Conclusion................................................................................................... 203 Chapter 7 GENERAL CONCLUSIONS 7.1 Summary............................................................................................ 207 7.1.1 Biblical Metaphorical Use of φῶς ……………………….…… …... 207 7.1.2 Translation of the Metaphorical Use of φῶς in Lugbarati …….. 208 7.1.3 RT Account of Metaphor ………………………………………… 209 7.2 Prospective: Directions for Future Research…..................................... 210 7.2.1 Linguistic Research …………………………………………….. 210 7.2.2 Metaphorical Use of φῶς ……………………..………………… 211 APPENDICES…….………………………………………………..……. 213 REFERENCE LIST….…….…………………..………………..……..... 223 iv DECLARATION I hereby declare that this whole thesis, unless specifically indicated to the contrary in the text by reference, is my own original work and has not been submitted to any other institution for academic degree. The views presented herein are not necessarily those of the Africa International University or the supervisors. Andy A. Alo June, 2011. v ABSTRACT φῶς in the biblical texts of/אוֹר This dissertation analyzes the metaphorical use of Isaiah (8:23-9.1) and Matthew (4:12-17) with the aim of evaluating its translation in Lugbarati (a Nilo-Saharan Language of northeastern Democratic Republic of Congo [DRC]). The theoretical perspective used is Relevance Theory developed by Sperber and Wilson. Quantitative method is used for treating the translation data. The threefold conclusion reached goes as follows: φῶς in Isaiah and Matthew is the/אוֹר a) The biblical metaphorical use of) expression of justice and peace in the existence of the people of God. The overarching concept is restoration from bondage of evil in its abstract or spiritual state, as well as in its materialization in socio-political settings; (b) The translation of this metaphor in Lugbarati reQuires a consideration of the distinction between ‘literal’ versus ‘metaphorical’ use of the linguistic expression. The and φῶς is best translated in Lugbarati by the expression dìzà אוֹר metaphorical use of which is the one used by a significant percentage of mother-tongue speakers in the translation survey. Illustrations in Swahili and Lingala, other languages, do attest such variation of expressions for translating the literal sense versus the metaphorical one. (c) RT remains a valid tool for analyzing metaphors. However, the RT account of metaphor developed by Wilson needs further development. My Quantitative research has proved that the linguistic representation of a broadened concept can be linguistically represented by another expression. Thus, the broadened concept LIGHT* in Lugbarati is linguistically represented by dìzà , while the non-broadened LIGHT in Lugbarati is linguistically represented by àci. The Lugbarati speakers have the tendency to select one of the synonyms of the expression ‘light’ for metaphorical use, and the other(s) is (are) reserved for literal use(s). This is a new avenue of research that focuses on the linguistic representation of a concept

Load more