A Boundary among Reference, Sense and Meaning: An Essence for Translating Rhetorical Statements

Article Sidebar

View the PDF File
Published: Jun 30, 2024
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14500/kujhss.v7n1y2024.pp557-568
Keywords:
Reference, Sense, Conceptual Meaning, Contextual Meaning, Rhetorical Translation ئاماژە, هزر, مانای چەمکی , مانای کۆنتێکست, دەربڕینی ڕەوانبێژی المرجع, المعنى, المعنى الادراكي, المعنى السياقي, العبارات البلاغية

Main Article Content

Bikhtiyar O. Fattah
Department of English, Faculty of Education, Koya University, Kurdistan Region, Iraq
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3283-3042

Abstract

This study, which examines the contributions of the translators’ awareness of the boundary among the notions reference, sense and meaning in translating rhetorical statements, aims at identifying the notions of reference, sense and meaning and how the translators’ familiarity with a boundary among these concepts would be helpful in the process of translating rhetorical statements. This process is a very challenging one because the translation of such types of statements could not be fulfilled without translators’ familiarity with the three essential levels of meaning which are: referential meaning (reference), conceptual meaning (sense), and contextual meaning (meaning). This study employs a qualitative approach to determine the influence of translators’ familiarity with the boundary among these notions and their contributions in the process of translating rhetorical statements. It is qualitative for having an experimental group and a controlling group of translators to investigate the influences of being familiar with the notions of reference, sense and meaning on their translation.  One of the significant findings of this study is that Kurdish translators who are not familiar with the boundary among these notions usually resort to referential meaning (reference) and conceptual meaning (sense) in translating rhetorical statements; however, after being familiarized with these notions and their distinctive features, they effectively employ contextual meaning (meaning) in translating rhetorical statements and arrive at the precise and understandable translation of them.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Fattah, B. O. . (2024) “A Boundary among Reference, Sense and Meaning: An Essence for Translating Rhetorical Statements ”, Koya University Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 7(1), pp. 557-568. doi: 10.14500/kujhss.v7n1y2024.pp557-568.
Issue
Vol. 7 No. 1 (2024): Issue Twelve
Section
Articles
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Author Biography

Bikhtiyar O. Fattah, Department of English, Faculty of Education, Koya University, Kurdistan Region, Iraq

Bikhtiyar Omar Fattah is an assistant professor of Linguistics & English Language at the Department of English Language/ Faculty of Education/ Koya University.
He was born on September 1, 1981 in Koya / Erbil. He got B.A. degree at Sallahaddin University, and got M.A. at Koya University. He attended and participated in many national and international English language and English linguistic courses, conferences, workshops and training courses; namely at: Huddersfield University, Sheffield Hallam University, Loughborough University/ the United Kingdom; Virginia Tech / USA; and Bilkent University/ Turkey, in addition to the almost all university in the Iraqi Kurdistan Region.

His research interests focus on Sociolinguistics, Discourses Analysis, Politeness and Applied Linguistics. He is a member of the Politeness Research Group.

References

Allan, K., 1986. Linguistic Meaning. London: Routledge.

Al-Sulaimaan, M., 2016. Semantics and Pragmatics. Erbil: Haval Press.

Ankersmit, F., 2012. Meaning, truth, and reference in historical representation. New York: Cornell University Press.

Carl, W., 1994. Frege's theory of sense and reference: its origin a scope. Cambridge: Cambridge, University Press.

Cruse, D.A., 1990. Language, meaning and sense: semantics. An encyclopaedia of language, pp.139-172.

Darwish, A., 2010. Elements of translation. Melbourne: Writescope Publishers.

Dave, L., 2008. Subliminal Persuasion. New Jersy: John Wiley & Sons.

Donnellan, K.S., 1972. Proper names and identifying descriptions. In Semantics of natural language. Dordrecht: Springer. pp. 356-379.

Fattah, B.O., 2020. Giving and interpreting compliments in English and Kurdish: Private-sector workplace as a sample. Koya University Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 3(1), pp.21-30. https://doi.org/10.14500/kujhss.v3n1y2020.pp21-30

Fattah, B.O., 2023. Novel Metaphor Recognition, Interpretation and Construction: Barriers Face Kurds as Non-native English Speakers. Koya University Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 6(1), pp.259-270. https://doi.org/10.14500/kujhss.v6n1y2023.pp259-270

Frisch, J. C., 1969. Extension and Comprehension in Logic. New York: Philosophical Library.

Green, C.R., 2005. Originalism and the Sense-Reference Distinction. Louis ULJ, (50), pp.555-629.

Kripke, S., 1972. Naming and necessity in Semantics of Natural Language (Doctoral dissertation, ed. D. Davidson and G. Harman (Dordrecht: Reidel).(1980). Naming and Necessity). pp. 253-355.

Leeds, S., 1978. Theories of references and truth. Erkenntnis, 13(1), pp. 111-129.

Linsky, L., 1967. Referring. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Lycan, W. G., 2008. Philosophy of language: A Contemporary Introduction. London: Routledge.

Lyons, J.,1977. Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

McGinn, C., 1987. Wittgenstein on meaning: an interpretation and evaluation. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Miller, A., 2007. Philosophy of language. London: Taylor & Francis.

Molina, L. and Hurtado Albir, A., 2002. Translation techniques revisited: A dynamic and functionalist approach. Meta, 47(4), pp.498-512.

Newmark, P., 1988. A textbook of translation (Vol. 66, pp. 1-312). New York: Prentice hall.

Nöth, W., 1995. Handbook of Semiotics. Delhi: Indiana University Press.

Putnam, H., 1979. Reference and understanding. In Meaning and use. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 199- 217.

Quine, W., 1981. Theories and Things. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press.

Stokhof, M., 2008. The architecture of meaning: Wittgenstein’s Tractatus and formal semantics. In Wittgenstein's enduring arguments (pp. 223-256). Routledge.

Trebaul, D., 2012. The early Wittgenstein's truth-conditional conception of sense in the light of his criticism of Frege. In Wittgenstein's footsteps, Mikael Karlsson, Reykjavik, Iceland.

Yankah, K., 1994). Rhetoric: Anthropological Perspectives, In R. Asher and J. M.Y.Simpson. Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. Oxford: Pergamon.