• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

site logo
The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language
search
  • Home
  • About TESL-EJ
  • Vols. 1-15 (1994-2012)
    • Volume 1
      • Volume 1, Number 1
      • Volume 1, Number 2
      • Volume 1, Number 3
      • Volume 1, Number 4
    • Volume 2
      • Volume 2, Number 1 — March 1996
      • Volume 2, Number 2 — September 1996
      • Volume 2, Number 3 — January 1997
      • Volume 2, Number 4 — June 1997
    • Volume 3
      • Volume 3, Number 1 — November 1997
      • Volume 3, Number 2 — March 1998
      • Volume 3, Number 3 — September 1998
      • Volume 3, Number 4 — January 1999
    • Volume 4
      • Volume 4, Number 1 — July 1999
      • Volume 4, Number 2 — November 1999
      • Volume 4, Number 3 — May 2000
      • Volume 4, Number 4 — December 2000
    • Volume 5
      • Volume 5, Number 1 — April 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 2 — September 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 3 — December 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 4 — March 2002
    • Volume 6
      • Volume 6, Number 1 — June 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 2 — September 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 3 — December 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 4 — March 2003
    • Volume 7
      • Volume 7, Number 1 — June 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 2 — September 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 3 — December 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 4 — March 2004
    • Volume 8
      • Volume 8, Number 1 — June 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 2 — September 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 3 — December 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 4 — March 2005
    • Volume 9
      • Volume 9, Number 1 — June 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 2 — September 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 3 — December 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 4 — March 2006
    • Volume 10
      • Volume 10, Number 1 — June 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 2 — September 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 3 — December 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 4 — March 2007
    • Volume 11
      • Volume 11, Number 1 — June 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 2 — September 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 3 — December 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 4 — March 2008
    • Volume 12
      • Volume 12, Number 1 — June 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 2 — September 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 3 — December 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 4 — March 2009
    • Volume 13
      • Volume 13, Number 1 — June 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 2 — September 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 3 — December 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 4 — March 2010
    • Volume 14
      • Volume 14, Number 1 — June 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 2 – September 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 3 – December 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 4 – March 2011
    • Volume 15
      • Volume 15, Number 1 — June 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 2 — September 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 3 — December 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 4 — March 2012
  • Vols. 16-Current
    • Volume 16
      • Volume 16, Number 1 — June 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 2 — September 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 3 — December 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 4 – March 2013
    • Volume 17
      • Volume 17, Number 1 – May 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 2 – August 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 3 – November 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 4 – February 2014
    • Volume 18
      • Volume 18, Number 1 – May 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 2 – August 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 3 – November 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 4 – February 2015
    • Volume 19
      • Volume 19, Number 1 – May 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 2 – August 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 3 – November 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 4 – February 2016
    • Volume 20
      • Volume 20, Number 1 – May 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 2 – August 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 3 – November 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 4 – February 2017
    • Volume 21
      • Volume 21, Number 1 – May 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 2 – August 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 3 – November 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 4 – February 2018
    • Volume 22
      • Volume 22, Number 1 – May 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 2 – August 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 3 – November 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 4 – February 2019
    • Volume 23
      • Volume 23, Number 1 – May 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 2 – August 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 3 – November 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 4 – February 2020
    • Volume 24
      • Volume 24, Number 1 – May 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 2 – August 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 3 – November 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 4 – February 2021
    • Volume 25
      • Volume 25, Number 1 – May 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 2 – August 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 3 – November 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 4 – February 2022
    • Volume 26
      • Volume 26, Number 1 – May 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 2 – August 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 3 – November 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 4 – February 2023
    • Volume 27
      • Volume 27, Number 1 – May 2023
      • Volume 27, Number 2 – August 2023
      • Volume 27, Number 3 – November 2023
      • Volume 27, Number 4 – February 2024
    • Volume 28
      • Volume 28, Number 1 – May 2024
      • Volume 28, Number 2 – August 2024
      • Volume 28, Number 3 – November 2024
      • Volume 28, Number 4 – February 2025
    • Volume 29
      • Volume 29, Number 1 – May 2025
      • Volume 29, Number 2 – August 2025
      • Volume 29, Number 3 – November 2025
      • Volume 29, Number 4 – February 2026
  • Books
  • How to Submit
    • Submission Info
    • Ethical Standards for Authors and Reviewers
    • TESL-EJ Style Sheet for Authors
    • TESL-EJ Tips for Authors
    • Book Review Policy
    • Media Review Policy
    • TESL-EJ Special issues
    • APA Style Guide
  • Editorial Board
  • Support

Translating by Factors

March 1998 — Volume 3, Number 2

Translating by Factors

Christoph Gutknecht and Lutz J. Rolle (1996)
Albany, NY: State University of New York Press
ISBN 0-7914-2957-1 (cloth); ISBN 0-7914-2958-X (paper)
Pp. xvi + 346
US $62.50; US $23.95

The complexity of translation, the number of factors involved, is enormous. Capitulate to this complexity? No translator can afford this if he or she wants to continue in the profession. As a way out, Professors Gutknecht and Lutz propose to make complexity transparent by systematizing translation factors.

Systematizing translation factors first involves pointing out factor dimensions and then finding out the individual factors and their effects. This is exactly what they propose to do in this book. By limiting their case study to modals in English and German, the authors have chosen an effective way to deal with their analysis of the syntactic, semantic, pragmatic, stylistic, discourse analysis, and text linguistic factors involved in describing the meaning and usage of modals in both German and English. The almost 800 numbered examples discussed are mainly English-German sentence pairs. It seemed to be natural to present the modals and their equivalents within sentences, because we speak and write in sentences, and it is sentence by sentence that the translator translates.

From chapter 2 to chapter 6, the classical semiotic dimensions of syntax, semantics, and pragmatics are examined. The authors explore linguistic factors according to the following categories: formal factors, such as syntax and morphology (word order, ellipsis); semantic factors (polysemy, voice, tense); and nonlinguistic factors such as pragmatic factors (illocutionary force, perlocution, factuality, situation, and culture). Chapter 7 deals with essential factors of the translation situation, such as the speaker and his or her direct relevance to the translator. Having focused on each factor individually to demonstrate its relevance as a translation factor, the last chapter is devoted to other topics central to translation theory, such as the notion of equivalence and the distinction between translation and adaptation.

This study serves to establish a range of factors that can be applied to the preliminary analysis of modals as used in a given source language (SL) text, in order to establish a hierarchy of factors and factor sets and of relations between factors and their sets, that could orient the translator’s choice of possible semantic, pragmatic and stylistic meanings to be transferred to a given target language (TL) text. The authors illustrate the factor approach with reference to one single linguistic phenomenon, English [-1-] and German modals. The advantage of this unified perspective is obvious. Each translator is repeatedly faced with translating specific linguistic items. Focusing on a small group of items occurring frequently enables them to point out the many factors relevant to their translation.

It is common sense to say that the very same factors determining translation may also be drawn upon as criteria for judging the adequacy of translation. The translator’s singling out of a specific variant may depend on various factors such as: a) the type of text to be translated; b) the extent to which the SL text bears stylistic markings; c) the intended TL audience; d) the extent to which the translator can comprehend the SL text and identify with it; e) the translator’s stylistic preferences and his or her ability to recognize and handle stylistic registers. Therefore the factor approach gives translation criticism an objective yardstick for assessing the quality of translations.

The authors’ linguistic study of modals serves as the launching pad for a complete presentation of factors to be considered in the translation of modal constructions. This study is so thorough that it could be usefully applied (as the authors themselves indicate) to the development of natural language processing (NLP) rules for computational linguistics parsers of modals (in English and German).

But their ambition is not to cover all possible translation factors existing, nor do they intend to deal with all aspects relating to each modal. In view of the complexity of their subject matter, they illustrate a number of translation factors by way of some examples. Their presentation is geared more toward inspiring further research in this field than toward compiling an encyclopedia of translation factors.

Their eclectic perspective is also reflected in their reference to previous studies. It is not their intention to give a full overview of the hundreds of publications on modality or of those in the field of translation studies. The German modals especially will be treated largely on the basis of the competence of the authors as native speakers of German.

This study is geared toward making the complexity of the translation situation transparent by presenting translation factors in a systematic way. The authors consider reading this book an exercise for becoming familiar with what might be called factor thinking; that is, the habit of breaking up a complex (translation) task into its smaller, more manageable units–its factors. Naturally, this factor approach will be most useful to those who have not yet acquired full translation competence. Hence their target group is students of translating and interpreting, as well as intermediate and advanced learners of German or English. [-2-]

The possible applications of this study are multiple. It could be very relevant to the study of modals in linguistics. In the case of translation it could serve, as the authors indicate, to distinguish factors in a) the training of translators and interpreters, b) the assessment of quality and adequacy of translations, and/or c) determining the translation of certain text classes.

Experts in the current state of translation studies will find in this book a very thorough, informed, and balanced review of the most important classical and recent texts on translation, as well as an especially apt application of these studies to sets of case studies of individual texts that are marked by modals, framed by a well-defined and elaborated general study of modals.

Non-experts will find a very clear introduction to classical and more recent aspects of translation theory and studies, with all of the relevant bibliography and very clear and understandable examples.

I would like to briefly recap what we consider to be the most important theoretical points the authors have made.

First, success of any translation may be gauged in terms of the extent to which the translator has successfully taken into account the factors demanded by the client. Thus, translation factors turn out to be the felicity conditions for each act of translating.

Second, factors are the guidelines for translation. Such guidelines must necessarily be expressly given by the client for each translation being commissioned because no one a priori translation principle could be said to be invariably valid for every commission.

Times have changed, and dogmatic statements by translatologists have given way to multifarious factor demands made by clients according to different needs on different occasions. But the principle has remained the same: No translator can translate without reference to a particular factor set that he or she is expected to go by in a given case.

This leads to the conclusion that translating by factors is in fact inevitable; throughout the ages each translator has invariably been doing it. Translating inevitably means translating by factors.

Juan Bosco Camón
IES High School Ibaéz Martin
<pgonza2@platea.pntic.mec.es>

© Copyright rests with authors. Please cite TESL-EJ appropriately.

Editor’s Note: Dashed numbers in square brackets indicate the end of each page in the paginated ASCII version of this article, which is the definitive edition. Please use these page numbers when citing this work.

[-3-]

© 1994–2026 TESL-EJ, ISSN 1072-4303
Copyright of articles rests with the authors.