Masarykova univerzita Filozofická fakulta Katedra anglistiky a amerikanistiky Magisterská diplomová práce

5. Explicitation, implicitation and non-literary texts—an observational research

The texts included in the corpus were searched for the occurrences of translation-inherent explicitation and implicitation⁹ (as well as for other potential translation universals) manually, the shifts were then categorized according to which component of meaning from the Hallidayian framework is explicitated, and assessed quantitatively. Consequently, the results were transferred into tables and graphs and analyzed.

Apart from the criteria for delimiting explicitation and implicitation stated above, in chapter 1, the following criteria were applied: if a completely new idea occurred that was—to our knowledge—not present in the original, not even implicitly, the shift was labelled as addition; on the other hand, if a whole clause or a part of the clause was left out or disappeared and could not be inferred from the context, the shift was considered to be omission. If some layers of meaning of a word got lost and could not be derived from the context, the shift was understood to be simplification at the level of lexis. Stylistic simplification and simplification at the level of syntax, though, were much more common: complex sentences were divided into more simple or compound ones in the translation. If the figures of speech were replaced with neutral expressions in the target text, the shift was marked as normalization.

Addition, omission, simplification, normalization as well as pragmatic and optional explicitation and implicitation, however, are not of the main interest in the present study and will, therefore, be mentioned only marginally in connection with each of the texts. Explicitation and implicitation will be analyzed in detail. Nevertheless, we have to bear in mind that the corpus is not too large and the numbers of occurrences of individual categories of explicitation and implicitation used for the analysis are very small. The conclusions presented below can only be applicable to the corpus given. Had longer samples of texts been chosen, the results could be fundamentally different.

5.1 Universals in Hradilek’s translations

5.1.1 Explicitation and implicitation and The Diversity of Life

In the analysis of the style of Wilson’s text and its translation by Hradilek an assumption was made: normalizations, omissions, simplifications and implicitations will not be rare. This assumption was confirmed: 8 instances of normalization (compared to 2, 1 and 1 in the other texts), 14 of omission, 33 of simplification (compared to 11, 13 and 16 in the other texts), and 49 instances of implicitation were identified. Nevertheless, explicitation was also extremely frequent; there were 138 instances of explicitation, which was the highest number among all four texts.

Graph 1. Types of explicitation and implicitation in The Diversity of Life¹⁰

• 
  For another way to visualize the tenuousness of life, imagine yourself on a journey upward from the center of the earth, taken at a pace of a leisurely walk.
  

• 
  And there is.
  

• 
  Yet life has divided into millions of species, the fundamental units, each playing a unique role in relation to the whole.
  

As far as implicitation is concerned, there are only 49 occurrences altogether. Experiential meanings tend to be implicitated most often (34 instances compared to 12, 29 and 24 in the other texts), meanings related to the process participants in particular (62%), the other types of experiential implicitation are evenly distributed.

• 
  If the world were the size of an ordinary desktop globe and its surface were viewed edgewise an arm’s length away, no trace of the biosphere could be seen with the naked eye.
  

The other types of implicitation are insignificant (6 LI, 5 TI and 4 II).

5.1.2 Explicitation and implicitation and Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny

Based on the analysis of the style of Hradilek’s second translation, it was assumed that normalization, simplification, interpersonal implicitation and experiential and textual explicitation should be rather frequent in the text. This assumption was confirmed only partially. Whereas the number of textual explicitations actually is the highest in the whole corpus, the number of experiential explicitations (that were not really expected in the first text even though so frequent) is only average and there are mere 10 instances of interpersonal implicitation (compared to 4, 13 and 10 in the other texts). As far as interpersonal implicitation is concerned, the category of appraisal is four times more frequent than in the previous text, which could be the reason why this category was expected to be noticeable. Nevertheless, the numbers of occurrences are very small and, in this case, the difference could be just coincidental. The number of simplifications is the lowest in the whole corpus and there are only two instances of normalization.

Interesting similarities as well as remarkable differences can be found within the two texts. There is a strong tendency towards experiential explicitation in both texts, whereas logical explicitations are rare in the first text and more common in the second one (11 occurrences of LE compared to 5 in the first text). Within the category of textual explicitation, the instances of which are almost as numerous as the instances of experiential explicitation, explicitation of meanings related to information structure prevails in the first text (63%), explicitated elements that strengthen the cohesion, on the other hand, dominate the second one (69%).

• 
  And the technology and social structure are part of the Northwesterners’ advanced economic development—part of what we’re trying to explain when we seek the causes of affluence.
  

The use of interpersonal explicitations is more or less the same as in the translation of Wilson.

The overall number of implicitations is similar to the first text. However, the distribution of individual subtypes differs. Experiential implicitations are scarce (12 occurrences compared to 34 in the first text), textual and partially also interpersonal implicitations, on the other hand, come forth (17 TI—59% information structure, and 10 II—80% appraisal, as already mentioned).

• 
  But they emphasize a different side of the growth: a downside, not an upside.
  

• 
  In this symbiotic growth lies the inexorable power of cultural complexification.
  

All in all, it can be summed up that Hradilek prefers explicitation to implicitation; the preference being substantial.

Graph 2. Types of explicitation and implicitation in Hradilek’s texts