Translation is a complicated task, during which the meaning of the source-

language text should be conveyed to the target-language readers. In other words,

translation can be defined as encoding the meaning and form in the target language
by means of the decoded meaning and form of the source language. Different
theorists state various definitions for translation.

2.1.2. The definition of general translation

When a translator It is necessary to understand the concept of translation as

translates a text literally, mentioned by many translation theorists to obtain an
translation strategies overall picture of the translation process. Some of these
may not be needed. concepts quoted by Jiraphatralikhit, Kaewjan, Klinpoon,
Visitwanit (2005: 7) are as follows: Bensoussan (1990)
states that translation is closely related to the reading
process. Hatim and Mason (1990) suggest that translation is a process involving
the negotiation of meaning between producers and receivers of the text. Picken
(1989) defines that general translation is a method of transferring oral and written
messages from writing to speech or from one language to another. Larson (1984)
states that in general translation communicates, as much as possible, the same
meaning that was understood by the speakers of the source language, using the
normal language form of the receptor language, while maintaining the dynamics of
the original source language text. She also expresses that the goal of a translator
should be to produce a receptor language text (a translation) that is idiomatic; i.e.,
one that has the same meaning as the source-language text, but is expressed in the
natural form of the receptor language. Nida (1974), cited by Jiraphatralikhit et al.
(2005), believes that translating consists of reproducing in the receptor language
the closest natural equivalent of the source language message, first in terms of
meaning and second in terms of style. Catford (1965, as cited in Jiraphatralikhit et
al. 2005) views translation as the replacement of textual material in one language
(SL) by the equivalent text material in another language (TL). Bell (1991) views
translation as the replacement of a text in one language by an equivalent text in
another language. Newmark (1981: 7) indicates that translation is a craft that
attempts to replace a written message and/or statement in one language by the
same message or statement in another language. Also, he views translation as a
science, a skill, an art, and a matter of taste. As a science, translation includes the
knowledge and assessment of the facts and the language that describes them; as a
skill, translation contains the appropriate language and acceptable usage; as an art,
translation differentiates good writing from bad and involves innovative, intuitive
and inspired levels; and lastly, viewing translation as a matter of taste includes the
fact that the translator resorts to his/her own preferences; so, the translated text
varies from one translator to another. Kelly (2005: 26-27) defines translation as the
skill of understanding the source text and rendering it in the target language by
using the register, the background knowledge, and other language resources
according to the intended purpose. Therefore, a translator is a mediator of the two
languages and cultures who can transfer the SL to the TL.

What has been discussed above relates to translation theory, which identifies
translation problems and recommends the most appropriate procedure for
translation in order to solve the identified problems. So, translation can be
explained as a decision-making process and a problem-solving task. It is also a
complicated task during which the translator encounters some problems or
problematic issues which require observation, identification and finding the
suitable solution. The means by which the translator deals with these problems are
called strategies. Finding the adequate strategy for solving the above-mentioned
problems takes place in the decision-making process.

2.2. Translation strategies

2.2.1. What is a strategy?

The word strategy is used in many contexts. In translation studies many theorists
have used the term translation strategies widely but with some considerable
differences in the meaning and the perspective from which they look at it. A list of
more general definitions of the word strategy is given below:

 A strategy is a long-term plan of actions designed to achieve a particular

goal (Wikipedia Committee, n. d.).

 A systematic plan, consciously adapted and mentioned, to improve one's

learning performance (Instruction Curriculum Reading Glossary, n. d.).
  A strategy is a planned, deliberate, goal-oriented (has an identifiable
outcome) procedure achieved with a sequence of steps subject to monitoring
and modification (Curriculum Learning Literate-Futures Glossary, n. d.).

 A set of explicit mental and behavioral steps used to achieve a specific

outcome (Deep Trance, n.d.).

Clearly, these definitions are general and can be related to different fields of study.
This study mainly concerns translation strategies, although the above-mentioned
definitions can be narrowed down to this research field, as well. Translation
strategies have their own characteristics, through which one can gain an
appropriate understanding of them.

Generally speaking, a translator uses a strategy when s/he encounters a problem

while translating a text; this means, when a translator translates a text literally,
translation strategies may not be needed. Bergen (n. d.) mentions that strategies are
not obvious and trivial. Although, when they translate word for word and use a
dictionary, beginners in the area of translation think they have made a good
translation; they do not understand that a problem still exists and changes must be
made at some levels of the translation. Therefore, problem-solving is the most
important function of the strategies. However, the question that arises here is: what
is a translation problem?

2.2.2. Translation problems

According to Dr. Miremadi (1991), translation problems are divided into two main
categories: lexical problems and syntactic problems.

1. Lexical problems

In the interpretation of lexical problems, Miremadi states that, although words are
entities that refer to objects or concepts, a word in one language may not be
substituted with a word in another language when referring to the same concepts or
objects.

He divides lexical problems into five subcategories:

 Straight/ denotative meaning

This kind of meaning refers to those words of the source text that can be matched
with those of the target text "without missing images" (e.g. mother, father, etc).

 Lexical meaning

Lexical meaning refers to words or phrases which seem to be equivalen, although

in that situation this may not be the case; the translator must be aware of the
intention beyond the words in order not to misrepresent the author's message.

 Metaphorical expression

This subcategory refers to the problematic issues of translating idioms and similar
expressions.

Broeik (1981) quoted by Dr. Miremadi (1991) offers the following suggestions for
translating idiomatic expressions:

a) Distinguishing between ordinary expressions and metaphors

b) Having access to the resources of translating a single metaphor

c) Being aware of different contexts and their constraints on using metaphors

d) Correctly realizing the constraints on the translation, and rendering the message.

 Semantic voids

This subcategory includes those words and/or expressions that represent concepts
that cannot be found in other special communities. The close equivalents may be
found, although the exact equivalent cannot.

According to Dr. Miremadi (1991), this may happen in two cases, subjects to
extra-linguistic factors such as those words that have referents in a certain speech
community but not in others, and subject to intra-linguistic factors such as those
concepts that may exist in two language communities but the structure of their use
may be completely different, Dagut (1931) believes, as Dr. Miremadi (1991)
mentioned, that this case occurs when the systems of lexicalization of shared
expressions are different from each other.

 Proper names
The last but not the least sub-category in this group is the problem of proper
names. Although proper names refer to individuals and can be transcribed from
one language into another, sometimes the specific meaning that they carry, which
do not exist in the target speech community, may be lost (e.g. Asghar Rize in
Persian).

2. Syntactic problems

Syntactic problems are the other main category of translation problems; as Dr.
Miremadi (1991) quoted Nida (1975), one can find no two languages that have the
exact identical systems of structural organizations (i.e. language structure varies
from one language to another).

These differences include:

a. Word classes
Languages differ from each other in the internal word formation of language
classification.

b. Grammatical relations
This difference exists among the languages in the way that a constituent of a
sentence functions within that sentence.

c. Word order

d. Style

e. Pragmatic aspects

Considering all these problems, a translator is expected to convey the message of

the source text to target readers; however, there is no completely exact translation
between any two languages and as Dr. Miremadi (1991) quoted Werner (1961), the
degree of approximation between two language systems determines the
effectiveness of the translation.

2.2.3. Translation strategies' typologies

Different scholars suggest various types, categorizations and classifications for the
strategies according to their particular perspectives. Here, some of these typologies
are mentioned.
Chesterman (1997), as Bergen (n. d.) stated, believes that in translation strategies'
field there is "considerable terminological confusion". As Chesterman (1997)
believes, the general characteristics of translation strategies are as follows:

1. They involve text manipulation.

2. They must be applied to the process.

3. They are goal-oriented.

4. They are problem-centered.

5. They are applied consciously.

6. They are inter-subjective. (It means the strategies must be empirical and
understandable for the readers not the person who used them.)

Different scholars have various perspectives to the aspects of the act of translation,
so, they define and describe different types of strategies. Bergen's (n. d.)
classification of the strategies includes three categorizations: 1. Comprehension
strategies, 2. Transfer strategies, 3. Production strategies

By his classification, he meant: first, we read and comprehend a text. Second, we

analyze the differences between the source text and the target one, and we must
decide on the kinds of strategies which we are up to use them. And lastly, we
produce the equivalent text in the target language.

Lorscher (1996: 28) identifies nine basic elements, or as he called, building blocks
of translation strategies. These building blocks are as follows:

Original elements of translation strategies

1. Realizing a translational Problem RP

2. Verbalizing a translational Problem VP

3. Searching for a possible solution to a translational Problem SP

4. Solution to a translational Problem SP

5. Preliminary Solution to a translational Problem PSP

6. Parts of a Solution to a translational Problem SPa, SPb…

7. Solution to a translational Problem is still to be found SPø

8. Negative Solution to a translational Problem SP=ø

9. Problem in the reception of the Source Language text PSL

The first complex notation means that there is a translation problem of some sort,
and the translator immediately finds a preliminary solution to the problem [(P) SP],
and stops working on this problem [#], or [/] decides to leave this problem
unsolved and return to it later [SP ø].

Hatim and Munday (2004) stated that some of the main issues of translation are
linked to the strategies of form and content of literal and free translations. This
division can help identify the problems of certain overly literal translations that
impair comprehensibility. However, the real underlying problems of such
translations lie in areas such as text type and audience.

Local strategies (concerning how to handle translation problems)

Bergen (n. d.) compared local strategies to the many vital systems which deliver
air, blood etc. to various parts of the body helping them to function well.

Chesterman (1997) believes, as quoted by Bergen (n. d.), that the taxonomy of
translation strategies can be presented simply. It includes a basic strategy which is:
change something. In his statement, Chesterman (1997) does not refer to the
replacement of elements in the source text words by their equivalent in the target
text; it means that this replacement cannot be the only task of a translator and it is
not sufficient. The normal types of changes made by the translators can be
classified as:

a) The words which are used in the source text

b) The structure of these words

c) The natural context of the source text

Thus, as Bergen (n. d.) mentioned, according to Chesterman (1997), local

translation strategies can be categorized into semantic, syntactic, and pragmatic
changes; each group has its own subcategories. Also, there is no obvious
distinction between them, so it is difficult to say which exact strategy is being
used. In the following subsections, Chesterman's (1997) classification of
translation strategies is described, according to Bergen (n. d.):

 Syntactic strategies

These local strategies change the grammatical structure of the target text in relation
to the source text. Although most of the strategies are applied because a literal
translation is not appropriate, Chesterman (1997) presents his first syntactic
strategy, literal translation. He believes that, according to many translation
theorists, this is a "default" strategy.

1. Literal translation: It means the translator follows the source text form as closely
as possible without following the source language structure.

2. Loan translation: This is the second syntactic strategy in his classification which
refers to the borrowing of single terms and following the structure of the source
text which is foreign to the target reader.

3. Transposition: Another term that Chesterman (1997) has borrowed from Vinay
and Darbelnet (1958) is transposition that refers to any change in word class, for
example adjective to noun.

4. Unit shift: This is a term that has been borrowed from Catford (1965) in the
levels of morpheme, word, phrase, clause, sentence and paragraph.

5. Paraphrase structure change: This strategy refers to changes which take place in
the internal structure of the noun phrase or verb phrase, although the source
language phrase itself maybe translated by a corresponding phrase in the target
language.

6. Clause structure change: This is a term which refers to a strategy in which the
changes affect the organization of the constituent phrases or clauses. For example,
changes from active to passive, finite to infinite, or rearrangement of the clause
constituents.
7. Sentence structure change: It is a term that refers to changes in the structure of
the sentence unit. It basically means a change in the relationship between main
clauses and subordinate ones.

8. Cohesion change: The way in which the parts of a sentence join together to
make a fluent, comprehensible sentence is called textual cohesion. Cohesion
change is a term referring to a strategy which affects intra-textual cohesion, this
kind of strategy mainly takes place in the form of reference by pronouns, ellipsis,
substitution or repetition.

9. Level shift: By the term level, Chesterman (1997) means the phonological,
morphological, syntactical and lexical levels. These levels are expressed variously
in different languages.

10. Scheme change: This strategy is another term in Chesterman's (1997)

classification. It refers to rhetorical schemata such as parallelism, alliteration and
rhythm and rhyming in poetry. Parallelism refers to similar arrangement of
collocations, phrases or sentences.

 Semantic strategies

The second group in Chesterman's (1997) classification is semantic strategy which

has its own subcategories.

1. Synonymy: It is the first subcategory in this group. In this strategy the

translator selects the closest synonym, which is not the first literal translation
of the source text word or phrase.

2. Antonymy: In this strategy, the translator uses a word with the opposite
meaning. This word mostly combines with a negation.

3. Hyponymy: It means using a member of larger category (e.g. rose is a

hyponym in relation to flower), and also hypernym is a related superordinate
term, which describes the entire category with a broader term (e.g. flower is
a hypernym in relation to rose).

4. Converses: This strategy refers to pairs of opposites expressing similar

semantic relationships from the opposite perspectives (e.g. send-receive
take-give).
5. Trope change: The formal name that is used for a figure of speech or
metaphor is called trope which means using a term or phrase to compare two
things that are unrelated with the purpose of revealing their similarity. This
relates to a type of strategy called trope change strategy.

6. Abstraction change: The other kind of strategy in the list is abstraction

change. This strategy concerns shifting either from more abstract terms to
more concrete ones or vice versa.

7. Distribution change: This is a kind of strategy in which the same semantic

component is distributed over more items (expansion) or fewer ones
(compression).

8. Emphasis change: This strategy increases, decreases or changes the

emphasis of thematic focus of the translated text in comparison to the
original.

9. Paraphrase strategy: This is the last strategy in the list. According to the
overall meaning of the source text, it creates a liberal approximate
translation, some lexical items may be ignored in this sort of strategy.

 Pragmatic strategies

1. Cultural filtering: According to Chesterman (1997 as cited in Bergen n. d.),

the first sort of strategy in this group is cultural filtering. It may be described
as the concrete realization, at the level of language, of the universal strategy
of domestication or target culture-oriented translation. This strategy is
generally used while translating culture-bound items.

2. Explicitness change: In explicitness change strategy some information of the

source text maybe added; or deleted to make the text more or less explicit.

3. Information change: The next type of strategy is information change which

is similar to the previous strategy; however, here the changed information is
NOT implicit in the source language text.

4. Interpersonal change: This strategy is used to affect the whole style of the
text to make it more or less informed, technical etc.
 5. Speech act: There is another strategy the changes the nature of the source
text speech act, either obligatory or non-obligatory (e.g. from reporting to a
command, or from direct to indirect speech).

6. Visibility change: This is a strategy that increases the "presence" of either

the author of the source text or its translator (e.g. footnotes that are added by
the translator).

7. Coherence change: Another strategy is coherence change which is similar to

cohesion change which was mentioned in the previous section ( syntactic
strategies). The only difference is that, cohesion change concerns micro-
structure level (e.g. a sentence or a paragraph), but coherence change
concerns a higher textual level (i.e. combining different paragraphs to each
other in a way different from the source text).

8. Partial translation: This is a strategy that refers to translating a part of a text,

not the entire text (e.g. song lyrics or poetry).

9. Trans-editing: As Bergen also stated, according to Stetting (1989), another

strategy which can be mentioned in this section is trans-editing that refers to
extensive editing of the original text when necessary (i.e. changing the
organization of the source text information, wording or etc).

The above-mentioned strategies present the classification of Chesterman (1997)

cited by Bergen (n. d.). It is clear that all strategies can specific cases of "changing
something," which is, as Chesterman (1997) believes, the basic strategy of
translation.

The levels on which these translation strategies work differ from each other; and as
Bergen (n. d.) stated, this may lead to terminological confusion among researchers
who are concerned with translation studies.

As Venuti (2001) states, from Vinay and Darbelnet's (1958) point of view,
translators can select two main methods of translating which are called:
direct/literal translation and oblique translation.

When literal translation is not possible because of lexical and syntactical

differences between the two languages, oblique translation is used.
Oblique translation includes seven subcategories which are as follows:

1. Borrowing: that is used to tackle a meta-linguistic difference. It is the

simplest strategy of translation that means using source language terms in
the target text.

2. Calque: This is a special type of borrowing in which the borrowed

expression is literally translated into the target language.

3. Literal translation: that means rendering a source language text into the
appropriate idiomatic or grammatical equivalent in the target language.

4. Transposition: that is substituting one word class with another without

changing the meaning of the message.

5. Modulation: this means changing in point of view (e.g. changing part of

speech).

6. Equivalence: this refers to rendering two situations by different stylistic and

structural methods; these two texts include the source text and its equivalent
text which is the target text.

7. Adaptation: that refers to those situations when cultural differences occur

between the source language and the target language. Thus, translation can
be considered as a special kind of equivalence which is situational
equivalence

The above-mentioned strategies fit the classification of Vinay and Darbelnet

(1958), which shows some similarities with Chesterman's classification; however,
as we can see above Chesterman's (1997) classification is clearly more detailed.
All the above-mentioned strategies are theories which are named differently by
different theorists. However; if one wants to examine the applicability of these
strategies, there would be no clear borderline between them. Moreover, they are
just some of the strategies that can be used by a translator, and it seems that there
are different options that a translator may have while doing the translation.
However, there is no hierarchical order of more or less often used strategies. Baker
(1992) offers a taxonomy of eight translation strategies, which are used by
professional translators.
Baker's taxonomy: Mona Baker (1992: 26-42) lists eight strategies, which have
been used by professional translators, to cope with the problematic issues while
doing a translation task:

1. Translation by a more general word

This is one of the most common strategies to deal with many types of
nonequivalence. As Baker believes, it works appropriately in most, if not all,
languages, because in the semantic field, meaning is not language
dependent.

2. Translation by a more neutral/ less expressive word

This is another strategy in the semantic field of structure.

3. Translation by cultural substitution

This strategy involves replacing a culture-specific item or expression with a
target language item considering its impact on the target reader. This
strategy makes the translated text more natural, more understandable and
more familiar to the target reader.
The translator's decision to use this strategy will depend on:

1. The degree to which the translator is given license by those who

commission the translation

2. The purpose of the translation

4. Translation using a loan word or loan word plus explanation

This strategy is usually used in dealing with culture-specific items, modern
concepts, and buzz words. Using the loan word with an explanation is very
useful when a word is repeated several times in the text. At the first time the
word is mentioned by the explanation and in the next times the word can be
used by its own.

5. Translation by paraphrase using a related word

This strategy is used when the source item in lexicalized in the target
language but in a different form, and when the frequency with which a
certain form is used in the source text is obviously higher than it would be
natural in the target language.
 6. Translation by paraphrase using unrelated words
The paraphrase strategy can be used when the concept in the source item is
not lexicalized in the target language.
When the meaning of the source item is complex in the target language, the
paraphrase strategy may be used instead of using related words; it may be
based on modifying a super-ordinate or simply on making clear the meaning
of the source item.

7. Translation by omission
This may be a drastic kind of strategy, but in fact it may be even useful to
omit translating a word or expression in some contexts. If the meaning
conveyed by a particular item or expression is not necessary to mention in
the understanding of the translation, translators use this strategy to avoid
lengthy explanations.

8. Translation by illustration
This strategy can be useful when the target equivalent item does not cover
some aspects of the source item and the equivalent item refers to a physical
entity which can be illustrated, particularly in order to avoid over-
explanation and to be concise and to the point.

As it is obvious, each theorist offers his/her own strategies according to his/ her
perspective; however, Baker’s (1992) taxonomy of translation strategies include
the most applicable set of strategies, because it shows the strategies which are used
by professional translators. So, this definition indicates the applicability of these
strategies, i. e. not only is it a set of strategies but it can also be tested by
professional translators to see to what degree they work if at all.

3. Conclusion

In this study, translation in general, translational problems and mainly translation

strategies were described, and different theories of translation strategies were
mentioned. It was shown that different theorists suggest various definitions of
translation strategies according to their different perspectives. Moreover, it was
mentioned that Baker (1992) lists the most applicable set of strategies. She does
not just name the strategies, but she also shows the application of each.