ARE PROVERBS ENFORCING DESIRABLE HUMAN BEHAVIOUR? COMPARING AND CONTRASTING ROMA- NIAN PROVERBS WITH THEIR ENGLISH VERSIONS
Main Article Content
Abstract
When stating that “Proverbs mean more than they say” – which can be in itself a proverb and a definition – we might need to rethink some of the fundamental terms in the study of these particular linguistic patterns. If, on the other hand, we believe that “Proverbs do more than they mean”, then, we have to take into account possible different ap- proaches and explore the latest terminology in paremiological research. Beginning with the literal meaning of words, phrases or sentences, proverbs can offer a perfect image of a literary translation. Proverbs are real challenges, when referring to the transfer of meaning from one lan- guage to another and it is interesting to see how two languages, the source language (SL) and the target language (TL) can complete each other if a certain version is preferred. Exploring translation as an act of communication, we can understand how the negotiation of meaning be- tween interactants is related to coherence and cohesion, as “a covert po- tential meaning relationship among parts of a text“ or as “an overt rela- tionship holding parts of a text, expressed by language specific mark- ers”[Blum-Kulka,S:2002,pp.298-299]. From a pragmatic point of view, proverbs can be seen as speech acts, conveying reflections of humans themselves. My analysis will target human thoughts, feelings, beliefs, realities and attitudes that might link homo religious to homo modernus, passing from ethnological fields like baptism, confession, faith to man, work, social hierarchy of Romanian proverbs and their English versions adopt- ing a cognitive and a systematic approach. The paremias samples have been selected from Virgil Lefter’s Dicționar de Proverbe Englez-Român și Român-Englez and from. Pr. Alexandru Stănciulescu-Bârda’s Sfintele Taine și proverbele românești.
Article Details
References
Blum-Kulka, S. 2002. “Shifts of Cohesion and Coherence in Translation”, pp.298-313 in Venuti, L. ed. The Translation Studies Reader, Routledge, London and New York.
Eliade, M. 1995. Sacrul și profanul, Humanitas, București.
Konstantinova, A. 2017. “Cognitive-Discourse Functions of Anglo-American Proverbs”, in Proverbium, 34, 2017, pp.159-178.
Lefter, V. 2007. Dicționar de Proverbe Englez-Român și Român-Englez, Teora, București.
Mieder , W. 2012. “Think Outside the Box: Origin, Nature and Meaning of Modern Anglo-American Proverbs”, in Proverbium, 29, 2012, pp.137- 197.
Ong, Walter J. 1982. Orality and Literacy. The Technologizing of the World. Methuen, London.
Petrova, R. & Stefanova, D. 2017. “Evaluation in Biblical Proverbs. A Linguo-Cultural Study with a Systemic Functional Perspective”, in https://www.researchgate.net./publications/334283010 pp.1-31
Pike, K.L. 1967. Language in relation to a unified theory of the structure of the human behavior (2nd. ed.). The Hague: Mouton.
Stănciulescu-Bârda, Al. 2012. Sfintele Taine și proverbele românești, Cuget românesc, Bârda.
Taylor, A. 1931. The Proverb, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Unseth, P, 2012. “The Function of Proverbs in Discourse”, in Proverbium, 29:2012, pp. 389-396.
Vager, M. 2015. “Variability and Modification of Proverbs in the Bulgarian Mass Media: A Systematic Approach”, n Proverbium, 32:2015. pp. 359-382
Vinay, J.-P. & Darbelnet, J. 2002. “A Methodology for Translation”, pp. 84-94 in Venuti, L. ed. The Translation Studies Reader, Routledge, London and New York.