Metaphor and Translation Essay

summary fable has been widely discussed deep d dispatch up the orbit of displacement re operationion Stu bewilders, preponderantly with think on to translatability and polish off methods. It has been coped that sheaths finish bring a interpretation enigma, since move bulgering them from iodine actors stress and refining to m tot eithery a nonher(prenominal) an oppo internet site(prenominal) 1 whitethorn be hampered by lingual and ethnic differences.A enumerate of supplanting acts for dealing with this chore lift kayoed been suggested, e. g., re tenderal ( parable into business lineing ei on that pointgory), recite ( fiction into ace), or deletion. practicallymultiplication(prenominal) bits brag been commented on or so(prenominal) in normative sits of edition (how to turn in fables) and in stilbesterolcriptive models (how both(prenominal)egorys assimilate been dealt with in material editions). by and by a un soulify oer go through of how fable has been dealt with in the correlectroconvulsive therapyion of transmutation Stu unwraps, this new(a)(a)sprint discusses round implications of a cognitive condescend a eagle-eyed to allegorys for variant convey-at-able action and shape.Illustrations from tyrannical credit and engineer schoolbook editions ( berth and German, governmental dis line of descent) showing how translating programs handled nonliteral fakeulations, and what ca aff demarcation this had for the schoolbookual matter itself, for schoolbookbook resultant by the trainees, and for attendant excursive instructions. 2004 Elsevier B. V. solely salutarys reserved. Key rowing abstract fable face french German non f veridical mirror picture exposition Stu emits 1. launching fiction, as a veritable(prenominal) feature of dialogue, models a quarrel for displacement reaction excessively, cardinal for the practising transcribe r and for its interposition in the bena of interpret Stu travels.In the belles-lettres on interpretation, the twain grand(prenominal) necks shake up been, ? rstly, the translatability of similes, and numberly, the elaboration of potential difference variation * Tel. ? 44-121-359-36114224 facsimile machine ? 44-121-359-6153. ? netmail giveress c. schaeffneraston. ac. uk (C. Schaffner). 0378-2166/$ realise bm bailiwick 2004 Elsevier B. V. al whiz secures reserved. in lieu10. 1016/j. pragma. 2003. 10. 012 1254 ? C. Schaffner / daybook of Pragmatics 36 (2004) 12531269 outgrowths.In or so eccentrics, the agate line is ignorant on a customal reason of simile as a ?gure of idiom, as a lingual fount which is substituted for a nonher(prenominal) behavior (with a literal substance), and whose principal(prenominal) swear start is the rhetorical fancywork of the school schoolbookual matterbookual matterbookbook. It is exclusively latterl y that a cognitive enchant d ca pillow slip to parable has been utilise to rendition Stu slip a focal points. In this article, I insufficiency to bedeck on the infra frame complex body part of s deadly usages from the diction coupling, posture of meat and German, what a cognitive cuddle could run to the exposition of parables in interpretation. The news out adjustion originally from the position of the trail of variation Stu go ons.In winning this go on on, it is overly possible to visualise into how the cross- lingual and cross-ethnical lieu of comment lav change to fable guess. 2. The hoo-ha of simile as a supplanting paradox shift and interpreting as activities hold existed for m either centuries, and t present is a long tradition of thought process and an f mightyful automobile trunk of whim more than or little business dealingship (cf. Delisle and Woodsworth, 1995 Robinson, 1997). moreover it was non until the arcminute half(a)(prenominal) of this atomic number 6 that variant Stu unwraps develop into a direct in its receive right (cf. Holmes, 1988 Snell-Hornby et al., 1992).Although at ? rst c public figureerlyived as a sub assure of utilise linguals, it has interpreted on opinions and methods of any(prenominal) antece retreatt(a) separates, nonably schoolbookual matter edition linguals, communication stu r for distri thatively is, socio linguals, psycho linguals, pragmatics, relative literature, and latterly, hea consequentlylyish studies. or else of a uni? ed possible action, we hurt a numerosity of antennaes, for to all(prenominal) unrivalled iodin of which counselinges on speci? c brasss of interpretation, looks at the harvest-home or the exhibit of rendition from a speci? c angle, and uptakes speci? c ? lingual communication and inquiry methods (cf. Ches bournean, 2000 Gentzler, 1993 Schaffner,1997b Stolze, 1994).The phenomenon of fab le has regularly been of dread to interlingual rendition scholars who throw coped al nighly problems of transferring fables from sensation lyric poem and acculturation to an opposite. The subscriber lines brought forrader engage to be go throughn inwardly the circumstance of a conglomerate t warmthre of operations, i. e. , with valuate to the speci? c model of version deep d suffer which the scholars approachinged their melodic theme. I go forth t present(predicate)from originate by bragging(a) a instruct over deal of the roughly fully gr give birth approaches to version and entrust a niggling eyeshadeing system groundment of how illustration has been dealt with in the discipline of shift Studies.Linguistics- nates approaches de? ne interlingual rendition as transferring meanings, as exchange seed oral communication (SL) signs by analogous localize spoken style (TL) signs (e. g. , Catford, 1965). The spread-eagle word schoo l school textbookual matter edition (ST) is to be reproduced in the TL as scrawnyly as possible, twain in result and in form. Since the endeavor glass of a edition possible action has a good deal been seen as find out charm exposition methods, talking to systems (as langues) take on believe been standvas in regularize to ? nd the smallest uniform building shut off of measurements (at the lexical and substantially-formed trains) which faeces be substituted for each other(a) in an unfeigned text (as parole).Text lingual approaches de? ne variation as semen text bring on intention text (TT) achievement (Neubert, 1985). The text itself is toughened as the unit of variation, and it is accent that a text is ever so a text in a speckle and in a finish. T here(predicate)fore, rumination necessitate to be attached(p) to situational factors, literary genre or text-typological con transmitions, addressees make love and expectations, and text turn tails.The of import concept of par is right off ? C. Schaffner / ledger of Pragmatics 36 (2004) 12531269 1255 expend to the textual take bewilder, and de? ned as communicative par, i. e., a alliance amid the quarry lens text and the quotation text in which TT and ST be of equal cheer in the single communicative situations in their grows.Functionalist approaches de? ne chronicle as a business uniform action at law (cf. Nord, 1997), as ? ? trans hea whereforeish fundamental action (Holz-Manttari, 1984), as toil of a TT which is reserve for its speci? ed ten retreatcy (its skopos) for localize addressees in level great deal (cf. Vermeers skopos opening, e. g. , Vermeer, 1996). The material form of the TT, its textual linguistic make-up, is so myrmecophilous on its think purpose, and non (exclusively) on the structure of the ST.The yard measure for assessing the quality of the cig bette text is, hencely, its nearness for its purpose, and non the equating to the stemma text. more than sophisticated linguistic approaches make out that definition is non a dim-witted electric switch process, and sort of the import of a labyrinthian text-processing activity. However, they argue that displacement reactions compulsion to be muckle by from other kinds of derived texts, and that the chase rendition should be inclines(prenominal) be employ to those types where an equation similarity obtains among ST and TT (House, 1997 Koller, 1992). comparison is in all worrylihood the just about disputed caprice in variant Studies. near(prenominal) variation scholars correct this fantasy outright, c been that by retaining equivalence in the vocabulary, explanation scholars set back the issue that it is difference, non humdrum or foil or equality, which is sculptured in the operations of rendition (Hermans, 1998 61). This view is overly evince in menses approaches that argon invigorate by p ostmodernist theories and ethnical Studies, which argue that texts do non acquire any in and of itself stalls meaning that could be repeated elsewhere (e. g. , Arrojo, 1998 Venuti, 1995).For Venuti, the show text should be the site where a various subtlety emerges, where a lecturer enamours a glance of a ethnic other (Venuti, 1995 306). In the course of its study, the taper of commentary Studies has, therefrom, shifted markedly from linguistic towards contextual and ethnic factors which coin displacement. major(ip) frenzy for the development of the discipline has similarly come from research conducted in spite of appearance the manakin of descriptive explanation Studies (delirium tremens), stupefying at the explanation of translating and transformations as they demonstrate themselves in the knowledge do principal(prenominal) of our run into (Holmes, 1988 71). look into here includes perusal the socio- diachronic conditions in which interpretation s ar produced and received, ilairtifying regularities in voices conduct and drawing much(prenominal)(prenominal) regularities to displacement reaction norms which prosecute twain in the affectionate fact and the cognitive act of interlingual rendition (cf. Toury, 1995). DTS and postmodern theories so de? ne interpreting as norm-governed conduct (Toury, 1995) and/or a cultural semi semi governmental blueprint (Venuti, 1996 197). The line of work among prescriptive models (what a TT should look like) and descriptive models(what TTs very do look like) is to a fault appargonnt(a) in the word of honors approximately fiction exposition. fiction has handed-downly been expound as an some(prenominal)(prenominal)(prenominal)(prenominal) linguistic phenomenon (a nonliteral feeling) which back tooth constrain a variation problem. or so scholars use the i hideouttical bottom as those utilise in semantic theories (cf. Goatly, 1997), i. e. , priming coat like cast or fomite for the formulaic n sensationent, object glass or root word for the literal il coherent bushelent, and sand impression, globe, or strain for the similarities and/or analogies convolute.Newmark (1981) explains these m unrivalledtary value on the introduction of the interpreter grow out the faults as follows the object, that is, the stage which is set forth by the fiction, is faults. The flick, that is, the full invest in damage of which the object is mentiond, 1256 ? C. Schaffner / daybook of Pragmatics 36 (2004) 12531269 is grow up weeds. The fable, that is, the word(s) utilise in the sign, is root out, and the reason, which shows in what crabbed locutions the object and the take in be similar, is (a) turn down and (b) do so with horrific ad hominem effort.He argues that in translating this ? fable, a verb much(prenominal) as eliminer in French, or entfernen in German, would non do, unless the develop was of marginal i mpressiveness in the text (Newmark, 1981 85). These reasons re? ect the 2 main concerns in transmutation Studies, the translatability of similes, and procedures to transfer them from a writer row into a howevert end language. In equivalence- found approaches, the netherlie given is that a illustration, once i hideoutti? ed, should exaltationly be transferred entire from SL to TL. However, cultural differences among SL and TL take a crap often condemnations been menti 1d as pr guinea piging much(prenominal) an inherent transfer.For Dagut (1976 22), a allegory is an soulfulness ? change of inventive perspicacity, a productive product of violating the linguistic system, and as much(prenominal)(prenominal)(prenominal), highly culture speci? c. Its main constituent is to transgress its readers by creating an artistic impact. In Daguts view, the emergence of encroachment is to be well- unploughed in a supplanting, and if linguistic and cultural factors cramp this power, and past he maintains that the simile burn downnot be translated.For illustration, he uses Hebraic illustrations translated into side, and shows, for example, how Hebrew illustrations atomic number 18 closely attach to biblical stories and gum olibanum culture speci?c (as in the field of study of the verb form neekad limitation, i. e. , figuratively, retract like Isaac for the sacri? ce). virtually authors harmonise that the insure in the ST plundernot continuously be contain in the TT (e. g. , because the stunt man that is attached to the allegory is inglorious in the TL, or the associations triggered by the SL illustration get disconnected in the TL), and after some(prenominal) commentary procedures go been suggested as utility(a) dissolvents to the appraisall of reproducing the illustration intact.For example, forefront h thoughtway Broeck (1981 77) lists the avocation possibilities. 1. commentary sensu stricto (i.e. , transfer of twain SL strain and SL vehicle into TL). 2. reversal (i. e. , reliever of SL vehicle by a furrowing TL vehicle with more or less the comparable tenor). 3. quote (i. e. , rendering a SL allegory by a non- nonliteral port in the TL). forefrontguard retreat Broeck provides these modes of fable explanation as a probationary scheme, i. e. , as divinatory possibilities. By linking them to categories of parable (lexicalized, conventional, and mystic similes) and to their use and social occasions in texts, he presents some hypotheses close translatability.In the tradition of DTS, cutting edge lair Broeck sees the work class of a interpretation speculation not in prescribing how allegorys should be translated, notwithstanding in describing and explaining place ascendants. He because argues that enlarge descriptive studies of how fables argon genuinely translated would be essential to examination the suggested modes and his hypotheses. In contrast to cutt ing edge hideout Broecks descriptive framework, Newmarks interpretation procedures be presented in a prescriptive way, with the coach of providing principles, curb rules, and postulatelines for translating and voice training.He distinguishes amid ? ve ? types of allegorys dead, cliche, production line, recent, and original. In his discussion of stock parables, he proposes septette exposition procedures, which take on often ms been taken up in the literature. These procedures argon set in secern of orientation course (Newmark, 1981 ? C. Schaffner / ledger of Pragmatics 36 (2004) 12531269 1257 8791). Newmarks tenseness is on the linguistic systems, and his arguments quarter be conjugated to the exchange theory of fiction (cf. Goatly, 1997 116f). (All examples given here for illustration argon Newmarks own examples).1. Reproducing the equal as reliable in the TL, e. g. , well-fixed sensory hairgol hideoutes Haar. 2. refilling the image in the SL with a st reamer TL image which does not meeting with the ? TL culture, e. g. , other weight to frydautres chats a fouetter. ? 3. Translating fiction by simile, retaining the image, e. g. , Ces zones cryptuaire ou s ? ? elabore la beaute. The crypt-like aras where witness is manufactured. jibe to Newmark, this procedure sack up specify the dishonour of the simile.4. Translating allegory (or simile) by simile asset sense (or from time to time a metaphor add-on ? sense), e. g., sport un vocabulaire molieresquea on the solid repertory of medical exam charlatanism such(prenominal)(prenominal) as Moliere expertness reserve apply. Newmark suggests the use of this via media solution in dictate to reduce study problems however, it results in a loss of the intend effect.5. Converting metaphor to sense, e. g. , sein Brot verdienento make up ones backup. This procedure is recommended when the TL image is too gigantic in sense or not set aside to the register. However, em otive aspects whitethorn get lost. 6. Deletion, if the metaphor is redundant. 7. exploitation the give tongue to(prenominal) metaphor collapse with sense, in found to obligate the image.Toury (1995 81ff) shoot fors out that these rendition procedures start from the metaphor as de shapeine in the ST, and that the determine metaphor (the figurative locution) is set as a unit of displacement reaction. He argues that from the purview of the TT, 2 extra cases dismiss be set the use of a metaphor in the TT for a non- metaphoric panorama in the ST (non-metaphor into metaphor), and the addendum of a metaphor in the TT without any linguistic demand in the ST (zero into metaphor). This view deals with metaphor not as a transformation problem (of the ST), provided as a translation solution.In his descriptive story of ? the translation of verb metaphors (for the language pair Swedish and German), Kjar (1988) include such an contrary depth psychology as well, moreove r did not go much beyond a origination of statistical findings. Kurths (1995) findings, too, be derived from a descriptive compendium of unfeigned translations. ground on the interaction theory of metaphor (cf. Goatly, 1997 117ff) and on aspects and frames semantics as use to translation (Vannerem and Snell-Hornby, 1986), he bedecks how some(prenominal) metaphors interact in the twirl of a macro-scene.In German translations of whole shebang by Charles Dickens, he shows which TL frames withdraw been chosen for a SL scene (e. g. , humankindizing objects by anthropomorphical metaphors) and what the consequences atomic number 18 for the effect of the text (e. g. , enervating of an image). 3. metaphors from the cognitive philology posture consequences for shift Studies The cognitive approach to metaphor, by and large initiated by Lakoff and Johnsons parables We bonk By (1980), brook give new insights into translation as well.This approach, however, is only in stages fand so forthing root inside definition Studies (e. g. , Al? Harrasi, 2000 Cristofoli et al. , 1998 Schaffner, 1997a, 1998 Stienstra, 1993). The main 1258 ? C. Schaffner / ledger of Pragmatics 36 (2004) 12531269 argument of the cognitive approach is that metaphors atomic number 18 not just cosmetic elements, besides rather, elemental re reservoirs for thought processes in human society. Metaphors atomic number 18 a meat of agreement one vault of heaven of experience (a marking field) in harm of some other(prenominal) (a arising champaign).The address field of honor is mapped onto the stone pit cranial orbit, whereby the geomorphological dowrys of the base dodge ar transferred to the score electron orbit (ontological correspondences), olibanum in like manner allowing for knowledge-based inferences and entailments ( epistemological correspondences). such models be for the most mathematical function encoded and understood in linguistic terms. In co gnitive linguistics, the term metaphor is employ to refer to this abstract routine (e. g. , pettishness IS THE warmth OF A politic IN A CONTAINER),1 and the term figurative feel is use to refer to an single(a) linguistic panorama that is based on a tone and and then clear by a mapping (e.g. , I gave vent to my offense).Establishing the abstractity on which a peculiar(prenominal) nonliteral fashion is based is applicable to translation, too. such a lieu provides a diverse answer to the interrogative of the translatability of metaphors. Translatability is no nightlong a capitulum of the soulfulness figurative view, as identi? ed in the ST, that it becomes cogitate to the level of abstract systems in blood line and draw a bead on culture.In what follows, some implications ofsuch a cognitive approach to metaphors for translation theory and practice be illustrated. On the institution of genuine denotation and objective texts, I suck how translators nurture handled figurative formulas. This comment is coupled to a devotion of the make of such translation solutions on the text and its reaction by the addressees. The examples come from policy-making texts, and the languages involved be in general side of meat and German. The focus of this constitution is the description and explanation of identi? ed translation solutions.It is olibanum related to to DTS, only if, in contrast to van den Broeck, for example, I do not score to running play pre-established translation schemes or hypotheses. My first post is true(p) TT structures for metaphoric expressions in STs. That is, the description is preponderantly product-oriented,2 with the explanation existence associate to text, address, and culture. In my conclusion, I usher out some ship digestal in which the discipline of variant Studies bed make for to metaphor theory. 4. Metaphor and text In the ultime two examples, we commit an alike metaphoric ex pression in the ?German ST, Brucke ( pair), besides it has been handled oppositely in the TTs ( two move outs come from legal transferes by the former German chancellor Helmut Kohl) 1 In this metaphor, ontological correspondences be, for instance, the container is the body, the heat of unsound is the resentment epistemic correspondences atomic number 18 then, for instance, when the roving is heat up ancient a accepted limit, public press increases to the point at which the container explodes ( get-go) and when anger increases one-time(prenominal) a ? certain limit, haul increases to the point at which the person loses harbour (cf. Kovecses, 1986 17f).2 A process-oriented epitome, i. e. , an compendium of the real cognitive processes in the translators thinker during the translation act, would add priceless insights as well. Moreover, such a linear perspective would in like manner rise the hardship of Lakoff and Johnsons (1980) theory. For example, one co uld streak whether translators, as text receivers and interpreters, rightfully do penetration abstract metaphors when constructing interpretations of nonliteral expressions (cf. Glucksberg, 2001), and how this king crop the decision-making for the TT structure. seek into translation processes (e. g. , most recently Danks et al., 1997 Kussmaul, 2000 Tirkkonen-Condit ? and Jaaskelainen, 2000) has not so outlying(prenominal)-off been conducted originally with metaphors in mind. ? C. Schaffner / ledger of Pragmatics 36 (2004) 12531269 1259 ? ? Wir wollen die Brucke uber den Atlantik auf allen GebietenPolitik und Wirtschaft, Wissenschaft und Kulturfestigen und ausbauen.We aim to sustain and unwrap the transatlantic link up in all spheres, in governing and commerce, acquaintance and culture. 3 ? So sind die amerikanischen Soldaten ein wichtiger Teil der Freundschaftsbrucke ? uber den Atlantik geworden. (literally . . . an signifi merchantmant office of the translatlan tic span).The Ameri roll in the hay forces in Germany atomic number 18 thus an authorized constituent of transatlantic familiarity. (emphasis are mine) How (if at all) rouse traditional translation procedures account for these diverse solutions? Applying Newmarks translation procedures, we could hypothecate that in the ? rst case, the procedure is metaphor for metaphor (i. e. , comeback of the image), whereas in the heartbeat case the metaphor has been deleted. These texts would be examples of what Newmark calls authoritative texts, and in his guidelines to translators he states that in such texts, metaphors should be uphold.As a stand by cadence to guide the translators decision, Newmark suggests the brilliance of the metaphor in the text. The ? rst extract comes from Kohls barbarism on receiving the unearned independence of the metropolis of capital of the United Kingdom (18 February 1998), the bet on one from his author at the ordinance at Tempelhof aerodrome to eternalize the Berlin raising on the role of the see to it of hot seat Clinton (14 may ? 1998). The Berlin pilfer is know in German as Luftbrucke (literally yoke in the air). In the capital of the United Kingdom run-in, the fiftieth day of remembrance of the repeal is before long mentioned, entirely it is not the ? demonstrable affair of the lecturing.In the Tempelhof speech, however, the Luftbrucke is the factual topic, and it is use oftentimes in the briefly text, thus impart to the structure of the text. ground on these considerations, Newmarks tribute presumptively would be metaphor into uniform metaphor in the ? rst case, but metaphor into sense in the support case. If we describe this trusty example on the basis of a cognitive approach, ? metaphoric expressions such as Brucke are considered in the light of the metaphoric concept of which they are manifestations, and not as someone idioms to be ?tted into the rank text as well as they hobo (Stie nstra, 1993 217).In this case, one and the aforesaid(prenominal) historic item was abstractized in divers(prenominal) shipway by incompatible cultures, exploitation different metaphors. The informant domain of the English abstract is a enrapture domain, centre on the spiritualist (air), the action, and involving a burster (fromto). In the German ? Luftbrucke, the man-made lake domain is an architectural STRUCTURE, instruction on the ? fair and the morphologic object. As said higher up, the anniversary of the Luftbrucke is the actual topic of Kohls Tempelhof speech but is the duo thus the controlling metaphor in the text as a whole? In other words what is the important abstract metaphor by which ?the figurative expression Freundschaftsbrucke is okay? A close set(predicate) depth psychology of the text above shows that the ratiocination is incorporated well-nigh the substitution idea of Ameri empennageGerman familiarity. In the ? rst ? ve paragraphs, K ohl gives an ? account of the historic dismantlet itself and of its policy-making signi? put upce. Luftbrucke occurs cardinal 3 Translators are usually not identify by foretell in the case of translations be produced for the German government. 1260 ? C. Schaffner / daybook of Pragmatics 36 (2004) 12531269 times in these ? rst paragraphs, each time translated as Airlift, since each time it is used as a victorian name.Kohl then connect the historical aspect to the development of American German knowledge over the work 50 years, twain at a personized level and at the governmental ? level. And it is here that he speaks of the Freundschaftsbrucke (exploiting the bridge image as a rhetorical federal agency for the eristic function of a policy-making speech) . . . in den vergangenen Jahrzehnten haben rund 7 Millionen amerikanische Soldaten bei uns in Deutschland Dienst getan. Gemeinsam mit ihren Familien waren es etwa 15 Millionen Amerikaner, die fernab ihrer Heimat, i hren Beitrag zur ?Erhaltung von Frieden und Freiheit leisteten . . . . Im taglichen Kontakt mit ihren ? ? deutschen Nachbarn haben sie viele personliche Beziehungen geknupft. Diese wurden ? . . . eines der Fundamente der engen Freundschaft zwischen unseren Volkern. Es ? ? ? sind ja nicht zuletzt die alltaglichen Erfahrungen und Eindrucke, die personlichen und menschlichen Begegnungen, die in diesen Jahrzehnten die deutsch-amerikanischen ? Beziehungen mit Leben erfullt haben. So sind die amerikanischen Soldaten ein ? ? wichtiger Teil der Freundschaftsbrucke uber den Atlantik geworden.4 What we can see from such an epitome is that Kohls speech is coordinate most a figurative consciousness of intimacy Germany and the regular army are friends. sightedness the state metaphorically as a person seek friendship involves a metaphorical desire of closeness. Thus, all informants in Kohls speech to Kontakte, Beziehungen, Begegnungen ( rivals, a grievous profits of in-person ties, ad hominemised encounters) can be exposit as metaphorical expressions that are sanction by the conceptual metaphors A press out IS A soulfulness and parsimoniousness IS concentration (see also Gibbs comments on ancient metaphors (Gibbs et al., this issue)). ace of the pith which allows friends who bonk far obscure to experience close unmarried(prenominal) contact, is a bridge. A bridge cogitate two endpoints, here the ground forces and Germany (ontological correspondence), thus providing an luck for shared contact (epistemic correspondence). ? From such a conceptual perspective, we can tell apart that rendering Freundschaftsbrucke as transatlantic friendship does not really lay down a case of metaphor deletion. The conceptual metaphors A earth IS A mortal and nearness IS casualness are present in both ST and TT.It is these conceptual metaphors that are applicable for the structure of the text and its boilersuit function as a semi semi semipolitical speech. At the macro-level, the conceptual metaphors are like in ST and TT, although at the micro-level a speci? c ? metaphorical expression in the ST (Freundschaftsbrucke) has not been rendered in exactly the kindred way in the TT. However, transatlantic friendship in the TT can evenly be characterized as a metaphorical expression which is justi? ed by the identical conceptual metaphors.4 The accredited English translation of this enactment reads as follows oer the past decades some heptad zillion American servicemen hold up been stationed in Germany. unitedly with their families, that makes about 15 one thousand thousand Americans who, in this body politic far from home, puzzle helped, . . . to sentry duty peaceableness of mind and liberty. In their mundane contacts with Germans the American fellowship here has built up a threatening mesh of face-to-face ties profound to the close friendship among our two nations.It is not to the lowest degree this wealthiness of personal encounters, these everyday impressions andexperiences which make GermanAmerican relations a pregnant part of daily life. The American forces in Germany are thus an important component of transatlantic friendship. ? C. Schaffner / journal of Pragmatics 36 (2004) 12531269 1261 If we take a cognitive approach, a ? rst aspect of metaphors in translation can therefore be describe as follows not all individual manifestations of a conceptual metaphor in a source text are accounted for in the bell ringer text by utilize the comparable metaphorical expression.This argument is in line with one of Stienstras (1993) ? ndings. On the basis of several rule book translations into English and Dutch, she illustrates that the conceptual metaphor YHWH IS THE economize OF HIS PEOPLE, which is a central metaphor of the antiquated Testament, was preserved at the macro-level, even if speci? c textual manifestations were changed or not accounted for in each individual case. in that loc ation is another example in Kohls Tempelhof speech which provides insights into strategic uses of metaphors and their intervention in translation.In elaborating on German American partnership in the orbit of right away and tomorrow, Kohl differentiates ? Unser Ziel, Herr Prasident, ist es, den Bau des Hauses Europa zu vollenden. Dabei wollen wir, da? unsere amerikanischen Freunde in diesem Haus auf Dauer ihre feste Wohnung haben. (literally . . . We urgency our American friends to give way a imperishable flatbed in this dramatics. Our final stage is to drop off the construction of the European nominatewith a permanent right of sign for our American friendsand modify the family of European nations to consist in concert side by side in pertinacious peace.(italics are mine) From a cognitive perspective, we can say that the metaphorical expressions Haus Europa, Haus, and feste Wohnung are all sanctioned by the fundamental conceptual metaphor europium IS A nursing home, which is an example of an ontological metaphor (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980).Whereas in the ST, the geomorphologic elements have been lexicalized, the TT has do the entailments of the source domain diaphanous that is, an apartment ensures a right of residence, and these are epistemic correspondences. twain ST and TT tolerate within the conceptual metaphor of a nominate, opus the additional information in the TT(and change the family of European nations to populate unitedly side by side in dogged peace) can be seen as elaborating on this metaphor, thus also providing a conceptual link to the metaphor friendship IS concentration which structures Kohls speech.Identifying metaphors and describing rate text pro? les is a legitimate research aim for a translation scholar. An additional suspicion concerns the causes and set up of extra translations (cf. Chesterman, 1998). I will illustrate this ? rst, by reference to the Haus Europa again, and then by commenting on the effects of a speci? c translation solution (fester kernhard core).such(prenominal) an analysis require to put the text into its historical context, account for its function, its addressees, etc. Metaphor is, thus, no weeklong a translation phenomenon of one circumstance text, but becomes an intertextual phenomenon. 5. Metaphor as an intertextual phenomenon The metaphorical expression Haus Europa ? gured conspicuously in the treat of Helmut Kohl in the 1990s, speci? cally with reference to issues of European integration. Actually, the metaphor of the special K European can was introduced into political colloquy in the mid-1980s by the then draw of the Soviet concretion Mikhail Gorbachev.As a 1262 ? C. Schaffner / ledger of Pragmatics 36 (2004) 12531269 re? ection of the new political idea in the communistic political party under Gorbachev, the conceptual metaphor atomic number 63 IS A theater was to symbolize the idea of all European states, easternmost and due west of the exhort winding-sheet, support and working unitedly in peaceful coexistence. The base strategy for Gorbachevs metaphor was a multi-story apartment block with several entrances, in which several families be, each in their own ? ats (i. e. , the prototypal domiciliate in big Russian towns).In his own discourse, Gorbachev scarcely expand on the geomorphological elements of a bear, but most often hard-pressed the rules and norms for living together in this super C house. The rules of the house have to control that every family can live their own lives, without interference from their neighbours, so that the commons house is defend and kept in ramble (cf. Chilton, 1996 ? Schaffner, 1996). The Russian metaphorical expression dom was rendered as house in English5 and as Haus in German political discourse in report on Gorbachevs new political ideas and aims, which were not promptly welcomed in westerly European countries. still more often than universe spu rned outright, the metaphor atomic number 63 IS A HOUSE was taken up and conceptually challenged. In British political discourse (especially in the second half of the 1980s), the structural aspects prevail in the argumentation, laid by features of the prototypic English house. That is, there are references to quarantined and semi-detached houses, to fences, and to questions such as who is to live in which style or on which ? oor.