bartonswaymedia.com

Translation of scientific terms

The issue of language in relation to science can be developed in different ways. An interesting theming and potentially useful is through the idea of translation.

The notion of translation occurs sporadically in the philosophy of science, but much of this literature only ignores the issue of translation. Even where the translation is invoked explicitly, is mostly understood in terms what is usually called the naive view of translation. This approach does not do justice to the philosophical complexity inherent in the idea of translation. It is to pay attention the complexities inherent in the "idea" of the translation, he realizes the intrinsic relationship between science and translation. Similar to the suspicion of science focus on language, language itself has a suspicion of translation. This has contributed to the view that translation is essentially a secondary, derived and dependent on the idea of an original text. However much scientific discourse like to believe that ideas can be distilled out of the realm of language, so does the vision naive translation translations believe that simply changing the language of the text, but retain its "essence" intact. These beliefs reinforce the vision naive translation, which, according to Andrew Benjamin (1989: 60), has "two dimensions":

First, it implies the idea of recovery; recovery of a meaning, or truth, and the subsequent re-expression of what has been recovered. Secondly, this understanding of translation also involves the idea of free exchange, of an economy without intermediaries that are subject to significant traded.

 

CONCEPT OF SCIENCE

The basic criterion of a scientific study is the consistent relationship between a cause and effect. In other words, whenever there is a cause an effect. In the modern context the term "science" away from its original definition and is normally used in areas study showing no relationship between cause and effect in the traditional sense. Sciences such as political science, psychology, etc fall under this category.

In the modern world of knowledge areas are divided mainly into three categories: 1. Natural sciences, 2. Social Sciences and 3. Humanities. The study of Science Natural natural phenomenon that are not artificial. The social sciences focus on the study of human behavior. The areas in Humanities try to explore issues aesthetic and creative human mind. In fact, these three categories are not mutually independent, but is not a narrow focus on these areas of study. For example, Psychology, on the one hand is related to the neuro-science and the other social sciences from a human being is created as a result of natural processes and controls the society of his social behavior. This to some extent affects their psychological behavior. Similarly, in the case of sculpture and architecture tools measurement derived from the physical sciences. While the Humanities to address their cosmetic concerns. As the translation process is concerned, you can also be treated as a scientific activity. "As a scientist weighs their chemicals in a precision scale and uses instruments like the microscope, the telescope and the knowledge to decipher a translator also uses the tools in their work, such as dictionaries, grammars, encyclopedias, etc. A good translator makes a judicious use of their instruments as a scientist makes disposal. A scientist scientific exhibition of the mind. He has an open mind on issues and problems and seeking evidence from all sources. A translator, to be successful in your work, you must show open and view all resources at their disposal. You can not afford to be circumscribed, capricious or emotional. "(Wanchoo, 1965, 52).

NATURE AND THE CONCEPT OF SCIENTIFIC TEXTS

A scientific text, either in original or in translation, differs from other texts because the text is factual and scientific information-oriented. The language of a scientific text is clear, simple and unambiguous. Since science is objective in its approach, the language of a scientific text is more objective and author's subjectivity remains outside it. It is said for the style of writing that "Style is the man, implying that the author's personality is reflected in his writing style. This may be true of literary genres as poetry, short stories, novels, essays etc, but does not apply to scientific writing, especially for natural sciences. Therefore it is said that the language of scientific texts is not subjective, but objective.

Within science of language itself can vary according to the study area. For example, the language of mathematics can vary from the language of physics. However, both are objective in their presentation of the subject. In other words, the language of scientific texts is more specific than the language clearer and unambiguous, in contrast to the literary text where language is often subjective. A plant-scientist in their effort to understand the structure of a flower that disintegrates into smaller units. In his descriptions of the structure the flower must be specific and objectively, without any possibility of diversion of the facts. A writer, on the other hand, their appreciation of the beauty of a flower and embodies is always subjective in its description. Therefore, the language of a scientific text, as opposed to the language of literary texts, if in fact its content. Every word is concrete and real. The style is figurative language is semantically individual layers and less ambiguous.

As mentioned above, the idea translation can be found in the discourse on science as in history and philosophy of science, although it has not inspired by the detailed discussion should have. In the context of interpretation, there has been a sustained commitment to this issue that has led to a significant amount of work on hermeneutical approaches science.1 Here the idea of translation is implicit. Science is seen as reading the book of nature. This reading implies immediately the notion of translation and interpretation, which are often used interchangeably in this context. Translation has also been explicitly invoked in the context of incommensurability thesis.2 This thesis responds to the belief that the theories of science are 'built' from each other, thus implying that the concepts and entities named in a theory are remain the same "when used in another theory, though in a different context. Incommensurability about theory suggests that it is not possible, in general, translate a word from a scientific theory old one again, if the translation means the full extension of meaning in these terms.

1. Scientific language is diachronic and not affected by temporal considerations.

2. Since the technical terms are coined by use of roots and suffixes of the classical languages of the language of scientific texts, therefore, tends to be hybrids.

3. Each branch of science defines its terms in their own way and therefore are free of context and express a single meaning.

4. surface level meaning is important in scientific "deep-level language.

5. Its use is always limited.

6. subjective elements avoid as far as possible and therefore passive constructions are mainly used. (James 1985, 171).

THE IMPORTANCE OF THE TRANSLATION OF SCIENTIFIC TEXTS

The translation of scientific texts is an essential need in the context of modern India as most scientific texts written in English, a colonial heritage, which is the language of the masses. As a result, most Indians are not able to benefit scientific advances within the nation and abroad. They do not receive even prior knowledge of scientific achievements. Because of its dependence on a foreign language Scientific Learning, Indian society has not made technical advances on par with technically developed countries. To overcome this situation it is necessary that our scientists should be encouraged to develop scientific writing in indigenous languages. Until then, the only way left is to rely on the translation scientific texts which could not only contribute to our knowledge, but also help us in the development and modernization of our languages. Language development means not only vocabulary development but also uses language in the domains of science and technology. Within the context of India, provided that the text is Scientists translated, differences in terminology are either minted root Sanskrit terms through loans, or adaptation of English words in our own language system, or by borrowing terms from other languages of India. In this way, develop our language and be able scientific records to express new ideas in the new rules.

As stated above, the translation of scientific texts also contributes to the modernization of our languages. For example, translating a book 18 centuries common in English in a native language could only help in the development of literature TL, but translation of a modern scientific text not only enriches the TL, but also help in its modernization.

Before addressing the problems of translation scientific texts, it is necessary to consider the skill level of the target group is a decisive factor in selecting the appropriate equivalents, such as words, terms, styles, descriptions etc in the process of translation. Clearly, the biggest consumer of the translated text in general science is the student community. In addition to this group may be some small groups of people interested in understanding the events of the scientific world for the sake of knowledge. From this point of view may be scientific literature placed in three categories:

a.

Text addressed to the common masses (journalistic)

b.

Student Community (textbooks, reference material)

c.

Expert Group (research, theses, etc.)

The first category, ie the scientific literature aimed at the masses may include reports, articles, short notes, reviews, columns for general reading on scientific issues, etc. As mentioned above, in the context of India's main source of knowledge Scientific language is English. Therefore, to some extent, scientific information is limited to the educated elite. To spread this knowledge to the masses scientific text written in English must be translated into indigenous languages with non-technical terms and expository. In this type of translation focuses in the message rather than on the structure and style of the original text.

The second category, ie the community of students learning through the media communication of indigenous languages also requires materials such as textbooks, reference books, work, etc. books in indigenous languages. Language used in this material have to be technical but should not be used as research papers written by scientists. All these books text and reading materials must be developed by the translation or the adaptation or adoption of English sources.

The third category, ie the panel may not require translation and that this group is already in the English language proficiency. So whatever your research results are contributing through English only. But if I ever decide to Indian scientists present their research results in their own language, will to develop the necessary language and presentation styles in it.

Agreement taking into account the constitutional obligations and the growing importance of languages Indians in our national life effort being made by governmental and nongovernmental institutions for scientific and technical terminology through the development of bilingual glossaries and tri-lingual, text, books in indigenous languages. It is obvious that all these tasks we have to rely on the translation only.

There are many practical problems of translation of scientific concepts and ideas from English to Indian languages. It is almost impossible scientific equipment to develop our languages, not overcome these problems. In other words, proper exposure, description, discussion and presentation of scientific concepts and ideas in indigenous languages, there are many practical problems that need to fight properly. The following points should be considered before of translating a scientific text:

(I)

The author,

(Ii)

The theme,

(Iii)

The method and translation

(Iv)

The reader.

Galison (1997: 47-50, 803 and 816) offers a more sustained critique of the idea of translation in science, both at the level of discourse and praxis. Instead of a model translation, suggests that language training on the edge of the different disciplines that is relevant. He concludes that it is the concept of negotiation illustrates how scientific communities and languages interact so formed within the limits are more in common with languages like creole and pidgin. But reading translation is also limited, as evidenced by their comments that the idea of temporality is not captured in the model of translation. He also believes that the translation is insensitive to the sociological problems associated with the dynamics of language.

These are serious claims that a vision of translation permits. The link between science translation and development below will become explicit. It is clear that there has been minimal involvement between the discourses of translation and science. Furthermore, this commitment, when it occurs, has been overshadowed by a dominant emphasis naive view of translation.

 

Literature, translation and science

Jakobson (1966: 232-239) identifies three types of translation. The first is the "translation" in the same language, referred to the translation intralingual. We are in this kind of translation each time they use different words and phrases to convey similar meanings. Translation in the same language also shares this problem of "equivalence" prevailing in the translation from one language to another. Jakobson points out but does not capture those synonyms of "equivalence" of words. Thus, when replacing a word by its synonym we are paying in the form of translation. In the case of scientific discourse, the problems associated with incommensurability theory arising from the translation intralingual. Although theories can use words and terms in the same language, and indeed have more of the same words in different theories, incommensurability can arise because to changing historical and social contexts in which the first word began to spread.

The second type of translation is interlingual translation. This is commonly known as translation, where translation is the rewriting of a text in one language to another. So interlingual translation becomes a written text in the source language (SL) to a letter in the target language (TL). The problems associated with this form of translation are numerous.

It is well illustrated in the simple example of translating it and salute their equivalents in French, German and Italian. This task, although seemingly simple, is fraught with difficulties, even though "they are all Indo-European languages, closely related lexically and syntactically, and terms of greeting and agreement are common to all three "(Bassnett, 1991: 16). Both 'yes' and 'hello' are used in very specific contexts. In other languages besides English, which convey very different meanings. For example, in the case of "Hello", states that English does not distinguish between welcome face to face or by telephone, while the other three languages this distinction explicit. The third type of translation is the translation intersemiotic ", an interpretation of verbal signs by means of signs of nonverbal sign systems. "Although this appears to be of little interest to professional translators, this is more near the translation mode present in the reading of scientific texts that are essentially multisemiotic character.

What unites these three activities different in a common category of translation? Jakobson identifies the problem of "complete equivalence" as a common category, which is never possible in any of these three types. This idea of complete equivalence, as well as the notion of faithful translation, has been the downfall, but also the stimulus for the generation of more complex theories of translation. These three relate to the notions of identity and change, whether it is the search for synonyms (text re-), or find other appropriate expressions in another language (re-write). This suggests that the main impetus to an activity that is named as 'translation' first should respond to an already-given, to an original. The concerns of equivalence and fidelity that appear after the initial recognition of the original. It is this primal urge us enables collection of science activities under the name of 'translation', where the "original" is the world as presented to us. All three types of translation can be clearly discerned in the scientific discourse. Although there is a predominance of translation in the speech, there is almost no recognition of this process. This is indeed surprising and suggests that science should have clear strategies for the dominant presence of translation in their activities.

This then it means there is always a meta-discourse on translation, argues that scientific discourse, on which the abolition of the translation is in itself based. The success of science in erasing the presence of translation has lessons for both science and translation. First, consider intralingual translation.

The case of interlingual translation, in the context of scientific discourse is also interesting. Although, worldwide, scientific discourse is increasingly written in the English language, which was not always so. The pioneering work in modern physics, including Einstein's papers on relativity, was largely written in German. Russian mathematicians, as well as their physical, wrote almost exclusively in Russian. There have been a lot of work in French, both in mathematics and physics. It is the translation and science truly remarkable that these diverse texts in different languages have been rewritten and is expressed in one language, English, with barely any mention of current problems in the translation from one language to another!

Surface Acceptance of quantum theory and relativity, for example, without reference to the problems of translation is an exception to point to the insistence that science ignores the claims of the translation. Why do not the problems of translation is present in translating scientific texts from German into English? Are the problems of fidelity of equivalence, the communication of meaning and so is not present in these texts? Or is it that is unimportant in the context of science? If so, which makes this trial? Why?

The neglect of translation in the re-writing of scientific texts should many reasons. Let me focus on one of the reasons that is repeated several times in our understanding of scientific discourse and that is related to a view of language possessing natural science. In the theoretical texts, as in quantum theory and relativity, it is presumed that the "essential" content of text, subtext mathematician. The natural language component of the text, either in German or English, not considered 'substantial' content so that the meaning of these texts is concerned. This is also highlighted in the text in the form of mathematical equations remain the same if the theory is written in English or German. Y since these equations are the "essential" content, does it matter what one uses natural language?

This is, broadly speaking, the argument that explains the science total disregard of the concerns of translation. I will not develop a response to this now, here, I just want to mention that the texts Scientists are in debt to the mathematicians and sub-texts in natural language. And the concerns of translation are also not indifferent to mathematics.

April this argument is also related to the third kind of translation, namely translation intersemiotic. I think it is clear that in the case of mathematics, there is always the presence "of translation in the way in which continuous interpolation of the symbols to natural language. The semiotic system of mathematics does not you generate any meaning without reference to natural language. In reading and writing scientific texts, there is always a movement of a semiotic system to another. No other mechanism other than translation, you can effectively explain how it is possible for us to generate "coherent" meaning of such texts. This then means that a scientific text, which ignores the issue of translation in order to present a unified "text as if the problems of translation across different semiotic systems are absent, is only a translation among many other possible translations. The use of diagrams, figures, tables, graphs and so on in scientific discourse is also related to the scientific activity concerns intersemiotic translation. Since translation is the translation of original ideas of correspondence between the translated text and original naturally arise. There have been many attempts to find equivalence criteria. As is well known, even word by word, the equivalence is problematic. The referential aspect of a word creates a possible criterion of equivalence, which is usually called denotative equivalence.

5. Equivalence may also be of the order of connotation, formal, pragmatic and so on. It may also be desirable to go beyond orbit of the text and the search for the notion of equivalence in the reader's agency and the different cultures involved in the translation. (1964) idea of equivalence Nida dynamics, for example, argues for a notion of equivalence based on "equivalent" text effect on the reader.

In his influential work, Popovic (1976) distinguishes between four types of equivalence that arise in linguistic translation, paradigmatic and syntagmatic style.

Related to this is its emphasis on the "invariant core" in each text, which suggests that the translation function to transmit and transfer this core. The idea of invariance is very suggestive of its uses in other disciplines, particularly science. The invariance is essentially a concept associated with the dynamics and change. It's just under the intervention of some type of action that we can recognize the invariance of an object or system. The invariance is thus specifically linked to an act as also that element, in part or in whole, which remains invariant. In the case of translation, the specific dynamic action is the translation.

Under this action, you can believe that "something" remains unchanged, perhaps the meaning of the text. The text itself may not be invariant, or the number of words or pages. This idea of invariance has important similarities with the philosophical notion of invariance as in science. As is well known, the idea of symmetry science is deeply involved in the idea of invariance. While not to suggest a simple analogy between the two, I mention this simply to draw attention on the close conceptual links between the concerns of translation and science. In all three types of translation, the problems of equivalence, identity and identity are present.

It is important to stress here that no scientific discourse is quite different from literary discourse. In a speech, has its own stylistics, aesthetics, rhetoric, metaphors, etc. But on.6 also has something more: it is this extra space must be clearly delineated. The nature of scientific discourse as a semiotic system and the multiple use of multiple literary strategies, as is implied in the concept of translation. Offer points Featured on translation arising from the concerns of literature, will help expand the understanding of scientific discourse, as manifested in form written. This is really urgent task considering the widespread belief that scientific and technical texts which do not present problems in literary translation. Even Susan Bassnett (1991: 79), who otherwise supports the need to recognize the complexity of translation, has this to say about scientific texts:

If the text is perceived as an object that should only produce a single reading unchanged, any "deviation" from the reader / translator will be judged as a transgression. This trial was actually engaged in scientific documents, for example, when the facts are discussed and presented in terms unconditionally objective for the reader and the text of SL TL alike, but with literary texts the situation is different.

This privilege the scientific text is unnecessary and unsustainable too. Ironically, the following sentence is quoted above, "one of the greatest advances in the twentieth century literary studies has been the re-evaluation of the reader." This change reinforces the reader the complexity that is inherent in scientific texts, to reach this stage of reading as such. Barthes view of the reader as a producer of the text and not only a consumer, along with the positioning of Kristeva reader, such as the completion of the expansion of the work process of semiosis are equally comments apply to scientific discourse. In fact, this schizophrenia Constant Reader / Translator is a brand that defines not only the translation but also scientific activity. If translators are readers of the source text are translated scientists readers of the book of nature "which are then translated.

There you can leave the textual nature of science. Being a collection of texts written in natural language and symbolic, there are several factors that regulate form and, less obviously, their content. It would be easy to say that scientific texts are a genre standard. But as poetry and fiction, the boundaries defining gender are constantly under pressure to change. Thus, although the text can be "identified" as belonging to the scientific community (And / or techniques), gender, does not negate the possibility that overlaps with the characteristics that mark the literary genres. This marriage of different genres creates more problems, so that the translation is concerned. Each gender refers to the concerns of translation in different ways.

Translation based in practice the translation of text, has tried to establish some basic rules of translation of different kinds. Lefevere seven strategies for the translation poetry and Hilaire Belloc's six general rules for prose translation are attempts in this direction. These strategies respond to the specific textuality of these different genres. Although at this moment, do not think you can try a similar exercise for scientific discourse, a more detailed analysis of that discourse could lead such attempts in the future. Here I will just say that writing and speech scientists, and implicitly involves discursive strategies relating to the translation. Most if not all, scientific texts are "structurally similar 'to prose. The text divides into chapters, sections, paragraphs, and prayers. There is an apparent linearity of the text-the development of text that begins with simple ideas and equations and proceeding to more complex physics (and mathematics, if necessary) problems and solutions. The first chapters are literally the foundation on which the building rests text. In the text, we find the claims, allegations, evidence, assumptions, references, etc.. All these elements will form the style of their own gender. Thus, the translation process has to negotiate with, utilize and integrating all these elements. It is also the case that the possibility of research has been based on the ambiguities inherent in the business of translation.

In spite of the translation is one of the oldest professions in the world (or perhaps because!), Venuti (1998: notes that the study "of history and theory translation remains a backwater in the academy. "This points to a fundamental tension at present according due importance to the study and practice of translation, and highlights the need for a sociological perspective, which is inherent to this activity. It also suggests an expansion of the academic game in the translation.

In particular, you can read Venuti The scandal of translation as a sign of growing pains. As a sign of the times, too, used Venuti translation as a prism through which the major sociological issues are articulated. My focus on the book by Venuti in this case is an act of appropriation of certain and conceptual categories that suit my own reading and re-writing of scientific discourse.

The fact that they are "sociological" causes even more relevant since this conversation I can connect naturally with the issues of sociology of science and place them within the gambit of translation. From my reading of Venuti is a credit explicitly, let me isolate two categories, minor literature and authorship, which are discussed in detail and also are useful for the understanding of scientific discourse.

Minor Literature: Venuti (1998: 10) begins with the issue of minor literature, which that reflects their personal preference to "translate foreign texts which have minority status in their cultures." As a translator, does not hold the position of that language is "simply an instrument of communication." Rather, he begins with a view of language as a "collective strength" with " various cultural groups and social institutions. "There is a hierarchy in this dialect diversity with" standard of domination. "

Without However, the standard dialect has to constantly negotiate and interact with the "Clichés group or regional dialects, slang and slogans, stylistic innovations" and so on. These variables are lower than are the language of a dynamic and also "substantially subvert," which "reveals that to be socially and historically situated. "Literary works can give this majoritizing the dominant influence of the language and culture or that can increase the" heterogeneity radical by the production of language variation important constant. "Thus, the literary work can be successful in the release of the" others " through which a minor literature "indicates that the primary language is foreign to itself."

Although these observations may seem to apply to very specific cases of literary texts that embody a minor literature, the problems they generate are relevant to a critical understanding of reading, writing and translate. The emphasis on the child, as forms of language and culture, it has an integral aspect of all languages, namely, the current trend in writing to gather around the dominant presence of the "majority" and a concurrent submission of the voices of lesser importance. It takes a conscious act to free the child from the overwhelming presence large ones. This conscious attempt to liberate the rest and let the child "sample is introduced an" ethic "of translation. So notes minoritizing translation is good: to know the rest by cultivating a heterogeneous discourse, opening up the standard dialect and literary canons to what is foreign themselves, to poor and marginal.

Explicitly calling abroad is a strategy I find useful in a discussion of scientific discourse. "Foreign" is not only the site of a different language. Being abroad is not just being different. It also suggests the possibility of continuing conflict and a "distance" you can never get completely assimilated. The relevance of this to the scientific discourse is immediate. The point of view of natural language (NL) Scientific discourse is strongly suggestive of its role as a minor language in the dominant culture of scientists 'language'. Attesting to this is the belief that literary strategies, such as the use of metaphors and rhetoric are not "part" of science, but rather belong NL aa baggage, which is taken as a reluctant partner in scientific discourse. The speech is always trying to achieve and maintain homogeneity of discourse. The heterogeneity in the context of opening the foreign, a problematic task in this speech.

The relevance of the National League sub-text, as minor literature, and the presence of foreign policy inherent within scientific discourse can only be released through the efforts of translation.

The rest is part of the alien to scientific discourse? I think it can be argued convincingly that the discourse of history, philosophy and sociology of science are abroad, in the context of being a literature minor in a major dominant (scientific) culture. Repeated suspicion of scientists towards the relevance of these fields, in the context of scientific practice is a pointer to this.

7. As mentioned above, the presence of literary elements in the discourse, the conceptual and subjectivity and mediation culture are considered outside the orbit of this discourse.

Literary elements are considered to be the space of jargon, rivets, dialects and so on scientific discourse. All these together form the "alien" as far as science is concerned. The priority given to mathematics and the repeated attempts to claim that the language of nature is mathematics only succeeds in bracketing the natural language as a foreign language within this discourse.

I am even willing to go to one end of the spectrum to say this: it is only through recognizing the ideas of translation in scientific discourse that the presence of foreigners can be made visible and legitimate. The suspicion of science to the language now can be expressed as a suspicion of the heterogeneity of the language. Venuti shift to minor literature and exposure of the rest are precisely what the fight against this suspect and allow the heterogeneity of language and culture that is made explicit in scientific discourse. In this context, it is worth recalling Walter Benjamin's citation of Rudolf Pannwitz (Benjamin, 1992: 81):

The fundamental error of the translator is that it preserves the state their own language which happens to be instead of allowing his language to be powerfully affected by the foreign language … He must broaden and deepen their language through language foreign.

Author: Venuti explores the idea of authorship in the context of translation. I isolate this category because the scientific discourse has a unique commitment to the idea of authorship and its association with the original notion. This commitment, once again reinforces the intrinsic link between science and translation.

The question of authorship is important in shaping scientific discourse. The world is the original, the touchstone around which emanates from scientific discourse and why it is sustained. The idea of the responsibility that comes from being associated with this original die is very different from literary texts. It in this sense that scientific discourse is always derived and provided a translation. The authorship in science, both in writing and practice, mimics the secondary role it is for translators.

Scientists are not the original authors. Only they can write, rewrite and translate the world as original. The first author Instead, it has intellectual property translation, is the world. Scientific discourse opens the text only the world, one that is already "written."

I will discuss this issue through the literary form known as "pseudo translation," because it allows me to expose the relationship only between science and authorship.

In order to expose the lack of critical engagement with foreigners, Venuti (1998: 33) introduces the discussion of pseudotranslation, what is "an original composition that the author has chosen to portray itself as a translated text." In the field of translation, such as is useful "because involving concealment of authorship "that" inevitably provokes a review of how the author defined in any period, leading to the imposition dominant reactionary conception or a revision disturbing that sparks new literary trends. "

Something similar occurs constantly in the speech scientist. The claims of science, as authorship is concerned, are articulated as follows.

The world is the original author. Science only speaks what is written in the language of this world. Thus, science and scientists abdicate that responsibility must be the original author. This also implies that science speaks for the world and not, by itself, add anything to what is in the world. Therefore, the scientific description of the world is not construction professionals who are part of a history and culture, but is only a revelation of the text in the world. On the contrary, criticism sociology of science is to place the responsibility of the discourse on the scientists themselves, suggesting that scientific discourse is co-formed by his narrative of the world which is "contaminated" by the historical and cultural positions they represent.

As to the question of authorship is concerned, scientific discourse is presented in the order of pseudotranslation. The traditional movement of the author in scientific texts, and the discoverer's cultivated image as someone who only speaks of wonder of nature, are best captured by this image of pseudotranslation. Pseudotranslation imply an abdication of responsibility. It also gives an ability to say something on behalf of another person. The discourse on technology, scientists and technocrats, follows a pattern similar argument.

The explicit implementation that the scientific story must be seen as pseudotranslation narrative implies that scientists should itself be recognized as 'original' rather than displace the original "the voice of the world. If this position of scientific discourse as pseudotranslation is sustainable, then it would be more in line with the assertion that narrative is a narrative world's scientific translation of the world.

The last category I want to introduce here, in the context of the relationship between science and literary concerns of translation, is the notion of dubbing. The dubbing process is based on a particular conception of language and its relation to the images.

Dubbing is usually a process related to the cinema. After the film was shot, the sound track so that it overlaps no picture and sound sync. Dubbing is also associated with replacing the language of the "original" language film bent. The dubbing process has assumptions about the inherent nature of the original and the role of language in visual media, and is closely related to translation.8 First, the language of the original movie is deleted and then the soundtrack of another language superimposed on the film, in large part after a lip-synching. In this translation, there is the assumption that the "essence" of the film is maintained, indicating that the visual media, language plays a secondary role compared with the visual effects. There are two issues with dubbing that I will mention here which I believe are related to scientific discourse. First, is the close relationship between dubbing and culture, both dominant (associated with original) and derivatives (the translation). This involves the question of language and its relationship with the film. This link between language and film in the case of dubbing can be contrasted with the case of subtitling films in foreign languages. Second, the example also illustrates dubbing intrinsic to the nature of texts and translation, and relates to the possibility that the texts are multilayered. It is obvious in the case of visual texts, but the possibility that there are "several layers "even in written texts can not be easily reduced. If there are multiple layers in a text, then what does the translation of a text mean? Will that all layers have to be translated at the same time? Or is that only those parts of the text implicitly associated with the language should be translated?

These questions are important in the articulation of the relationship between science and translation. The scientific text is itself multi-layered, as it is primarily multisemiotic. Moving from a semiotic system of the other dubbing activity is present. Dubbing does not exist in the extensive text, but only in certain parts of text. Labelling of diagrams, figures and tables, for example, is similar to the process of subtitling. Just as the language is changed, but the images are retained in the dub, mathematical equations are often retained but the "language" in relation to specific problems changes. I think this is a fruitful way of understanding how similar mathematical structures to take charge of modeling, describe and explain the different physical situations.

The world is manifested through various means. One is "reading" of nature, while others correspond to various forms of visual presentation of the world. The world becomes the text of science through the continuous translation at the level of language, certainly, but also visual, sensory media auditory, tactile and others. Different scientific theories translate the world at different levels, while always "something of the original. This is just a reflection scientific discourse as it is in the world. The consequences of such translations of various levels are crucial to an understanding of the meaning and practice of science. The different semantic fields created by using pictures, diagrams, geometry and mathematics, as part of the scientific literature, involves the overlay Multiple essence of these texts. The notions of translation and dubbing and therefore play a crucial role in the transmission and communication with those texts.

REFERENCES

Bassnett-McGuire, S. (1991): Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge, Revised Edition.

Benjamin, W. (1992): "The Task of the Translator," Illuminations. Trans. Harry Zohn, Fontana Press.

Buchwald, J. (1993): "Design Experiments, "change the world, Horwich, (Ed.), Cambridge: The MIT Press.

Crease, R. (Ed.) (1997): Hermeneutics and the natural sciences. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Derrida, J. (1982): "White mythology: Metaphor in the text of philosophy," Margins of Philosophy. Trans. Alan Bass, Harvester Press Ltd.

Galison, P. (1997): Image and logic. Chicago London: University of Chicago Press.

Gross, A. (1990): The rhetoric of science. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Hacking, I. (1983): Representation and participation: Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Halliday, M. (1988): "The language of physical science," Records of written English Ghadessey (ed.), Pinter Publishers.

Heelan, P. (1983): Space-perception and the Philosophy of Science. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Jakobson, R. (1966): "On aspects language translation, "On Translation, Reuben Brower (ed.), New York: Oxford University Press.

Kuhn, T. (1970): The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970.

Locke, D. (1992): Science as writing. New Haven and London: University Press of Yale.

Marsonet, M. (1995): Science, reality and language. Editorial Anthropos, Barcelona.

Montgomery, S. (1996): The Scientific Voice. New York and London: The Guilford Press. Baker,

Nida, EA (1964): Toward a science of translation. Leiden: EJ Brill.

Ortony, A. (Ed.): Metaphor and thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Peterfreund, S. (Ed.) (1990): Literature and Science: Theory and Practice. Boston: Press of Northeast University.

Popovic, A. (1976): A dictionary for the Analysis of Literary Translation. Edmonton: University of Alberta.

, H. (1994): incommensurability. Thesis Sankey Aldershot: Avebury.

Steiner, G. (1975): After Babel. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Neither disputes or Disapproving Yúdice whiteness, George (1995) 'Does Brand viable policy: The limits of identity politics, "After the politically Correct: Humanities and society in the 1990s, ed. Christopher Newfield & Ronald Strickland, Westview Press: Boulder, pp. 255-285.

About the Author

MA in TRANSLATION, great translation theoretician,mazandaran province ghaemsharcity,IRAN

The American Hero and the American Dream: Reflections on Our Contemporary Political Narrative