Senior Lector (Language Instructor)

Lovorka Zergollern-Miletić, B.A., M.A.

Senior Lector (Language Instructor)

Department of English

Faculty of Philosophy

University of Zagreb

e-mail:

THE CATEGORIES OF DEFINITENESS AND INDEFINITENESS AS A PROBLEM IN TRANSLATING FROM CROATIAN INTO ENGLISH AND VICE VERSA

1. INTRODUCTION

It is has been widely accepted by scholars that the categories of definiteness and indefiniteness areconceptual, as well as linguistic universals. In other words, it is supposed that all nations possess these logical categories in their conceptual systems, but they express them in different ways. In language, they are recognized as grammatical, semantic and pragmatic categories.The prototypical markers of definiteness and indefiniteness are articles.These categories have been researched since ancient times, and most studies have been dedicated to articles.

In his book Definiteness (1999), Christopher Lyons reviews different approaches to definiteness and indefinitess, from Dyscolus (2nd c. AD),through Bertrand Russell and his logical or formal semantic analysis, to a number of contemporary linguists and philosophers who write about different languages and different aspects of the problem. In the end, Lyons comes to the conclusion that most theories revolve around the concepts of identifiability/familiarity, uniqueness and inclusiveness (i.e. whether the referent includes all the members of a set).

Literature on definiteness/indefiniteness is rather rich. Most studies have focused on languages that have articles (primarily English and French). Still, there is a number of studies on article-less languages, among which are Slavic languages, by authors such as Violetta Koseska-Toszewa (1984, 1987 ), Irena Sawicka (1984), Bozenna Bojar (1987), Kazimierz Feleszko (1987), to name only a few.

2. CROATIAN

When Croatian is concerned, we can find studies from the 1960s and 1970s that were dealing with Serbian and Croatian, which were at the time treated as one language (Fekete 1969 & 1973, Mišeska Tomić 1974, Spalatin 1976). Over the past few years, definiteness/indefiniteness in Croatian have been discussed mostly by Marija Znika, Josip Silić, Ivo Pranjković and Ivan Marković. As for Serbian, there has been interesting work done by Zlatić and Trenkić.

In Croatian, definiteness/indefiniteness are connected primarily with the two forms of adjectives – the so called definite (long) adjectives, and the so called indefinite (short) adjectives. The demonstratives ovaj, onaj, taj are also closely linked to definiteness, whereas indefiniteness can be expressed in Croatian by the so called indefinite pronouns such as neki (some). There have been attempts, for instance by the Serbian linguist Mišeska-Tomić, at proving that the demonstratives in “Serbo-Croatian” are potential translation equivalents of the English definite article. Our position is that the Croatian demonstratives can be seen as translation equivalents of the English definite article only in those contexts where the English definite article has deictic function, i.e. where it can be replaced by an English demonstrative. In recent works by Croatian linguists indefinite pronouns are referred to as quantifiers (e.g. Šarić 2002). We do not object to that, but we do object to the author's claim that the quantifiers neki and jedan (also called a number by most grammarians) function as indefinite articles, and are mutually interchangeable. We do not find them to be mutually interchangeable in all contexts. Also, they cannot be considered articles, for the fact that they haven't lost their primary meanings, and are not imposed by grammar in any context.

Some studies written by authors other than Croatian or Serbian mention Croatian, but mostly as “Serbo-Croatian”. For instance, Jiry Kramsky, in his book The Article and the Concept of Definiteness in Language (1972), mentions “Serbo-Croatian” as a language which expresses definiteness with special forms of adjectives, as well as with the declension of nouns (the latter is not very well explained). Christopher Lyons, in the already mentioned book, talks about the “Serbo-Croat” definite and indefinite adjectives, as well as the three demonstrative pronouns (taj, ovaj, onaj). Discussing grammaticalization, the author speaks about Serbo-Croat again, and he says that “in Serbo-Croat, the definite adjective may not be expressing definiteness anymore, but it is necessary in some grammatical contexts” (1999: 339). This statement is compatible with the views of Croatian linguists, such as Ivo Pranjković, who, in his article “Izražavanje neodređenosti/određenosti imenica u hrvatskom jeziku” (“Expressing the indefiniteness/definiteness of nouns in Croatian”, 2000), says: ''I think that a discussion about the categories of indefiniteness and definiteness is even more important now that the formal differences between the grammaticalized forms of expressing these two categories are getting blurred, or, rather, they are preserved in the nominative of nouns having masculine gender. The indefinite adjectives are almost non-existent in oral communication, and are present in a limited number of written texts''

In Croatian, apart from definite and indefinite adjectives, there are some other means of expessing definiteness/indefiniteness. Some of them are brought to our attention by Pranjković in the above mentioned article, and are as follows:

1. choosing between the accusative case and the so called partitive genitive – example: uzeti kruh (to take the bread) – DEF, as opposed to uzeti kruha (to take some bread) – INDEF;
2. the so called Slavic genitive – example: Ne vidi stol. (He cannot see the table.) – DEF, as opposed to Ne vidi stola. (He cannot see a table.)– INDEF;
3. Indefiniteness can be suggested by the plural of those nouns that normally don't have plural – example: razni Bushovi i Clintoni (various Bushes and Clintons);
4. Sometimes speakers of Croatian make use of the difference between the so called distributive singular and plural, where singular suggests some kind of definiteness, and plural some kind of indefiniteness – example: ljudi u odijelu (*men in a suit) - DEF, as opposed to ljudi u odijelima (men in suits) – INDEF.

5. In her article ''Izražavanje neodređenosti pomoću riječi čovjek'', Snježana Kordić points out that indefiniteness can also be expressed by the use of the word čovjek (man). Example: Čovjek ovdje ne može disati (One cannot breathe here).

We must point out here that the mentioned means of expressing definiteness/indefiniteness are even more marginal than the definite and indefinite adjectives.

2. 1. Research concerning the perception of definite (long) adjectives and indefinite (short) adjectives.

To investigate the perception of definite (long) adjectives and indefinite (short) adjectives, we conducted research which included two groupsof respondents – a group of twenty fourth- year students of English (Faculty of Philosophy, University of Zagreb) – attending the course ''Translation from English into Croatian'', and a a group of twenty native speakers of Croatian, all having a university degree.

The questions we asked them to answer were as follows:

1)Which of the two sentences is grammatically correct: On je visoki*;

On je visok?

2) What is the difference in meaning between these two sentences:

Došao je visok čovjek;

Došao je visoki čovjek?

3) Are both of these sentences grammatically correct? If they are, what is the difference in meaning:

Želim nov rječnik.

Želim novi rječnik.

4)Is the following form of the adjective grammatical:

Danas se na Markovu trgu govorilo o braniteljima?

If it is, is the formMarkovomstill more acceptable?

( Note: Markovom – still considered ungrammatical, although the grammatically correct form is encountered only in the media)

5)Is the form of the possessive in the following example correct:

Našao sam to u njegovu kaputu.

If it is, is the form njegovomstill more acceptable?

(Note: njegovom – still considered ungrammatical, although njegovu is used solely by the media)

2.1.1. Students' answers

We must point out here that the students come from various parts ofCroatia, and none of them studies Croatian.

1)All the students answered that the sentenceOn je visokis grammatically correct.

2)Only one student didn't know how to explain the difference.

3)All the students answered that both sentences are correct. Two of them did not know how to explain the difference, and another two wrote down that they would express indefiniteness using the following sentence:

Želim jedan novi rječnik.

4) Thirteen students think that this is the correct form of the adjective, two were not sure, two of them think it must be correct, as it is repeatedly heard on TV, and three of them wrote down that they didn’t understand why the media insisted upon that form.

17 think that the form Markovomis more natural, while three students state that if this form is cited in grammars, then this is the form to use.

5) Sixteen students wrote down that it was a grammatically correct form, three students wrote down that it was not, and one person was not sure.

Fifteen students find the form njegovommore acceptable..

2.1.2. Answers by Croatian native speakers holding university degrees

Out of our twenty participants, four people studied languages. All of them live in the capital (Zagreb), but not all of them have spent their entire lives there. No one studied Croatian.As expected, this group proved to haveless theoretical knowledge concerning the definite and indefinite adjectives than the students. They also showedworse comprehension of their respective meanings. In this group of educated Croatians, only two knew of the existence of definite and indefinite adjectives. Even those two respondents were not sure about their usage, and could not always tell the semantic difference within a text. To educated Croatians, indefinite adjectives seem in most cases to be barely acceptable, even ungrammatical, or stylistically marked.

We can conclude that the semantic difference between the definite and indefinite adjectives has almost ceased to exist, therefore the difference between them has almost no communicative value.

3. TRANSLATION

3.1. Translation from Croatian into English

In the following part of our paper we shall attempt to point out which are the most important problems concerning definiteness/indefiniteness for Croatianstranslating into English. We are going to analyse a Croatian text that has been translated into English. The Croatian text was chosen out of thirty texts used as exam material for fourth-year students of Englishat the University ofZagreb. While choosing the text, we couldn't but notice again that very few markers of definiteness/indefiniteness are used in Croatian texts. Over the years, in our work with students, we have noticed that Croatian demonstratives and quantifiers posed no problem in translation. In our opinion, most problems are connected to various set phrases, abstract nouns and situations where translators have to depend upon the immediate context, or a broader context (i.e. the knowledge of the world).

We must point out that the translators of the following text, i.e. fourth-year students of English, have acquired rather high proficiency in English. On the other hand, all of them are native speakers of Croatian who are expected to have good theoretical, as well as practical knowledge of Croatian grammar.We must also mention that the English translation was marked by two non-native English language instructors, as well as by two Americans linguists/language teachers.

Francuska i Amerika ne svade se zato što su različite, već zato što su tako slične

Plan da Campagne, koji se smjestio u dolini nedaleko Aix-en-Provencea, predstavlja poznat (indef.) francuski krajolik. Onkraj romaničkih crkava i polja lavande uz turističku stazu, Francuska se mijenja. Njezinnačin života počinje nalikovati onome u zemlji koju voli mrziti. Više od četiri petine Francuza danas živi u gradovima ili predgrađima, što je više nego u Americi. Manje od četiri posto zaposlenih Francuza bavi se poljodjelstvom. Francuski intelektualci možda još uvijek filozofiraju u zadimljenim kafićima, no njihovi su zemljaci navalili na holivudske filmove i proždiru američke brendove. Američki kulinarski grijesi – brza hrana i gotovi smrznuti obroci – sve su prisutniji u zemlji kulinarstva, a s njima i pretilost djece. Ipak, što više prosječni Francuzi prihvaćaju takveameričke običaje, to je elita, čini se, sve više opsjednuta proutuameričkim osjećajima čiji korijeni sežu mnogo dublje od nesuglasica oko Iraka.

We underlined all the cases where the translators encountered problems. There is only one marker of indefiniteness in the Croatian text (poznat – indefinite adjective), which wasn't recognized as such by all translators.In all the other cases where singular nouns are involved, the translators had to decide whether the referent is unique or taken out of a set of things. In all the cases where plural nouns are involved, the translators had to decide whether the referents represent the whole sets of things, or only some members of those sets.

In the English translation we can see what choices they had to make.

France quarrels with America not because they are so different but because they are so alike

Nestledin a/the valley near Aix-en-Provence, Plan de Campagne is a/the familiar French landscape. Beyond the/0 Romanesque churches and lavender fields of the/0 tourist trail, France is changing. Slowly, its way of life is beginning to resemble that of the/a country it loves to hate. Over four-fifths of the French now live in the/0towns or suburbs – more than in America. Less than 4% of the/0 employed Frenchmen is in farming. The/0 French intellectuals may still philosophise in smoke-filled cafes, but their countrymen run to Hollywood films and devour the/0American brands.The/0 American culinary sins – fast food, TV-dinners – are on the rise in the land of gastronomy, and with them child obesity. Yet the more that ordinary French acceptsuchAmerican ways, the more the elite seems fixated with an/theanti-Americanism that is far deeper than the/0 differences over Iraq..

3.2. Translation from English into Croatian:

This text was also chosen out of thirty texts representing exam material. The Croatian translation was marked by two teachers who teach translation at the Department of English in Zagreb, as well as by two Croatists.

The Civil War

Few events in American history have been studied more that the Civil War. Scarcely a year passes that does not see the publication of a wave of books and articles dealing with the war as well as the events leading up to it. So widespread has been interest in the origins and consequences of the conflict that many organizations as well as journals have been founded expressly for the purpose of furthering additional research and stimulating popular and professional interest in this subject. Indeed, to refer to the «cult» of the Civil War enthusiasts is not to exaggerate the intense interest that this topic has generated.

One of the reasons for the enduring interest in the Civil War era undoubtedly lies in the fact that this conflict pitted Americans against Americans. Under such circumstances responsibility for the coming of the war could not easily be placed on an external foe or upon factors beyond the control of Americans. The symbolic influence of the conflict as a major dividing line in American history also helps to explain the continued fascination with this problem. To American historians the Civil War bears the same relationship to the American people as the French Revolution to Frenchmen, the English civil war to Englishmen, and the Russian Revolution to Russians. Questions involving vital national issues seemed to be at stake: the problem of nationalism versus states' rights and sectionalism; the role the war played in promoting industrialization and urbanization; and the status blacks were to have in American society.

Građanski rat

Malo je događaja u američkoj povijesti koje se proučavalo više od Građanskog rata. Jedva prođe godina, a da se ne objavi mnoštvo knjiga i članaka koji se bave tim ratom kao i događajima koji su mu prethodili. Zanimanje za uzroke i posljedice tog sukoba u tolikoj je mjeri rašireno da su osnovane mnoge organizacije i pokrenuti mnogi časopisi sa svrhom unapređivanja daljnjeg istraživanja i poticanja općeg i stručnog zanimanja za tu temu. Doista, kada govorimo o «kultu» zanesenjaka Građanskim ratom ne preuveličavamo golemo zanimanje koje je ta tema pobudila.

Jedan od razloga što za to trajno zanimanje za Građanski rat nedvojbeno je činjenica da su se u tom ratu Amerikanci međusobno sukobili. U takvim se okolnostima odgovornost za početak rata ne može jednostavno pripisati vanjskom neprijatelju niti čimbenicima izvan kontrole Amerikanaca. Simbolički utjecaj tog sukoba kao važne prekretnice u američkoj povijesti također pomaže objasniti trajnu fascinaciju tim problemom.

Američki povjesničari smatraju da Građanski rat za američki narod ima istu važnost kakvu Francuska revolucija ima za Francuze, Engleski građanski rat za Engleze te Oktobarska revolucija za Ruse.

Čini se da se radilo o temeljnim pitanjima od nacionalne važnosti: o problemu nacionalizma u odnosu na prava država i regionalne interese, o ulozi koju je ovaj rat imao u promicanju industrijalizacije i urbanizacije te o statusu crnaca u američkom društvu.

Translating this text from English into Croatian, a number of students did not translate the demonstrative this (6th line), which is a mistake. They were also wrong in not translating the underlined definite articles that have deictic function, and had to be translated by a Croatian demonstrative (apart from the case in line 10, where it was not necessary). By not translating the definite articles, the translators rendered the text incoherent.

CONCLUSION

We have seen that in Croatian definiteness and indefiniteness are expressed in a very limited number of cases. Even when they are overtly expressed, native speakers tend not to perceive it. In everyday communication it poses no problem, since speakers can resort to various linguistic and non-linguistic means to clarify their intentions, and hearers can require clarification. On the other hand, translating written texts, both from Croatian into a language possessing articles such as English, and from such a language, Croatians have to be very cautious and read very carefully into the context. We suggest that it is necessary for translators to be trained in such a way that they acquire good theoretical knowledgeconcerning (in)definiteness, not only as a grammatical category, but primarily as a semantic and pragmatic category.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BarićEugenija, Mijo Lončarić et al., 1997:Hrvatska gramatika. Zagreb

Bojar Bozenna ,1987: Jezykowa opozycja okreslonosci/nieokreslonosci jako kategoriametainformacyjna. In: “Studia gramatyczne bulgarsko-polskie», t. II:Okreslonosc/nieokrslonosc”.Wroclaw

Chesterman Andrew, 1991:On definiteness (A study with special reference to English and Finnish).Cambridge

Christophersen Paul, 1939: The articles: A study of their theory and use in English. Copenhagen

Fekete Egon, 1969: Oblik, značenje i upotreba neodređenog i određenog pridevskog vidau srpskohrvatskom jeziku. In: “Južnoslovenski filolog”, knj. 28, sv. 1-2: 5-66

Fekete Egon, 1973: Oblik, značenje i upotreba neodređenog i određenog pridevskog vidau srpskohrvatskom jezik. In: “Južnoslovenski filolog”, knj. 29, sv. 3-4:67-247