Record Details

’n Korpuslinguistise vergelyking van die Totius- en Cloete-Psalmomdigtig

In die Skriflig

 
 
Field Value
 
Title ’n Korpuslinguistise vergelyking van die Totius- en Cloete-Psalmomdigtig
 
Creator van Rooy, Bertus
 
Subject Linguistics Corpus linguistics; Psalms; Translation; Rhyming
Description Kritiek teen die Cloete-omdigting van die metriese psalms word beoordeel deur die Totiusomdigting en die Cloete-omdigting met behulp van ’n korpuslinguistiese analise te vergelyk. Die analise geskied vanuit ’n kritiese beskouing van die aannames oor taal en vertaling onderliggend aan die resente debatte oor psalmomdigting. Die aanname van ’n deursigtige verhouding tussen die vaste betekenisse en spesifike woorde, sowel as die moontlikheid dat formele ekwivalensie in die vertaling bewerkstellig kan word, word as vertrekpunte van die kritici van die Cloete-omdigting geïdentifieer. Die data analise toon dat die ooreenkomste tussen die twee omdigtings omvangryk is, maar dat die verskille beperk is. In die Totiusomdigting word meer van argaïese woorde gebruik gemaak. Nederlandse sowel as argaïese grammatikale konstruksies soos die genitief, die datief en die inflksie van die werkwoord kom selfs sporadies voor. Daar kom ook heelwat naamwoorde in die Totius omdigting voor wat op ʼn formeler digterlike styl dui. Daarteenoor kom meer werkwoorde in die Cloete-omdigting voor, asook taaleienskappe wat verband hou met ’n spreektaalregister. Werklik beduidende teologiese verskille blyk nie uit die korpusanalise nie. Totius maak byvoorbeeld van drie verskillende Godsname gebruik, terwyl Cloete van ’n groter verskeidenheid adjektiewe gebruik maak wat soortgelyke betekenisse verwoord as wat in die Godsname vervat is.A corpus linguistic comparison of the psalm versifiations of Totius and Cloete. Criticism of the Cloete versifiation of the metrical psalms is evaluated by comparing the Totius and Cloete versifiation with the aid of a corpus linguistic analysis. The analysis is presented against the backdrop of a critical assessment of assumptions about language and translation that underlie the recent debates on psalm versifiation. The assumption of a transparent relation between fied meanings and specifi words, as well as the degree to which formal equivalence can be attained in translation, is identifid as the points of departure of the critics of the Cloete versifiation. The data analysis shows that the two versifiations share many similarities, but the differences are limited. In the Totius versifiation, archaic forms are usedmore often. Dutch as well as archaic grammatical constructions such as the genitive, dative and verbal inflction are still occasionally encountered. There are also many nouns in the Totius versifiation, which points to a more formal poetic style. By contrast, there are more verbs in the Cloete versifiation, as well as language features that are typical of a spoken language register. Really substantial theological differences do not emerge from the corpus analysis. For instance, where Totius uses three names for God, Cloete uses a wider range of adjectives that encode similar meanings to what Totius encodes in proper nouns.
 
Publisher AOSIS
 
Contributor National Research Foundation
Date 2014-11-07
 
Type info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion — Corpus linguistics
Format text/html application/octet-stream text/xml application/pdf
Identifier 10.4102/ids.v48i2.1806
 
Source In die Skriflig/In Luce Verbi; Vol 48, No 2 (2014); 10 pages 2305-0853 1018-6441
 
Language eng
 
Relation
The following web links (URLs) may trigger a file download or direct you to an alternative webpage to gain access to a publication file format of the published article:

https://indieskriflig.org.za/index.php/skriflig/article/view/1806/2704 https://indieskriflig.org.za/index.php/skriflig/article/view/1806/2705 https://indieskriflig.org.za/index.php/skriflig/article/view/1806/2706 https://indieskriflig.org.za/index.php/skriflig/article/view/1806/2642
 
Coverage South Africa — —
Rights Copyright (c) 2014 Bertus van Rooy https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
ADVERTISEMENT