Imagine that you are a scholar preparing a publication that will combine a critical review
of the most significant existing literature on your chosen Bauhaus-object and its maker. For
your thesis statement, think about how this object reflects the formal principles taught at the
Bauhaus, how it challenged existing norms, and how it influenced the further course of art
and/or design history.
Sample Solution
TT1: Voici l’occasion de retrouver votre jeunesse (qui sait?) et pour les in addition to jeunes de voir remark leurs guardians et grands-guardians vivaient et voyageaient. (Pastry specialist 1992:41). TT2 : Acum ave”i “ansa de a v” reaminti trecutul, iar vizitatorii mai tineri pot vedea cum au tr”it “I c”l”torit p”rin”ii lor “I p”rin”ii p”rin”ilor lor. In model (7) we can see that the structure, all things considered, detail is excluded in the two interpretations; the interpreter has decided to do this in light of the fact that the data isn’t generally important, and its nonappearance doesn’t influence in any capacity the content. As a sidenote, in Romanian it works the two different ways, with or without that term. In the event that the Romanian interpreter had decided to save the structure, the objective content would have been this way: (8) Acum ave”i “ansa de a v” reaminti trecutul, iar vizitatorii mai tineri pot vedea careful cum au tr”it p”rin”ii lor “I p”rin”ii p”rin”ilor lor. 3.2. Proportionality above word level. Collocations, maxims and fixed articulations So far we have discussed what can happen when the issue of non-comparability happens at word level. We may consider what happens when words consolidate and structure different structures (Baker 1992:46). Words for the most part happen within the sight of certain different words, the occurence being founded on certain limitations. This goes under the name of ‘lexical designing’, which is the situation of collocations and figures of speech and fixed articulations (Baker 1992:47). In her investigation of interpretation, Baker examines the issue of collocations, maxims and fixed articulations in interpretation. As she puts it, collocations are ‘semantically subjective limitations which don’t follow sensibly from the propositional importance of a word’ (Baker 1992:14). A few interpreters discover the interpretation of lexical examples somewhat troublesome on the grounds that they may befuddle the source and target designs and be impacted by the collocational designing of the source language. This is probably going to happen on the grounds that the language changes constantly: ‘we make new collocations constantly, either by broadening a current range or by purposely assembling words from various or restricting reaches’, Baker clarifies (1992:52). Interpreters must be in contact with all the phonetic changes in the dialects they works with, on the grounds that else they won’t have the option to think of a characteristic comparable.>
TT1: Voici l’occasion de retrouver votre jeunesse (qui sait?) et pour les in addition to jeunes de voir remark leurs guardians et grands-guardians vivaient et voyageaient. (Pastry specialist 1992:41). TT2 : Acum ave”i “ansa de a v” reaminti trecutul, iar vizitatorii mai tineri pot vedea cum au tr”it “I c”l”torit p”rin”ii lor “I p”rin”ii p”rin”ilor lor. In model (7) we can see that the structure, all things considered, detail is excluded in the two interpretations; the interpreter has decided to do this in light of the fact that the data isn’t generally important, and its nonappearance doesn’t influence in any capacity the content. As a sidenote, in Romanian it works the two different ways, with or without that term. In the event that the Romanian interpreter had decided to save the structure, the objective content would have been this way: (8) Acum ave”i “ansa de a v” reaminti trecutul, iar vizitatorii mai tineri pot vedea careful cum au tr”it p”rin”ii lor “I p”rin”ii p”rin”ilor lor. 3.2. Proportionality above word level. Collocations, maxims and fixed articulations So far we have discussed what can happen when the issue of non-comparability happens at word level. We may consider what happens when words consolidate and structure different structures (Baker 1992:46). Words for the most part happen within the sight of certain different words, the occurence being founded on certain limitations. This goes under the name of ‘lexical designing’, which is the situation of collocations and figures of speech and fixed articulations (Baker 1992:47). In her investigation of interpretation, Baker examines the issue of collocations, maxims and fixed articulations in interpretation. As she puts it, collocations are ‘semantically subjective limitations which don’t follow sensibly from the propositional importance of a word’ (Baker 1992:14). A few interpreters discover the interpretation of lexical examples somewhat troublesome on the grounds that they may befuddle the source and target designs and be impacted by the collocational designing of the source language. This is probably going to happen on the grounds that the language changes constantly: ‘we make new collocations constantly, either by broadening a current range or by purposely assembling words from various or restricting reaches’, Baker clarifies (1992:52). Interpreters must be in contact with all the phonetic changes in the dialects they works with, on the grounds that else they won’t have the option to think of a characteristic comparable.>
