Meaning and Evaluation System Analysis ofTranslation in the Framework of Afferent and Inherent Semantic Features

Translation is an active process in which a meaning is transferred from a source to a target language. During this process, meaning can be modified by variations in ontology, understandings, and beliefs of those who belong to the target civilization. Sometimes these variations can turn the meaning-making process into a controversial challenge for both translators and critics. Therefore, reflections on the impact of the meaning-making process and its influential differences in the receiving civilization hold absolutely a crucial position in translation studies. These differences, which are all classified under a main category called interculturality, represent a mass of studies accomplished in the field of trans latology. Such studies adopt mainly a semantic point of view and work mostly on meaning analysis and its perception in the target language. In this regard, researchers have recently renovated the field and introduced two main semantic sub-systems for multidimensional concept of meaning-making: signification and evaluation. Signification is related to a signified unit of a linguistic sign and its encompassing properties known as seme. However, evaluation includes a range of different actualizations from more tangible referential properties to the most abstract ones.
Theoretical Framework: During the process of translation, it is essential to consider the importance of both semantic features (signification) sand the inferential values (evaluation) of the translated text. If the interculturality is based on variations in signification, signifying units may exchange (such as in Christmas and Norouz), however variations in values may provoke antipathy, position takings, or even enmity of the readers toward the translated text (as in Jerusalem/Ghods/ Or shalim or Palestine/Israel, etc.).
In this study, which is concentrated on semantic features and their relationship with evaluation attributes (or values), we will have a look at afferent and inherent semantic features which were first introduced by Rastier in the field of semantics. After establishing a meticulous study on these features, which is specially labeled for its classification of afferent/inherent semes and the idea it provides about the functionality of figures of speech, we will propose an explanation, within a semantic framework, about meaning-making process and variations of interculturality in practice. In the end, a connection will be established between semantic properties and evaluation systems found in the field of translation.
To do so, we utilize articles, journals, and books as our research materials and adopt a descriptive point of view to study the phenomenon of interculturality. In this regard, we assume that inherent features satisfy initial needs of translation while afferent properties are for answering its essential needs. As a result, meaning transference, in case of afferent figures, will provoke much bigger concerns for translators as they need the presence of some kind of encyclopedic knowledge beyond the ordinary language competency they have stored in their mind. Thisencyclopedic knowledge is not only essential for translators but also must be present or at least accessible for the target language readers. Other factors that can modify meaning reception during the process of translation are context of speech, figures, personality, and inferential capacities of the readers. Yet, evaluation systems and semantic values can always interfere with the discourse meaning-making process and break the boundaries of semantics. This is particularly the case of litotes (understatement of values) and euphemism (promotion of values).
The purpose of the present study will be then an analysis of the semantic features and their status in translation studies based on textual values and evaluation systems of the target language and its culture. The reason for such a study is to improve the awareness in students of translation disciplines who will sooner or later confront interculturality and its problems. In like manner, the present study will be helpful for decision-making and justifying unusual behaviors of translators in case of intercultural difficulties. It also opens a horizon for future students and researchers about ideology, values exchange, and particularly the case of censorship in political translations.