فصلنامه مطالعات زبان و ترجمه
سال پنجاهم شماره 2 (تابستان 1396)

1. Introduction Teaching Persian language to non-Persian speakers has various purposes such as making them familiar with the Iranian culture and customs, establishing more interpersonal interactions, enhancing business and professional communication, and finally increasing mutual understanding between two cultures. Persian language classes and instructors play a fundamental role in satisfying the mentioned goals through modifying the learners’ attitudes. Attitude, as a set of beliefs, emotions, and behavioral intentions toward an object, a person, or an event, significantly influences the language learners’ overall success or failure. One of the factors influencing students’ attitudes is involving their senses and emotions. A pertinent concept which juxtaposes senses and their resultant emotions is emotioncy. Drawing upon the emotioncy model, in this study, the researchers made an attempt to teach Persian language cultural issues and, thereafter investigate the effect of this model on the attitudes of the Persian learners and their learning outcome.
The concept of emotioncy was first introduced by Pishghadam, Tabatabaeyan, and Navari (2013). This model is based on the psychological findings of the developmental individual- differences relationship-based (DIR) model, and it assumes that emotions are the foundation of evolution and learning (Greenspan & Weider, 1997). According to the emotioncy model of Pishghadam (2015), when a language learner has never heard of a subject, s/he has no emotion for it (null emotioncy). When s/he hears about the subject, the degree of emotioncy of that word moves from the null to the auditory level, and if he sees or even touches that item, then the emotioncy can be raised from the auditory level to the visual and kinesthetic levels, respectively. If his experiences of this subject increase, in the next steps, the inner emotioncy of the word is created, and the learner can achieve an arch emotioncy by doing research. At this stage, an accurate understanding of the subject will be formed which will lead to profound learning.
2. Methodology In the present study, the results of interviews with 60 non-Persian language learners from 16 countries (including India, Pakistan, Malaysia, Turkey, Egypt, Madagascar, Burundi, Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Libya, Tajikistan, Lebanon, Iraq, Guinea-Bissau, Syria, and Indonesia) who were studying at Al-Mostafa International University were analyzed. To get the most information and a deep understanding of the participant's attitude, the learners were not selected randomly, but they were all purposefully selected from a group with similar relative knowledge of Persian. All participants in the study were non-Persian and female. They were between 17 and 30 years old (M= 23.5). The level of fluency in the Persian language was the same for all of them (Book Seven). All were studying at Al-Mostafa International University, and on average, one year had passed from their presence in Iran. Semi-structured interviews were used as for the qualitative phase. Based on the cultural topic taught in each class, with "Why" and "How" questions (Dornyei, 2007) students were asked to express their feelings about the topic and then to provide more explanations about their answers in two minutes. Therefore, according to the purpose of the study, their positive or negative attitudes toward the subject taught in the class were determined, and the change in their attitudes toward learning was evaluated. Four different cultural issues which were selected are as follows: "Yazd badgir" (Yazd windproof), "Ajil-e-moshgelgosha" (problem-solving nuts), "Mirzaqasemi" (a kind of Iranian food), "Zal and Simorgh's Story". Learners did not have any information about these subjects being completely related to the Iranian's culture and customs. The subjects were taught in four classes (each class included 15 learners), by the same lecturer according to the different levels of the emotioncy model (Pishghadam, 2015) and in 6 sessions (each session lasted 50 minutes including 20 minutes of teaching and 30 minutes of interviewing ( two minutes per participant)). Subsequent to teaching each subject, an interview was conducted to determine the participant's attitudes and emotions towards learning based on the emotioncy model.
3. Discussion The results of the answers related to the auditory session showed that the learners did not have an effective relationship with the subject during this session and did not have a very positive attitude toward the subjects taught. According to the received responses, the observed results at the visual stage improved. The change in the attitude of the learners from negative to positive was also evident in the kinesthetic sessions. At this stage, since there was a more active engagement of the language learner with the subject, we also monitored a deeper attitude toward the subject, and the language learners gave convincing reasons for their responses and emotional experiences. In the fifth session (inner), having brought the necessary and relevant subjects into the class, the instructor asked the learners to simulate the subject taught. In the final session (Arch), the learners were asked to explore the resources available (cyberspace, library, etc.) about the topics taught during the fifth session (inner session).
4. Conclusion In the emotioncy model proposed by Pishghadam (2015), levels of avolvement, exvolvement (auditory, visual, and kinesthetic), and involvement (inner and arch) are considered separately based on the subjects’ emotional experiences. That is, to teach a subject and gradually increase the level of emotion of an individual, six sessions are required to allow the learner to reach the desired level. However, according to the model proposed in this study, due to the time constraints, the small number of teaching sessions for each book, and the skills mentioned therein, it was not necessary to hold separate sessions at the exvolvement stage in teaching Persian to non-Persian speakers. Because the results of the study showed that learners can reach the desired level leading to positive attitudes by participating in involvement (inner and arch) sessions. Therefore, auditory, visual, and kinesthetic sessions could be integrated into the inner session simultaneously, and during the inner session, the tools used for all auditory, visual, and kinesthetic sessions were also used. According to the mentioned model, a teacher can engage student's emotions when teaching different subjects of the Persian language, especially cultural subjects. The teacher can integrate all aforementioned sessions while stimulating visual, auditory, olfactory, tactile, etc. senses. so that learners learn more effectively. In addition, recommended strategies can be useful for Persian language instructors, textbook authors, and holders of Persian language workshops to provide them with appropriate materials for teaching.

1. Introduction The various disciplines in the humanities are related by chains of authority. Sociolinguistics, for example, historically refers to linguistics and to sociology for the authority of its founding concepts, just as linguistics in turn might refer to philology, or sociology might look back to history, to psychology, or to political economics. In the same vein, the investigation of discourses of philosophy from a historical perspective might be related to translation and translation studies, so that frames and theories in the interface of philosophy and translation can be historically projected. These chains allow concepts to be borrowed and thus constantly displaced. They also allow authority to be projected back onto the discipline referred to, such that authority itself is also constantly displaced across disciplines in consideration.
Proposing frames can enable us to idealize Western philosophy as a set of discourses that do not ostensibly borrow authority from external disciplines. It is, instead, a place where terms and concepts would be elaborated and refined for use in other disciplines; it might supremely act in the service of others. On the other hand, translation of philosophy and philosophical discourses has been a concern of Western philosophy ever since the relation with the classical past became problematic. In this vein, the authority of philosophy and the role it takes in other fields of study, including translation studies is notable, which is the main topic of the current study.
Drawing on the immense prominent theories and notions proposed by varied scholars in the field of philosophy, the main objective of the present study is to theorize on translation and offer an all-round framework to enable us to hypothesize that translation studies, as a client discipline, is drawing on philosophical discourses and indeed on many other intermediary disciplines as well. In this vein, taking advantage of varied theories and concepts in the area of philosophy, the present research aims to find answers to the following questions: 1. What is the historical relationship between discourses of philosophy and translation studies?
2. How can revision of discourses of philosophy assist development of translation studies?
3. How can hypothesis-making on translation studies be attained through proposing a general all-round framework?
2. Methodology As a descriptive study, the current research aims to investigate the role of the discourses of philosophy in the development of translation studies from a historical perspective. Accordingly, it attempts to unravel the interfacing role of the philosophical discourses in translation studies to probe the main impact of philosophy on translation and translation theories and reveal in which way(s) the revision in discourses of philosophy can contribute to the developing area of translation studies.
3. Discussion The evidence proposed in this study revealed a major problem in the relationships between philosophy and translation. Considering the relevant evidence, the findings showed that authority would mostly flow more from philosophy to translation studies than the other way around. In other words, the theorization of translation has leant on philosophical discourses far more than philosophers have seriously considered translation. In this highly asymmetric relationship, difficult texts fall into the hands of readers from more generalist spheres, therefore, one may suspect that the philosophers would not always identify with what has been done in their name. Besides, in the presence of philosophical authority, many translation theorists are needlessly parochial, while in the absence of philosophical authority, a rather quaint empiricism rules, as in much of Descriptive Translation Studies, or in corpus linguistics, or think-aloud protocols, which rarely transcend positivist notions of science. The central divisions of philosophical discourse itself could help poorly in this respect. Hence, the result is not just a lack of dialogue, but serious misunderstandings.
Furthermore, considering the findings it was shown that the discourses of philosophy might be related to translation studies in at least three ways: Philosophers of various kinds have used translation as a case study or metaphor for the issues of more general application; translation theorists and practitioners have referred to philosophical discourses for support and authority for their ideas; and philosophers, scholars, and translators have commented on the translation of philosophical discourses.
4. Conclusion Translating can be seen as a problem-solving activity in which a source element may be rendered by one or more elements in the target language. If translators have only one available option, there is no more to be said; no philosophy is needed. When, however, they have two or three options, translation is worth talking about, ideally between translators, who start theorizing. And when there are numerous options available and no clear theory about how to reduce that complexity, the cause for discussion reaches levels where philosophical discourse may be turned to, for ideas about the options, although rarely for translational solutions. This can be seen in most of the theories and approaches which have been dealt with in this study.
In general, what the philosophical discourses may miss, are for the most part the logics of the more everyday activities, the many techniques by which translators themselves constantly reduce complexity. In addition, philosophical discourses show great tendencies to be revised with respect to problems where more than three or four alternatives are available, and while to develop words appropriate to those alternatives might be the role of philosophy; to adapt and propose them might be one of the roles of translation studies. The current study, as well as the following analogous studies in future, can prepare the ground for proposing further frames and theories in the interface of philosophy and translation.

1. Introduction Given the role of affective variables in relatively every facet of human life, the research into the function of self-efficacy systems on individuals’ behavior and performance has recently carried much weight for psychologists and educators. Translation as a higher–order cognitive task is also viewed both as a process of problem-solving strategies and decision making. More specifically, translation competence in PACTE’s TC model encompasses five sub-competences, among which strategic competence is of utmost importance, playing a pivotal role in solving problems and making interrelations between the other sub-competences. All these sub-competences are also connected to the psycho-physiological component, reflecting cognitive and behavioral, and psychomotor mechanisms. Consequently, self-efficacy and problem-solving strategies can make contributions to each other according to this model.
Although translation strategies are of essence to translation process, whereby relevant decisions are made, the available literature shows somehow the neglected field of problem-solving strategies in the field of translation. Therefore, this study tries to investigate this relationship and to determine the way and to what extent translators’ self-efficacy influences the complex process of problem-solving and decision making throughout the translation practice.
Self-efficacy, the principal notion of Bandura’s social cognitive theory (1997), is defined as the belief in one’s capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to manage prospective situations. In fact, self-efficacy plays a significant role in achieving goals, performing tasks, and approaching challenges. What is more, people’s level of motivation, affective states, and actions are based more on what they believe than on what is objectively true. On the other hand, translation strategies are at the core of translation process; every translation entails a certain strategy and each translator possesses a specific one. Actually, translators face multiple constraints at various levels and stages, which require tapping into more effective decision making and problem-solving strategies; and translators’ self-efficacy perceptions may serve a function on the strategies they choose in their performance.
2. Methodology A total of 76 translation students of Imam Reza International University and Ferdowsi University of Mashhad participated voluntarily in this study. Their selection was based on convenience sampling. The sample was made up of 19 males (25%), 54 females (71%), and 3 non-mentioned (3.9%) whose first language was Persian. Their background education encompassed BA translation studies and literature in English. The primary purpose of the present inquiry was to develop an inventory scale to examine the probable impact of self-efficacy sense of student translators on their translation strategies. In so doing, two inventory scales of Translation Self-efficacy (TSE) and Translation Problem-solving Strategy (TPSS) in English were designed. The selection of scale items for the self-efficacy questionnaire was based on Bandura’s self-efficacy theory. The earlier version of the questionnaire was also consulted with two translation specialists for the better improvement and clarity of the scale. The construction of translation problem-solving strategy questionnaire was basically a case of the researchers’ personal experience based on their classroom observation of translation students. However, the main focus was on shared translation strategies which are commonly employed and verbally stated by translation students. Moreover, the earlier version of the scale was consulted with two translation teachers who commented on the items.
3. Discussion Statistical analysis indicated that both scales enjoyed validity and reliability. Upon running an exploratory factor analysis to identify interrelationships among items in the scales, a couple of factors were extracted from both questionnaires. As for TSE, 7 factors were loaded and labeled. They were willingness to translate, motivation enhancement for translating, the ineffectiveness of colleagues’ remedial points on reducing motivation, demotivation in facing problems, positive feeling and translation, and having no fear against translating problems. Along with that, 5 factors were extracted from TPSS and labeled as metacognitive strategy (evaluating and designing strategy), reviewing the text in order to simplify next translating, translating then evaluating, reviewing the text prior to translating, and utilizing dictionaries.
In order to examine the relationship between students’ self-efficacy and translation strategy scores, the Pearson-Product Moment formula was used between the loaded factors of both questionnaires. Statistical calculations accounted for a significant relation between the first factor of the TPSS questionnaire (i.e. metacognitive strategy) and the first and second factors of the TSE questionnaire (i.e. willingness to translate and also self-assuredness in ability to translate). What is more, using a dictionary made a modest contribution to the enhancement of motivation. An important implication of these findings is that the translation students who showed no concern or stress in facing translation problems were more qualified in designing and evaluating the relevant strategy in translating practice. It was also derived that the enthusiasm and confidence of students in translating were perceived to be inclining toward the application of metacognitive strategies. It can also be inferred that high-efficacious people compared to low-efficacious ones are cognitively and metacognitively aware of their behavior, trust themselves, and are able to control their demeanor and envisage success or failure.
4. Conclusion Summing up the results, self-efficacy’s potentiality in the translation domain is evident in this study, which helped to broaden the insight of such tenet in connection with the application of translation problem-solving strategies. More importantly, the extant literature substantiates the findings of the present study as regards the impact of self-efficacy beliefs on stress, self-confidence, willingness, and motivation; therefore, meticulous recognition of the source, nature, significance, and process of efficacy perceptions serves the merit of proposing and developing practical guidelines on improving training and performance of translation students as well as stimulating translation expertise.

1. Introduction Dynamic assessment (DA) is grounded in the Vygotskyan concept of the zone of proximal development (ZPD) and includes mediated teacher-learner dialog during the assessment procedure. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of DA on EFL learners’ morphological awareness. A secondary aim of the study was to examine whether there was a relationship between dynamic assessment and static assessment measures.
In this study, a new approach to measure morphology was adopted targeting the shortcomings of measures of morphological awareness, which have been dually noted in the literature (Apel, Diehm, & Apel, 2013; Moats & Smith, 1992). Neither criterion-referenced nor norm-referenced assessments that adequately assess derivational morphology are available (Moats & Smith, 1992); therefore, a new method of assessment can be adopted to examine morphology.
Despite promising findings gained from the implementation of DA in the domain of L1 morphological awareness (Larsen & Nippold, 2007; Ram, Marinellie, Benigno, & McCarthy, 2013; Wolter & Pike, 2015), no published study has tried to find whether a DA of morphological awareness task may improve morphological awareness in the EFL context. In this regard, the current study has applied the principles of DA to the teaching and assessment of EFL learners’ morphological awareness in order to offer an alternative perspective on assessment and its relevance to teaching and learning of morphological awareness based on the sociocultural theory of mind developed by Vygotsky (1987).
2. Methodology The participants of this study were two groups of female students each consisting of 25 students between the ages of 14 and 18, all of whom had enrolled at the intermediate level of general English classes in Iran Language Institute, Yazd branch. First, all of the participants of this study, who were at the same level of general English proficiency based on the institute’s policies, in the experimental and control groups completed the static morphological awareness task (SMAT). In the DA sessions, students in the experimental group were asked to define each targeted word (e.g., define the word cookery). If needed, a series of prompts or scaffolds, consistent with Larsen and Nippold’s (2007) task, was then systematically provided to determine the level of assistance needed to define the given word. After each cue, the researcher paused for up to 10 seconds; if no response was given or the language learner responded incorrectly, the next clue was provided. In addition, the scoring stipulations of Larsen and Nippold (2007) were further adapted for EFL students and were similar to those of Ram et al. (2013). Finally, the SMAT, was administered in the posttest aimed at understanding the extent to which the intervention affected students’ reading morphological awareness.
3. Discussion The first question of this study addressed the effect of DA task on morphological awareness. Comparing A comparison of the pre- and post- static morphological awareness of the students indicated that their performance on the dynamic morphological task significantly improved through the use of scaffolding [(t =3.81, df =48, p4. Conclusion There was a significant improvement in the EFL learners’ ability to demonstrate morphological knowledge on low-frequency derivatives, indicating that scaffolding prompts likely resulted in morphological improvement. The findings can be a unique contribution to the literature as the study examines improvement in morphological awareness performance via DA, a subject that does not seem to have been investigated in previous research in the EFL context. In addition, findings concerning the validity of the DATMA are encouraging. In the current study, the dynamic measure was shown to have adequate internal consistency. Findings show that the DATMA had a strong relationship with the SMAT, a static measure of morphological awareness. It can be concluded that the DA was not just a measure of individual variations in a morphological analysis task; it was a measure of individual variations in a student’s ability to respond to adult instruction. Generally, static measures typically assess already-developed abilities whereas dynamic measures are an indicator of a student’s potential to learn new information (Lantolf & Pohner, 2004). The DATMA task may have potential as a tool to help determine an individualized instruction plan for EFL learners to improve their morphological awareness. Since each successive prompt increases the amount of scaffolding that is given to a language learner, it could potentially help a mediator how much instructional support needs to be provided. All in all, DA may open a new horizon in teaching and assessing morphology, paving the way for language learners to learn vocabulary more efficiently.

1. Introduction In the not so long history of translation studies, scholarship has always had pride of place in the act of translating. Essentially, the weight and authenticity of a translated work may be measured in the amount of research done about and around the work. In other words, the deeper the translator’s research on a work, the more vivid the essence of the text involved, including, among others, its meaning, content, and function. Translation is usually based on the common assumption that the source and target texts are, in one way or another, typically identical; yet, more often than not, translation fortified by scholarship may generate a translated text which may surpass the original, so much so that it may function quite independently. We may also come across translators who not only rely on research while translating, but also depend on research prior to translation. In this article, the author explores both the process and product in Behzad Ghaderi Sohi’s (re)translations of Henrik Ibsen’s dramas by focusing on two aspects of his work, namely, research and dramaturgy before, during, and after the translation process.
2. Methodology The present study is qualitative in nature and means to show the role of research and dramaturgy in Ghaderi’s work. After a review of the translator’s authorial, scholarly background, interests, and attitudes, a specific categorization of three (interrelated) elements - para-textuality, intertextuality, and textuality has been contrived to be applied to a data-based exploration of his (re)translations of five Ibsen’s dramas, 1)The Wild Duck, 2) Ghosts, 3) Rosmersholm, 4) Little Eyolf, and 5) When We Dead Awaken, to eventually draw conclusions about the impact force of research and dramaturgy employed by the translator.
3. Discussion Based on a close reading of the above mentioned texts, the author argues that paratextual parameters as employed by Ghaderi, can be divided into three sub-categories: a) introductions, b) criticisms, and c) footnotes. The first category includes comprehensive prefaces/introductions tagged to the texts by him (or, where necessary, other Ibsen scholars/translators) to promote his readership’s knowledge of Ibsen’s world, in general, and the translated work, in particular. Such detailed introductions typically cover literary analyses of each and every given dramas, with a view to establishing their dialectical relationships within the overall cycle of Ibsen’s plays. The second sub-category of paratextuality (i.e., criticism), refers to explanations and critical points made by Ghaderi within (or prior to) his own translations, sometimes also fortified by making references to other translators’ works. Being quite familiar with the art of dramaturgy, Ghaderi recognizes translation as a kind of performance, yet a linguistic performance. He has illustrated the linguistic processes involved and the problems ahead of the craft of translation as much as he can, aiming at sharing with his readership the strategies and solutions he has already managed to apply to such problems. Such information can be beneficial to researchers and for educational purposes. Footnotes, as the third sub-category of paratextuality, have been further sub-divided, in their own rights, into two different forms: sometimes, the proper names appear in the footnotes while, at other times, potential readers have been provided with certain additional explanations.
At another level, Ghaderi’s translations further reflect the role of research and dramaturgy in terms of intertextuality. In a constant attempt to ensure reasonable reactions on the part of his readership, Ghaderi tries to (re)shape the given drama’s meaning by making frequent genealogical and prototypical references to other texts around it; in other words, he resorts insistently to intertextual analyses, be it inner or outer intertextuality. By “inner intertextual analysis”, the author means the interrelationships among different dramas written by Ibsen while "outer intertextuality" refers to the relations of Ibsen’s dramas with other writers’ literary works.
Finally, the last analytical layer used in exploring Ghaderi’s (re)translations has been labeled as textuality. An assessment of Ghaderi’s performance at text level displays his success in not neutralizing language varieties of the source texts at both macro and micro levels. Reflecting the informal and colloquial speech forms in writing, recreating language varieties at the two levels of language user and language use, achieving idiomatic renderings and emphasizing on performativity of the target dramatic texts rather than their mere literary aspects, among others, are the most important characteristics of Ghaderi’s translations at the level of textuality.
4. Conclusion As stated earlier, the present article has been an attempt to show the role of research and dramaturgy in Behzad Ghaderi Sohi’s (re)translations of five Ibsen’s dramas. Ghaderi’s works reflect at least five different translation strategies employed in rendering Ibsen’s dramas. He has adopted a specific approach which does not necessarily result in so-called faithful renderings – he has his own views about faithfulness - but entails creating experience-driven translations, experiences derived from the translator’s deep and close readings of dramatic literature, in general, and, of Ibsen’s dramas, in particular. The provision of introductions, criticisms, and footnotes as well as his unique, detailed explanations at the intertextual level offer sufficient evidence that he, as a translator, has always been anxious to consider the significance of research in translation. Bearing in mind the significance of such qualities as reflecting informal and colloquial forms in the written variety of language or recreating linguistic varieties at both levels of language user and language use, the author suggests that a thorough examination of Ghaderi’s translations may always be inspiring for students and scholars because it shows his focus on the representation of essential elements of drama on a stage, that is, the final arena for dramaturgy.

1. Introduction Day after day, the progress of language studies reveals the latent and deep underlying realities of languages better. Translation studies, in its turn, have led us to the discovery of more surprising facts emerging due to the contact of languages with each other. This study is an analysis of effective processes in translating exclusively French into Persian and insists, particularly, on extra-language as an important reality in translation. Extra-language typology results from linguistic analysis but it relies on cultural and ethnic realities. Without any pretention for a comparative stylistic work, our hypotheses will be confirmed by an overview of main procedures applied when translating from French to Persian.
Based on the theory of translation processes (Vinay & Darbelnet, 1958), our academic experiences showed that the principles of the fundamental processes of translation could be extended to the difficulties of the extra-language. This study, therefore, suggested that respect and adaptation of “ordinary register” and/or “non-ordinary register” between both source and destination cultures can be considered as a solution. Identifying and applying these features meticulously can lead our translations to the same creativity and ingenuity that exists in the original text.
2. Methodology Based on academic theories and practical field efforts, this paper demonstrated that a high-quality translation cannot be done based only on “words” as linguistic signs or forms. Even if texts are translated based on word meanings, they will certainly not be able to transfer the entire dimensions of the meaning. In this transfer, some other parameters will be revealed such as “ordinary register” and/or “non-ordinary register”, which will only appear and can be discussed and analyzed across the contact of original culture and target culture in translation. In the current study, the techniques available in translation from French-to-Persian have been briefly discussed and they have been divided into four main processes: modulation, transposition, adding and suppression, and equivalence. These four processes are the basic techniques of translation and cover all registers of vocabulary, syntax, meaning, and culture (proverbs). Moreover, the most important processes in Persian translation of a French text and how these interact was taken into consideration in this study. This concise and functional analysis can be considered as a prelude to the main concern that the science of translatology cares about - the category of culture and extra-language. This category has remained one of the main struggles for expert translators in the field of translation.
3. Results and Discussion As a result, this study demonstrates that cultural issues are not fully compatible from one community to another and can sometimes create anomalies in translation. The extra-language topics as a solution for situations where the processes and techniques of translation mentioned in the first section are not responsive to the translator's work were proposed. In this section, the hypothesis of the study was based on the principle that the examination of translation procedures is based on comparing two cultures coming into contact by the means of translation. On this basis and in an attempt for a sustainable translation, it was showed that looking for linguistic equivalences is preceded by the scrupulous research of extra-linguistic equivalences.
4. Conclusion In order to limit the various procedures, it is necessary to clearly distinguish two communication standpoints: understanding extra-linguistic signs and expressing meaning. Translator’s task could therefore be resumed on picking the extra-linguistic signs out in original text and expressing meaning in the target culture. The expression of meaning is a dynamic attempt to convey the same concept by looking for equivalences and horizons in the destination culture. In order to achieve this goal, the problems of translation are divided into two categories: extra-linguistic and linguistic. Only once the problem of extra-linguistic differences from one language to another has been solved, we would be able to deal properly with specific language problems. “Language problems are initially related to the establishment of correspondences between types of texts (genre)” (Srpová, 1997). This issue has not yet been investigated systematically. However, interesting suggestions have been made in the framework of the evaluation of translations and in the framework of discourse analysis. From a translatological perspective, discourse analysis allows us to focus on meaning by two main topics: the "type or genre" and the “text”. Because of textual phenomena such as "intertextuality", which relates to explicit and implicit relationships between texts, the translator must be able to recognize these relationships and boundaries, not to translate for example, a piece of a famous poem included in the source text into prose in the target language.