Editing Shifts

Shibu Simon, India

Prof (Dr) Shibu Simon teaches at India’s ‘National Defence Academy’ (Ministry of Defence) at Pune. He has introduced the genre ‘Editing Studies’ in English. An active researcher in TESOL, he has published seven books on ELT. E-mail: ambatshibu@rediffmail.com.

Menu

Introduction
Origin of the concept of ‘shift’
Kinds of ‘editing shifts’
Language shifts
Content shifts
Shifts in language and in content
Pedagogical relation between ‘editing strategies’ and ‘editing shifts’
Relation between ‘editing shifts’ and ‘Interference’
Relevance for language teaching
Conclusion
Notes
References

Introduction

This article proposes to look at the concept of ‘editing shifts’ from the pedagogical point of view and formulate explanatory hypotheses about the practice of editing in general and of the relationship between editing shifts and other concepts of editing in particular.

Editing involves the process of transferring written text from one version of the language into another version of the same language. ‘Editing shifts’ refer to the linguistic changes that occur between the source text (unedited version) and the target text (edited version). Specifically, they refer to the changes that occur between units¹ in a source text/target text pair. This article thus describes a theoretical position that promotes the systematic analysis of the changes that take place in moving from ST to TT.

Origin of the concept of ‘shift’

Hatim and Munday (26) point out that John Catford was the first scholar to use the term ‘shift’ in his book A Linguistic Theory of Translation. He defined ‘shifts’ as “departures from formal correspondence² in the process of going from the source language to the target language (1965:73). A shift occurs if an ST element is rendered by a TL element that is different from the expected TL correspondent.

The most comprehensive work in this area is by Vinay and Darbelnet (1958/1995) whose detailed taxonomy of translation procedures has influenced later theorists. They identified two methods³ covering seven procedures⁴.

Vinay and Darbelnet’s taxonomy influenced later studies, notably the work of van Leuven-Zwart (1989, 1990). He supplemented by his in-depth analysis of Latin American translations based on the denotative meaning of each word. Leuven-Zwart realised the need for some kind of evaluator to assess the equivalence of the source text and target text units to verify the occurrence of a shift. He accepted the dictionary meaning of the source text term as a comparator to objectively and independently evaluate⁵ the closeness of the source text and target text terms.

Gideon Toury, an Israeli scholar, proposed a ‘descriptive methodology’ (1980, 1995) in the place of Leuven-Zwart’s ‘Atchitranseme Concept’ due to the difficulty experienced in realising ‘absolute objective dependability’ in dictionary meanings. It sets out to ‘describe’ by comparing and analysing source text/target text pairs. Toury used a flexible ‘adhoc’ approach towards description based on the characteristics of the individual texts under consideration.

Kinds of ‘editing shifts’

In any text, writers make use of the resources of language – its words and structures – to give expression to their ideas. The activity thus translates itself into a business of communication. As every communication involves an addresser (sender of the message) and an addressee (receiver of the message), its text also involves, on practical terms⁶, content and the language in which the content is conveyed.

An editor by virtue of his/her profession is thus concerned with both the language and the content of the text. This makes available to him/her three different options:

1. An editor modifies the language of the text, leaving the content unaltered.
2. An editor alters the content, leaving the language more or less untouched.
3. An editor modifies both the language and the content of the text.

Language shifts

Language shifts refer specifically to the changes brought about in the language of the source text. They occur extensively in grammatical, stylistic, and structural editing strategies⁷. Thus the common factor underlying all genres of editing is the factor of language which underlines the universal perception that editing is primarily language editing of the content provided by the source text. See the example below, in the context of an instruction put up on an office computer, illustrating language shifts in editing:

Don’t use personal pen drives. (Source Text)
Avoid using your personal pen drives, please. (Edited Text 1)
Not to use your pen drives here, please. (Edited Text 2)
Only office pen drives are permitted. (Edited Text 3)

The source text and its three edited versions convey the same message. In spite of the uniformity the four sentences share in terms of their content, the use of language in each is different. The source text is a negative imperative where as the edited text (2) is a negative infinitive. Edited text (1) and edited text (3) are both affirmative but the former is an imperative sentence where as the latter is an assertive one. Of all the four messages, the edited text (3) is unique in that it is the only passive construction. Thus in the edited versions, each editor has used the option to modify the language of the text, leaving the content unaltered.

The three edited versions of the source text are its three different stylistic variations. In literary communication, each stylistic variation has its own unique significance; but in ordinary communication, the stylistic variations are considered to be equivalent in meaning for all practical purposes. However, a perceptive reader can discern greater politeness and respect to the addressee in the edited versions (1) and (2), and cold formality and officiousness in (3).

However, all language shifts need not be stylistic variations. Compare the source text and its edited version (target text) given below:

The staff meeting discussed about the student problem (Source Text)
The staff meeting discussed the student problem (Target Text)

In this example of grammatical editing, the editor makes a grammatical correction with respect to the use of the transitive verb discuss. Grammatical corrections in editing constitute one area wherein language shifts carry minimal stylistic significance in communication but are nevertheless included under the category of ‘shifts’.

Content shifts

Content shifts in editing refer to the changes the editor brings about in the content of the source text. In a given source text/target text pair, the content lies altered, leaving the language more or less untouched. The content shifts may result in adding content to the text or deleting content from it. It may also result in reorganising the text, foregrounding some information or backgrounding some. Technically, content shift also includes formatting the content of the text.

In the examples given below (texts 1 and 2), illustrating content shifts, the source text is the ‘draft message’ prepared for the Principal of an institution by its MCA faculty at the time of releasing their in-house magazine. The target text is the edited version of the same message by the Principal.

Text 1 – Unedited Source Text

Both the edited and the unedited texts have four paragraphs each. In the edited version, both the salutation (para 1) and leave-taking (para 4) of the source text stand deleted. In their places, the editor adds new introductory and concluding paragraphs. Another example of content shift occurs in the third para of the source text which is totally deleted in the edited text. This leaves us to the second para of the source text which is more or less retained after minor language editing in its third and fourth sentences. Another example of language shift is observed in the title which is rendered more concise in the target text by using possessive case. Formatting is yet another area which results in content shift: the target text version is provided with ‘date’, small font size, and its para-wise numbering is conspicuous by its absence. The re-organisation of the text without para-wise numbering in particular gives the edited text more fluidity and less of overbearing technicality.

Text 2 – Edited Target Text

Shifts in language and in content

In practice, while editing, an editor never treats the language and the content of the text as water-tight compartments. In spite of the popular conception that editing is essentially ‘language editing’, the editor pays attention to both the content and its language. Every language shift is inherently a content shift; change in language – except in cases of grammatical corrections – brings about a change in meaning even marginally. But as stated earlier, in ordinary communication, stylistic variations and their significance in meaning are not realised as much as in literary communication. Now, compare and contrast the excerpt from para 2 of the source text with its edited version:

Source Text Its progress in infrastructure alone has been particularly impressive. The dedication and commitment of the Management coupled with the commendable devotion and perseverance of the Faculty helped our MCA programme blaze a trail for other institutions in the state.

Target Text Its progress in infrastructure, in particular, has been impressive. The financial support of the Management along with the dedication of the Faculty helped our MCA programme attain greater heights in academics.

Here, editing resulted in shifts both in language and in content. The language shift in the first sentence has no stylistic significance since it is a basic grammatical correction pertaining to the wrong use of the adverb ‘alone’. But the second sentence exhibits shifts both in language and in content:

Table: Comparison between the Original and the Shifts

Outwardly, there is a shift in language only – with the content more or less retained. But closer scrutiny will reveal that the deletion/substitution of the adjectives (financial support in the place of dedication and commitment, dedication in the place of commendable devotion and perseverance), substitution of coordinator (along with for coupled with), and the replacement of the idiom blaze a trail with the phrase attain greater heights help to scale down the overstatement bordering on hyperbole used in the source text. This correspondingly reduces the relative importance given to MCA faculty – one among many programmes run by the institution – in consonance with the sentiment expressed about the plurality of courses in the para 3 of the edited text.

Pedagogical relation between ‘editing strategies’ and ‘editing shifts’

Editing shifts, in general, are related to editing strategies. In grammatical editing, where the editor is primarily engaged in correcting grammatical errors and the conventions of language use, the editing changes are mostly confined to ‘language shifts’. Since the study of any language involves the study of its language system (its words and structures) as well as the use of this system in the actual business of communication, editing shifts resulting from grammatical editing strategy are of significant pedagogical importance in classrooms where students are helped to master the language system and learn how the system is made use of in different kinds of linguistic communication.

In the advanced ‘stylistic editing’ strategy, where editing is largely confined to effecting stylistic changes to improve the source text’s readability and cohesion in line with the general style and force of the native tongue, the editing changes are once again limited to language shifts. The linguistic and stylistic changes thus brought about in target text become a practical textbook in the classroom for teachers to train their students in mastering the system of language and its use in context. In this situation, the difference between ‘grammatical editing’ and ‘stylistic editing’ can be compared with the distinction Hatim and Munday (240) make between ‘option’ and ‘servitude’ in the context of translation studies:

In transfer from source text to target text, servitude refers to a shift that is unavoidable because of systemic differences between the languages; option refers to a non-obligatory variant that the translator has chosen for stylistic or other reasons.

‘Structural editing’ results in ‘language shifts’ as well as ‘content shifts’ since in this most radical form of editing, source text is subject to summary/re-wording/expansion to concur with the text’s target audience, its text type and its purpose of editing. The language and content shifts brought about as a result of structural editing help learners to practise further the skills of language use.

Relation between ‘editing shifts’ and ‘Interference’

In the context of speaking about patterns of editing behaviour, ‘interference’ refers to excessive linguistic influence. The inference can be either ‘source text interference’ or ‘editor interference’. The source text interference is the excessive influence of source text on target text. Editor interference, on the other hand, is related to two other concepts of ‘editor interpretation’ and ‘negotiation’. Editing, like translation, can be primarily thought of as a form of interpretation where an editor aims at rendering (Eco 4-5) “not necessarily the intention of the author but the intention of the text.” Here, the intention of the text becomes the outcome of an interpretative effort on the part of the editor, as is the case with any reader, critic or translator. Conversely, editing can be also interpreted as a form of negotiation – the editor being the negotiator between the source text and the target text between their linguistic, cultural and social meanings.

Compared to language shifts, editor interference will be higher in the case of content shifts where the text is subject to deletion/addition of the content as well as re-organisation/foregrounding/backgrounding/formatting of its information. Consequently, source text interference will be the lowest in texts with content shifts. In comparison, editor interference will be lower in texts which occasion language shifts since the editor more or less retains the form and structure of the text despite making use of the lexical, syntactic and stylistic choices available to him/her while editing. As a result, source text interference will be higher in texts with language shifts. The pattern emerging from this discussion on editing is that as the editor interference decreases, the source text interference increases and vice versa.

Relevance for language teaching

The relevance of ‘editing’ as a humanising, task-based language teaching activity in communicative classrooms cannot be over-emphasised. Editing shifts as a subject is particularly useful for group-editing and for subsequent discussion in language classes. A feasible methodology will be to provide a class with an unedited passage (source text) and motivate the students to edit it in groups. The best edited version (target text) can be selected by the teacher and displayed on the screen side by side with the unedited version. In the ensuing discussion prompted and moderated by the teacher, the following categories of points can be utilised.

1. Identification of the editing shifts
2. Classification of the editing shifts
3. Communicative significance of the shifts

As an illustration, a student’s original write-up and its edited version are given below.

Text 3 – Unedited Source Text

Text 4 – Edited Target Text

The write-up is a mandatory submission as part of the requirements for admission to a prestigious international internship programme in a Japanese company. In his ‘personal statement of intent’, the student is responding to two basic queries: why he is applying for this programme and why he feels he would be successful. Based on these two passages, teacher can prompt students for a discussion on the following lines:

1. Read both the passages carefully. Try to compare and contrast between the two.
2. Find out the portions where the two texts differ from each other.
3. Are the differences caused by an alternative way of using language or by a change in content?
4. In your view, what is the relevance of the changes brought about?

It can be seen that such a methodology has the potential to prompt students to read passages with critical insight which is an indispensable skill for learning languages in general and for editing in particular. A discussion on the relevance of editing shifts also helps learners reinforce their knowledge of the language system and use it for communication in discourse. Being a task-based group activity undertaken by students themselves, it has the added advantage of providing a tension-free, non-threatening learning ambience where learners can think freely and express openly without constraint. Learning becomes an interactive process where authentic and meaningful communication takes place in an environment which is free of learner anxiety and classroom tension.

Conclusion

‘Editing shift analysis’ purports to be an objective analysis of the changes that take place between two texts. It is a step forward in the formulation of a framework for the evaluation of editing. The study should profitably mention the functions of language or the acts of communication which take place between editor and reader. It should also focus above the word level analysis and include the wider discourse characteristics and the cultural contexts of editing.

It is also possible to think in terms of proposing a branch of ‘descriptive editing studies’ in which ‘editing shift analysis’ can be used to generate hypotheses and make generalisations about editing. What is to be avoided, however, is the totally negative kind of reasoning sometimes occasioned in the search for ‘shifts’ in which error, failure and loss in editing are unduly highlighted. Instead, editing shift analysis is most valuable as a form of discovery, a step towards the formulation of explanatory hypotheses on the practice of editing.

Notes

1 Editing unit is generally thought of as the linguistic unit (Shuttleworth and Cowie 1997: 192) which the editor uses when editing and at which level the source text (ST) is re-codified into target text (TT). Various units have been proposed as units of editing – word, phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph or the text itself. Newmark (1988: 66-67) even proposed that “all lengths of language” have the potential to function so “at different moments and also simultaneously.” It may seem that editors often work at the level of sentence or paragraph, but they cannot afford to neglect the function of the whole text, and references to its inter-textuality and extra-textual features.

2 Catford defined ‘formal correspondent’ as any target language category like class, unit or structure which occupies the same place in the economy of the target language as the given source language category occupies in the source language (Catford 1965: 27). Formal correspondence therefore involves a comparison and description of the language systems comparable to Saussure’s ‘langue’.

3The methods Vinay and Darbelnet identified were ‘direct translation’ and ‘oblique translation’.

4 Vinay and Darbelnet named seven procedures such as borrowing, calque, and literal translation (under ‘direct translation’), and transposition, modulation, equivalence, and adaptation (under ‘oblique translation’).

5 van Leuven-Zwart’s concept is popularly known as ‘Architranseme Concept’.

6 It is true that in literature, especially in poetry, form and content are inseparable. But then creative writing rarely shows up on the editor’s table!

7 Grammatical editing is editing at the primary level. Here, the editor is basically engaged in checking the text for errors in relation to the rules of grammar and conventions of its language use. Besides, it checks the text for such basic submission requirements, prescribed by the editorial board, as its length, specifications related to font, margins, titles, references, diagrammatical representations, paragraph alignment, spacing and indentation. Source text interference/presence will be the highest in this kind of editing since the editor more or less retains the form of the source text along with its lexical choices and syntactic patterns as long as the edited text’s comprehensibility is not compromised.

Stylistic editing includes grammatical editing and is considered as an editing strategy at an advanced level. At this stage, the editors are primarily concerned with the stylistic options available to them in the place of the lexical and syntactic choices exercised by the ST writer. Besides improving cohesion and reading comprehension, stylistic editing strategy enhances domestication by focussing on the general style and force of the native tongue.

Structural editing includes stylistic editing but is considered hierarchically the highest and the most radical form of editing strategy. It is necessitated when the source text doesn’t respond adequately to the text type, target audience and the purpose of editing. It involves mostly subordination and/or coordination of ideas and the corresponding changes in syntactic patterning coupled with summary/rewording/expansion of the source text as the situation demands.

References

Catford, J.C. A Linguistic Theory of Translation. Oxford: OUP, 1965.

Eco, Umberto. Mouse or Rat? Translation as Negotiation. London: Phoenix, 2003.

Hatim, Basil, and Jeremy Munday. Translation: An Advanced Resource Book. New York: Routledge, 2004.

Leuven-Zwart, K. Van. “Translation and Original: Similarities and Dissimilarities, I”. Target 1.2 (1989): 151-81.

- - -. “Translation and Original: Similarities and Dissimilarities, II”. Target 2.1 (1990): 69-95.

Newmark, P. A. Textbook of Translation. New York and London: Prentice Hall, 1988.

Saussure, F, de. Course in General Linguistics. Trans. and ed. R. Harris. London: Duckworth, 1916/1983.

Shuttleworth, M., and M.Cowie. Dictionary of Translation Studies. Manchester: St. Jerome, 1997.

Toury, G. In Search of a Theory of Translation. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, 1980.

- - -. Descriptive Translation Studies – and Beyond. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1995.

Vinay, J. P., and J. Darbelnet. Comparative Stylistics of French and English: A Methodology for Translation. Trans. and ed. J. C. Sagar and M. J. Hamel. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1995.

Please check the English Language Improvement for Teachers course at Pilgrims website.
Please check the English Language Improvement for Adults course at Pilgrims website.
Please check the Teaching Advanced Students course at Pilgrims website.