PROBLEMS RELATING TO THE TRANSLATION OF 

YOUNG ADULT’S LITERATURE FROM ENGLISH INTO 

ISIZULU 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By 

Thulasizwe Sylvester Zondi 

 (Student no.2005959) 

 

 

 

 

THE UNIVERSITY OF THE WITWATERSRAND 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A Research Report Submitted to the University of the Witwatersrand for the Degree of 

Master of Arts in Translation in the School of Literature, Language and Media 

 

 

 

March 2022 



DECLARATION 
I affirm that the entire content of this research report is my work. It is being submitted for 

Master of Arts in Translation at the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. It has not 

been submitted before for any degree or examination at any other University. 

 

____________________________________ 

Thulasizwe Sylvester Zondi 

Date: 15 March 2022 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

 My first appreciation, gratitude, and a great shout of praise go to my God Jehovah for his 

constant support, undeserved kindness, and loyal love he has shown me all my life and in 

everything I do. 

I am also sincerely grateful to my supervisor, Dr Bongeka Buhle Hlongwane-Selepe, for her 

guidance, support, and patience throughout my whole research journey as one of her students. 

Through her mentorship during the past four years, I have learned valuable lessons from her, 

academically, professionally, and personally. May God consistently shower her and her family 

with multiple blessings and ensure that all their dreams and desires are realized. 

I am also very thankful to my family, my wife, Mrs Mmaphuthego Zondi and my son 

Thulaganyo Zondi for being very supportive and inspirational to me throughout every journey 

of my life.  

I cannot forget my colleagues who sacrificed a great deal to assist proofread my work to verify 

that all is in order. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



ABSTRACT 
 

Are there any challenges relating to the translation of young adult’s literature from 

English into isiZulu, and how may these be identified and solved? 
 

This Research Report investigates problems relating to the translation of young adult’s 

literature from English into isiZulu. The also present a ranked classification of problems in 

translating young adult’s literature from English into isiZulu, as these are identified. The 

researcher explored challenges relating to the translation of young adult’s literary works by 

translating Sello Mahapeletsa’s When Lions Smile (Mahapeletsa, 2003). 

 

This research will entail categories: supra, main, sub and sub-sub-categories. The supra section 

will incorporate challenges involved in understanding the source text, production of the target 

text, and the transfer process. The main section will comprise challenges regarding technique, 

strategy, micro-language, and macro-language. The sub-section will contain challenges 

regarding culture, background knowledge, style and register, spelling, vocabulary, rhetorical 

and stylistic devices. The sub-sub-sections cover various categories, e.g., omissions, additions, 

spelling slips, fixed expressions, and word order. An experimental ranking of challenges is 

based on the following factors: error severity, error count, and observed pitfalls. The 

combination of source text understanding in young adult’s literature, target text production, 

problems of the transfer process, linguistic problems, and those of an extra-textual nature 

furnishes this research, a status of comprehensiveness that makes it different from most 

research that exists currently. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Contents 
DECLARATION................................................................................................................................... 2 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................................. 3 

ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................................... 4 

CHAPTER ONE ................................................................................................................................... 7 

1.1 Aims and objectives ...................................................................................................................... 7 

1.2. Research questions ....................................................................................................................... 7 

1.3. Background and Rationale ........................................................................................................... 8 

1.4. Literature Review ......................................................................................................................... 8 

1.4.1. The nature of young adult’s literature translation ..................................................................... 9 

1.4.2. Binary Relationship and A Dual Target Audience ................................................................. 11 

1.4.3. The Plurality of Purposes ........................................................................................................ 12 

1.5. Theoretical Framework .............................................................................................................. 12 

1.6. Methodology .............................................................................................................................. 16 

CHAPTER TWO ................................................................................................................................ 19 

2. Translation: effectuation and proficiency problems ..................................................................... 19 

2.0. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 19 

2.1. Proficiency and Effectuation of the Translator .......................................................................... 19 

2.1.1. The notion of acceptability ..................................................................................................... 20 

2.1.2. Translation problems .............................................................................................................. 21 

2.1.3. Classification of translation problems ..................................................................................... 23 

2.1.4. Classification of translation problems ..................................................................................... 25 

2.1.4.1. Text type approach ............................................................................................................... 25 

2.1.4.2. Macro or micro-textual level approach ................................................................................ 27 

2.1.4.3. Summary .............................................................................................................................. 28 

CHAPTER THREE: TRANSLATION OF THE BOOK................................................................ 29 

3.1. Section one ................................................................................................................................. 29 

3.1. Source text ................................................................................................................................. 29 

TRANSLATION OF THE BOOK .................................................................................................... 39 

3.2. Section two................................................................................................................................. 39 

3.2. Target text .................................................................................................................................. 39 

CHAPTER FOUR: RESEARCHER CASE-STUDY ...................................................................... 50 

4.1. Part One: Aims, Methods and Procedures ................................................................................. 50 

4.1.0. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 50 

4.1.1. The aim and the objective of the investigation ....................................................................... 50 

4.1.2. Investigation approach ............................................................................................................ 50 

4.1.3. Examination of problems in Translation ................................................................................. 51 



4.1.3.1. Translation ........................................................................................................................... 51 

4.2. Translation Problems ................................................................................................................. 57 

4.2.0. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 57 

4.2.1. Problems related to linguistic features .................................................................................... 57 

4.2.2. Problems related to textual features ........................................................................................ 66 

4.2.3. Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 73 

CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................. 74 

5.1. Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 74 

5.1.1. Translation problems .............................................................................................................. 75 

BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................................... 77 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



CHAPTER ONE 

1.1 Aims and objectives 

Considering the void in research focusing on the translation of young adult’s literature from 

English into isiZulu, the primary objective in this research is to conduct a pragmatic study that 

seeks to identify challenging aspects of the translation of young adult’s literature. It is empirical 

and aims to perform extensive research involving experimentation in translating various 

sections within the proposed book to investigate various problems in young adult’s literature 

texts for an educational and pedagogic purpose. Identifying pitfalls of phenomena is a positive 

step towards proper analysis and the discovery of appropriate solutions. If such problems, 

challenges, or pitfalls are identified and highlighted, new translation students and novice 

translators may be able to avoid or tackle them head-on. This study also seeks to bring to the 

attention of trainers in the translation discipline pitfalls student generally encounter during the 

translation of young adult’s literature. The study’s outcome will also seek to indicate the degree 

of complexity between various problematic texts encountered, as to whether these are easily 

handled, or are more complex, or whether any of them are specifically unmanageable. In 

practical terms, this research aims to furnish designers of translation curricula, institutions of 

higher learning in translation, and freelance training programs at undergraduate and 

postgraduate level with a checklist of challenges to be aware of when translating young adult’s 

literature from English into isiZulu. 

 

1.2. Research questions: 

1. What types of challenges are involved in translating young adult’s literature from 

English to isiZulu? 

2. How can these challenges be categorised to provide guidelines for future translators of 

such literature? 

3. What kinds of solutions to challenges and problems are most appropriate for the target 

audience? 

 

This research report will contain five chapters: Chapter One highlights the topic of the project 

and outlines the various research questions to be addressed. Chapter Two will consist of a 

literature review; focusing on problems and errors encountered during translation. Chapter 

three will consist of the actual translation of passages from the book. Then Chapter Four will 



consist of a reflexive essay commenting on and summarizing the types of problems the 

researcher encountered and how these were solved. Chapter Five will form the conclusion. 

 

1.3. Background and Rationale 

 

The researcher’s interest in researching problems relating to the translation of young adult’s 

literature from English into isiZulu began during his earlier studies, and it became a more 

definite and fixed topic while he was preparing his proposal. Massoud (1988, p. 10) suggests 

that, in many cases, new translators commence translation projects with the assumption that 

they can perform translation work just because they are bilingual. However, the researcher is 

convinced that thorough academic training is required in order translate successfully. 

 

From the researcher’s perspective and experience, novice translators of young adult’s literature 

and new students in the translation academic landscape are not always cognisant of specific 

demands in each translation project they are given. In addition to that, they seem to be unable 

to identify numerous pitfalls associated with each translation project they receive. This may be 

the result of gaps in translator training. It is public knowledge that in real life, the translation 

market is filled with translation practitioners who did not study translation at postgraduate level 

in a tertiary institution (Massoud, 1988, p. 10). Very often it seems that such practitioners do 

not have a systematic approach to translation challenges and the identification of solutions. 

Identification of potential pitfalls is an important part of analysis and of the choice of 

appropriate solutions during translation. Furthermore, current research is deficient in data that 

seeks to pinpoint pitfalls that characterize the translation of young adult’s literature that may 

be encountered by isiZulu speaking translators during translation from English to isiZulu. 

1.4. Literature Review 

This section seeks to delve into intricacies that may be encountered when translating young 

adult’s literature. Therefore, it will perform a literature review to investigate what young adult’s 

literature is and identify certain convergences between various theories and complications 

involved in ascertaining a working definition due to intricate characteristics. Arguments with 

regards to the nature of young adult’s literature compel us to thoroughly explore the 

idiosyncrasies and convolutions of this genre as these are highlighted by a variety of theorists 

who will be mentioned in this section. Various aspects of young adult’s literature will be 

scrutinized and explored as this section attempts to highlight the involvement of adults at 

various stages of production of literature of this nature. Some of the issues to be explored 



involves ideological characteristics that determine condensation, addition, adaptation, 

omission, and linguistic adjustments. 

 

1.4.1. The nature of young adult’s literature translation 

According to Jobe (1996, p. 513), the translation of young adult’s literature is one of the most 

taxing responsibilities translators may shoulder. He argues that translation of young adult’s 

literature is a complex dilemma, in which a translator finds himself/herself having to 

distinguish as to whether s/he should produce free translation or a translation of a literal nature. 

The translator ought to determine what will work best in the target culture system, whether it 

is sense-for-sense or word-for-word, to ensure the production of a coherent flow of the text 

subject to translation. When selecting a source text-oriented approach, the translator runs a risk 

of producing a translated text that reads awkwardly and may not be understood by the target 

audience. On the flip side, if they choose a target text-oriented approach, they always risk 

producing a translation that lacks certain crucial elements of the source text the author intended 

to convey. In addition to that, adaptation may result in a translated text that is too simple. 

Bastin (2009, p. 4) elucidates adaptation as a phenomenon that may be comprehended as a set 

of translation mechanisms that lead to texts not embraced as a translation but perceived as a 

reflection of the source text. Such a term is generally linked with young adult’s literature 

translation. That connection could be based on necessary transformations and shifts to the 

construction of message that will be conveyed to the target culture system audience since the 

sociolinguistic requirements of the target culture system audience are at variance to those of 

the source culture system. According to what has become common practice, translators would 

generally paraphrase, add and omit in such cases. The idea of adaptation is still perplexing 

when compared to the act of translating. Translation would be more associated with the notion 

of faithfulness to the source text, while any form of distancing, omitting or diversion pinpointed 

as flouting what is regarded as the original would be closely connected with adaptation. The 

practice of adapting can be used for certain parts of the text or the entire text. For instance, 

during a story adaptation in theatre; old information adaptation; by offering clarifications; 

normalizing dialects, slang and words nonsense; in recreating cultural contexts; in maintaining 

the message, ideas and function of the source text, but locating the message in a new context 

without being concerned with the literalness (Bastin, 2009, p. 4). 



Amid translation discussions, it is common to have questions about various specificities of 

translating young adults and children’s literature. Such questions would generally be centred 

around the differences between the two types of translation and whether the translation of 

young adult’s literature is easier or more complex to perform compared to adult literature. 

According to Klingberg (1986, p. 10), it is impossible to identify boundaries between the 

problems in the translation of adult and young adult’s texts. Problems in these texts tend to be 

similar in multiple ways, but on certain occasions, they may pose serious challenges that 

demand more focus from the translators in terms of academic theory and methodology. Maybe 

such a difference is precisely one of the reasons why young adult’s literature translation may 

be perceived as a simple exercise. Other theorists like Van Coillie and Verschueren (2006, pp. 

5-6) appear to support Klingberg’s position. The authors explain that being cognisant that 

translation of young adult’s texts is not different from that of adult’s literature is crucial for the 

liberation of a research area which was formerly neglected.  

Nevertheless, they further state that contemporary translation of young adult’s texts is 

perceived as a literary dilemma, and it is no less problematic than the translation of texts for 

adults. On the other hand, creating and using playful language creates more challenges that 

force translators to put themselves in young adult’s shoes and adopt their perspective, 

particularly their imaginative nature. In addition to numerous aspects facing translators of 

young adult’s literature, they also ought to keep themselves completely indiscernible in the 

translated text, meaning their presence ought not to be detected by the readership of the 

translated product. Such a stance is diametric since translators are the ones who should perform 

an adaptation of the text to make it functional. As Lathey (2006, pp. 1-2) puts it, even though 

translators’ names are not indicated in the text, their silent voices are characterized through 

their discursive existence in the text. 

Emer O’Sullivan (2013) lists five problems that take centre stage during a discussion of the 

translation of young adult’s literature. For example, foreignization/domestication, young 

adult’s perspective from the translator’s and target community’s point of view, the binary 

communicative relationships between adults, middleman, young adults, semiotic features, and 

readability (texts and images), and a relative degree of elements like onomatopoeia and 

nonsense, rhymes and wordplay which demand innovativeness from the translator’s point of 

view. Tabbert (2002) states that translators of young adult’s literature encounter multiple 

problems. To highlight some of these, the author pinpoints those associated with the source 



text, e.g., incorporating texts and pictures, cultural variances, ludic usage of language, a binary 

dual target audience made up of both adults and young adults, linguistic styles, dialect and 

sociolect differences. In terms of the target culture system text, there seem to be problems 

pertinent to an ideology like purifying and simplifying the language to achieve readability. 

Amid various aspects indicated by scholars mentioned above, the researcher might go further 

and include Jobe’s (1996) frame of reference on problems that exist in young adult’s literature 

translation and zoom in on three aspects for further discussion: the binary relationship between 

the dual-target audience, the plurality of purposes and the manipulation of the text. 

1.4.2. Binary Relationship and A Dual Target Audience 

On the premise of Lathey’s (2009, p. 31) argument, the young adult/adult duality is notable in 

the discussion of young adult’s literature in efforts to establish and distinguish whether young 

adult’s literature is intended for adults while aimed at a young adult’s audience in the target 

culture system, or if such texts are directed to adults and ultimately read by young adults or 

read by both readerships made up of young adults and adults. Numerous attempts to define 

young adult’s literature draw particular attention to the adult’s presence at every stage of 

producing this kind of text. One fundamental point worth mentioning here is the transformation 

of this implicit relationship that may result from translation within the text. The fact that adults 

examine literature that is meant to be read by young adults is the primary aspect that 

distinguishes adult literature from young adult’s texts. Adults are actively portrayed as a 

middleman in all stages of production of books until these reach the hands of intended target 

culture system recipients. In addition to that, the literature is managed by librarians on library 

shelves while teachers utilize them in classes and encourage students to read them. Also, adults 

are the ones who buy these books while playing the roles of censors and readers at the same 

time. Ironically, no young adult’s literature would exist in the absence of adults’ involvement 

in the production process (O'Sullivan, 2013). 

In as much as the presence of the adult person is not always clearly discernible in young adult’s 

literature, the dual readership will consistently exist due to all adult interventions in the various 

stages of literature production mentioned above (Alvstad, 2010). Hunt (2010, p. 80) postulates 

that when adult people scan through literature meant for young adults, they do so to censor and 

recommend such literature either for professional or personal use while judging whether these 

are appropriate for young adults or not. There is a sharp dichotomy of requirements and 

preferences amongst all participants involved in the young adult’s literature production 



process, which consequently cause translation to be a dilemma and a problematic exercise. 

Translators ought to comprehend various readers participating in the textual fabric of the work 

and determine how they are to allude to those specific readers. 

1.4.3. The Plurality of Purposes 

Young adult’s texts are not divergent only in terms of their various models and relationships 

concerning their readers but also in achieving multiple purposes. By concurrently being 

associated with two systems, the pedagogical and the literary systems are characterized by the 

educational, cultural, and social patterns, ideas, and values of a specific period and, for 

O'Sullivan (2013), these are associated with customary practices whose primary purpose is the 

socialization of its target culture system audience. In terms of the educational features of young 

adult’s literature, the relationship between school and literature commences when young adults 

start reading printed literature meant for them. Such ties position young adult’s texts in two 

places. Firstly, as a middleman between young adults and consumers in the community who 

gradually emerge into existence; and secondly, as peripheral to the demands of the school since 

schools are generally at the forefront in encouraging and promoting circulation of young adult’s 

literature among learners. Lathey (2006, p. 7) states that the reading of young adult’s literature 

was always linked to teaching and educational objectives, indicating a pedagogic nature in 

young adult’s literature even before there existed specific literature books. Translations are not 

immune from such a role since, apart from serving entertainment purposes, these also serve as 

modes of transportation for various ideologies and may be manipulated to ensure they conform 

to various market requirements, values, and ideas prevalent in any given target culture system. 

1.5. Theoretical Framework 

To answer such research questions indicated above, this section of the study will rely on and 

be guided by the theoretical framework outlined in this section. There is hardly a study, either 

an article or book on translation, that does not mention the word “problem” at least several 

times. However, translation problems have not been exhaustively investigated. While studying 

these translation problems would eventually benefit trainees, trainers should be enlightened 

about what is a problem in the first place because trainers must be able to point out specific 

problems rather than relying on vague impressions, and they must be able to back up their 

decisions with more substance and scientific evidence (Bowker, 2000, p. 186). 

Moreover, as mentioned above, identifying problems is the first step towards positive 

evaluation and analysis of successful solutions. Though some apply to most or even all 



language pairs, some can be very specific and even unique to that pair. So, what is a translation 

problem? For now, a simple definition could be that a translation problem is anything that 

imposes challenges in conveying the message of one language into another, whether the latter 

be an element (word), a string of elements (clause), a phrase, a grammatical pattern or even a 

whole text. The intensity of challenges may differ, resulting in the assumption that translation 

problems belong to various categories in terms of challenge. While a translation problem 

should be defined in its more comprehensive concept as anything in a text that does not translate 

straightforwardly or unaided, in this study, they are mainly defined in the context of the 

outcome of the translation (i.e. concerning what result in errors). In other works of literature, 

translation problems are referred to as ‘challenges’ and ‘pitfalls’ (Clark, 2000, p. 20). Others 

alternate between ‘difficulties’ and ‘problems’ (Pontiero, 1992; Mauriello, 1992). Peter 

Newmark (1980) also use problems and difficulties together without differentiating between 

the two labels. Newmark (1993, p. 2) characterizes a translation problem as a stretch of texts 

of various lengths which may not be readily amenable to literal or word for word translation. 

As for the more general question of what a translation problem is, the definition given by De 

Beaugrande and Dressler (1981, p. 37) to a problem and its ranking and solving is highly 

relevant to the way we look at a translation problem and its ranking in terms of difficulty in the 

present study. 

In terms of “Children’s literature”, another term often used in this research report, is generally 

acknowledged as difficult to define in children’s literature and children’s literature translation 

studies due to the ambiguity and cultural variability of the terms “children” and “literature”, 

and to the wide range of literary species which have come to be considered appropriate for 

children (O'Connell, 2006, pp. 16-17; Maybin & Watson, 2009, pp. 3-4; Hunt, 2009, pp. 22-

23; Pearson & Hunt, 2011, pp. 3-7). Consequently, various working definitions have been 

proposed, such as “literature which is read silently by children and aloud to children” (Oittinen, 

1993, p. 11), or “literature intended for readers aged between one and eighteen at the time it 

was written” (Pearson & Hunt, 2011, p. 4). In this study, “children” are defined as persons aged 

up to eighteen; however, distinctions are made between younger and older readers whenever 

necessary, mainly since the book When Lions Smile by Sello Mahapeletsa (2003) is intended 

for young adults. “Children’s literature” is understood as literature published for children, 

including texts written expressly for children and texts that have eventually been embraced as 

appropriate for children, although initially not explicitly aimed at them. As a “young” strand 

of translation theory with origins in comparative studies, children’s literature translation theory 



counts no more than six decades. During this time, there are various theories that influence one 

way or different translation approaches, strategies, and norms in children’s literature translation 

and pose issues of concern in the field. 

The treatment of cultural references in translation has received much attention in young adult’s 

literature translation studies. Although the concept is not always clearly defined, the existing 

literature explores various items that are specific to the source culture system which may be 

challenging to transfer into the target language and culture, including food items, flora and 

fauna, units of measure and currency, songs and rhymes, games, cultural practices, proper 

names, intertextual references and humour (wordplay) as indicated in Klingberg (1986, pp. 17-

18; Cascallana, 2006, p. 103; Nic Lochlainn, 2013). A distinct category is cultural references 

in the source text system, which pertain to other cultures or the target culture (Minier, 2006, 

pp. 129-130; Joosen, 2006, pp. 75-76). The discussion here explores young adult’s literature 

translation findings regarding the general challenges and strategies of translating cultural 

references. 

Cultural references are more challenging to translate in young adult’s literature than in 

literature for adults, mainly due to the more limited world knowledge of the target audience 

and the translator’s and publisher’s conceptions regarding their reader’s ability to cope with 

the unfamiliar. Various authors advocate either domesticating or foreignizing approaches for 

translating cultural references. Thus, Oittinen (2006, pp. 42-43) states that choosing between 

domestication and foreignization in young adult’s literature translation is less clear-cut since a 

foreignized text may alienate young adults from reading. González Cascallana (2006) 

expresses a similar concern about young adult’s rejection of the unfamiliar and criticizes a 

perceived foreignizing tendency in young adult’s literature translation which “ignores 

contextual and pragmatic considerations and therefore causes alienation of the target reader 

through the presence of culture bumps (p. 108). In contrast, other scholars claim that the 

preservation of source culture references allow young adults to experience otherness and 

increase their intercultural awareness (Mambrini, 2010, p. 250; Hoving, 2006, p. 43). 

O’Sullivan (2005) argues that young adults are used to facing the unfamiliar since they 

commonly encounter new things as they grow up (p. 95). 

The challenging nature of cultural references in translation is also evident from the range of 

strategies employed by translators. Several studies explore these strategies, often based on 

Venuti’s domestication-foreignization dichotomy, and attempt to account for them. The factors 



that can influence translation strategies include conceptions of childhood, educational 

philosophies, ideas regarding the purpose of translations, commercial interests, language 

policy, and translated young adult’s literature in the target literary systems (Lathey, 2006c). 

Desmidt (2006) points out that “localization” is typical, especially when translators prioritize 

pedagogical norms (“the emotional and cognitive development of the reader”) and  achieving 

the same effect as that of the original (pp. 90-91). When the primary purpose is raising cultural 

awareness, a foreignizing approach is preferred; this can be a publisher’s general policy, 

complied with by translators (Parkinson, 2013, p. 156). Kruger’s (2012) investigation of 

translations for young adults in South Africa suggests that one of the main assumptions of 

polysystems theory does not apply in the South African context. According to Even-Zohar 

(1978), domestication frequently occurs in peripherally positioned translations, and 

foreignization and innovation, in centrally placed ones. 

Nevertheless, young adult’s literature translated into Afrikaans is peripheral because it only 

complements original productions, the Afrikaans translators in Kruger’s study claim that they 

do not domesticate significantly. Moreover, translations into African languages are central 

because they are essential for building a corpus of reading matter for young adults, while 

African-language translators feel it is necessary to domesticate (Kruger, 2012, pp. 272-273). 

Furthermore, Kruger’s textual analysis reveals that translators use both strategies to various 

degrees in practice, depending on the perceived functions of the books and their degree of 

foreignness (p. 276). A related point regarding “marginalized languages” and language policy 

is made by Nic Lochlainn (2013) concerning Irish translations of English texts. Nic Lochlainn 

quotes previous research suggesting that domestication can help improve literacy among 

speakers of minority languages (p. 74). Such concurs with the opinions of the African-language 

translators quoted by Kruger. Nevertheless, Nic Lochlainn also remarks that most English 

children whose literature is translated into Irish are bilingual and therefore may be familiar 

with the original books and their cultural references. As a result, a domesticating translation 

policy is not justified (p. 86). 

References to the target culture or other cultures also entail specific challenges and strategies. 

Minier (2006) comments on the “Ruritania” references in Harry Potter (an allusion to Eastern 

Europe and the Balkans), which the Hungarian translator could have “corrected” by replacing 

with references to Western Europe or to cultures to which the Hungarians feel superior. Minier 

states that the references were preserved, although she does not explain why (pp. 129-130). 

References to the target culture in the source text may be received differently by the target 



culture audience. For example, the “Hungarian Horntail” dragon may sound “exotic” to British 

children but would be a reason for national pride for Hungarians (p. 130). Such references may 

also have a positive defamiliarizing effect for target culture readers, as could have been the 

case with the 26 Dutch translations of Chambers’s Postcards from No Man’s Land. Although 

the original is set in Amsterdam and includes explanations about the dutch language and 

lifestyle, its defamiliarizing potential was not preserved in the Dutch edition, which removed 

those explanations, considered redundant for Dutch readers (Joosen, 2006, pp. 75-76). 

There is little empirical research on young adult’s reception of translated cultural references, 

and the few published studies (Kruger, 2012; Stoica, 2012) suggest that further investigation is 

necessary. Kruger’s eye-tracking experiments concerning children’s and adult’s reactions to 

domesticating and foreignizing strategies indicate that the effects of such strategies (e. g. on 

comprehension) are neither regular nor predictable and require further research (2012, p. 277). 

Based on surveys and cloze tests administered to 10-14-year-old Romanian children, Stoica’s 

study identifies differing attitudes to domestication and foreignization. Furthermore, only about 

one-third of the young adults had a good understanding of a largely foreignized text. Based on 

this, Stoica raises the degree of foreignization that is acceptable in a translated text. She 

concludes that the young adults in her study have different attitudes to foreign cultures, 

depending on the context. While they adopt foreign customs and use English to communicate 

in real life, they are “more conservative” when they read translated texts (Stoica, 2012, pp. 

104-112). To conclude, young adult’s literature translation research frequently deals with the 

translation of cultural references, whose challenging nature stems from children’s limited 

world knowledge and adults’ concern that too much “foreignness” might alienate them. There 

is little and generally inconclusive empirical research into young adult’s reception of 

foreignized or domesticated translations, but young adult’s literature translation scholars 

advocate domesticating or foreignizing approaches and show that translation strategies are 

affected by commercial and ideological (including pedagogical) concerns. 

1.6. Methodology 

The primary method the researcher will use to answer the research questions in this study will 

be translating texts that will be subject to close investigation. During the translation process, 

the researcher will record various problems s/he will encounter in a notebook under headings 

alluding to the type of the problem, e.g., word order, terminology, expression, metaphor, and 

more. The researcher will also write down notes in diary form about those elements of the texts 

that s/he anticipated might prove problematic for a trainee or novice translator (if not always 



for myself) based on differences between the two languages or cultures of these languages. To 

avoid production of a biased translation, the researcher requested five translators to read his 

work to ensure correctness. 

 

All problems that seem to belong to the same category will subsequently be grouped with the 

examples illustrating them as extracted from the texts and listed separately in different sheets. 

Problems will be recorded in English, and some will be listed with a commentary elaborating 

on the nature of the problem at hand. A labelling system will be created to identify the type of 

potential problem, e.g., cultural, grammatical, stylistic, pragmatic. Problems will sometimes be 

listed with their possible solutions and commentaries, and on some instances, reasons why such 

solutions were opted for will be provided. The process of text translation will not primarily be 

aimed at providing solutions to translation problems but at identifying as multiple potential 

problems as possible and exploring their nature. However, searching for the best solutions will 

help determine the actual problem and its severity. 

 

Besides the notes of categories of problems and commentaries recorded per text, some of the 

notes are researcher’s memos. Such memos are notes regarding the verification of the 

translation with a professional translator or revisiting the text. As an organizational procedure 

and for convenience of reverting to texts, texts will be numbered sequentially according to their 

order and page location: e.g., Text 1: 20 will be referring to the first text that appears in the 

research report on page 20. As insinuated above, at times, such noting will be performed as a 

reminder to consult a particular professional translator for opinion, and the name of such 

translator will also be recorded. In addition, such memos will serve as reminders for taking 

certain actions concerning specific aspects, such as turning to different resources. 

 

Texts were translated in the order in which they are listed in the book. To evade a disruption 

of translation flow, problems that proved to be stubborn in one way or another will be skipped 

or dealt with utilizing a temporary solution at the time but marked in for revision and another 

attempt at a later stage (Newmark, 1983; Weaver, 1989, p. 117). If other solutions proved 

unsatisfactory, the preliminary one might become ultimate. When the effort become strenuous, 

for the sake of continuity, the translation task will still be carried out while activities 

accompanying the process of translation - such as recording the problems, writing commentary, 

or resorting to resources for help – will be postponed. Those will then be concluded at the 

revision stage. Suspect target texts (when there is uncertainty as to whether it is acceptable or 



not) will be marked for more revision and editing or consultation of professional translators for 

assistance. The researcher does not anticipate that text translation will always be a 

straightforward process, as texts occasionally require extra effort to process or better 

understand the source text. For commentary that is after translation of each section, the 

annotations method will be utilized. 

 

As the study focuses on translation products as data, a heavy emphasis will be laid on material 

selection. Various chapters from eleven chapters of the book When Lions Smile, authored by 

Sello Mahapeletsa (2003), were selected for translation. The objective during selection is to 

ensure that such texts contain as multiple varied translation problems as possible. As the 

primary purpose of the task was to investigate translation problems, the selection of the texts 

will, on the evidence of the researcher case study, mainly be based on how many varied 

problems each might exhibit, and on how far the definitive collection of texts in its entirety 

was comprehensive, hence representing as many as possible translation problems identified in 

the study. Of course, when a text exhibits more than one translation problem, interference 

between problems becomes possible. Such means that one problem can create another or lead 

to another and that the presence of one problem makes another one more difficult, hence 

making it more challenging to determine its rank in terms of difficulty. For practical reasons, 

however, not every translation problem can be tested in isolation from others, and as a matter 

of principle, it may not be desirable, as problems interact in real life. Texts to be tested, 

therefore, represents most translation problems. The researcher translated a single text during 

the case study. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

CHAPTER TWO 

 

2. TRANSLATION: EFFECTUATION AND PROFICIENCY PROBLEMS 

 

2.0. Introduction 

 

The focal point of this section is to address the issue of direct relevance in translation and that 

of mistakes and problems. As a point of departure, the researcher addresses translation 

effectuation and proficiency. 

 

2.1. Proficiency and Effectuation of the Translator 

 

Van den Broeck (1980, p. 86) interprets what he alludes to as a 'basic' translator's proficiency 

as his/her capacity to handle various texts as a translator, effectively conveying messages from 

one language to another, from one culture to the other, and from one system of textual norms 

to the next. Also, Pym (1992, p. 281) describes proficiency in translation to include a 

combination of three skills: 

 

The capability to produce a target culture text series of more than a single suitable 

term and the capacity only to choose one from such a variety, instantly and with 

conviction, and to suggest such a target text equivalent as a substitute of a source 

text for a specified objective and audience. 

 

The above definitions allude to the translator's proficiency as a capacity that requires some 

skill. Hatim and Mason (1997, p. 205) offer what is deemed a categorization of a translator's 

capabilities that include skills to process the source and target text and convey the message 

effectively. Such an analysis aligns with Bachman et al's (1990) analysis that indicates that a 

language that communicates is founded on three classifications of knowledge and skills, e.g., 

organizational proficiency, pragmatic proficiency, and strategic proficiency. At this juncture, 

we ought to differentiate between bilingual proficiency, which begins simultaneously with their 

proficiency in two languages in question, and the proficiency in translation, which is acquired 

through training in which trainees are granted exposure to a specific translation material chosen 

for fulfilling such an objective (Harris, 1977) (Lörscher, 1990) (Jones, 1995). 



 

Both proficiencies generally manifest themselves through the ability to understand the source 

text and produce the target text. What is proposed here is that although failure to understand 

the source text may result in the incorrect translation, the understanding of a source may not 

necessarily mean a correct translation will be produced. Many translation theorists have taken 

too much time to examine the understanding stage and its extra and intra-textual elements 

(Nord, 1991); however, based on Dancette (1995) in Bastin (2000, p. 232), such is not the case 

with the production process stage. In terms of the target language and its language system, 

knowledge and good command of its cultural features, skill to produce texts in the target 

language, and skill to handle idiomatic language are fundamental aspects that result in a good 

translation. Nevertheless, the credibility of the presumption that what is clearly understood can 

be efficiently re-expressed and relevant lexical equivalence may easily be achieved remains a 

contentious issue (Bastin, 2000, p. 232). This last point concerns the third primary skill, which 

is the capacity to translate the source text into good but optimally faithful message to the target 

culture system. Translation proficiency is demonstrated through translation effectuation. 

Translation effectuation is usually used but rarely clearly defined. Based on Shuttleworth and 

Cowie (1997, p. 124): 

 

Post Chomsky's distinction, Toury (1980) utilizes the concept of effectuation to 

define the occasion of instances of translation instead of any system of translation 

possibilities existing between any potential source language and target language. 

 

Translation effectuation leads to a translation product that may be considered unacceptable or 

acceptable. Thus, effectuation can be used as an instrument to assess translation quality that is 

presumed to demonstrate proficiency, as will be elucidated below. 

 

2.1.1. The notion of acceptability 

Due to the nature of translation discipline, incorrect and correct is generally not definite, and 

when translation is assessed, common ground is always considered; acceptability and 

unacceptability are frequently utilized instead of correct and incorrect in translation 

assessment. Such acceptability creates problems and makes it challenging to perform 

translation assessments. Newmark (1991) postulates: 

 

It is easy to identify good translation, but it is complex to describe. 



 

House believes that a good translation should not read like a translation (1997, pp. 1-2). 

According to Lauscher (2000, p. 151), a good translation seeks to achieve its maximum 

equivalence. Nevertheless, Maier (2000, p. 139) argues that a description that says a "good" 

translation, whether as admirable as House's model or not, is maybe a more abiding concern 

when it comes to literary rather than non-literary translations. 

 

Good translation incorporates a high level of quality in translation, which is a concept a little 

closer to what Rose (1987) defines as 'translation excellence'. Based on Rose, 'excellence' - in 

an ideal situation - would seek to produce a maximum translation, which may hardly be 

achieved, if it does exist. She elucidates that such excellence involves a suitable and sufficient 

translation of the source text for a target culture system, where the suitability and the adequacy 

of translation would apply to both the text and the audience. Nida and Taber (1969, p. 1) believe 

an excellent translation must satisfy the requirements of the target audience it is meant for. 

They posit that the average reader for which the translation is meant should likely comprehend 

it correctly.  

 

2.1.2. Translation problems 

While translation problems ought to be described in their broader sense since anything in a text 

does not translate easily or without help, in this investigation, these are defined mainly in the 

context of translation results. Problems in the translation are assigned a variety of titles in 

literature, e.g., challenges, pitfalls, difficulties, and so on (Clark, 2000, p. 20) (Pontiero, 1992) 

(Mauriello, 1992) (Newmark, 1980). A problem of translation which Newmark (1993: 2) 

defines as a text of various lengths not produced through a word-for-word rendering, is 

examined from different angles in this investigation. As for the more general question of what 

a translation problem is, the description offered by de Beaugrande and Dressler (1981, p. 37) 

to a problem and its categorization and solution proves more relevant to how we scrutinize 

problems in translation and their categorization in terms of complexity in the current 

investigation: 

 

A PROBLEM is defined as a pair of states whose connecting pathway is subject to 

FAILURE (not being traversed) because it cannot be found or identified. A 

SERIOUS PROBLEM would obtain if the chances of failure significantly 

outweigh success. The problem is SOLVED when a pathway is found leading 



without interruption from the INITIAL STATE to the GOAL STATE. A BLOCK 

has occurred if a point is reached where the problem-solver cannot advance at all 

toward the goal. 

 

The above quotation refers more to perceived process complexity, while our investigation 

focuses mainly on product error when error alludes to failure to solve the problem. Nord's 

(1991, p. 151) distinction of problems in translation and difficulties in translation appears more 

relevant to our investigation when she states: 

 

A problem of translation is an objective one all translators ought to solve during 

the performance of some translation exercise, on the contrary, difficulties in the 

translation are subjective and have everything to do with the translator directly, and 

working conditions s/he is subject to. 

 

Nord suggests that while a problem can exist and the translator is cognizant of it, the word 

difficulty defines an issue concerning hardship it presents and the ability to solve it with ease. 

Concerning difficulties in translation, Nord states: 

 

A specific problem that appears too complex for a novice translator will always be 

a problem, even when it has acquired skills to overcome it. It can still become a 

difficulty when solving it in the absence of needed resources (Nord, 1991, p. 151). 

 

In this investigation, even though the researcher's usage of problems comprises difficulties, the 

word difficulty is not employed to substitute the word problem. In this study, Nord's distinction 

is embraced and further developed as follows: 

 

A problem in translation is a possible barrier based on the absence of skill or 

linguistic variance, while difficulty is a discerned problem. A problem may be 

complex to overcome, or it may be overcome with ease. As a result, if a translation 

problem is overcome, a correct translation is accomplished (acceptable). If it is not 

overcome, that results in incorrect translation (unacceptable) or an error which is a 

flawed translation caused by failure to overcome a problem. An error may be too 

serious when it hinders intended communication or conveys incorrect knowledge 

or mild if it does not hinder the intended message. 



 

Our description of problems related to translating in this investigation has a few dimensions: 

difficulties, which may be recognized by the novice translator who performs a translation 

exercise, are what we refer to as discerned problems. However, others may not be recognized 

by the novice translator, but may still lead to errors. The severity of problems is decided based 

on the translation results or the translation product. Some detected problems may slow down 

the translation process due to hesitancy but may ultimately be overcome, while some may result 

in a flawed or incorrect translation or completely stall the translation exercise. Here we have a 

distinction regarding the process and the product. What happens in the translator's mind during 

translation is what is referred to as a "process" of translation, which would possibly entail 

hesitation when seeking translation strategies. Flawed translation, on the contrary, has 

everything to do with the "product", the kind of error which is what this investigation is also 

focussed on. 

 

2.1.3. Classification of translation problems 

In the field of empirical studies in translation, problems relating to translating have been 

divided into problems relating to understanding and problems relating to production (Lam, 

1995, pp. 912-913). Problems relating to understanding are linked to comprehension of the 

source text. These refer to a term, phrase, or sentence in which the translator was slowed down 

trying to understand the source text or find a suitable equivalent for the target culture system. 

Problems relating to production have everything to do with finding suitable equivalents for the 

target culture system. In terms of how to efficiently handle problems relating to translating, 

Fang (1959, p. 110) highlights three focal points to pay attention to: 

 

Sufficient understanding of the source text, good command of the target language, 

and translation process. 

 

On the contrary, Wilss (1995, p. 858) distinguishes between problems at two levels: macro-

context and micro-context. In terms of how to solve macro-contextual problems, she elucidates 

that the translator requires a blueprint that ultimately targets text oriented. Here the focus is on 

message conveyed and the target audience. On the other hand, micro-contextual matters entail 

phrases and terms. Under the banner of problems relating to translating, Nord (1991, p. 151) 

lists four classifications: (a) translation problems that are text-specific, caused by some aspects 

of the source text, e.g., a wordplay, (b) translation process problems, surfacing during the 



translation exercise, e.g., the recipient orientation of the text, (c) translation problems that are 

culture-specific, caused by divergent conventions and norms that characterize the source and 

the target culture systems, e.g., text-type conventions, and (d) language translation problems, 

caused by differences in structure between the target and the source language. Nida (1976) 

sums up problems relating to translating in two classifications: content problems and form 

problems. Newmark (1980, p. 128) alludes to problems relating to the translation that is typical 

as: 

 

The most common equivalent grammatical structures and their variants in each 

language concerning English; the various methods of rendering institutional terms, 

including couplets and triplets; the methods of normalizing idiolect, including the 

reduction of wayward or stock metaphors to sense; when to distinguish source 

language synonyms; how to deal with neologisms, acronyms, eponyms, proper 

names, statistics; how to do a quick practical componential analysis, and so on. 

 

What Newmark appears to mean by typical translation problems is the most general problem 

relating to linguistic features and transmission strategies. Nida and Taber (1969) add their 

notion to the list of personal problems. Included among these problems are problems relating 

to too much information regarding the subject matter, underestimating translations, insecurity 

about one's language, a desire to conserve the language mystery, wrong theological 

preconceptions, lack of translation knowledge. Massoud (1988, pp. 36-38) further adds to such 

'personal problems' when she refers to them as problems related to the translator. She cites too 

much focus in language subtleties and lack of respect for the readership, incorrect focus, less 

respect for the source text, lack of knowledge about similar words with a different connotation. 

Such problems that result in translations – understood or not - that convey an interpretation 

utterly contrary to the intended initially are primarily due to insufficient knowledge regarding 

the source language or a lack of writing skills in the target language (Massoud, 1988, pp. 10-

11). Other problems Massoud refers to and which come under 'personal problems' are 

inadequate knowledge of the source language culture, lack of cognizance in the historical 

changes in the meaning of the words, or unsophisticated comprehension of the source language, 

especially in terms of idioms and metaphors. She mentions two parlous errors resulting from 

the problems, as mentioned earlier. Firstly, translations are generally incomprehensible, even 

though they have been translated using the lexical rendering of the text. Secondly, they can be 

understood but convey a meaning contrary to the intended meaning (Massoud, 1988, p. 10). 



The above models are similar in various levels but differ in labelling. For example, some 

people's problems are other people's comprehension problems. Mauriello (1992, p. 64) sets 

what she calls reference steps to assess the severity of the difficulty of a text's problem based 

on 'typology' criteria, allowing her to categorize the degree of complexity. She claims this can 

also identify the difficulties in the text. 

 

In this investigation, the researcher focuses on problems relating to source language features 

and target language and target text features and adopts a two-distinction categorization to 

differentiate between two kinds of translation problems: linguistic problems and textual 

problems that may lead to language and textual errors, respectively (Hatim & Mason, 1997). 

Since this study focuses on text-related problems and its analytical framework is based on 

language features, personal problems referred to by Nida and Taber (1969) and Massoud 

(1988) are irrelevant here. However, they may assist in elucidating linguistic feature-related 

problems scrutinized through the current study. 

 

2.1.4. Classification of translation problems 

The Classification of translation problems allows one to design translation training programs 

accordingly. One of the principles of multiple training programs is that progress should be from 

easy to difficult, which implies considering the order of kinds of texts chosen for training and 

the complexity within such types of text. However, this is by no means a definite fact and 

remains a presumption as authentic teaching material would generally entail a variety of 

linguistic features that vary in complexity. Nonetheless, a classification could aid in detecting 

problems that require more practice time to overcome and those that require less time, or which 

only advanced trainees can handle effectively. There seem to be three approaches in 

categorizing translation problems: ranking according to text type, the inter-textual level 

approach, and the translation training approach. 

 

2.1.4.1. Text type approach 

In a rough ranking of translation problems within the context of degrees of translatability, Sager 

(1993) classifies translation problems on a scale ranging from maximum uncertainty to the 

most remarkable ease of translation. The difficulty of translation results from what he calls 

conflicting demands while easing translation he sees as deriving from maximum restriction and 

prescription of tasks, thus leading to pre-established equivalents. His criteria for such a 

classification are based on the concept of the existence or absence of units of equivalence 



between linguistic items of two languages which may be established according to text type, 

sub-language, text segments or whatever other criteria may be relevant (Sager , 1993, p. 131). 

At the top of the difficulty scale, Sager places puns, anagrams, palindromes, and other plays 

on words that he says cannot be translated, i.e., are untranslatable. These forms of wordplay, 

he explains, must be 'recreated' in a target language because they are entirely text-bound. 

Despite this fact, he maintains that degrees of translatability can be established relatively 

quickly at the level of text types. According to this, Sager deems it possible to classify texts on 

a scale that ranges from maximum uncertainty to the most remarkable ease of translation. On 

such a scale, poetry, texts of songs, jokes and film scripts rank among the most difficult because 

of their need to balance content with requirements of form; less complex would-be advertising 

texts such as tourist brochures and guidebooks, as well as plays, novels, and religious texts. 

Even further down the scale, fewer problems are encountered, as in journalistic, legal, 

economic, and sociological texts, because of the numerous precedents which serve as models. 

Considerably less complex would-be legal documents and court proceedings, which need to fit 

into established patterns and conform to precise models. Official documents and scientific and 

technical texts offer still fewer problems as they are considered less context-dependent and 

therefore less culture-bound. 

 

By employing these criteria, Sager is confident that few obstacles should be encountered with 

such specific texts as cookery recipes and weather reports. He explains that circumstances of 

use and readership are the same in the source and target language, and fixed models determine 

the accepted modes of expression. He calls the extreme of translatability at the lowest point - 

such text forms as nomenclature lists, part lists, technical specifications and measurements, and 

labels can be translated if they already have precise equivalents in terms of text form and lexical 

items (Sager , 1993, pp. 131-132). Snell-Hornby (1988, p. 41) proposes a continuum of text 

type and relevant criteria where literary texts, especially those embedded in a culture of distant 

past, tend to be less easily translatable than those dealing with the "universals" of modern 

science. To avoid generalization in this respect, for example, Pontiero (1992, p. 300) states 

that: A seemingly artless tale for young children can throw up as many difficulties as lines from 

Dante or a particularly obscure passage from Racine, Cervantes or Quevedo. 

 

Such implies that broad notions of text type are not very reliable indicators of difficulty; what 

is more reliable is specific features within the text, whether language features (e.g., vocabulary 

and grammar) or textual features (e.g., cohesion and register). Classifying texts according to 



text type is usually based on more prominent language features such as lexis or syntax. As texts 

are often hybrid when it comes to such features (i.e., a mix of features), text type is almost 

certainly insufficient as an index of difficulty. 

 

2.1.4.2. Macro or micro-textual level approach 

The macro-textual level refers to the totality of the text (e.g., text-type), and the micro-textual 

level refers to details in the text (e.g., content). Problems at the level of macro context Wilss 

(1995, p. 58) says they are only minor, whereas handling micro contextual problems often 

necessitates time-consuming formulation and reformulation, with frequent leaping efforts of to 

and fro between the target and the source text. For Wills, these obstructions include semantic 

vagueness, syntactic complexity and syntactic ellipses, the distribution of thematic and 

rhematic information in sentence relationships, metaphorical expressions, ironic incongruities, 

distorted or ineffective formulations, morphological idiosyncrasies, adjectival-substantive 

collocations, gerundial and participial constructions, and so on. Some of these problems can 

cause severe or almost insurmountable difficulties, for even the experienced translator and 

hence are more complex (Wilss, 1995, p. 58). However, Wilss' ranking still considers text type; 

domain-specific texts such as technical reports or academic articles raise only minor problems 

at the level of macro context while literary texts are more difficult at the micro contextual level. 

Triandis (1976, p. 229) classifies what one must translate into two categories: universal or 

culture specific. The first concept such as fire, noon, and sun, he says, produce fewer translation 

difficulties than the latter concepts, such as the Greek concept of philotimia or the Anglo-

American concept of fairness. By contrast, Nida (1976) considers problems of form to be 

generally more difficult to translate than problems of content: 

 

One can simply analyze and define the cognitive equivalences of content than the 

formal equivalences of language. That is to say, the features of components of 

cognitive interpretation can be more readily conveyed and, if necessary, 

redistributed from source to receptor language than the corresponding elements of 

discourse structure, Nida (1976, p. 51). 

 

In the context of translation equivalence, where pairs of languages are compared in search for 

correspondence, Farghal (1994, p. 57) emphasizes that: 

 



Comparing words or grammatical forms between languages looks simpler than 

comparing metaphors or proverbs, which is still simpler than comparing 

condolences at funerals or festivities at weddings. Moving from 'micro-levels' like 

words and phrases to 'macro-levels' like whole discourse transactions is always 

complicated and soon spills beyond the 'purely linguistic' borders. 

 

Examining lexis, Saraireh (1994, p. 79) classifies technical terms in translating between 

English and Arabic as belonging to three categories: the first includes lexical items of the 

source language which have direct equivalents, the second items which have only partial 

equivalents, and the third items which do not have equivalents so that the translator must coin 

or borrow terms.' In terms of ranking, he labels the first as easy, with more effort being needed 

for the second type and the real problems coming from the third. A similar ranking system was 

initially proposed for the main categories and their immediate subcategories in the present 

study. 

 

2.1.4.3. Summary 

In this section, the main issues discussed are translation proficiency and effectuation, errors in 

translation and translation problems. Translation effectuation as a reflection of translation 

proficiency refers to translating. The acceptability of the product of such an activity is decided 

through translation assessment which applies specific criteria that signals and identify errors. 

Among the various models for translation assessment, none seems to be comprehensive. 

 

For this reason, this study devises its system of assessment based on detailed classification, not 

only at the level of the main categories but also at the level of subcategories and the sub-sub-

categories. Though varying in severity, errors in this study are considered as symptoms of 

translation problems, which themselves vary in the intensity of difficulty. Translation problems 

- a core issue in the above discussion and mainly as manifested by errors - will focus on the 

remainder of this study. In Chapter Four, translation problems will be investigated by 

translating a few short texts representing various English text types. 

 

 

 

 

 



CHAPTER THREE: TRANSLATION OF THE BOOK (Mahapeletsa, 2003, pp. 

5-10, 39-48) 

3.1. SECTION ONE 

3.1. SOURCE TEXT 

 

Text One 

Text 1: 2. It was a cloudy summer day, with a strong, east wind blowing and trees dancing to 

and fro, singing their joyful songs, when a red minibus taxi curved onto the tarred road that 

split Bohlokong squatter camp into two sections. Fat raindrops fell pattering onto the rusty 

corrugated zinc walls and roofs on the shacks as the taxi came to a halt, and out stepped a tall 

young man wearing tight jeans. Then suddenly the clouds burst. Thibose plodded through the 

rain, heading for one of the shacks that were packed tightly together on the left-hand side of 

the road. He had been in jail for ten years. Shivering, he knocked on the door of the tiny shack, 

wondering how his grandmother would react to seeing him. She had never come to him in 

prison. And who would blame her, after what he had done? But she was the only relative he 

had left, and he had nowhere else to go. 

Text 2: 2. He knocked again, harder this time. Gogo was probably sleeping, he thought. Then, 

he heard the sound of a television set. That was strange. His Gogo never used to watch 

television during the day – only the evening news, before she went to sleep. When he realised 

that no one was answering the door, Thibose decided to open it. Surely, Gogo would not mind 

– she knew her ears were not good. But when he pushed the door, he found it was locked. The 

rain continued to pour down, and he could see lightning. Black clouds cast darkness over the 

slum, as if it were night-time. Thibose was starting to get worried, when suddenly the door 

opened to reveal a beautiful young woman. She was wearing a towel that covered her breasts 

and upper thighs. Thibose had never seen her before. The young woman stared back at him and 

screamed as the lightning struck again. Thibose stood there motionless, uncertain whether to 

go in or not. He was captivated by the girl’s beauty. 

Text 3: 2. “What is it?” A voice came from behind the curtain that divided the shack. A man’s 

voice. “There is somebody at the door,” she replied, stroking back her long, black hair. A short 

man came from the behind the curtain and stood half-naked at the door. He was about Thibose’s 

own age – twenty-seven. “Who are you, broer?” the man asked. “Thibose,” he answered, 

wiping his face with a hand. “What do you want?” “Gogo,” he said, shivering. The short man 



frowned. “Who is Gogo?” The lightning struck again. Thibose jumped forward, but the man 

did not move, blocking the way into the tiny shack. “My grandmother. She lives here,” Thibose 

replied. He was beginning to get annoyed. “Sorry broer, you are lost. There is no Gogo wakho 

here,” said the man, turning and starting to close the door. 

Text 4: 2. Thibose was startled. This was his Gogo’s shack. He had lived in the shack next 

door for seventeen years, before he went to prison. So how could he be lost? The man was 

crazy, he told himself in his heart. “But this is her mpantsi. I know she lives here,” he insisted. 

“I’ve told you she doesn’t stay mona! O batlang jwale?” the man shouted angrily. Thibose did 

not know what else to say or do. He just stood there staring, as the short man slammed the door 

in his face. Was he dreaming? Where could his Gogo be? Then he heard voices in his old shack, 

next door. It must be Gogo, he thought. Who was she talking to? 

Text 5:2. Thibose knocked at the door, praying that he would find her. But another strange 

woman peeped out at him, her body hidden behind the door. She was not his Gogo. God! What 

was happening? He stared at the woman hopelessly. “Where is my Gogo?” he asked, with tears 

in his eyes. “I don’t know anything about that.” And like the man before, the woman shut the 

door on him as thunder crashed in the sky. Thibose squatted, his face buried in his hands, 

shivering. His blood was as cold as ice. Where should he go now? He wiped his face with a 

hand and stood up. Then he remembered what he had decided in prison – he would go to visit 

Lefu’s mother. What would she say when she saw him? Would she talk to him after what he 

had done to Lefu? Well, he knew he had to do it. He had to ask her for forgiveness. It was the 

only way to ease the pain that had been in his heart for ten years. Maybe she could even tell 

him where his Gogo was. 

Text 6: 3. Thibose rushed down a narrow street and knocked at the door of a two-roomed 

shack. His clothes were wet and heavy. “Mehlolo! What do you want here?” a woman 

squawked from the doorway. Her big eyes were red, like her night-dress. Thibose looked at her 

and realised that she was knocking at the door of old age; and she was fatter than when he last 

saw her, ten years ago. He could not meet her eye. Instead, he looked over her shoulder and 

scanned the interior of the shack, where he caught sight of a bucket on the floor, catching the 

water that dripped from the roof. “Please, Mme Dillo. Just let me in. I want to talk to you,” 

Thibose begged, brushing his shaved head with his right hand. This was the moment he had 

been dreading. The moment of truth. “Talk wena? You do want me to talk to you? She asked, 

angrily. “I can’t believe this,” she continued, shaking her big head. 



Text 7: 3. “I know what I did to Lefu was wrong. Please, forgive me.” Tears rolled down his 

cheeks with those words, but the rain washed them away before Mrs Dillo could see that he 

was crying. Mrs Dillo started sobbing. Her right hand covered her eyes, while the other hand 

rested on the door handle. She turned and looked at the bucket, then back to him. Her face was 

full of rage and hatred. “I will never forgive you for killing my son like a… a dog. Never!” She 

slammed the door shut. Thibose stood there for a moment. He could hear her crying in the 

shack. Clearly, he had scratched open a painful wound. Lightning struck again, and the rain 

ceased as if the lightning had ordered it to stop. Thibose turned and walked into the streets of 

the slum. His heart was bleeding. He wished Lefu were there.  

Text 8: 3. Tears welled up again in Thibose’s eyes when he remembered the day he killed his 

best friend in front of the whole class. That was Bontle’s fault, and he hated her for it. Thibose 

wished he had never met her in his life, but he had; and now his life was ruined – by what he 

had thought was love. “Damn!” Thibose shouted. He listened to the song of the roaring water 

on the street. It was talking to him with a language he had never understood before, the 

language of freedom. He knew he had to do something to free himself from his pain. There 

was only one way: suicide. Without wasting any more time, Thibose headed for the 

supermarket. It was open and he went in with one thought in his head. But soon as he was 

inside, he was reminded of what he did not want to remember. The sight of the place made him 

quiver with anger. It used to be his hiding place, and now he hated it – and its owner, Captain 

Mebala. Why had he come to this evil, dirty den?” Thibose!” a voice cried. It was Joe, looking 

nervous. “You’re back?” 

Text 9: 3. Thibose nodded without a word. He scanned the shelves, reaching for his pocket. 

What can I do for you? Joe said. He was leaning forward to see what Thibose was doing with 

his hand. Thibose looked at him and realise how scared he was. He couldn’t believe it! Even 

Joe, his former classmate from Thutong High School, was scared of him. He was not human 

anymore. He was a monster who hurt and frightened people. Then Thibose knew he had to 

carry out his plan. Give me ga le phirime,” he said, with his eyes on the counter. “What?” Joe 

looked at Thibose for a second. “What do you want to do with ga le phirime?” he asked. His 

open mouth revealed two gold upper teeth. “Kill rats”, he answered. 

Text 10: 4. Joe stared at him without a word, stroking his beard with his right hand. He went 

to the shelves to fetch the pesticide. His eyes were shining behind the spectacles. “Please, 

Thibose. Don’t do it,” he begged.” I told you, I’m going to kill rats. Is there a problem? When 



Joe saw the anger in Thibose’s eyes, he silently gave him the poison. Who couldn’t argue with 

a murderer? Joe knew Thibose had been in prison. He also knew that he had been a member of 

the Smiling Lions – his own father’s gang. His father, Captain Mebala, was still in prison 

because of Thibose. So why should he worry about him? After all, he had nothing to lose by 

Thibose’s death; he could only benefit. Thibose would never be a threat to him anymore. 

Text 11:4. Thibose left the supermarket with the rat poison in his hand and headed for a 

dumping site outside the squatter camp. No one would disturb him there. He could end his life 

peacefully. The reddish-yellow sun peeped out from behind the clouds; the day was on its way 

to dusk. Thibose arrived at the smelly, muddy dump, and set on a rock next to the path. His 

red, wet eyes went to his hands, which held the pesticide and then up to the rainbow up in the 

sky. He was deeply buried in his thoughts when suddenly a flock of swallows flew up behind 

him, startled. He could hear the voices of people approaching along the path. 

Text 12: 4. “I was a teacher. A good teacher. But they fired me,” a skinny, dirty man said, 

walking with a woman. They were both drunk. Thibose watched them as they passed. There 

was something about the man… He knew he had seen him before, but where? Then it came to 

him: Meneer Seloma! Was that really him? Why was he looking so old and thin? Life is just a 

wheel, always turning, he told himself. Meneer Seloma was the teacher who had helped to ruin 

him, and the sight of him sent Thibose’s memory back to that day – a day that had blighted his 

whole future. He could still remember every second of it. 

 

Text Two 

Text 13: 5. Why is the human body so easily tempted by things that the human mind would 

never touch? How can the two parts of a body disagree? Why can’t the mind and the body 

move in one direction, like bicycle wheels? Thibose knew the dangers of taking drugs. He 

knew they were not good for his body; he knew that he might get hooked, and then there was 

no way out. But still, he was tempted to experiment. He had always heard people talking about 

cocaine, but he had never seen it before. Now it was in his hands, and he could not believe how 

such an innocent-looking powder could destroy a human body. How would he feel if he just 

took a little? There was only one way to find out… But Thibose’s mind defeated his heart this 

time, and he did not touch the drugs. 



Text 14: 5. After preparing, Thibose went to school with the packets inside his school bag. 

Today was a big day for him: his first day as Captain Mebala’s employee. He knew he had to 

sell well to impress his boss from the start, but that would not be difficult: his best friend had 

promised to help him. He also did not forget to bring the money, so that he could take the love 

of his life to the city after school. The main street was overcrowded as always, with people 

going to work. There was a lot of noise: school children chatting on their way to school, taxis 

hooting for passengers, and hawkers selling on the side of the road. There was smoke in the air 

from vendors who were busy cooking food. “Thibose! Wait for me,” Lefu called, running after 

Thibose, a heavy schoolbag slung on his left shoulder. Thibose turned and looked at Lefu, his 

hand over his mouth in shock. He had to call Lefu on the way to school, like he always did. 

God! What was happening to him? Lefu stopped by his side, panting like a dog. 

Text 15: 5. “I can’t believe it, man. You were…going to school without me? Lefu asked, 

pulling up his size six black trousers. Then he looked down at his black school shoes, to check 

that they were shiny as ever. “Sorry, broer. I was lost in my thoughts,” Thibose answered 

looking at Lefu’s white shirt, and back to his own old shirt and faded trousers. Then he realised 

that he had forgotten to polish his school shoes, something he had never forgotten before, and 

wondered who he was turning into. He was becoming a stranger to himself. “What were you 

thinking about? Bontle? Lefu asked, biting into a sandwich. “No!” Then he swallowed, what 

were you thinking about? Suicide? “What!” he asked, staring at Lefu with a wrinkled nose. 

“How could I think about that when life is so fun? Now I know the meaning of the word life!” 

Lefu adjusted his spectacles with a smile. “Well, well, well. You got her, didn’t you? 

Text 16: 5. “Now what are you talking about? Got who?” Thibose asked with a frown – 

although of course he knew what Lefu was talking about.” Bontle. Did you talk to her 

yesterday? I came to your shack last night. Where were you, broer? “Doing some man stuff.”  

“Heitha boys,” Lebolela said, arriving with Mogapi. “Lefu my man. Can I borrow your specs 

vandag? I want to ask Kedibone out today after school. I want her to think I’m the profesara,” 

he teased, reaching for the spectacles. Lefu tried to move away, but Lebolela managed to take 

the spectacles from his face. “Give them back,” with his hand shielding his eyes. “Come on 

broer. Just for today.” Lebolela jumped away from Lefu. ‘Give them back to him Lebolela. 

You know you can’t put them on. I mean, there is no nose on your face. Just look at your big 

forehead. You don’t even need an umbrella for the sun,” Thibose said jokingly, and they all 

laughed at Lebolela, who gave a sheepish grin. ‘Maybe I should ask Bontle out, to prove that 

girls don’t need handsome men in their lives – just a real man who acts like a real man. A man 



who knows what girls want. Not a boy like you,” Lebolela said, fighting back; but he gave Lefu 

his spectacles. 

Text 17: 6. “That will be a miracle, for I have never seen you talking to any girl. Maybe in the 

night, yes,” Thibose said, as they arrive at school. “Thibose, come with us,” Mogapi said. Lefu 

watched them as they headed for the toilets, leaving him alone on the stoep. He knew what 

Mogapi and Lebolela were going to do there. What he didn’t understand was why today they 

were taking Thibose with them. Was he also doing drugs? But he knew how Thibose hated 

drugs and was certain that he would not try them. So then why did he go to the toilets with the 

others? Should he follow them and see what was going on in there? Well, Thibose was a man 

now, and surely he knew how to take care of himself, Lefu thought. Lefu waited on the stoep, 

hoping Thibose would come back and join him as always; but Thibose didn’t come back. 

Suddenly, Bontle appeared, and came and sat with Lefu. Even though they were not friends, 

they started chatting about Thibose. She was worried about what had happened between her 

and Thibose yesterday after school. Then the bell cut their chatting, and they went to assembly.  

Text 18: 6. Thibose was still in the toilets with his friends and customers. They were all using, 

except him. He was the one selling – and he couldn’t believe how easy it was. It seemed like 

half the schoolboys was taking drugs, and that made him sick inside. What a lost generation, 

Thibose thought, watching them snort the white powder. It looked as if they felt like they were 

in heaven. That day, Thibose could not concentrate on his studies. The only thing he could 

think about was how Bontle would react when he took to the city after school. He could not 

wait to see the look on her smooth face when he bought the necklace for her. Surely, she would 

be thrilled. This time, Thibose knew he had her where he wanted her. He was certain that he 

was going to win her heart. 

Text 19: 6. Finally, the time he was waiting for came. It was school out, and learners left for 

their homes. Thibose watched Bontle, hoping she would stay in the classroom like yesterday. 

But surprisingly, she was one of the first to leave. She was in a hurry and headed for Meneer 

Seloma’s grey Cressida. Thibose followed her with the intention of stopping her, so that she 

could go to Johannesburg with him. But before he could catch up with her, she opened the door 

of Meneer Seloma’s car, and got in the front. Thibose could not believe his eyes. What was 

happening to this girl? How could she just go to Meneer Seloma’s car and get in, in front of 

learners and teachers? Was she crazy or what? Even though he knew this kind of behaviour 



was usual for teacher at Thutong High School, he had never expected Bontle to be like that. He 

had thought she was different; but clearly, he’d been wrong. 

Text 20: 6. Well, Thibose was the only one who was surprised. To other learners, this sort of 

thing was not surprising anymore. Their teachers were not afraid to reveal their affairs. How 

could they be afraid, when the principal’s girlfriends visited him at the school all the time? He 

could not tell them not to get involved with the learners. Especially after his wife had a fight 

with one of his girlfriends, at the school, in front of everybody. To the teachers, he was not a 

principal anymore, but one of their colleagues. To learners, he was just nothing. They respect 

their teachers more than him. Thibose stood under the jacaranda tree, watching Bontle in 

Meneer Seloma’s car. Then he saw Meneer Seloma head for the car and get in. Meneer Seloma 

stroke Bontle’s hair with a smile, then kissed her on the cheek. Bontle looked happy. To 

Thibose it was like a spear in his heart. He wished he could just go to the car and pull her out 

of it. How could she be so stupid? That man could ruin her, and she was giving him the 

opportunity to do so. He wondered as the car set off: was Bontle really the girl he thought she 

was? The girl he wanted to marry one day? 

Text 21: 7. “Damn him!” Thibose snarled, stamping his right foot on the ground. Then he 

stormed off angrily to the toilets, his hand dug around in his bag, and came out with a small 

packet of snow. With tears rolling down his cheeks, he emptied the white powder onto a 

notebook and started snorting it, as he had seen Mogapi and Lebolela do. Then suddenly felt 

dizzy, with everything in the toilet spinning. There was a funny, zinging sound on his ears. 

Then he burst into laughter. Laughing at everything spinning. He could even feel his own body 

floating in the air. He spread his arms and started flying. He was alive and happy. 

Text 22: 7. On his way home, Thibose could not believe what he had been missing. He’d 

always thought that drugs were fatal. How could they be fatal when they gave him such energy? 

For the first time in his life, Thibose felt free from worries. Everything was possible to him 

now. Thanks to Captain Mebala, he now knew the meaning of happiness. Every bad thing that 

had happened to him was forgotten. He still felt love for Bontle, even though she had hurt him 

deeply. But now he felt no pain or anger, for the drugs told him it was all a bad dream, and he 

would soon wake up from it. Bontle would still be his wife one day, he told himself. Perhaps 

he should go to Johannesburg right now and buy that necklace for her, so that he could give it 

to her tomorrow morning. With that last thought, Thibose took a taxi to the city, where he 

bought a necklace and some groceries for his Gogo.  



Text 23: 7. “Nkgono, I bought you some groceries,” Thibose said, entering his Gogo’s shack 

with plastic bags in his hands. He was feeling the effects of the drugs, although he managed to 

hide it successfully. “Where did you get the money?” Meokgo asked, stirring the porridge in a 

saucepan on the paraffin stove. “Don’t worry about that, Gogo. You know I’m not a thief, 

gakere? he said, plonking the plastic bags on a little table behind the door. “I know, son. But I 

also know that you are not working. What am I supposed to think when you come back from 

school at this hour with plastic bags full of groceries? Thibose, I don’t want you to get involved 

in anything bad. Those two friends of yours, I don’t like them le ha nnyane. They are crooks,” 

Meokgo said, staring at him with sharp eyes. Those were the eyes that Thibose feared, for he 

knew they could see through him, especially when he was lying. “I know, Gogo. Don’t worry 

… I’m not senokwane,” Thibose said, looking at the table to avoid eye contact with her. 

Text 24: 7. “Then where did you get the money? And where were you? Lefu was here, looking 

for you. He seemed very worried about you. Thabo, my son, what is happening to you? Her 

big nose wrinkled when she said that. She knew her grandson very well and could tell when 

something was bothering him. Thibose looked at her from the corner of his eye and wondered 

what she would say if she knew that he was working for Captain Mebala. Then he forced a 

smile and said, “I was playing Mochina. I won, Gogo.” Meokgo shook her head and said, “This 

game of yours ya Mochina … Ha ke e rate.” Then she picked up the plastic bags and opened 

them to see what was inside. “It’s just a game, Gogo. Even old ladies like you play it. I think 

you must try it too, Gogo” Thibose said, walking to her bed.  “I know what Mochina is. But to 

me, gambling is bad, no matter what of people are playing it. Once you start you never stop. 

It’s like drugs and cigarettes.” She paused, looking in the plastic bag. “What is this?” she asked, 

a rectangular white box in her hand. Thibose watched her with a smile as she opened the box. 

“Basadi! Thabo … do you want to tell me that you bought this with Mochina money? she asked 

suspiciously, staring at him.” “Yes, Gogo. Kajeno kemo hlohlorile,” Thibose said with a smile.  

Text 25: 8. “Thabo, this is beautiful,” she said, looking at the shining necklace in her hands. 

“You think so, Gogo? he asked happily. “Yes, and she will love it, too,” she said, nodding her 

head. “Ao! Gogo, what makes you think I’ve bought it for a girl? “I was not born yesterday, 

Thabo. I was in this world long before you came. Jwale njwetse he ngwanaka. Who is she?” 

She was looking at him in the eyes. “Hei, Gogo,” he said, brushing his shaved shyly with his 

hand.  “Just be careful, Thabo. These days girls can be dangerous. Young children are dying 

with this Phamokate thing, this Aids. You are still young and intelligent, son. Take things 

slowly. Don’t end up like your mother,” she paused, and continued with a smile. “Can you 



believe that she named you Phosokgolo, when she first saw you?” She burst into laughter. “I 

fought her until she accepted my name.” “Maybe you should have left her, Gogo. She was 

right. I don’t deserve this name. I don’t even know the meaning of happiness,” he said sadly. 

“Now, what is the problem? Is she giving you troubles?” “Who? My mother?” “No. This girl. 

The one you bought this for.” Thibose looked at her with eyes filling with tears and wished he 

could just talk to her about Bontle; but fear and embarrassment overcame him. She had never 

talked to him about girls until today. “It’s okay, Gogo. Don’t worry. I don’t have a girlfriend 

yet,” he said, turning to the door. Meokgo looked at her grandson sadly; she knew something 

was wrong, but she could not tell what it was. She took some meat out of the shopping bag and 

started unwrapping it. 

Text 26: 8. “I’m going to change my uniform. I will be back, Gogo,” he said, leaving the shack. 

“Oh! Thibose!” She called, remembering something. Thibose stood for a second without 

answering. He was surprised by his Gogo. She had never called him Thibose before; why now? 

He turned back. “What is it, Gogo?” he asked, leaning in at the door. “Your mother phoned 

today. She phoned Mme Dillo and told her she is getting married. At last, she had realised that 

shacking up with a man is a disgrace,” she said, chopping the red meat into pieces. “She is 

getting married?” he asked, astonished. “Yes.” “To whom? That pig boyfriend of her?” “Watch 

your words, boy,” she said seriously. “She chose some man over her own son. I can’t believe 

that stupid little bitch.” The cocaine was doing it’s work now. “Thabo! How could you say that 

about your mother?” she asked, angrily. 

Text 27: 8. “But it’s true, Gogo. She chose him. How could she do that to me, Gogo? I never 

asked her to bring me into this world when she was only sixteen. When will she stop blaming 

me for her mistakes?” “It’s not that, my boy. She is marrying him because she loves him. 

Sometimes love makes us blind. You will know what I mean one day, trust me,” she said 

kindly, with her hand on his shoulder. “Now I know. I don’t have parents!” he said angrily, and 

stormed out of the shack, his eyes blinded by tears. “Thabo! Thabo!” Meokgo called. Thibose 

ran into his shack and locked himself in and started crying his heart out. Everything was going 

against him. His mother was marrying a man he hated, while a girl he loved was in love with 

her teacher. It was clear that he would never see his mother again, for the man who was 

marrying her hated him too. “If this is what they call life, then I hate it. I hate it, for to me it 

isn’t life but hell. There is no life for me but Bontle. Why is this happening to me?” Thibose 

asked himself, digging around in his school bag for the “powder of life”. He was starting to 



turn to drugs every time things went wrong – but that didn’t bother Thibose. Snow eased his 

pain, and that was what mattered to him now. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



CHAPTER THREE: TRANSLATION OF THE BOOK 

3.2. SECTION TWO 

3.2. TARGET TEXT 

 

Text One 

Text 1: 2. Kwakusehlobo kuguqubele, kuheleza umoya onamandla, ovela empumalanga futhi 

imithi iphephuka iya le nale, ivunguza kamnandi, lapho itekisi ebomvu ithatha ijika ingena 

emgwaqweni oyitiyela ohlukanisa imijondolo yaseBohlokong ibe izingxenye ezimbili. 

Amathonsi amakhulu emvula ayelokhu eshaya izindonga nophahla lukathayela ogqwalile 

lapho itekisi ima futhi kuphuma insizwa ende egqoke udangara oyimpintshayo. Izulu labe 

seliyidliva kungalindelekile. UThibose wabaleka evika le mvula, eqonde komunye 

wemijondolo eyayithothene ndawonye ohlangothini lwesobunxele lomgwaqo. Wayesehlale 

iminyaka eyishumi ejele. Eqhaqhazela, wangqongqoza emnyango womjondolo omncanyana, 

ezibuza ukuthi ugogo wakhe wayezokwenzenjani uma embona. Wayengakaze azombona ejele. 

Futhi ubani owayengamsola, ngemva kwento ayeyenzile? Kodwa ugogo wayewukuphela 

kwesihlobo ayesasele naso, futhi wayengenayo enye indawo angaya kuyona. 

Text 2: 2. Waphinde wangqongqoza, kakhudlwana kulokhu. Ecabanga ukuthi kungenzeka 

ukuthi uGogo wayelele. Ngemva kwalokho, wezwa umsindo kamabonakude. Kwakuxakile 

lokhu. UGogo wakhe wayengajwayele ukubukela umabonakude phakathi nosuku – 

wayebukela izindaba zakusihlwa kuphela, ngaphambi kokuthi ayolala. Lapho ebona ukuthi 

akusabeli muntu uma engqongqoza, wanquma ukuthi azivulele. Wayeqiniseka ukuthi uGogo 

ngeke abe nankinga – naye wayezazi ukuthi unezindlebe ezingezwa kahle. Kodwa lapho 

ephusha umnyango, wathola ukuthi ukhiyiwe. Izulu laqhubeka liyithela futhi esebona libaneka. 

Amafu amnyama enza kwamnyama kule mijondolo, sengathi kwakusebusuku. UThibose 

wayeseqala ukukhathazeka, lapho umnyango uvuleka kungalindelekile futhi kuvela intokazi 

esencane enhle. Yayibhince ithawula elaliyemboze amabele nengxenye engenhla yamathanga. 

UThibose wayengakaze ayibone ngaphambilini. Le ntokazi esencane nayo yamgqolozela futhi 

yahayiza ngesikhathi umbani uphinde ubaneka. UThibose wama wanganyakaza, engaqiniseki 

ukuthi angene yini noma angangeni. Babumkhangile ubuhle bale ntombazane. 

Text 3: 2. “Yini?” Kukhuluma izwi emva kwekhethini elalehlukanise umjondolo kabili. Izwi 

lendoda. “Kukhona umuntu osemnyango,” iphendula, iphulula izinwele ezinde, ezimnyama 

iziyisa emuva. Kweza insizwa emfushane iqhamuka emva kwekhethini futhi yama phambi 

komnyango iqimbile. Yayicishe ilingane noThibose ubudala – ineminyaka engamashumi 



amabili nesikhombisa. “Ungubani, bhuti (broer)?” kubuza le nsizwa. “NginguThibose,” 

ephendula, ezesula ubuso ngesandla. “Ufunani?” “UGogo,” esho, evevezela. Le nsizwa 

emfushane yahwaqabala. “Ubani uGogo?” Umbani waphinde wabaneka. UThibose 

wagxumela phambili, kodwa le nsizwa ayizange inyakaze, imvimba ukuba angangeni kulo 

mjondolo omncanyana. “Ugogo wami. Uhlala lapha,” kuphendula uThibose. Wayeseqala 

ukucasuka. “Uxolo bhuti (broer), udukile. AkunaGogo wakho la,” kusho le nsizwa, ifulathela 

futhi isiqala ukuvala umnyango. 

Text 4: 2. UThibose wethuka. Kwakuwumjondolo kaGogo wakhe lona. Wayesehlale 

emjondolo okwamakhelwane iminyaka eyishumi nesikhombisa, ngaphambi kokuthi ayejele. 

Kwakungenzeka kanjani ukuthi udukile? Isangene le nsizwa, esho ngenhliziyo. “Kodwa indlu 

yakhe (mpantsi) le. Ngiyazi ukuthi uhlala lapha,” ephikelela. “Ngikutshelile ukuthi akahlali 

lapha (mona)! Ufunani manje (jwale)?” kubhoka le nsizwa ngolaka. UThibose wayengasazi 

ukuthi athini noma enzeni. Wavele wama lapho ejamile, lapho le nsizwa emfushane ibhaklaza 

umyango phambi kwakhe. Ingabe wayephupha? Wayekuphi uGogo wakhe? Ngemva 

kwalokho, wezwa amazwi ekhuluma emjondolo wakhe wakudala, kwamakhelwane. 

Wacabanga ukuthi kungenzeka kwakunguGogo. Wayekhuluma nobani? 

Text 5:2. UThibose wangqongqoza emnyango, ethandazela ukuthi amthole. Kodwa 

kwalunguza umuntu wesifazane angamazi, umzimba wakhe ucashe ngemva komnyango. 

Wayengeyena uGogo wakhe. Nkulunkulu! Kwakwenzekani? Wajamela lona wesifazane 

ephelelwe ithemba. “Uphi uGogo wami?” ebuza, ehlengezela izinyembezi. “Angazi lutho 

ngalokho.” Njengensizwa yasekuqaleni, lona wesifazane wamvalela ngaphandle lapho umbani 

uqeqebula esibhakabhakeni. UThibose waqoshama, ezimboze ubuso ngesandla, evevezela. 

Engaqondakali ukuthi wayezizwa kanjani. Wayezobheka kuziphi izinkalo manje? Wazesula 

ubuso ngesandla wabe esesukuma. Ngemva kwalokho wakhumbula isinqumo ayesenze esejele 

– ukuthi wayezovakashela umama kaLefu. Wayezothini umama kaLefu uma embona? Ingabe 

wayeyokhuluma naye ngemva kwento ayenza kuLefu? Akukhathaliseki ukuthi kwenzekani, 

wayazi ukuthi kumele akwenze lokhu. Kwakumele amcele ukuthi amxolele. Leyo 

kwakuwukuphela kwendlela ayengaqeda ngayo ubuhlungu ayebuzwa ngaphakathi iminyaka 

eyishumi. Mhlawumbe lo mama wayengamtshela nokuthi wayekuphi uGogo wa