What it is
An intra-system shift arises where source and target both possess a closed grammatical system with formally corresponding terms, and the translation nonetheless selects a term that does not correspond. Number, article, deixis and gender are the usual candidates. The systems match; the choices inside them do not.
Catford placed the category last among his shift types because it is the odd one out. The other shifts record a departure from formal correspondence where correspondence was never available. Here correspondence is available: both languages distinguish singular from plural, both operate an article system, and yet the equivalent selects the other term. His illustrations are the English singular "advice" against the French plural des conseils, and the English plural "trousers" against the French singular le pantalon. The observation behind the category is that formal correspondence between two systems does not license term-for-term substitution within them, because the systems are put to different uses.
One caution about the label. Some derivative papers extend "intra-system shift" to cover culture-driven lexical substitution, treating any replacement of a source item by a target item drawn from a target-culture inventory as a shift inside a shared system. That is not Catford's sense and does not fit his definition, which requires a closed grammatical system with formally corresponding terms on both sides. Open-class vocabulary and cultural inventories are not systems in that sense. Substitution of that kind belongs with adaptation or cultural filtering, and a claim of intra-system shift should be checked against the question of whether a closed grammatical system is involved at all.
When it applies
- Number is at issue: mass against count treatment, pluralia tantum, or nouns that pluralize in one language and not in the other.
- Article systems diverge in use, particularly for generic reference, abstract nouns and institutional names.
- Numeral constructions govern the noun differently, so agreement is marked on one side and suppressed on the other.
- Demonstrative systems have different numbers of terms, so a two-term system must be mapped onto a three-term one or the reverse.
Examples
FR>EN
- Source: Il m'a donné des conseils.
- Target: He gave me some advice.
- Comment: Catford's own illustration. Both languages have a number system; French counts the individual pieces of counsel, English treats the notion as a mass. The correspondence holds between the systems and fails between the terms.
DE>EN
- Source: Die Milch ist teuer geworden.
- Target: Milk has become expensive.
- Comment: Both languages have a definite article. German selects it for generic reference, English selects the zero article. The formally corresponding choice, "The milk", is grammatical and says something else: it points to a particular quantity of milk.
TR>EN
- Source: beş kitap
- Target: five books
- Comment: Turkish has a plural suffix and uses it readily, but leaves the noun unmarked after a numeral, where the quantity is already expressed. English requires the plural. Neither language lacks the category, which is what makes this an intra-system shift rather than a level shift.
Watch out for
Because these shifts are obligatory, they rarely present themselves as decisions, and that is exactly the problem. They are the classic site of interference: a translator working into a language that is not their strongest carries the source selection across, producing "an advice", "the milk is expensive" or "five book". None of these is a mistranslation of content, and all are immediately visible to a native reader, which is why revisers treat them as a diagnostic.
- Number can be substantive rather than formal. In drafting, singular and plural affect the scope of an obligation, which is why many legal systems insert an interpretation clause providing that the singular includes the plural. Where such a clause exists in the source instrument, the target selection is constrained by it.
- Definiteness can be substantive in the same way. "The document" and "a document" allocate different burdens, and an article chosen for idiomatic reasons may resolve a reference the source left open.
- Where the target genuinely lacks the category rather than using it differently, the operation is a level shift, and the two should not be recorded under one heading.
References
- Catford, J. C. (1965). A Linguistic Theory of Translation: An Essay in Applied Linguistics. London: Oxford University Press, p. 80.