-
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCEAuthor: Haralambie AlinaScientific
coordinator: PhD. Croitoru ElenaLower Danube UniversityMasters in
Translation and InterpretationGalai2011
-
MOTTODo we really know how we translate or what we
translate?...Are we to accept naked ideas as the means of crossing
from one language to another?...Translators know they cross over
but do not know by what sort of bridge. They often re-cross by a
different bridge to check up again. Sometimes they fall over the
parapet into limbo.
(Firth, 1957:197)
-
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCEtranslation studies: the contemporary theory
of partial communication: communication does not transfer the total
message the translating process does not transfer the totality of
what is in the originalthe ideal of total equivalence is a chimera.
Languages are different from each other; they are different in form
having distinct codes and rules regulating the construction of
grammatical stretches of language and these forms have different
meanings.[...]There is no absolute synonymy between words in the
same language, so why should anyone be surprised to discover a lack
of synonymy between languages? (Bell, 1991:6)
-
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE J.C. Catford (1965): equivalence = textual
interchangeability in a given situation- criticized by K. Reiss and
Vermeer (1984): a translation is not interchangeable with its
source text in a given situation; source texts and translations
operate in different language communities.The information they
convey may be felt and judged to be equivalent, and the situations
they communicate in may be felt to be interculturally comparable
(or equivalent), but they are not the same. (A.L. Jakobsen)
-
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)S. Bassnett-McGuire (1991): the
interpretation of translation should be based on the comparison of
the texts function as original and as a translation.
Disadvantage: her use of the term function is so broad that
almost any deviation, addition, deletion could be labelled a
functional equivalent. it allows the replacement of much of the
text, with all its particular resonance and associations, with
something new and completely different, but which theoretically
affects the reader the same way. (E. Gentzler, 1993:101)
-
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)
Holmes (1974:78):
equivalence= preservation of the sound, the sense, the rhythm,
the textual material and recreation of those specific
sensation-sound, sense and association- despite inherent
limitations in the TL (opposed to S. Bassnett-McGuires theory)
-
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)Van den Broeck (1978) :
redefines and recuperates equivalence for his own concept of
true understanding of how one should regard literary translation.
(Broeck, 1978:29)
In agreement with Lefevere (1975), Broeck (1978) considers that
the original authors intention and the function of the original
text can be determined and translated so that the TT will be
equivalent to the ST and function accordingly. A translation can
only be complete if and when both the communicative value and the
time-place-tradition elements if the ST have been replaced by their
nearest possible equivalents in the TT (Lefevere, 1975:102; Broeck,
1978:39).
-
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)Neubert (1986):
the text has a kind of a mosaic quality, an elasticity that
allows it to be translated into a variety of relative TTs.
introduces the term translational relativity in the
reconstruction process, allowing for a creative process of transfer
from the ST to the TT. This relativity derives from an inherent
multiplicity of structural possibilities in the original (Neubert,
1986:97).
-
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)Toury (1980):considers
translation from the point of view of the target culture (TC)sets
forth a TT theory for translation, focussing not on a notion of
equivalence as postulated requirements, but on the actual
relationships between the ST and its factual replacement (Toury,
1980:39).The following aspects of Tourys theory have contributed to
the development of translation theory:
The abandonment of one-to-one notions of correspondence and the
possibility of literary/ linguistic equivalenceThe involvement of
the literary tendencies within the TC in the production of any
translated textThe destabilization of the notion of an original
message with a fixed identityThe integration of both ST and TT in
the semiotic web of intersecting cultural systems.
-
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)Translation studies: there are
as many variants of a translation as there are translators. Yet,
among those many versions, there will be what Popovic (1976) calls
the invariant core of the original. The invariant= what exists in
common between all existing translations of a single work. Instead
of prescribing a technique which can eliminate losses and smooths
over changes, Popovic accepts that losses, gains and changes are a
necessary part of the translation process because of the inherent
differences of intellectual and aesthetic values in the two
cultures.
-
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)E. Nidas (1969) two types of
equivalence:
formal equivalence (focuses attention on the message itself, in
both form and content);
dynamic equivalence (based on the principle of equivalent
effect, i.e. that the relationship between receiver and message
should aim at being the same as that between the original receivers
and the SL language).
The equivalent effect is based on the four basic requirements of
a translation:making sense;conveying the spirit and manner of the
original;having a natural and easy form of expression;producing a
similar response.
-
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)Peter Newmarks two types of
translation:
communicative translation- attempts to produce on its readers an
effect as close as possible to that obtained on the readers of the
original ~ Nidas dynamic equivalence;
semantic translation- attempts to render, as closely as the
semantic and syntactic structures of the second language allow, the
exact contextual meaning of the original ~ Nidas formal
equivalence.
-
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)Werner Koller (1979) introduces
the concept of correspondence, linked with the concept of
equivalence:
Field Contrastive LinguisticsScience of Translation Research
areaCorrespondence phenomena and conditions, describing
corresponding structures and sentences in the TL and SL
systemsEquivalence phenomena, describing hierarchy of utterances
and texts in SL and TL according to the equivalence
criterionKnowledgeLangue Parole Competence Foreign language
competenceTranslation competence
-
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)Werner Kollers (1979) five types
of equivalence:Denotative equivalence- related to the
extralinguistic content of a text (content invariance);Connotative
equivalence- related to the lexical choices, especially between
near-synonyms (stylistic equivalence);Text-normative equivalence-
related to text types;Pragmatic/ communicative equivalence-
oriented towards the receiver of the text or message;Formal
equivalence- related to the form and aesthetics of the text,
includes word plays and the individual stylistic features of the ST
(expressive equivalence).
-
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)Cay Dollerups (2006: 64) main
concepts:
Translations as approximations- there is no perfect translation
or ideal translator; we can only discuss tangible approximations of
these elusive ideals;
Adequacy- a translation is adequate when it conveys the meaning
of the source text to the target language in a given situation; the
users, clients, recipients can determine the fulfillment of this
criterion.
-
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)Most theories to date can be
characterized as theories of (what is allegedly) the only
legitimate or genuine kind of translation (D. Delabastita,
1991:143).The genuine concept of translation can be defined
- in positive terms, i.e. to render the SL message with the
closest TL equivalent...is, we believe, the only possible way
leading to fidelity (Shen, 1989:234). - in negative terms, i.e.
literalism has indeed little claim to theoretical validity as an
approach to total translation (Shen, 1989:224).
-
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)Recent theories: translation= an
act of communication across cultural boundaries, the main criteria
being determined by the recipient of the translation and its
specific function (Snell-Hornby, 1988:47)The traditional
relationships between the ST and TT are replaced by networks of
relationships and concepts of intertextuality (Toury, 1986;
Lambert, 1989; E. Gentzler 1993) cultural studies model.The
translators task is to strive for the highest possible degree of
matching or equivalence between the SL and the TL text, i.e. the TL
text must try to achieve a similar effect on the foreign reader as
the SL text does on the native reader (Wekker and Wekker, 1991:221,
apud Gentzler, 1993). The TL text must be equivalent to the SL text
on both a linguistic and a socio-cultural level.
-
EQUIVALENCE AND ADEQUACY IN TRANSLATION
K. Reiss and H. Vermeer (1984:133): in a number of translations,
e.g. translations for teaching purposes and philological
translations, the function of the TLT is different from that of the
SLT. In this case, the principle governing the translation process
is adequacy.
Adequacy= the appropriate selection of linguistic signs in the
TL in view of the dimensions selected in the ST. (Reiss) An
adequate TT= one in which the TT matches a relevant dimension of
the ST, because the translator does not aim at producing a full
textual equivalent of the ST but focuses on a certain dimension of
the ST.
Adequacy is a more general concept than equivalence. Equivalence
involves matching not just one dimension, but all dimensions of the
ST.
E. Nida (1976:64) considered that the relative adequacy of
different translations of the same text can only be determined in
terms of the extent to which each translation successfully fulfils
the purpose for which it was intended (Nida, 1976:64).
-
CONCLUSIONSTranslation must take into consideration:
the linguistic context;the semantic context;the pragmatic
context.
Translation also involves cultural translation, as cultures
shape concepts and texts differently.
-
REFERENCES:
Croitoru, Elena. 1996. Interpretation and Translation. Galati:
Editura Porto-Franco.
Dollerup, Cay. 2006. Basics of Translation Studies. Iasi:
Institutul European.
Munday, Jeremy. 2001. Introducing Translation Studies. Theories
and applications. London: Routledge Group.