Lower Danube University

Masters in Translation and Interpretation

Galai
2011

VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE

Author: Haralambie Alina

Scientific coordinator: PhD. Croitoru Elena

MOTTO
Do 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 EQUIVALENCE

translation 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 original
the 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:
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=
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. BassnettMcGuires 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)

1.
2.
3.
4.

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 equivalence
The involvement of the literary tendencies within the TC in
the production of any translated text
The destabilization of the notion of an original message
with a fixed identity
The 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)

1.
2.
3.
4.

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,
correspondence linked with the concept of equivalence:
equivalence

Field

Contrastive Linguistics

Science of
Translation

Research area Correspondence phenomena

and conditions, describing
corresponding structures and
sentences in the TL and SL
systems

Equivalence

Knowledge

Langue

phenomena, describing
hierarchy of utterances
and texts in SL and TL
according to the
equivalence
criterion
Parole

Competence

Foreign language competence

Translation 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,
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.
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.

K. Reiss and H. Vermeer (1984:133): in a number of

EQUIVALENCE
ANDforADEQUACY
IN
translations, e.g. translations
teaching purposes and
philological translations, the function of the TLT is different
TRANSLATION
from that of the SLT. In this case, the principle governing the
translation process is adequacy.
adequacy

Adequacy=
Adequacy the appropriate selection of linguistic signs in the
TL in view of the dimensions selected in the ST. (Reiss)
An adequate TT=
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
intended (Nida, 1976:64).

CONCLUSIONS

Translation 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.