翻译与翻译对等

2. He raises further questions concerning the readers to whom Nida directs his dynamic equivalence, asking if they are „to be handed everything on a plate‟, with everything explained for them. 3. Semantic translation differs from literal translation in that it „respects context‟, interprets and even explains (metaphors, for instance).
02
Eugene Nida
Ⅰ.The nature of meaning: advances in semantics and pragmatics

Central to Nida‟s work is the move away from the old idea that a word has a fixed meaning and towards a functional definition of meaning in which a word „acquires‟ meaning through its context and can produce varying responses according to culture.
e.g. Russian “syr” & English “cheese” “cottage cheese”
Ⅲ. Translation and translatability


源自文库
Interlingual translation involves „substituting messages in one language not for separate code-units but for entire messages in some other language‟. The problem of meaning and equivalence focuses on differences in the structure and terminology of languages rather than on any inability of one language to render a message that has been written or uttered in another verbal language. The question of translatability becomes one of degree and adequacy.
This receptor-oriented approach considers adjustments of grammar, of lexicon and of cultural references to be essential in order to achieve naturalness.
04
Later developments
Koller: equivalence relations

correspondence & equivalence 5 types of equivalence relations: denotative; connotative; text-normative; pragmatic; formal
Meaning is broken down into the following: 1. linguistic meaning e.g his house; his journey; his kindness 2. referential meaning e.g “son” 3. emotive or connotative meaning e.g Don't worry about that, son. Techniques adapted to determine the meaning: 1. hierarchical structuring 2. componential analysis 3. semantic structure analysis

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. It has similarities to Nida‟s formal equivalence.
01
The nature of meaning and equivalence
02 03
04
The science of translating
Semantic and communicative translation
Later developments
01
Roman Jakobson
Ⅰ. Saussure: langue & parole signified & signifier Ⅱ. “There is ordinarily no full equivalence between code-units.”
THANK YOU

Newmark's unique points
1. He distances himself from the full principle of equivalent effect, since that effect „is inoperant if the text is out of TL space and time‟ .
Ⅱ. Equivalence and the principle of equivalent effect
1. formal equivalence/correspondence 2. dynamic/functional equivalence

He defines the goal of dynamic equivalence as seeking „the closest natural equivalent to the source-language message‟ .
1. making sense 2. conveying the spirit and manner of the original 3. having a natural and easy form of expression 4. producing a similar response
03
Peter Newmark

Communicative translation attempts to produce on its readers an effect as close as possible to that obtained on the readers of the original. It resembles Nida‟s dynamic equivalence in the effect it is trying to create on the TT reader
Chesterman: equivalence is obviously a central concept in translation theory
Bassnet: Baker: problems of equivalence different types of equivalence
Therefore, Equivalence continues to be a central, if criticized, concept.


For Nida, the success of the translation depends on achieving equivalent effect or response. It is one of the „four basic requirements of a translation‟, which are

As long as equivalent effect is achieved, Newmark holds literal translation to be the best approach.

However, if there is a conflict between the two forms of translation (if semantic translation would result in an ‘abnormal’ TT or would not secure equivalent effect in the TL) then communicative translation should be preferred.