TS. NGUYỄN XUÂN HỒNG (Chủ biên)
ThS. NGUYỄN ĐÌNH LUẬT
ThS. LÊ THỊ THIÊN PHỪỚC

ThS. LÊ NGỌC DIỆP

GIÁO TRÌNH LÝ THUYẾT DỊCH
FUNDAMENTAL INSIGHTS INTO
THE THEORIES OF TRANSLATION
AND INTERPRETATION

NHÀ XUẢT BẢN ĐẠI HỌC CƠNG NGHIỆP
THÀNH PHĨ HỊ CHÍ MINH


LỜI NÓI ĐẦU
Hiện nay, việc nghiên cứu và học tập về Lý thuyết dịch rất cần thiết

cho sinh viên các trường đại học thuộc khối ngành Ngoại ngữ nói riêng và
ngành Ngơn ngữ .Anh nói chung. Tuy nhiên, giáo trình dành cho mơn học

này vẫn cịn hạn chế. Nhằm giúp các em sinh viên Khoa Ngoại ngữ,

Trường Đại học Công nghiệp Thành phổ Hồ Chí Minh có tài liệu phục vụ

tốt cho việc học tập, nghiên cứu môn Lý thuyết dịch, nhóm tác giả đã biên

soạn cuốn giáo trình “Fundamental Insights into the Theories of

T ranslation and Interpretation”.
Giáo trình này trình bày khái quát nền tảng cơ sở lý thuyết của hai

mảng biên dịch và phiên dịch, đồng thời đưa ra một số gợi ý về việc áp
dụng các lý thuyết đó vào thực tiễn. Hy vọng cuốn giáo trình sẽ đem đến

cho các em sinh viên những kiến thức cơ đọng và hữu ích về lý thuyết dịch,
làm tiền đề cho việc học các môn học nâng cao hơn trong ngành Ngơn ngữ

Anh.

Giáo trình gồm 08 chương như sau:
Chương 1: Trình bày định nghĩa về biên dịch, quá trình biên dịch,
các loại hình biên dịch, lý thuyết về biên dịch và các yếu tố cần xem xét
trước khi thực hiện công việc biên dịch.

Chương 2: Đe cập đến các phương pháp tiếp cận khi thực hiện
công việc biên dịch, các mức độ của biên dịch và các đơn vị của biên dịch.

Chương 3: Bàn về các phương pháp biên dịch và so sánh các
phương pháp biên dịch phổ biến.

Chương 4: Cung cấp kiến thức về các chiến lược mà người biên
dịch áp dụng khi thực hiện công việc biên dịch.

1


Chương 5: Nêu các định nghĩa về phiên dịch, các mơ hình phiên
dịch và q trình phiên dịch.

Chương 6: Đe cập đến các khía cạnh của phương pháp dịch nối
tiếp và dịch song song.


Chương 7: Cung cấp hướng dẫn về các kỹ năng cần thiết cho
người làm công việc phiên dịch.

Chương 8: Bàn về những qui tắc, chuẩn mực đạo đức của người
làm cơng việc phiên dịch.

Trong q trình biên soạn, nhóm tác giả đã có nhiều nỗ lực kết nối
tốt nhất những nền tảng kiến thức cần thiết cho mơn học. Tuy nhiên, những

thiếu sót trong giáo trình chắc chắn là khơng tránh khỏi. Rất mong nhận
được sự góp ý chân thành từ giảng viên, sinh viên và độc giả.

Xin trân trọng cảm ơn!

NHÓM TÁC GIẢ

11


LỜI CẢM ƠN
Sau một thời gian tiến hành biên soạn và thẩm định, cuốn giáo trình

“Fundamental Insights into the Theories of Translation and
Interpretation” đã được hoàn thành và xuất bản. Sự ra đời của cuốn giáo
trình này khơng chỉ là cơng sức của nhóm tác giả mà cịn là sự giúp đỡ, hỗ
trợ của nhiều tập thể và cá nhân.

Trước hết, nhóm tác giả xin gởi lời cảm ơn đến Ban Giám hiệu
Trường Đại học Công nghiệp Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh, Lãnh đạo Khoa

Ngoại ngữ và Bộ mơn Biên phiên dịch đã tin tưởng giao nhiệm vụ cho
nhóm tác giả biên soạn cuốn giáo trình trên để phục vụ giảng dạy mơn Lý
thuyết dịch (02 tín chỉ) cho sinh viên chuyên ngành Ngôn ngữ Anh thuộc
Khoa Ngoại ngữ, Trường Đại học Cơng nghiệp Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh.

Nhóm tác giả xin gởi lời cảm ơn đến quý thầy cô thuộc Bộ mơn
Biên phiên dịch vì đã có nhiều ý kiến đóng góp q báu cho nhóm trong
q trình đưa giáo trình ra lấy ý kiến góp ý ở cấp bộ mơn, qua đó, giúp cho
nhóm tác giả kịp thời chỉnh sửa và cập nhật các nội dung trong giáo trình.
Nhóm tác giả xin chân thành cảm ơn q thầy cơ trong Hội đồng
đánh giá, nghiệm thu giáo trình đã có những góp ý thẳng thắn và bổ ích.
Nhờ đó, nhóm tác giả đã có thể hồn thiện giáo trình tốt hơn.
Nhóm tác giả cũng xin cảm ơn Phịng Quản lý khoa học và Hợp
tác quốc tế và Nhà xuất bản Đại học Cơng nghiệp Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh
đã hỗ trợ tích cực trong q trình biên soạn, thẩm định và xuất bản giáo
trình.
Đặc biệt, giáo trình được biên soạn trên tinh thần kế thừa có chọn

lọc những thành tựu nghiên cứu của các cơng trình đi trước. Nhóm tác giả
xin chân thành cảm cm tất cả các tác giả mà nhóm đã sử dụng thành tựu
nghiên cứu của họ để trích dẫn trong giáo trình.

NHĨM TÁC GIẢ


TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE........................................................................................................... i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................................................iii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS...................................................................... viii
LIST OF FIGURES......................................................................................... ix

LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................ X

1.1.
1.2.
1.3.
1.4.
1.5.

CHAPTER 1
OVERVIEW OF TRANSLATION
Definitions of translation........................................................................ 1
The dynamics of translation....................................................................1
Translation theories................................................................................. 3
Pre-translation considerations................................................................ 4
Extra readings.......................................................................................... 8

2.1.
2.2.
2.3.
2.4.
2.5.

CHAPTER 2
THE PROCESS OF TRANSLATING
Procedure of translating ....................................................................... 17
Approaches to translating...................................................................... 18
Levels of translating...............................................................................19
The relation of translating to translation theory................................ 21
Unit of translating................................................................................. 22


3.1.
3.2.
3.3.
3.4.
3.5.
3.6.
3.7.
3.8.
3.9.
3.10.

CHAPTER 3
TRANSLATION METHODS
Word for word translation.................................................................... 24
Literal translation...................................................................................25
Faithful translation................................................................................ 25
Semantic translation.............................................................................. 25
Communicative translation.................................................................. 25
Idiomatic translation............................................................................. 25
Free translation....................................................................................... 25
Adaptation...............................................................................................26
Semantic translation versus Communicative translation................. 26
Aspects of language............................................................................ 29
V


4.1.
4.2.
4.3.
4.4.

4.5.
4.6.

CHAPTER 4
STRATEGIES FOR TRANSLATORS
Strategies to deal with non-equivalence at word level......................38
Strategies to deal with idioms and fixed expressions....................... 44
Strategies to deal with non-equivalence of structures.......................46
Strategies to deal with proper names.................................................. 50
Translation of newspaper headlines................................................... 54
Applying technology in translation..................................................... 56

CHAPTER 5
INTERPRETATION AND THE INTERPRETING PROCESS
5.1. Overview of interpretation....................................................................... 66
5.2. Modes and types of interpreting...........................................................70
5.3. Interpreting process.............................................................................. 73

6.1.
6.2.
6.3.
6.4.

CHAPTER 6
CONSECUTIVE INTERPRETING
Consecutive interpreting.......................................................................78
The common settings of consecutive interpreting............................ 79
Some principles for the job of on-site interpretation....................... 81
Interpreting in some specialized areas................................................ 84


CHAPTER 7
CRUCIAL SKILLS AND ATTRIBUTES FOR INTERPRETING
7.1. The most common qualities of a consecutive interpreter .............. 88
7.2. Crucial skills for interpreting............................................................... 89

8.1.
8.2.
8.3.
8.4.
8.5.
8.6.
8.7.

VI

CHAPTER 8
CODE OF ETHICS FOR INTERPRETERS
Accuracy and fidelity.......................................................................... 104
Confidentiality..................................................................................... 105
Impartiality...........................................................................................106
Respect................................................................................................. 106
Cultural responsiveness...................................................................... 107
Role boundaries.................................................................................... 108
Accountability...................................................................................... 108


8.8. Professionalism.................................................................................. 109
8.9. Professional development ..................................................................110
APPENDIX 1
112

APPENDIX 2
113
REFERENCES............................................................................................... 114

vii


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

viii

No.

Abbreviation symbol

1

SL

Source Language

2

TL

Target Language

3

ST


Source Text

4

TT

Target Text

5

L

Language

6

c

Culture

7

STM

Short-Term Memory

8

LTM


Long-Term Memory

9

KSAs

Knowledge, Skills and
Attributes

10

WRHA

Full term

Winnipeg Regional Health
Authority


LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Ỉ.Ỉ. The diagram ofparti cipants/actors in the translation process
Figure 1.2. The dynamics of translation
Figure 2.1. The diagram of translating procedure
Figure 2.2. Afunctional theory of language
Figure 3. Translation methods in the relation -with the SL and the TL
Figure 5.

The interpreting process


Figure 6.

Seat arrangement for interpretation

Figure 7.1. Notes organized as a diagram
Figure 7.2. Notes organized vertically
Figure 7.3. Shifting notes

IX


LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1. Semantic translation vs Communicative translation

Table 4.Ỉ. English vs. Vietnamese personal pronouns
Table 4.2. Translating Vietnamese “non-subject” sentences
Table 4.3. Examples ofEnglish sentences with passive structures
Table 4.4. Examples ofEnglish general nouns containing proper names
Table 4.5. Guidelines for translating newspaper headlines
Table 5.1. Five different levels offormality in every language
Table 7.1. Frequently occurring verbs
Table 7.2. Frequently occurring nouns
Table 7.3. Verbs or nouns

X


CHAPTER 1


OVERVIEW OF TRANSLATION
This chapter aims to discuss the definitions of translation and
analyzes the dynamics of translation, the prominent theories of translation,
and the pre-translation considerations. Extra readings about the reasons for
translation, the history of translation, and the problems of equivalence in
translation are also provided.

1.1. DEFINITION OF TRANSLATION
Fundamentally, translation is defined as the action of “rendering a
written text into another language in the way that the author intended the
text” (Newmark, 1988, p. 5).

Thus, translators are concerned with the written texts. They render
written texts from one language into another. Translators are required to
undertake assignments, which range from simple items, such as birth
certificates and driving licenses, to more complex written materials, such
as articles in specialized professional journals, business contracts and legal
documents (Bui & Dang, 1999, p. 9).
As implied in the definitions above, translation is basically a
change of form (which is usually referred to as the actual words, phrases,
clauses, sentences, paragraphs etc., which are spoken or written).
Meanwhile, the meaning being transferred must be held constant.

1.2. THE DYNAMICS OF TRANSLATION
As shown in the diagram below, there are some participants/actors
in the translation process.

1



LI Cl

LI Cl

LI Cl

L2 C2

Author

Reader

Translator

Reader

L2 C2

Translation Initiator

Translation Commissioner
Figure 1.1. The diagram ofparticipants/actors in the translation process
(Bui &Dang, 1999, p. ỈỈ)

According to Newmark (1988), a text is typically pulled in ten
different directions:

The truth (the facts of the matter)


1

SL writer

2

SL norms

3 SL culture
4 SL setting and
tradition

Figure Ỉ.2. The dynamics of translation (Newmark, 1988, p. 5)

The ten factors that affect the translation of a text are explained in
more details as follows:

2


(1) The individual style or idiolect of the SL author. When should it be (a)
preserved, (b) normalized?
(2) The conventional grammatical and lexical usage of this type of text,
depending on the topic and the situation.
(3) Content items referring specifically to the SL, or third language (i.e.,
not SL or TL) cultures.
(4) The typical format of a text in a book, periodical, newspaper, etc., as
influenced by tradition at the time.
(5) The expectations of the putative readership, bearing in mind their
estimated knowledge of the topic and the style of language they use,

expressed in terms of the largest common factor, since one should not
translate down (or up) to the readership.
(6), (7), (8) As for 2, 3 and 4 respectively, but related to the TL.

(9) What is being described or reported, ascertained or verified (the
referential truth), where possible, independently of the SL text and the
expectations of the readership.
(10) The views and prejudices of the translator, which may be personal
and subjective, or may be social and cultural, involving the translator's
“group loyalty factor”, which may reflect the national, political,
ethnic, religious, social class, sex, etc. assumptions of the translator.
Figure 1.2 above shows the various forces pulling the translation
activity. However, there are more for translators to consider, such as word
order, grammar, concision, comprehensiveness and accuracy.

1.3. TRANSLATION THEORIES
Since the mid-1980s, there have been some major translation
theories in the world:
• Linguistic Theory of Translation by Catford (1965) and Nida
(1969) focuses on finding the equivalence of meaning, grammar, content,
etc.
• Functionalist Theories of Translation (German School) by Reiss
(1971, 1984), Neubert (1981), Wilss (1983), Vermeer (1978, 1984), and

3


Skopos (1978) do not pay attention to source texts, as their main aim is
what translators do with the translation.
• Translation as Cultural Events Theory by Hornby (1988, 1995)

sets up an integrated approach to translation.
• Manipulation School Theory of Translation by Bassnett and
Lefevere (1990s, 2001) points out the power of translation.
• Deconstructionist Theory of Translation by Gentzler (1993,
2001) suggests forgetting source texts and regards translation as the second
original.
• Culture and Context Theory of Translation by Newmark (1988,
2001) focuses on culture and context during the translation process.
The theory proposed by Newmark (1988) appears to be the most
suitable for undergraduate students, covering essential aspects of
translation theories as outlined below:
“Translation theory, in a narrow sense, is concerned with the
translation method appropriately used for a certain type of text, and it is
therefore dependent on a functional theory of language. However, in a
wider sense, translation theory is the body of knowledge that we have
about translating, extending from general principles to guidelines,
suggestions and hints.”
“What translation theory does is, first, to identify and define a
translation problem; second, to indicate all the factors that have to be taken
into account in solving the problem; third, to list all the possible translation
procedures; finally, to recommend the most suitable translation procedure,
plus the appropriate translation.”

1.4. PRE-TRANSLATION CONSIDERATIONS
Several steps need to be taken before translating a written text from
a SL into a TL. Newmark (1988, p. 11) suggests an analysis process of the
text, including the following factors for translators to consider.

1.4.1. Reading the text
The translators begin the translation by reading the original text for

two purposes. The first purpose is to understand what it is about and the

4


second one is to analyze it from “the translators’ point of view” because
their point of view is not similar to a linguist’s or a literary critic’s one.
The understanding of the text requires both general and close
reading. General reading is to get the gist. Close reading is for details, and
it is required for challenging texts, where the translator needs to examine
the words’ meaning both out of and in context.
The translators must have a linguistic competency which is optimal
in both languages and a sufficient amount of knowledge concerning the
text’s content. They have to work hard on being the best reader of the text.
Particularly, on the first reading, the translators familiarize themselves
with the text in its setting. Textual problems (such as lexical elements or
unfamiliar concepts) require a specific solution. Meanwhile, extratextual
problems (such as the desired motive and function of the translation)
influence on the translation strategy adopted in consideration of the text in
its totality. On the second reading (intense reading), the translators analyze
the basis of syntactic, semantic and pragmatic elements of the text.

1.4.2. The intention of the text
The intention of the text represents the SL writer’s attitude to the
subject matter. Therefore, it is crucial to search the intention of the text.
The intention of the text is normally shown through the selected means
such as grammatical structures, and vocabulary.

Take an example, two texts may describe a battle or a riot or a
debate, stating the same facts and figures, but the type of language used

and even the grammatical structures (passive voice, impersonal verbs often
used to disclaim responsibility) in each case may be evidence of different
points of view. Particularly in this case, the positive text uses positive
expressions, or vocabularies such as “hopefully”, “luckily”, “fortunately”
etc. while the negative text uses negative expressions, vocabulary such as
“unfortunately”, “badly”, “it is a pity that...” etc.

1.4.3. The intention of the translator
According to Newmark (1988, p. 12), the translators’ intention is
generally identical with that of the authors of the SL texts.

5


However, in real translation practice, the translators’ intention may
be a little bit more or less than that of the authors of the SL texts. For
example, the translators may be translating an advertisement, a notice, or
a set of instructions to show their clients how such matters are formulated
and written in the SL, rather than how to adapt them in order to persuade
or instruct a new TL readership. And again, the translators may be
translating a manual of instructions for a less educated readership so that
the explanation in their translation may be much larger than the
“reproduction”.

1.4.4. Text styles
According to Nida (1964), there are four types of text styles
(literary or non-literary):

- Narrative is a dynamic sequence of events, where the emphasis
is on the verbs or, for English, “dummy” or “empty” verbs plus verb-nouns

or phrasal verbs.

- Description is static with emphasis on linking verbs, adjectives
and adjectival nouns.

- Discussion is a treatment of ideas with emphasis on abstract
nouns (concepts), verbs of thought, mental activity (“consider”, “argue”,
etc.), logical argument and connectives.

- Dialogue is a conversation with emphasis on colloquialisms and
phatic expressions.
Some researchers divide text styles into five types of writing that
serve different purpose as follows:

- Narrative writing is storytelling at its most basic. It is all about
sharing something that happens to a character. It can be an epic tale or a
small anecdote. It can span years of time or a few minutes. It can be fact
or fiction. It includes a beginning, middle and end.
- Descriptive writing involves every detail of the place, person, or
scene the authorAvriter is writing about. The goal is to really immerse the
readers in the experience, making them feel like they are there.

6


- Persuasive writing is all about getting the writer’s point across.
The goal is to share the writer’s opinion in a thoughtful way to actually
convince the reader of an idea or a viewpoint. Whether you have a strong
stance on an issue or need to inspire people to take action towards a cause,
persuasive writing is the way to do it.


- Expository writing exists to explain a subject or inform readers
about a particular topic area. The goal is simply to teach the readers
something.

- Creative wanting is any piece of writing that exists outside of the
styles above, or even combines the styles in surprising new ways. The goal
of this writing style is really to rind new ways to tell stories that can
surprise and delight readers.
Therefore, understanding the text styles helps the translators in
deciding suitable translation strategies to achieve a good translated version
as expected.

1.4.5. The readership
The translators should characterize the readership of the original,
then that of the translation, and decide how much attention they have to
pay to the TL readers.
In order to characterize the readership, the translators may try to
assess the level of education, the class, age and sex of the readership. For
example, the average text for translation tends to be for an educated,
middle-class readership in an informal, not colloquial style.

All of these considerations help the translators decide on the degree
of formality, generality (or specificity) and emotional tone they must
express when working on the text.

1.4.6. The quality of the writing
The quality of the writing has to be judged in relation to the
author’s intention and/or the requirements of the subject matter.


If the text is well written, i.e., the right words are in the right places,
with a minimum of redundancy, the translators have to regard every
nuance of the author's meaning as having precedence over the reader's
7


response. If a text is well written, the syntax will reflect the writer's
personality. For instance, complex syntax will reflect subtlety, and plain
syntax will reflect simplicity.

A badly written text will be cluttered with stereotyped phrases;
recently fashionable general words and probably poorly structured. In this
case, translators have to correct the text themselves before doing
translation work.

1.5. EXTRA READINGS

1.5.1. Reasons for translation
The fact is that we can never know how many languages people
use today in the world and how many languages they have used during the
course of their development, even with the most up-to-date and
sophisticated communication systems nowadays. It is estimated that there
are two or three thousand languages being used in the world, but some
others say that the number may be as large as eight thousand. Therefore, it
is rather difficult for people to master all the languages available in the
globe due to a large number of them in use.
Communication in general or daily communication within only one
speech community is not enough so certainly there has been a great number
of times when some individuals are unable to understand the words or
expressions of some others. This phenomenon creates a barrier to

understanding whenever man tries to communicate across a great distance
of space or across a great interval of time.

Thereby, something has to be done to overcome this restriction.
One way to cope with the restriction is for individuals to know the foreign
language. But this is not the final solution because apparently no individual
in the world can know all the languages in use. The best polyglot so far
knows only about twenty-five languages, and still people want to read what
other people write and what other people say. Translation and interpreting
may be considered as the most universally accepted solution for
surmounting the obstacle. And thus, there is a need for professional
translators and interpreters.

8


In conclusion, translation work will help to solve most of the
obstacles of language barriers.

1.5.2. History of translation
Translation has been done for a long time. It has always been done
by someone and for some purposes. The first trace of translation dates from
3000 B.C., during the Egyptian Old Kingdom, the area of the First
Cataract, Elephantine, where inscriptions in two languages have been
found.
Translation became important in the Western world around 300 BC
when the Romans adopted many aspects of Greek culture. In the 12th
century, there was contact between the West and Islam in Spain. This
created conditions for widespread translation due to cultural differences
and language interaction. In the 1500s and 1600s, Bible translations like

Luther's in German and King James' in English had a big impact.
Translation was significant before Shakespeare, during French classicism,
and the Romantic Movements.
In the 19th century, translation was mainly a one-way means of
communication between prominent men of letters and, to a lesser degree,
philosophers and scientists and their educated readers abroad, whilst trade
was conducted in the language of the dominant nation, and diplomacy,
previously in Latin, was in French.

The 20th century has been called the “age of translation” to which
one may add “and interpreting”. International agreements between states,
public and private organizations are now translated for all interested
parties, whether or not the signatories understand each other's language.
Events such as the setting up of a new international body, the constitution
of an independent state, or the formation of a multinational company give
translation enhanced importance. The exponential increase in technology,
for example, patents, specifications, and documentation, the attempt to
bring it to developing countries, the simultaneous publication of the same
book in various languages, and the increase in world communication, have
correspondingly increased requirements for translation and interpretation.
That the very existence of such an organization as the United Nations is

9


crucially dependent on interpreting and translation indicates the
importance of translation and interpreting.

In modem time, translation and interpreting have become
extremely important in almost every aspect of life, and their significance

is expected to increase remarkably in the future.

1.5.3. Problems of equivalence
Establishing equivalence between the source text (ST) and the
target text (TT) on different linguistic levels is very important. The
definition of translation cited previously implies that producing the same
meaning or message in the TL text as intended by the original author is
the main objective of a translator. This notion of 'sameness' is often
understood as an equivalence relation between the STs and TTs. This
equivalence relation is generally considered the most salient feature of a
high-quality translation.

The principle that a translation should have an equivalence relation
with the ST, however, is problematic. There are three main reasons why
an exact equivalence or effect is difficult to achieve.

Firstly, it is impossible for a text to have constant interpretations
even for the same person on two occasions (Hervey et al., 1995, p. 14).
According to these translation scholars, before one could objectively
assess textual effects, one would need to have recourse to a fairly detailed
and exact theory of psychological effect, a theory capable, among other
things, of giving an account of the aesthetic sensations that are often
paramount in response to a text (Hervey et al., 1995, p. 14).
Secondly, translation is a matter of subjective interpretation of
translators of the SL text. Thus, producing an objective effect on the TT
readers, which is the same as that on the ST readers is an unrealistic
expectation. Thirdly, it may not be possible for translators to determine
how audiences responded to the ST when it was first produced (Hervey
etal., 1995, p. 14).
Miao (2000) gives a specific example of the impossibility of the

equivalence relation. If an original was written centuries ago and the
language of the original is difficult to comprehend for modem readers,

10


then a simplified translation may well have a greater impact on its readers
than the original had on the readers in the source culture. No translator
would hinder the reader's comprehension by using absolute expressions
in order to achieve an equivalent effect (Miao, 2000, p. 202).

Because the TT can never be equivalent to the ST at all levels,
researchers have distinguished different types of equivalence (Lauscher,
2000, p. 151).
Nida (1964, p. 159) suggests formal and dynamic or functional
equivalence. Formal equivalence focuses attention on the message itself,
in both form and content. It requires that the message in the TL should
match as closely as possible the different elements in the SL. Dynamic
equivalence is based on the principle of equivalent effect, where the
relationship between the receptor and message should be substantially the
same as that which existed between the original receptors and the
message.

Newmark (1988) makes a distinction between communicative
and semantic translation. Like Nida's dynamic equivalence,
communicative translation also tries to create an effect on the TT reader
which is the same as that received by readers of the SL text.
Koller (1977) proposes denotative, connotative, pragmatic,
textual, formal and aesthetic equivalence.
Munday (2001, p. 47) describes these five different types of

equivalence as follows:
1. Denotative equivalence is related to equivalence of the extralinguistic content of a text.

2. Connotative equivalence is related to lexical choices,
especially between near-synonyms.
3. Text-normative equivalence is related to text types, with texts
behaving in different ways.
4. Pragmatic equivalence or 'communicative equivalence' is
oriented towards the receiver of the text or message.

11


5. Formal equivalence is related to the form and aesthetics of the text,
including word plays and the individual stylistic features of the source text.
Popovic (1976) also distinguishes four types of equivalence:
linguistic, paradigmatic, stylistic, and textual. These types of equivalence
provide a framework for translators to analyze the relationship between
the ST text and the TLtext and to make decisions about how to render the
SL text into the TL.

a. Linguistic equivalence

Linguistic equivalence happens where there is homogeneity on
the linguistic level of both ST and TT, i.e., word for word translation.
Equivalence that can appear at word level and above word level, when
translating from one language into another. In fact, when the translators
start analyzing the SL, they look at the words as single units in order to
find a direct 'equivalent' term in the TL. They give a definition of the term
word since it should be remembered that a single word can sometimes be

assigned different meanings in different languages and might be regarded
as being a more complex unit or morpheme. This means that the translators
should pay attention to a number of factors when considering a single
word, such as number, gender and tense. In other words, linguistic
equivalence refers to the matching of individual words and expressions
from the SL to the TL.

b. Paradigmatic equivalence
Paradigmatic equivalence occurs where there is equivalence of “the
elements of a paradigmatic expressive axis”, i.e., elements of grammar.

c. Stylistic equivalence

Stylistic (translational) equivalence happens where there is
“functional equivalence” of elements in both original and translation
aiming at corresponding word or expression in another language. Stylistic
equivalence is actually the matching of the style and tone of the ST in the TL.

d. Textual (or syntagmatic) equivalence
Textual (or syntagmatic) equivalence happens where there is
“equivalence ofform and shape''. Textual equivalence, when referring to
the equivalence between a SL text and a TL text in terms of information

12


and cohesion. Texture is a very important feature in translation since it
provides useful guidelines for the comprehension and analysis of the ST
which can help the translators in their attempt to produce a cohesive and
coherent text for the TL audience in a specific context. It is up to the

translators to decide whether or not to maintain the cohesive ties as well as
the coherence of the ST. Their decision will be guided by three main
factors, which are: the target audience, the purpose of the translation and
the text type. In short, textual equivalence refers to the preservation of the
meaning and structure of the ST in the TL, including the organization of
the text, the use of headings, and the overall structure of the document.
In short, equivalence in translation, then, should not be approached
as a search for sameness, since sameness cannot even exist between two
TL versions of the same texts, let alone between the SL and the TL version.
The four types of equivalence proposed by Popovic (1976) offer a useful
starting point. Therefore, equivalence is very important and must be taken
into consideration for the achievement of the highest level of equivalence.

1.5.4. Untranslatability
“Untranslatability is a property of a text, or of any utterance, in
SL, for which no equivalent text or utterance can be found ỉn TL. The
degree of difficulty of translation depends on their nature, as well as on
the translator's abilities. ”

(Catford, 1965)
Untranslatability is also frequently seen in translation of poetry and
wordplay. In these two areas, there is hardly an approach to reach a perfect
equivalence. Poetry is difficult to translate because of its reliance on the
sounds (for example, rhymes).

When difficulties are encountered by the translator(s), the whole issue
of the translatability of the text is raised. Catford (1965) distinguishes two types
of untranslatability, which he terms linguistic and cultural.
On the linguistic level, untranslatability occurs when there is no
lexical or syntactical substitute in the TL for an SL item.


Cultural untranslatability is one of the complicated factors in
translation. When the TL and its culture lack relevant situational features

13


for symbols of the ST, the translators will find it difficult or impossible to
translate the language into the language of another culture.
Catford’s category of linguistic untranslatability, which is also
proposed by Popovic, is straightforward, but his second category is more
problematic. Linguistic untranslatability, he argues, is due to differences
in the SL and the TL, whereas cultural untranslatability is due to the
absence in the TL culture of a relevant situational feature for the ST.

❖ Activity 1
Read the following definitions of translation and put them in the
order ofpracticality for you as a college student.
A. “Translation must always be the re-creation of the original into
something profoundly different. On the other hand, it is never
a substitution of word for word but invariably the translation of
whole contexts.” (Malinowski, 1965, p. 11-12)
B. “Translating consists in reproducing in the receptor language
the closest natural equivalent of source-language message in
terms of meaning and style.” (Nida & Taber, 1969, p. 12)
c. “Translation consists of transferring the meaning of the source
language into the receptor language. It is meaning which is
being transferred and must be held constant. Only
the form changes.” (Larson, 1984, p. 3)
D. “Translation means “recodification”. Translation is the

reduction of coded input into another code; Since every
translation is a recodification, the act of translation involves at
least two codes (matrix code and target code).” (Frawley, 1984,
p. 160-161)
E. “To translate means to express in another language the content
of a given text. The objective of translation is to replace the
form and to preserve the content of the text. Translation is thus
form manipulation with reference to content.” (Papegaaij &
Schubert, 1988, p. 11)
F. “As language itself is a translation, the act of recreating
language through the reading process constitutes another form
of translation.” (Schulte & Buguenet, 1992, p. 9)

14


G. “Reading is already translation, and translation is translation
for the second time.” (Gadamer in Schulte & Biguenet, 1992,
P-9)
H. “Translation is implicit in every act of communication, in the
emission and reception of each and every mode of meaning, be
it in the widest semiotic sense or in more specifically verbal
exchanges.” (Steiner, 1992, p. xii)
I. “Translation can be seen as (co-)generation of texts under
specific constraints, relative stability of some situational
factors and therefore register, and classically, but not
necessarily, change of language and (context of) culture.”
(Steiner, 1996, p. 103)
J. “Translation is a craft consisting in the attempt to replace a
written message and/or statement in one language by the same

message and/or statement in another language. Each exercise
involves some kind of loss of meaning, due to a number of
factors. It provokes a continuous tension, a dialectic, an
argument based on the claims of each language. The basic loss
is on a continuum between over-translation (increased detail)
and under-translation (increased generalization)” (Newmark,
2001, p. 7)

Your answer:
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

❖ Activity 2

Amongst the definitions provided in Activity 1, recite the one that
you consider the most suitable for translation tasks in your work after
graduation. Support your opinion.

15