Comprehensive Notes on Translation Theories

Overview

  • This chapter provides a concise overview of translation theory stages: linguistic, communicative, functionalist, and ethical/aesthetic.
  • It introduces the concept of equivalence in translation theories, referencing prominent theories and examples.
  • Key topics include stages of translation theories and the notion of equivalence.
  • Research works supporting the chapter's contents:
    • Direct and Oblique Translation (Vinay & Darbelnet, 1958/2004)
    • Van Leuven-Zwart’s Comparative-descriptive Model of Translation Shifts (1989)
    • Overt and Covert Translations (House, 1997)
    • Jakobson’s Equivalence (1959)
    • Dynamic Equivalence and Formal Equivalence (Nida, 1964)
    • Communicative and Semantic Translation (Newmark, 1981, 1988)
    • Form-Based and Meaning-based Translation (Larson, 1998)
    • Halliday’s Typology of Equivalence
    • Catford’s Typology of Equivalence (1965)
    • Mona Baker’s Typology of Equivalence (1992/2011)
    • Koller’s Notion of Equivalence
    • Popovič (1976) Types of Equivalence
    • The Cognitive Approach in Translation (Bell, 1991)
    • The Functionalist Approach
    • Non-Equivalence Approach (Skopos Theory)
    • The PolySystems Theory

Stages of Translation Theories

  • Munday (2009) notes that translation theory was Western-dominated until recently.
  • In Western Europe, word-for-word vs. sense-for-sense translation was debated until the 20th century.
  • 'Translation studies' emerged as a discipline in the second half of the 20th century from applied comparative linguistics and modern languages; James Holmes introduced the concept in 1972 as a substitute for 'translation science' or 'translatology'.
  • Newmark (2009) prefers 'translation theory' as an important framework for translation students, though not fundamental to being a good translator.
  • Peter Newmark (2009) identified four stages: linguistic, communicative, functionalist, and ethical/aesthetic, each with a unique approach.

Linguistic Stage

  • Up to 1950, focused on literary texts (poetry, stories, plays, novels, autobiographies).
  • Concerned with word-for-word (literal) vs. sense-for-sense (natural, liberal, idiomatic) translation.
  • Preference for sense-for-sense or contextual translation marked the interpretive theory of translation.
  • Alexander Tytler's (1790) Essay on the Principles of Translation defined a good translation as one where the original work's merit is completely transfused into another language, apprehended and felt as strongly by natives as by those who speak the original language. Newmark interprets this to mean the translation should completely convey the message, follow the original style, and have the same ease as the original composition.
  • George Steiner’s After Babel (1975) marks the end of this stage.

Communicative Stage

  • Beginning around 1950, this stage applied linguistics to translation studies, covering both non-literary and literary texts.
  • It focused on categorizing text registers, considering a range of readership groups, and identifying procedures for translating various text segments.

Functionalist Stage

  • Commencing around 1970, mainly covered non-literary texts ('the real world').
  • Concerned with a text's intention and essential message, rather than the source text's language.
  • Translation focused on how to translate a text functionally.

Ethical/Aesthetic Stage

  • Since around 2000, concerned with authoritative, official, or documentary texts, and serious literary works.
  • Highlights translation as a truth-seeking profession.
  • Truth is twofold: correspondence of factual text with reality and correspondence of imaginative text with meaningful allegory, and translation with the respective text type.
  • Newmark concludes these stages are cumulative, overlapping and absorbing without eliminating each other (2009, p. 21).

The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories

  • Discussion involves perspectives on concepts: universality vs. relativity.
  • Chomsky (1977) proposed the universality of concepts, suggesting shared basic brain structures lead to deep similarities between languages, even if surface grammar does not reveal them. Universalists believe all languages share common or universal concepts.
  • Relativists (Steiner, 1998) believe languages are too disjointed for concepts to be common. Steiner rejects Chomsky's universality in After Babel (1998), asserting language is relative.
  • These stances influence understandings of equivalence. Universalists suggest equivalence is achievable due to deep structural similarities. Relativists argue real equivalence does not exist.
  • These differing stances have fueled debate about the concept of equivalence, a source of disagreement among translation and linguistics scholars (Munday, 2009).
  • Munday (2009) states that equivalence is a contentious issue in translation studies, with some scholars rejecting it (e.g. Gentzler, 2001; Snell-Hornby, 1988/1995) and others finding it useful (e.g. Baker 1992; Kenny 1998). Some believe translation without equivalence is impossible (e.g. Koller, 1989, 1995; Nida and Taber, 1974/1982).
  • Munday concludes equivalence is a principal issue, remaining essential in translation practice (Munday, 2008, p. 49).
  • Evidence for necessity of equivalence:
    • Definitions of translation revolve around equivalence (e.g. Catford, 1965; Newmark, 1981, 1988).
    • Translation is communication, requiring equivalence between source text (ST) and target text (TT).
    • Translation difficulty and untranslatability are discussed regarding finding equivalent items in a TT (Yinhua, 2011).
  • Equivalence was dominant in translation discussions during the 1960s and 1970s (Venuti, 2004).

Direct and Oblique Translation (Vinay & Darbelnet, 1958/2004)

  • Vinay and Darbelnet (2004) were influenced by Catford’s (1965) shifts and identified two translation strategies: direct and oblique translation.
  • Oblique translation: Changing the syntactic order and lexis of the ST in the TT is sometimes necessary to transpose certain stylistic effects of the ST, filling the gap in the TL
  • Direct translation: Sometimes it is possible to transpose the ST message elements into the TT individually, due to structural or metalinguistic parallelism between the ST and the TT
  • These strategies are subdivided into seven procedures; three for direct translation and four for oblique translation.

Direct Translation Procedures

  • Borrowing
  • Calque
  • Literal translation

Oblique Translation Procedures

  • Transposition

  • Modulation

  • Equivalence

  • Adaptation

  • Borrowing: An SL word is transferred to the TT to fill a semantic gap in the TL; keeps SL connotations and adds SL culture to the TL. Examples: menu, coup d’état, café, alcohol, sheik, Islam (English);

  • Calque: An SL expression or structure is transferred with minimum adaptation, subdivided into lexical and structural calque.

    • Lexical calque: SL lexis transferred into the TT without violating the syntactic structure of the TT.
    • Structural calque: A new structure is introduced into the TL, translating the ST lexicons literally.

  • Literal translation: Word-for-word translation, most common between related languages/cultures (e.g. French and Italian). Possible at the lower level of language.

  • Vinay and Darbelnet (2004) state that If direct or literal translation procedures do not yield acceptable translations, oblique translation offers an alternative.

  • Unacceptability of translation occurs when the message translated:

    • gives another meaning;
    • has no meaning;
    • is structurally impossible;
    • does not have a corresponding expression within the metalinguistic experience of the TL; or
    • has a corresponding expression, but not within the same register’ (p. 87).

  • Transposition: Changing a part of speech (i.e. word class) without altering the meaning. Two types: obligatory and optional.

    • Obligatory transposition: Sought when the TL does not allow any other than a specific form. Example: French expression “Dès son lever” must transpose into the English expression ‘As soon as he gets up’.
    • Optional transposition: Employ either transposition strategy (i.e. ‘Dès son lever’) or calque strategy (i.e. ‘Dès qu’il se lève’).

  • Modulation: Changing the semantics and point of view expressed in the SL; this strategy is followed when literal translation or transposition can result in unidiomatic or unsuitable text in the TL. Similarly to transposition, there are obligatory and optional modulations. Example: The time when’, which must be translated into French as ‘Le moment où’ (literally: ‘the moment when’).

  • Equivalence: A strategy whereby different stylistic or structural means are used by the SL and TL, respectively, as in idioms and proverbs. In other words, the ST and TT can render the same message using different styles or different structures

  • Adaptation: Proposed by Vinay and Darbelnet (2004), and is the changing and/or explaining of cultural differences between an SL and a TL. This strategy is employed to create situational equivalence.

  • Vinay and Darbelnet (2004) conclude that the proposed strategies frequently overlap, as more than one strategy can be used within the same text or even the same sentence.

Van Leuven-Zwart’s Comparative-Descriptive Model of Translation Shifts (1989)

  • Proposed a comparative model that aims to carry out analysis above the level of a sentence.
  • The model is primarily based on Vinay and Darbelnet’s categorization of direct and oblique translations, and consists of a comparative model and descriptive model.
  • Comparative model: Aims to analyse an ST and its TT at micro levels, or based on microstructural shifts. divides texts into comprehensible units, which she called ‘transemes’. The identified transeme is compared to what she calls an ‘architranseme’, the invariant principal meaning of the ST transeme, but does not stand as a full equivalent for the ST transeme.
  • Descriptive model: A macrostructural model that aims to analyse the ST. It refers to the three metafunctions of language: ideational, interpersonal and textual.
  • The model, however, has drawbacks, as in practice it is difficult to apply to a long text. Also, tracking shifts does not seem to be easy.

Overt and Covert Translations (House, 1997)

  • House (1997) views equivalence as a relation between an ST and its translation.
  • In House’s words, translation is doubly bound: on its ST on one hand, and on its recipient’s communicative condition, on the other hand.
  • She adds that absolute equivalence is impossible, and that an important term that should be discussed is ‘invariance‘, which refers to dealing with equivalence according to each individual case. Based on situational dimension and functional equivalence, House differentiates between two types of translation: overt and covert.

Overt Translations

  • Focuses on the universal meaning of a text, without addressing the reader.
  • This kind of translation is employed for translating STs of an established value.

Covert Translation

  • Makes translation equal to a ST in the target culture.
  • In other words, a translated text will appear to be original and not a mere translation.
  • The ST and its culture are not specifically addressed. The most important consideration is to convey the ST message in a functional manner.

Jakobson’s Equivalence (1959)

  • Jakobson (1959), a Russian linguist who studied linguistic meaning and equivalence in meaning between different languages, observed many differences among languages.
  • He stated that meaning of any linguistic sign (i.e. word) can be considered a further translation of this sign. For example, the word ‘bachelor’ can be converted into a more explicit sign, such as unmarried man.
  • Jakobson differentiated between three types of translation:
    • Intralingual
    • Interlingual
    • Intersemiotic

Intralingual Translation

  • Refers to rewording, using signs of the same language; in this type of translation, another less or more synonymous word is used or circumlocution is employed in the absence of a synonym.
  • Jakobson further mentions that each code unit (i.e. word) should be translated by an equivalent combination of code units; for example, every ‘bachelor’ is an ‘unmarried man’, and every ‘unmarried man’ is a ‘bachelor’.
  • In intralingual translation, a word is replaced by another that is a near synonym or near equivalent. For example, celibate and bachelor can be near synonyms, but they are not complete synonyms because every celibate is a bachelor, but not every bachelor is a celibate.

Interlingual Translation

  • Refers to replacing a verbal sign with another sign but of a different language; on this level of translation, there is no full equivalence between code units.
  • Translation substitutes only messages but not code units. Similarly, on the level of interlingual translation, there is no full equivalence between code units, while messages may serve as adequate interpretations of alien code units or messages.

Intersemiotic Translation

  • Intersemiotic translation or transmutation refers to transmuting verbal to non-verbal signs.
  • In intersemiotic translation, the focus is on the message more than wording (Jakobson, 1959/1966/2000). To clarify, a text (verbal sign) may be translated as a picture, or dancing, or any other type of performance (non-verbal sign).

Dynamic Equivalence and Formal Equivalence (Nida, 1964)

  • In 1964, Eugene Nida proposed his new notion of equivalence, which is considered the first attempt to differentiate between pragmatic equivalence, on the one hand, and linguistic and cultural (i.e. formal) equivalence, on the other hand.
  • Nida presented two new types of equivalence; dynamic (which he later ‘functional’) and formal equivalence (Munday, 2008).

Formal Equivalence

  • Inclined to be more ST structure oriented.
  • It is more concerned with the message in the TL, but it should match as closely as possible the different elements in the SL (Nida, 2000).

Dynamic Equivalence

  • More concerned with the effect of the principle equivalent, where the relationship between the receptor and the message should be significantly the same as that which existed between the original receptors and the message (Nida, in Venuti, 2004.).
  • Dynamic translation is receptor oriented and, therefore, aims at complete naturalness of expression, which requires adaptations of grammar, lexicon and cultural references.

Additions by Nida

  • Filling out elliptical expressions
  • Obligatory specification
  • Additions required by grammatical restructuring
  • Amplification from implicit status to explicit status
  • Answers to rhetorical questions
  • Classifiers
  • Connectives
  • Categories of the TL

Subtractions by Nida

  • Repetitions
  • Specification of reference
  • Conjunctions
  • Transitionals
  • Categories
  • Vocatives
  • Formulae

Communicative and Semantic Translation (Newmark, 1981, 1988)

  • Newmark’s theory of translation is pertinent to the linguistic theory of translation, as he follows Catford’s formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence; however, he calls them ‘semantic translation’ and ‘communicative translation’ (As-Safi, 2011).
  • In translation, Newmark (1988) underscores the importance of referring to the textual level, referential level, cohesive level and the level of naturalness at the process of translation.
    • Textual Level
    • Referential Level
    • Cohesive Level
    • Naturalness

Communicative Translation

  • TT oriented
  • attempts to produce a similar effect on its readers to that of the original text

Semantic Translation

  • source text oriented
  • attempts to render as closely as possible the semantic and syntactic structures of the second language to allow the exact contextual meaning of the ST

Form-Based and Meaning-Based Translation (Larson, 1998)

  • Larson (1998) identifies two main kinds of translation: form-based translation and meaning-based translation.
  • Within these two basic taxonomies, Larson makes another subdivision in the form of a continuum that comprises seven kinds of translation ranging from the ‘very literal’ translation to the ‘unduly free’. He states that ‘unduly free’ translations are unacceptable translations for most purposes.

Halliday’s Typology of Equivalence

  • Halliday (2001) argues that translation equivalence is the central organizing concept of translation.
  • Halliday proposes his typology of equivalence in terms of a systematic functional theory.
  • This typology centres on three vectors:
    • Stratification,
    • Metafunction
    • Rank

Stratification

  • According to Halliday—refers to the organization of language in ordered strata.
  • Such strata include the phonetic/phonological, lexico-grammatical, semantic and contextual levels of the multi-coding system of language.
  • These strata do not carry the same value in equivalence in translation. For example, semantic equivalence is more important than lexico-grammatical equivalence.

Rank

  • deals with how the formal strata (i.e. phonology and lexico-grammar) are organized.
  • In other words, it is concerned with how clause complexes, clauses, phrases, groups, words and morphemes are organized.
  • However, rank deals with morphemes, words, clauses and sentences. Similarly, to strata, equivalence in ranks will differ in value.

Metafunction

  • Includes three categories of function that all languages share:
    • Ideational
    • Interpersonal
    • Textual
Ideational Function
  • About the ‘content function of language’ (Halliday, 2007, p. 183).
  • refers to the use of language to express and talk about our experience of our inner and outer worlds.
Interpersonal Function
  • Refers to the use of language to interact with others, and to establish and maintain relations with them.
Textual Function
  • Refers to how language functions as a system that organizes messages in a common manner.
  • In this sense, it explains how the different messages fit logically with those around them, and with the wider context in which the talking or writing is takaing place.

Catford’s Typology of Equivalence

  • Catford is a British linguist who based his theory of translation on those of Firth and of Halliday (Manfredi, 2008).
  • Catford’s book, entitled A Linguistic Theory of Translation (1965/1978), is his most famous book in translation.
  • He, following Halliday, deemed language as working functionally on a variety of levels (i.e. phonology, graphology, grammar, lexis) and ranks (i.e. sentence, clause, group, word, morpheme) (Manfredi, 2008).

Types of translation in terms of extent

  • Full Translation
  • Partial Translation

Types of translation in relation to the levels of language involved in translation:

  • Total Translation
  • Restricted Translation

Types of Shifts

  • Level Shift
  • Category shifts
    • Structural shifts
    • Class shifts
    • Unit or rank shifts
    • Intra-system shifts.

Mona Baker’s Typology of Equivalence

  • Baker’s typology of equivalence is outlined in her seminal work In Other Words, in which she discussed the different problems of equivalence in translation between any two languages.
  • Equivalence has always been identified as a central component of most of the definitions of translation (e.g. Catford, 1965; Nida, 1959; Wilss, 1982).

Types of Equivalence

  • Equivalence at word level
  • Equivalence above the word level
  • Textual equivalence
  • Grammatical equivalence

Problems with non-equivalence at word level

  • Cultural specific concepts
  • SL concepts are not lexicalized in the TL
  • Semantically complex SL words
  • Different distinctions in meaning in the SL and the TL
  • The TL lacks a superordinate
  • The TL lacks a specific term (hyponym)
  • Interpersonal or physical perspective differences
  • Differences in expressive meaning
  • Differences in form
  • Differences in frequency and purpose of using specific form and the use of loan words in the SL.

Strategies followed by translators to overcome non-equivalence

  • Translation using a more general word (superordinate)
  • Translation using a neutral/less expressive word
  • Cultural substitution
  • Translation using a loan word or a loan word accompanied by an explanation
  • Paraphrasing using a related word
  • Paraphrasing using unrelated words
  • Omission and illustration.

Koller’s Notion of Equivalence

  • Denotative equivalence
  • Connotative equivalence
  • Text-normative equivalence
  • Pragmatic equivalence
  • Formal equivalence

Popovič (1976) Types of Equivalence

  • Linguistic equivalence
  • Paradigmatic equivalence
  • Stylistic (translational) equivalence
  • Textual (syntagmatic) equivalence

The Cognitive Approach to Translation

  • Bell (1991) proposed a cognitive approach to translation, which is based on Halliday’s SFL theory
  • Bell posits that a text is a product of three types of choice and, therefore, three types of meaning. According to Bell, there are three types of meaning: cognitive, interactional and discoursal.
  • These three types of meaning are organized by three metafunctions—ideational, interpersonal and textual—and they are realized by three language systems—logical, grammatical and rhetorical.

Functionalist Approach in Translation (Non-equivalence Approach)

Katherina Reiss

  • Informative texts
  • Expressive texts
  • Appellative or operative texts
  • Audiomedial texts

Documentary vs. instrumental translation (Nord, 1988/1991)

Documentary translation
  • ‘serves as a document of a source culture communication between the author and the ST recipient’ (Nord, 1991, p. 72).
  • It is ST oriented, in the sense that the reader of the TT knows that what they read is a translation.
Instrumental translation
  • ‘serves as an independent message transmitting instrument in a new communicative action in the target culture, and is intended to fulfill its communicative purpose without the recipient being conscious of reading or hearing a text which, in a different form, was used before in a different communicative situation’ (Nord, 1991, p. 73).
  • This type of translation is TT oriented and, rather than sounding like a translation, the TT sounds as though it is an original text..

Skopos theory: Three types of purpose in translation

  • the purpose of the translator
  • the communicative purpose
  • a particular translation strategy or procedure

Darwish’s Notion of Equivalence (2010)

  • equivalence can be considered in terms of relative equivalence, rather than absolute equivalence
  • Terms such as ‘approximation’ and ‘alignment’ used for the practical consideration of equivalence
  • Translation should aim at achieving optimal approximation, rather than absolute equivalence
  • The translator, then, should work on removing the language constraints to achieve such approximation.

The Polysystem Theory

  • Even-Zohar (1979, 1997) considered translation as a part of the polysystem of literature, and it can occupy a primary position or peripheral position based on different factors.
  • Toury (1980) explored the reasons behind choosing specific texts to be translated into Hebrew.
  • He found that the reasons are far from literary ones, as texts are mostly selected based on personal reasons, a translator’s preferences, and the purpose of translation.