对奈达功能对等理论质疑的辩驳.doc

ugene A. Nida and his functional equivalenceHe believes that , since no two languages are identical, either in the meaning given to corresponding symbols or in the ways in which such symbols are arranged in phrases and sentences, it stands to reason that there can be no absolute translation, the translation may be close to the original, but there can be no identity in details. As there are no such things as identical translation, so the translators should strive what they can to achieve the closest equivalent. Given the facts that Nida distinguished two orientations in translation: formal equivalence and functional equivalence or can be called dynamic equivalence. Formal equivalence focuses on the message itself, in both form and content, that is to say , the message in the receptor language should match as closely as the original(I am curious about whether we can see the semantic translation from Peter Newmarks theory is similar to the formal translation to some extent.), nevertheless, I think few people can accomplish this request, and in my perspective, I think it is meaningless to reach this level, for most of the time , our aim is to deliver the main idea yet the whole information.In contrast, a translation which attempts to produce a dynamic rather a formal equivalence is based on the principle of “equivalent effect”. With dynamic equivalence a translator is not so concerned with matching the receptor language message with the source language message should be substantially the same as that which satisfied both the original receptors and the message. Nida holds that translation consists in reproducing in the receptors language and the closest natural equivalence of the source language message, first in terms of meaning and secondly in terms of style. Nida thinks that a translation of dynamic equivalence aims at complete naturalness of expression and tries to relate the receptor to modes of behavior relevant within the context of his own culture; it does not insist that he understand the cultural patterns of the source language context in order to comprehend the message. And the majority of failures in translation seem to result from an “inadequate understanding of the text in the source language”. Nida also places stress on the original background and culture. He says the role of language within a culture and the influence of the culture on the meanings of words and idioms are so pervasive that scarcely any text can be adequately understood without careful consideration of its cultural background (thus, we can see, as a proficient translator, we should not only pay much attention on the receptors behavior with the context of his culture, but on the cultural background of the source language). Nida has also succeeded in shifting the focus of attention from the comparison between the two texts to that between the responses of readers of the two languages. Here is what he thinks: translating means communicating, and this process depends on what is received by persons hearing or reading a translation. Judging the validity of a translation cannot stop with a comparison of corresponding lexical(词汇语义) meanings, grammatical classes , and rhetorical devices. What is important is the extent to which receptors correctly understand and appreciate the translated text. Accordingly, it is essential that functional equivalence be stated primarily in terms of a comparison of the way in which the original receptors understood and appreciated the text and the way in which receptors of the translated text understand and appreciate the translated text.” Thus, Nidas theory of functional equivalence or dynamic equivalence has produced enthusiastic responses from translation scholars. Moreover, it has exerted a great influence on Chinas translation circles. For his theory has broken away from the traditional criteria of “faithfulness, expressiveness, elegance”, giving much attention to and having as the starting point the receptors responses. His theory is a relatively practical one and has guided the translation activities in China for many years.Above all is primarily about the merits and compliments about Nidas translation theory. In his perspective, functional equivalence is the closest natural equivalence. And it does not indicate the fame of the translation, but the appropriateness of the translation. 功能对等的两个重要概念是读者反映论和异质同构。Dispute on Nidas translation theoryThere are some criticizes and suspects on Nidas translation theory. Now lets analyze and distinguish these criticizes. 1. some think that the theory is the summary of the indo-European language translation, which is not suitablein the translation of west-east language. However Nida himself thinks that many examples in his study come form east oriented language, which strongly proves that his theory also works well in the translation of west-east language.2. 读者反映不能作为译文评价标准。但是原文读者与译文读者有一个共同特点，那就是属于另一个语言文化，必然有一些共同的反应。而且译者很有可能对之做出准确的事前估计和事后测量，因此可以作为译文的参考标准。3. People think the translation theory on the Bible can not instruct the translation on literal work. However, Nida himself doesnt think he is the translator of the Bible, but doing the research on the language of the Bible. Some also think