Eugene A. Nida.ppt

UnitOne LinguisticApproachestoTranslation ChapterOneEugeneA Nida DynamicEquivalence FormalEquivalence EugeneA Nida EugeneA Nidahasbeenacclaimedasapioneerofthelinguisticapproachtotranslationstudies Hisworkbecamethebasisuponwhichanewfieldofinvestigationinthe20thcentury the science oftranslation wasfounded Hismainresearchinterestliesin Bibletranslationdynamicequivalence PublicationsbyEugeneA Nida Nida EugeneA 1992 Basicelementsofdiscoursestructures Nida EugeneA 1960 AsynopsisofEnglishsyntax Nida EugeneA 1952 53 Selectivelistening Shedd L M andE A Nida 1952 ApedagogicalgrammaroftheQuechuatongue Nida EugeneA 1951 Asystemforthedescriptionofsemanticelements Nida EugeneA 1951 Outlineofdescriptivesyntax Nida EugeneA 1950 Learningaforeignlanguage ahandbookformissionaries Nida EugeneA andMois sC Romero 1950 ThepronominalseriesinMaya Yucatec Nida EugeneA 1949 Approachingreadingthroughthenativelanguage Nida EugeneA 1949 Morphology thedescriptiveanalysisofwords Nida EugeneA 1948 Theanalysisofgrammaticalconstituents Nida EugeneA 1948 Theidentificationofmorphemes Nida EugeneA 1947 Fieldtechniquesindescriptivelinguistics Nida EugeneA 1947 Bibletranslating Ananalysisofprinciplesandprocedures withspecialreferencetoaboriginallanguages Nida EugeneA 1946 Syntax adescriptiveanalysis Nida EugeneA 1945 Linguisticsandethnologyintranslationproblems Nida EugeneA 1943 Linguisticinterludes Nida EugeneA 1937 TheTarahumaralanguage Researcheson Equivalence Firth theso calledtranslationequivalentsbetweentwolanguagesareneverreallyequivalent Jakobson equivalenceindifferenceisthecardinalproblemoflanguageandthepivotalconcernoflinguistics Catford distinguishestwotypesofequivalence formalcorrespondenceandtextualequivalence Nida dynamicequivalenceandformalequivalenceWernerKoller classifiesequivalenceintodenotativeequivalence connotativeequivalence text normativeequivalenceandpragmaticequivalence CommentsonDynamicEquivalence Snell Hornby equivalenceisunsuitableasabasicconceptintranslationtheory PeterFawcett translationequivalencecontinuestobeusedintheeverydaylanguageoftranslationbecausetheyrepresenttranslationreality Fawcett therearemanythingsintranslationwhichcanonlybedescribedandexplainedbylinguistics Dynamic FormalEquivalence Dynamicequivalenceandformalequivalencearetwoapproachestotranslation Dynamicequivalence alsoknownasfunctionalequivalence attemptstoconveythethoughtexpressedinasourcetext ifnecessary attheexpenseofliteralness originalwordorder thesourcetext sgrammaticalvoice etc whileformalequivalenceattemptstorenderthetextword for word ifnecessary attheexpenseofnaturalexpressioninthetargetlanguage Thetwoapproachesrepresentemphasis respectively onreadabilityandonliteralfidelitytothesourcetext Thereis however inrealitynosharpboundarybetweendynamicandformalequivalence Broadly thetworepresentaspectrumoftranslationapproaches Functionalequivalenceisfurtherdividedintocategoriesontwolevels Theminimallevelandthemaximallevel ForNida goodtranslationsalwaysliesomewherebetweenthetwolevels Thereadersofatranslatedtextshouldbeabletocomprehendittothepointthattheycanconceiveofhowtheoriginalreadersofthetextmusthaveunderstoodandappreciatedit Minimallevel Maximallevel Thereadersofatranslatedtextshouldbeabletounderstandandappreciateitinessentiallythesamemannerastheoriginalreadersdid Ifthereaderinthereceptorlanguageunderstandsandappreciatesthetranslatedtextinessentiallythesamemannerandtothesamedegreeasthereaderinthesourcelanguagedid suchatranslationcanbeevaluatedasadynamicequivalenttranslation Whenjudgingaproduct oneshouldtesthowconsumersreacttotheproduct forregardlessofhowtheoreticallygoodaproductmightbeorhowseeminglywellitisdisplayed ifpeopledonotrespondfavorablytoit thenitisnotgoingtobeaccepted NidaandTaber Nidawasusingthistheorytojudgeaproduct Theterms dynamicequivalence and formalequivalence areassociatedwiththetranslatorEugeneNida andwereoriginallycoinedtodescribewaysoftranslatingtheBible butthetwoapproachesareapplicabletoanytranslation Differentvoice Gentzler sview Nida stheoryisonlyusefulfortranslationsofpropaganda advertisementorcertainreligiousmaterials butitcouldnotprovidethebasisforageneraltranslationtheory I DifferenttypesoftranslationDifferencesintranslationscangenerallybeaccountedforbythreebasicintranslating 1thenatureofthemessage2thepurposeorpurposesoftheauthorand byproxy ofthetranslator3thetypeofaudience Fourpurposes Theparticularpurposesofthetranslatorarealsoimportantfactorsindictatingthetypeoftranslation Theprimarypurposeofthetranslatormaybeinformationastobothcontentandform Atranslator spurposesmayinvolvemuchmorethaninformation Astillgreateradaptationislikelytooccurinatranslationwhichhasanimperativepurpose Fourdecoding 1thecapacityofchildren whosevocabularyandculturalexperiencearelimited2thedouble standardcapacityofnewliterates whocandecodeoralandwrittenmessageswithfacilitybutwhoseabilitytodecodewrittenmessagesislimited3thecapacityoftheaverageliterateadult whocanhandlebothoralandwrittenmessageswithrelativeease4theunusuallyhighcapacityofspecialists doctors theologians philosophers scientists etc II TwobasicorientationsintranslatingTherearefundamentallytwodifferenttypesofequivalence onewhichmaybecalledformalandanotherwhichisprimarilydynamic Formalequivalencefocusesattentiononthemessageitself inbothformandcontent Thedynamicrelationshipbetweenreceptorandmessageshouldbesubstantiallythesameasthatwhichexistedbetweentheoriginalreceptorsandthemessage III LinguisticandCulturalDistanceAtranslationmayinvolvenotonlydifferencesoflinguisticaffiliationbutalsohighlydiversecultures Asamatteroffactiflanguagesaretoocloselyrelatedoneislikelytobebadlydeceivedbythesuperficialsimilarities withtheresultthattranslationsdoneunderthesecircumstancesareoftenquitepoor Theculturalsimilaritiesusuallyprovideaseriesofparallelismsofcontentthatmakethetranslationproportionatelymuchlessdifficultthanwhenbothlanguageandculturesaredisparate Infact differencesbetweenculturescausemanymoreseverecomplicationsforthetranslatorthandodifferencesinlanguagestructure IV DefinitionsofTranslatingDefinitionsofpropertranslationarealmostasnumerousandvariedasthepersonswhohaveundertakentodiscussthesubject Thisdiversityisinasensequiteunderstandable fortherearevastdifferencesinthematerialstranslated inthepurposesofthepublication andintheneedsoftheprospectiveaudience Moreover livelanguagesareconstantlychangingandstylisticpreferencesundergocontinualmodification Thusatranslationacceptableinoneperiodisoftenquiteunacceptableatalatertime Thoughsomedissentingvoicescanbefoundonvirtuallyallproposalsastowhattranslatingshouldconsistof thereareseveralsignificantfeaturesoftranslatingonwhichmanyofthemostcompetentjudgesareincreasinglyinagreement makingsense conveyingthespiritandmanneroftheoriginal havinganaturalandeasyformofexpression producingasimilarresponse Definitionsanddescriptionsoftranslatingarenotservedbydeterministicrules rather theydependonprobabilisticrules Onecannot therefore statethataparticulartranslationisgoodorbadwithouttakingintoconsiderationamyriadoffactors whichinturnmustbeweightedinanumberofdifferentways withappreciablydifferentanswers Onecannotstatethataparticulartranslationisgoodorbadwithouttakingintoconsiderationamyriadoffactors whichinturnmustbeweightedinanumberofdifferentways withappreciablydifferentanswers Hencetherewillalwaysbeavarietyofvalidanswerstothequestion isthisagoodtranslation V PrinciplesGoverningaTranslationOrientedTowardformalEquivalence1 DefinitionofF EtranslationAF Etranslationisbasicallysource oriented thatis itisdesignedtorevealasmuchaspossibleoftheformandcontentoftheoriginalmessage 2 FeaturesofanF EtranslationAnF Etranslationattemptstoreproduceseveralformalelements including grammaticalunits consistencyinwordusage meaningsintermsofthesourcecontext 1 reproductionofgrammaticalunitsThereproductionofgrammaticalunitsmayconsistin translatingnounsbynouns verbsbyverbs etc keepingallphrasesandsentencesintact i e notsplittingupandreadjustingtheunits preservingallformalindicators e g marksofpunctuation paragraphbreaks andpoeticindentation 2 reproductionofconsistencyinwordusageInattemptingtoreproduceconsistencyinwordusage anF Etranslationusuallyaimsatso calledconcordanceofterminology thatis italwaysrendersaparticularterminthesource languagedocumentbythecorrespondingterminthereceptordocument Theresultmayberelativelymeaninglessstringsofwords butonthecontrary acertaindegreeofconcordancemaybehighlydesirableincertaintypesofF EtranslationasinthatofPlato sdialoguesinEnglish 3 meaningsintermsofthesourcecontextInordertoreproducemeaningsintermsofthesourcecontext anF Etranslationnormallyattemptsnottomakeadjustmentsinidioms butrathertoreproducesuchexpressionsmoreorlessliterally sothatthereadermaybeabletoperceivesomethingofthewayinwhichtheoriginaldocumentemployedlocalculturalelementstoconveymeanings 3 LiabilitiesofF EtranslationsInmanyinstances however onesimplycannotreproducecertainformalelementsofthesourcemessage solution marginalnotes AconsistentF Etranslationwillobviouslycontainmuchthatisnotreadilyintelligibletotheaveragereader solution marginalnotes SometypesofstrictlyF Etranslationsareoflimitedvalue othersareofgreatvalue Butonthewhole F Etranslationsareoftenperfectlyvalidtranslationsofcertaintypesofmessagesforcertaintypesofaudiences VI PrinciplesGoverningTranslationsOrientedTowardDynamicEquivalence1 DefinitionofD EtranslationInaD Etranslation thefocusofattentionisdirectednotsomuchtowardthesourcemessage astowardthereceptorresponse AD Etranslationmaybedescribedasoneconcerningwhichabilingualandbiculturalpersoncanjustifiablysay Thatisjustthewaywewouldsayit Itisnotmerelyanothermessagewhichismoreorlesssimilartothatofthesource Itisatranslation andassuchmustclearlyreflectthemeaningandintentofthesource Inonesentence aD Etranslationisdefined ordescribed as theclosestnaturalequivalenttothesource languagemessage 2 ThreeessentialtermsinthedefinitionaboutD Etranslation Equivalentpointstowardthesource languagemessage Naturalpointstowardthereceptorlanguage Closestbindsthetwoorientationstogetheronthebasisofthehighestdegreeofapproximation 3 Implicationsoftheword natural SinceaD Etranslationisdirectedprimarilytowardequivalenceofresponseratherthanequivalenceofform itisimportanttodefinemorefullytheimplicationsoftheword natural asappliedtosuchtranslations Anaturalrenderingmustfitthereceptorlanguageandcultureasawhole Anaturalrenderingmustfitthecontextoftheparticularmessage Anaturalrenderingmustfitthereceptor languageaudience 1 Conformanceofatranslationtothereceptorlanguageandcultureasawhole AccordingtoNida theconformanceofatranslationtothereceptorlanguageandcultureasawholeisanessentialingredientinanystylisticallyacceptablerendering Actuallythisqualityoflinguisticappropriatenessisusuallynoticeableonlywhenitisabsent Inanaturaltranslation therefore thosefeatureswhichwouldmaritareconspicuousbytheirabsence AccordingtoJ H Frere thelanguageoftranslationought wethink beapure impalpableandinvisibleelement themediumofthoughtandfeelingandnothingmore itoughtnevertoattractattentiontoitself Allimportationsfromforeignlanguages are tobeavoided Suchanadjustmenttothereceptorlanguageandculturemustresultinatranslationthatbearsnoobvioustraceofforeignorigin A Anaturaltranslationinvolvestwoprincipalareaofadaptation namely grammarandlexicon a Ingeneralthegrammaticalmodificationscanbemadethemorereadily sincemanygrammaticalchangesaredictatedbytheobligatorystructuresofthereceptorlanguage Thatistosay oneisobligedtomakesuchadjustedasshiftingwordorder usingverbsinplaceofnouns andsubstitutingnounsforpronouns b Thelexicalstructureofthesourcemessageislessreadilyadjustedtothesemanticrequirementsofthereceptorlanguage forinsteadofobviousrulestobefollowed therearenumerousalternativepossibilities Therearegenerallythreelexicallevelstobeconsidered termsforwhichtherearereadilyavailableparallelse g river tree stone knife etc termswhichidentifyculturallydifferentobjects butwithsomewhatsimilarfunctionse g bookinEnglishvs bookinNewTestmenttimessuggestedsolution becauseofpossibleconfusions eitheruseanothertermwhichreflectstheformofthereferent thoughnottheequivalentfunction orwhichidentifiestheequivalentfunctionattheexpenseofformalidentity termswhichidentifyculturalspecialtiese g synagogue homer ephah cherubim andjubilee etc suggestedsolution notranslationthatattemptstobridgeawideculturalgapcanhopetoeliminateallracesoftheforeignsetting fortheseexpressionsaredeeplyimbeddedintheverythoughtstructureofthemessage Theculturaldiscrepanciesofferlessdifficultythanmightbeimagined especiallyiffootnotesareusedtopointoutthebasisfortheculturaldiversity forallpeoplerecognizethatotherpeoplesbehavedifferentlyfromthemselves B Naturalnessofexpressioninthereceptorlanguageisessentiallyaproblemofco suitability butonseverallevels ofwhichthemostimportantareasfollows wordclasses grammaticalcategories semanticclasses discoursetypes culturalcontexts 2 AnaturalrenderingmustfitthecontextoftheparticularmessageTheproblemsarenotrestrictedtogrossgrammaticalandlexicalfeatures butmayalsoinvolvesuchdetailedmattersasintonationandsentencerhythm Atrulynaturaltranslationisonewhichavoidsseriousanomalies vulgarities slang colloquialism whichstrikethereaderasbeingoutofplaceinthecontext Onomatopoeicexp