Is the word equivalent to a word or not

Asked by: Prof. Kenneth Haley PhD

Score: 4.7/5
(17 votes)

Equivalate is not a word. Something can be «Equal» to another; something can be «Equivalent» to another.

What does Equivalates mean?

What does equate to mean?

: to be the same as or similar to (something) : to equal Disagreement doesn’t equate to disloyalty.

What is the verb of equivalent?

equivalence. (transitive) To be equivalent or equal to; to counterbalance.

What is equivalent in math?

The term «equivalent» in math refers to two meanings, numbers, or quantities that are the same. … It also means a logical equivalence between two values or a set of quantities. Equivalence is similar but more universal than equality.

38 related questions found

A. Lexical
Meaning

            every
word (lexical unit) has . . . something that is individual, that makes it
different from any other word. And it is just the lexical meaning which is
the most outstanding individual property of the word. (Zgusta, 1971:67)

            The
lexical meaning of a word or lexical unit may be thought of as the specific
value it has in a particular linguistic system and the ‘personality’ it  acquires through usage within that system. It
is rarely possible to analyse a word, pattern, or structure into distinct
components of meaning; the way in which language works is much too complex to
allow that. Nevertheless, it is sometimes useful to play down the complexities
of language temporarily in order both to appreciate them and to be able to
handle them better in the  long run. With
this aim in mind, we will now briefly discuss a model for analysing the
components of lexical meaning. This model is largely derived from Cruse (1986),
but the description of register (2.2.3 below) also draws on Halliday
(1978). For alternative models of lexical meaning see Zgusta

(1971: Chapter 1) and Leech (1974:
Chapter 2).

2.2.1.   Propositional vs expressive meaning

            The propositional
meaning of a word or an utterance arises from the relation

between it and what it refers to or
describes in a real or imaginary world, as conceived by the speakers of the
particular language to which the word or utterance belongs. It is this type of
meaning which provides the basis on which we can judge an utterance as true or
false. For instance, the propositional meaning of shirt is ‘a piece of
clothing worn on the upper part of the body’. It would be inaccurate to use shirt,
under normal circumstances,to refer to a piece of clothing worn on the
foot, such as socks. When a translation is described as ‘inaccurate’, it
is often the propositional meaningthat is being called into question.

            Expressive
meaning cannot be judged as true or false. This is because expressive
meaning relates to the speaker’s2 feelings or attitude rather thanto what words
and utterances refer to. The difference between Don’t complain and Don’t
whinge does not lie in their propositional meanings but in the expressiveness
of whinge, which suggests that the speaker finds the actionannoying. Two
or more words or utterances can therefore have the samepropositional meaning
but differ in their expressive meanings. This is true not only of words and
utterances within the same language, where such words are often referred to as
synonyms or near-synonyms, but also for words

and utterances from different
languages. The difference between famous in English and fameux in
French does not lie in their respective propositional meanings; both items basically
mean ‘well-known’. It lies in their expressive meanings. Famous is
neutral in English: it has no inherent evaluative meaning or connotation. Fameux,
on the other hand, is potentially evaluative and can be readily used in
some contexts in a derogatory way (for example, une femme fameuse means,
roughly, ‘a woman of ill repute’). It is worth noting that differences between
words in the area of expressive

meaning are not simply a matter of
whether an expression of a certain attitude or evaluation is inherently present
or absent in the words in question. The same attitude or evaluation may be
expressed in two words or utterances in widely differing degrees of
forcefulness. Both unkind and cruel, for instance, are inherently
expressive, showing the speaker’s disapproval of someone’s  attitude. However, the element of disapproval
in cruel is stronger than it is in unkind. The meaning of a word
or lexical unit can be both propositional and expressive, e.g. whinge, propositional
only, e.g. book, or expressive only, e.g. bloody and various
other swear words and emphasizers. Words which contribute solely to expressive
meaning can be removed from an utterance without affecting its information
content. Consider, for instance, the wordsimply in the following text:

2.2.2    Presupposed
meaning

            Presupposed
meaning arises from co-occurrence restrictions, i.e. restrictions

on what other words or expressions
we expect to see before or after a particular lexical unit. These restrictions
are of two types:

1. Selectional restrictions: these
are a function of the propositional meaning of a word. We expect a human
subject for the adjective studious and an inanimate one for geometrical.
Selectional restrictions are deliberately violated in the case of
figurative language but are otherwise strictly observed.

2. Collocational restrictions: these
are semantically arbitrary restrictions which do not follow logically from the
propositional meaning of a word. For instance, laws are broken in
English, but in Arabic they are ‘contradicted’. In English, teeth are brushed,
but in German and Italian they are ‘polished’, in Polish they are ‘washed’,
and in Russian they are ‘cleaned’. Because they are arbitrary, collocational
restrictions tend to show more variation across languages than do selectional
restrictions.

            The
difference between selectional and collocational restrictions is not always

as clear cut as the examples given
above might imply. For example, in the following English translation of a
German leaflet which accompanies Baumler products (men’s suits), it is
difficult to decide whether the awkwardness of the wording is a result of
violating selectional or collocational restrictions:

Dear Sir

I am very pleased that you have
selected one of our garments. You have made a wise choice, as suits, jackets
and trousers eminating from our Company are amongst the finest products Europe
has to offer.

Ideas, qualities, and feelings
typically emanate (misspelt as eminate in the above text) from a
source, but objects such as trousers and jackets do not, at least
not in English. The awkwardness of the wording can be explained in terms of
selectional or collocational restrictions, depending on whether or not one sees
the restriction involved as a function of the prepositional meaning of emanate.

3.         Evoked meaning

            Evoked
meaning arises from dialect and register variation. A dialect is
a variety of language which has currency within a specific community or
group of speakers. It may be classified on one of the following bases:

1. Geographical (e.g. a Scottish
dialect, or American as opposed to British English: cf. the difference between lift
and elevator);

2. Temporal (e.g. words and
structures used by members of different age groups within a community, or words
used at different periods in the history of a language: cf. verily and really);

3. Social (words and structures used
by members of different social classes: cf. scent and perfume, napkin
and serviette).

Register is a variety of language that a language user considers appropriate

to a specific situation. Register
variation arises from variations in the

following:

1. Field of
discourse: This is an abstract term for ‘what is going on’ that is

            relevant to the speaker’s choice of linguistic items. Different
linguistic choices are made by different speakers depending on what kind of
action other than the immediate action of speaking they see themselves as participating
in. For example, linguistic choices will vary according to whether the speaker
is taking part in a football match or discussing football;

making love or discussing love;
making a political speech or discussing politics; performing an operation or
discussing medicine.

2. Tenor of
discourse: An abstract term for the relationships between the

            people
taking part in the discourse. Again, the language people use varies depending
on such interpersonal relationships as mother/ child, doctor/ patient, or
superior/inferior in status. A patient is unlikely to use swear words in
addressing a doctor and a mother is unlikely to start a request to her child
with I wonder if you could . . . Getting the tenor of discourse right in
translation can be quite difficult. It depends on whether one sees a certain
level of formality as ‘right’ from the perspective of the source culture or the
target culture. For example, an American teenager may adopt a highly informal
tenor with his/her parents by, among other things, using their first names
instead of Mum/Mother and Dad/Father. This level of informality
would be highly inappropriate in most other cultures.

3. Mode of
discourse: An abstract term for the role that the language is playing
(speech, essay, lecture, instructions) and for its medium of transmission
(spoken, written).3 Linguistic choices are influenced by these  dimensions. For example, a word such as re
is perfectly appropriate in a business letter but is rarely, if ever, used
in spoken English.

B.        THE
PROBLEM OF NON-EQUIVALENCE     

            Based
on the above discussion, we can now begin to outline some of the more common
types of non-equivalence which often pose difficulties for the translator and
some attested strategies for dealing with them. First, a word of warning. The
choice of a suitable equivalent in a given context depends on a wide variety of
factors. Some of these factors may be strictly linguistic. Other factors may be
extra-linguistic. It is virtually impossible to offer absolute guidelines for
dealing with the various types of nonequivalence which exist among languages.
The most that can be done in this and the following chapters is to suggest
strategies which may be used to dealwith non equivalence ‘in some contexts’.
The choice of a suitable equivalent will always depend not only on the
linguistic system or systems being handled by the translator, but also on the
way both the writer of the source text and the producer of the target text,
i.e. the translator, choose to manipulate the linguistic systems in question.

2.3.1 Semantic
fields and lexical sets – the segmentation of experience

            The
words of a language often reflect not so much the reality of the world,

but the interests of the people who
speak it. (Palmer, 1976: 21) It is sometimes useful to view the vocabulary of a
language as a set of words referring to a series of conceptual fields. These
fields reflect the divisions and sub-divisions ‘imposed’ by a given linguistic
community on the continuum of experience.4 In linguistics, the divisions are
called semantic fields. Fields are abstract concepts. An example
of a semantic field would be the field of SPEECH, or PLANTS, or VEHICLES. A large
number of semantic fields are common to all or most languages. Most, if not
all, languages will have fields of DISTANCE, SIZE, SHAPE, TIME, EMOTION,
BELIEFS, ACADEMIC SUBJECTS, and NATURAL PHENOMENA. The actual words and
expressions under each field are sometimes called lexical sets.5 Each
semantic field will normally have several sub-divisions or lexical sets under
it, and each subdivision will have further sub-divisions and lexical sets. So,
the field of SPEECH in English has a sub-division of VERBS OF SPEECH which
includes general verbs such as speak and say and more specific
ones such as mumble, murmur, mutter, and whisper. It seems
reasonable to suggest that the more detailed a semantic field is in a given
language, the more different it is likely

to be from related semantic fields
in other languages. There generally tends to be more agreement among languages
on the larger headings of semantic fields and less agreement as the sub-fields
become more finely differentiated. Most languages are likely to have
equivalents for the more general verbs of speech such as say and speak,
but many may not have equivalents for the more specific ones. Languages
understandably tend to make only those distinctions in meaning which are
relevant to their particular environment, be it physical, historical,
political, religious, cultural, economic, legal, technological, social, or
otherwise.

Limitations aside, there are two
main areas in which an understanding of semantic fields and lexical sets can be
useful to a translator:

a. appreciating the ‘value’ that a
word has in a given system; and

b. developing strategies for dealing
with non-equivalence.

(a) Understanding the difference in
the structure of semantic fields in the source and target languages allows a
translator to assess the value of a given item in a lexical set. If you know
what other items are available in a lexical set and how they contrast with the
item chosen by a writer or speaker, you can appreciate the significance of the
writer’s or speaker’s choice. You can understand not only what something is,
but also what it is not. This is best illustrated by an example.

            In
the field of TEMPERATURE, English has four main divisions: cold, cool, hot and
warm. This contrasts with Modern Arabic, which has four different divisions:
baarid (‘cold/cool’), haar (‘hot: of the weather’), saakhin (‘hot:
of objects’), and daafi’ (‘warm’). Note that, in contrast with
English, Arabic (a) does not distinguish between cold and cool,
and (b) distinguishes between the hotness of the weather and the
hotness of other things. The fact that English does not make the latter
distinction does not mean that you can always use hot to describe
the temperature of something, even metaphorically (cf. hot temper, but
not * hot feelings). There are restrictions on the cooccurrence
of words in any language (see discussion of collocation: Chapter 3,
section 3.1). Now consider the following examples from the COBUILD corpus
of English:6

1. The air was cold and the wind was
like a flat blade of ice.

2. Outside the air was still cool.

Bearing in mind the differences in
the structure of the English and Arabic fields, one can appreciate, on the one
hand, the difference in meaning between cold and cool in the
above examples and, on the other, the potential difficulty in making such a
distinction clear when translating into Arabic.

(b) Semantic fields are arranged
hierarchically, going from the more general

            to
the more specific. The general word is usually referred to as superordinate

and the specific word as hyponym.
In the field of VEHICLES, vehicle is a superordinate and bus,
car, truck, coach, etc. are all hyponyms of vehicle. It stands to
reason that any propositional meaning carried by a superordinate or general
word is, by necessity, part of the meaning of each of its hyponyms, but not
vice versa. If something is a bus, then it must be a vehicle, but not the other
way round. We can sometimes manipulate this feature of semantic fields when we
are faced with semantic gaps in the target language. Translators often deal
with semantic gaps by modifying a superordinate word or by means of
circumlocutions based on modifying superordinates. More on this in the
following section.

2.3.2
Non-equivalence at word level and some common strategies for

            dealing with it

            Non-equivalence
at word level means that the target language has no direct equivalent for a
word which occurs in the source text. The type and level of difficulty posed
can vary tremendously depending on the nature of nonequivalence. Different
kinds of non-equivalence require different strategies, some very
straightforward, others more involved and difficult to handle. Since, in
addition to the nature of non-equivalence, the context and purpose of
translation will often rule out some strategies and favour others, I will keep
the discussion of types of non-equivalence separate from the discussion of
strategies used by professional translators. It is neither possible nor helpful
to attempt to relate specific types of non-equivalence to specific strategies, but
I will comment on the advantages or disadvantages of certain strategies wherever
possible

.

2.3.2.1 Common
problems of non-equivalence

            The
following are some common types of non-equivalence at word level, with examples
from various languages

:

(a) Culture-specific concepts

            The
source-language word may express a concept which is totally unknown in the
target culture. The concept in question may be abstract or concrete; it may
relate to a religious belief, a social custom, or even a type of food. Such concepts
are often referred to as ‘culture-specific’. An example of an abstract English
concept which is notoriously difficult to translate into other languages is
that expressed by the word privacy. This is a very ‘English’ concept
which is rarely understood by people from other cultures. Speaker (of
the House of Commons) has no equivalent in many languages, such as Russian,
Chinese, and Arabic among others. It is often translated into Russian as
‘Chairman’, which does not reflect the role of the Speaker of the House of Commons
as an independent person who maintains authority and order in

Parliament. An example of a concrete
concept is airing cupboard in Englishwhich, again, is unknown to
speakers of most languages.     

(b) The source-language concept is
not lexicalized in the target language

The source-language word may express
a concept which is known in the target culture but simply not lexicalized, that
is not ‘allocated’ a targetlanguage word to express it. The word savoury has
no equivalent in many languages, although it expresses a concept which is easy
to understand. The adjective standard (meaning ‘ordinary, not extra’, as
in standard range of products) also expresses a concept which is
very accessible and readily understood by most people, yet Arabic has no
equivalent for it. Landslide has no ready equivalent in many languages,
although it simply means overwhelming majority’.

 (c) The source-language word is semantically
complex

            The
source-language word may be semantically complex. This is a fairly common
problem in translation. Words do not have to be morphologically complex to be
semantically complex (Bolinger and Sears, 1968). In otherwords, a single word
which consists of a single morpheme can sometimes express a more complex set of
meanings than a whole sentence. Languages automatically develop very concise
forms for referring to complex concepts if the concepts become important enough
to be talked about often. Bolinger and Sears suggest that ‘If we should ever
need to talk regularly and frequentlyabout independently operated sawmills from
which striking workers are locked out on Thursday when the temperature is
between 500° and 600°F, we would find a concise way to do it’ (ibid.: 114). We
do not usually realize

how semantically complex a word is
until we have to translate it into a language which does not have an equivalent
for it. An example of such a semantically complex word is arruação, a
Brazilian word which means clearing the ground under coffee trees of rubbish
and piling it in the middle of the row in order to aid in the recovery of beans
dropped during harvesting’ (ITI News, 1988: 57).7

(d) The source and target languages
make different distinctions in meaning

            The
target language may make more or fewer distinctions in meaning than the source
language. What one language regards as an important distinction in meaning
another language may not perceive as relevant. For example, Indonesian makes a
distinction between going out in the rain without the knowledge that it is raining
(kehujanan) and going out in the rain with the knowledge that it is
raining (hujan-hujanan). English does not make this distinction, with
the result that if an English text referred to going out in the rain, the
Indonesian translator may find it difficult to choose the right

equivalent, unless the context makes
it clear whether  zor not the person in question
knew that it was raining.

(e)
The target language lacks a superordinate

The
target language may have specific words (hyponyms) but no general word
(superordinate) to head the semantic field. Russian has no ready equivalent for
facilities, meaning ‘any equipment, building, services, etc. that are
provided for a particular activity or purpose’.8 It does, however, have several
specific words and expressions which can be thought of as types of facilities,
for example sredstva peredvizheniya (‘means of transport’), naem
(‘loan’), neobkhodimye pomeschcheniya (‘essential accommodation’), and neobkhodimoe
oborudovanie (‘essential equipment’).

f)      
The target language lacks a specific term (hyponym)

More commonly,
languages tend to have general words (superordinates) but lack specific ones
(hyponyms), since each language makes only those distinctions in meaning which
seem relevant to its particular environment.

There are
endless examples of this type of non-equivalence. English has many hyponyms
under article for which it is difficult to find precise equivalents in other
languages, for example feature, survey, report, critique, commentary,
review, and many more. Under house, English again has a variety of
hyponyms which have no equivalents in many languages, for example bungalow,
cottage, croft, chalet, lodge, hut, mansion, manor, villa, and hall. Under
jump we find more specific verbs such as leap, vault, spring, bounce,
dive, clear, plunge, and plummet.

g)     
Differences in physical or interpersonal perspective

Physical
perspective has to do with where things or people are in relation to one
another or to a place, as expressed in pairs of words such as come/go,
take/bring, arrive/depart, and so on. Perspective may also include the
relationship between participants in the discourse (tenor). For example,
Japanese has six equivalents for give, depending on who gives to whom: yaru,
ageru, morau, kureru, itadaku, and kudasaru (McCreary, 1986).

h)     
Differences in expressive meaning

There may be a
target-language word which has the same propositional meaning as the
source-language word, but it may have a different expressive meaning. The
difference may be considerable or it may be subtle but important enough to pose
a translation problem in a given context. It is usually easier to add
expressive meaning than to subtract it. In other words, if the target-language
equivalent is neutral compared to the source-language item, the translator can
sometimes add the evaluative element by means of a modifier or adverb if
necessary, or by building it in somewhere else in the text. So, it may be possible,
for instance, in some contexts to render the English verb batter (as in
child/wife battering) by the more neutral Japanese verb tataku, meaning
‘to beat’, plus an equivalent modifier such as ‘savagely’ or ‘ruthlessly’.
Differences in expressive meaning are usually more difficult to handle when the
target-language equivalent is more emotionally loaded than the source-language
item. This is often the case with items which relate to sensitive issues such
as religion, politics, and sex. Words like homosexuality and homosexual
provide good examples. Homosexuality is not an inherently pejorative
word in English, although it is often used in this way. On the other hand, the
equivalent expression in Arabic, shithuth jinsi (literally: ‘sexual
perversion’), is inherently more pejorative and would be quite difficult to use
in a neutral context without suggesting strong disapproval.

i)       
Differences in form

There is often
no equivalent in the target language for a particular form in the source text.
Certain suffixes and prefixes which convey propositional and other types of
meaning in English often have no direct equivalents in other languages. English
has many couplets such as employer/employee, trainer/trainee, and payer/payee.
It also makes frequent use of suffixes such as -ish (e.g. boyish,
hellish, greenish) and -able (e.g. conceivable, retrievable,
drinkable). Arabic, for instance, has no ready mechanism for producing such
forms and so they are often replaced by an appropriate paraphrase, depending on
the meaning they convey (e.g. retrievable as ‘can be retrieved’ and drinkable
as ‘suitable for drinking’). Affixes which contribute to evoked meaning,
for instance by creating buzz words such as washateria, carpeteria, and groceteria
(Bolinger and Sears, 1968), and those which convey expressive meaning, such
as journalese, translationese, and legalese (the -ese suffix
usually suggests disapproval of a muddled or stilted form of writing) are more
difficult to translate by means of a paraphrase. It is relatively easy to
paraphrase propositional meaning, but other types of meaning cannot always be
spelt out in a translation. Their subtle contribution to the overall meaning of
the text is either lost altogether or recovered elsewhere by means of
compensatory techniques.

j)       
Differences in frequency and purpose of using specific forms

Even when a
particular form does have a ready equivalent in the target language, there may
be a difference in the frequency with which it is used or the purpose for which
it is used. English, for instance, uses the continuous — ing form for
binding clauses much more frequently than other languages which have
equivalents for it, for example German and the Scandinavian languages.
Consequently, rendering every -ing form in an English source text with
an equivalent -ing form in a German, Danish, or Swedish target text
would result in stilted, unnatural style.

k)     
The use of loan words in the source text

The use of loan words in the source text poses a special
problem in translation. Quite apart from their respective prepositional
meaning, loan words such as au fait, chic, and alfresco in
English are often used for their prestige value, because they can add an air of
sophistication to the text or its subject matter. This is often lost in
translation because it is not always possible to find a loan word with the same
meaning in the target language. Dilettante is a loan word in English,
Russian, and Japanese; but Arabic has no equivalent loan word. This means that
only the prepositional meaning of dilettante can be rendered into
Arabic; its stylistic effect would almost certainly have to be sacrificed.

The above are some of the more common examples of non-equivalence
among languages and the problems they pose for translators. In dealing with any
kind of non-equivalence, it is important first of all to assess its
significance and implications in a given context. Not every instance of
non-equivalence you encounter is going to be significant. It is neither
possible nor desirable to reproduce every aspect of meaning for every word in a
source text. We have to try, as much as possible, to convey the meaning of key
words which are focal to the understanding and development of a text, but we
cannot and should not distract the reader by looking at every word in isolation
and attempting to present him/her with a full linguistic account of its
meaning.

STRATEGIES USED BY PROFESSIONAL TRANSLATORS

With the above proviso in mind, we can now
look at examples of strategies used by professional translators
for dealing with various types of nonequivalence. In each example,
the source-language word which represents a translation problem is
underlined. The strategy used by the translator is highlighted in
bold in both the original translation and the back-translated version.
Only the strategies used for dealing with non-equivalence at word level
will be commented on. Other strategies and differences between the source
and target texts are dealt with in subsequent chapters.

a)     
Translation by a more
general word (superordinate)

This is one of
the commonest strategies for dealing with many types of nonequivalence,
particularly in the area of propositional meaning. It works equally well in
most, if not all, languages, since the hierarchical structure of semantic
fields is not language-specific.

Example D

Source text (China’s Panda Reserves; see Appendix 3, no. 3):

Today there may be no more than 1000 giant
pandas left in the wild, restricted to a few mountain strongholds in the
Chinese provinces of Sichuan, Shaanxi and Gansu.

Target text (back-translated from Chinese):

Today there may be only 1000 big pandas which still remain in the wild
state, restricted to certain mountain areas in China’s Sichuan, Shaanxi
and Gansu.

What the translators of the above extracts have done is to go up a
level in a given semantic field to find a more general word that covers the
core propositional meaning of the missing hyponym in the target language.

(b) Translation by a more neutral/less expressive word

Example
A

Source text: (Morgan Matroc – ceramics company brochure; see Appendix 2):

Today people are aware that modern ceramic materials offer unrivalled
properties for many of our most demanding industrial applications. So is this
brochure necessary; isn’t the ceramic market already overbombarded with
technical literature; why should Matroc add more?

Because someone mumbles, ‘Our competitors do it.’ But why should we
imitate our competitors when Matroc probably supplies a greater range of
ceramic materials for more applications than any other manufacturer.

Target text: (Italian):

Qualcuno suggerisce: ‘i nostri concorrenti lo fanno.’

Someone suggests: ‘Our competitors do it.’

There is a noticeable difference in the expressive meaning of mumble
and its nearest Italian equivalent, mugugnare. The English verb mumble
suggest confusion or embarrassment, as can be seen in the following
examples:9

Simon mumbled confusedly: ‘I don’t believe in
the beast.’

I looked at the ground, shuffled my feet and
mumbled something defensive.

‘I know it wasn’t very successful,’ he
mumbled. ‘But give me another

chance.’

The Italian near equivalent, mugugnare, on the other hand,
tends to suggest dissatisfaction rather than embarrassment or confusion.
Possibly to avoid conveying the wrong expressive meaning, the Italian
translator opted for a more general word, suggerisce (‘suggest’).

 (c) Translation by cultural substitution

This strategy involves replacing a culture-specific item or expression
with a target-language item which does not have the same propositional meaning
but is likely to have a similar impact on the target reader. The main advantage
of using this strategy is that it gives the reader a concept with which s/he
can identify, something familiar and appealing. On an individual level, the
translator’s decision to use this strategy will largely depend on (a) how much
licence is given to him/ her by those who commission the translation and (b) he
purpose of the translation. On a more general level, the decision will also
reflect, to some extent, the norms of translation prevailing in a given
community. Linguistic communities vary in the extent to which they tolerate
strategies that involve significant departure from the propositional meaning of
the text.

Example :

Source text (The Patrick Collection – a leaflet produced
by a privately owned museum of classic cars; see Appendix 4):

The Patrick Collection has restaurant facilities to suit every taste –

from the discerning gourmet, to the Cream Tea expert.

Target text
(Italian):

. . . di soddisfare tutti i gusti: da quelli del gastronomo esigente a
quelli

dell’esperto di pasticceria.

. . . to satisfy all tastes: from those of the demanding gastronomist
to

those of the expert in pastry.

In Britain, cream tea is ‘an afternoon meal consisting of tea to drink
and scones with jam and clotted cream to eat. It can also include sandwiches
and cakes.’12 Cream tea has no equivalent in other cultures. The Italian
translator replaced it with ‘pastry’, which does not have the same meaning (for
one thing, cream tea is a meal in Britain, whereas ‘pastry’ is only a type of
food). However, ‘pastry’ is familiar to the Italian reader and therefore
provides a good cultural substitute.

This strategy involves replacing a
culture-specific item with a target language item which does not have the same
meaning but may have a similar [impact] influence on the receptor.

Source text	Target text [Italian]
The Patrick Collection has restaurant facilities to suit every taste from discerning gourmet to the Cream Tea expert.	…………………….to satisfy all tastes, from those of the demanding gastronomist to those of the expert in pastry.

 In Britain, cream tea is “an afternoon meal” consisting of tea to
drink and scones with jam and clotted cream to eat. It can also include
sandwishes and cakes.

d.        Translation by
using a loan word plus explanation

We use this strategy to deal with culture-specific items/ notions/concepts,
especially modern concepts.

Source text	Target text [German]
The Patrick collection has restaurant facilities to suit every taste – from the discerning gourment, to the Cream Tea expert	…vom anspruchsvollen Feinschmecker bis zum ‘Cream tea’

e.        Translation by
paraphrase [ using a related / close word ]

The concept in the source text is lexicalized but the source text
is significantly higher than the natural target language

Source text	Target text [ German ]
Hot and cold food and drinks can be found in the Hornet’s Nest, overlooking the Alexick Hall	In the Hornet’s Nest, which overlooks the Alexick Hall, you can have hot and cold meals and drinks.

f.         Translation
by paraphrase [ using a unrelated  word ]

The concept in the source text is not lexicalised in
the receptor text [ so this means there is no equivalent word / lexical unit]

à        The
translator has to paraphrase by using unrelated words

Source text	Target text [in German]
You can even “alfresco” in the summer on our open air terrace	In the summer you can also sit and eat on the terrace in the open.

à        “alfresco”
and “in the open” have the same propositional meaning but different evoked meaning

Source text	Target text [ in Arabic]
They have a totally integrated operation from the preparation of the yarn through to the weaving process.  On the basis of the world view uncovered by the Shaman’s faculties, with its vision of another and miraculous plane which could interact causally with our own, the more advanced..	The company carries out all steps of production in its factories, from preparing the yarn to weaving it. …………….with the image of another miraculous dimension which can causallyinfluence each other mutually with……..

      The main advantage of
the paraphrase strategy is that it achieves a high level of precision in
specifying propositional meaning.

This strategy may sound rather drastic, but
in fact it does no harm to omit translating a word expression in some context.

Source text	Target text
This is your chance to remember the way things were, and for younger visitors to see in real-life detail, the way their parents, and their parents before them lived and travelled.	Here is the chance to rediscover your youth and for the younger ones to see how their parents and grandparents used to live and travel

h.
translation by illustration

This strategy to useful option if the word which
lacks an equivalent.

—  Lipton Yellow Tea Packet in
Arab market as Tagged teabags

refrensi : Mona Baker, In other word

Скачать материал

Скачать материал

Описание презентации по отдельным слайдам:

• 

  1 слайд

  EQUIVALENCE IN TRANSLATION.
  THE LEVELS OF TRANSLATION.
  PRAGMATIC ASPECT OF TRANSLATION.
  Lecture 2.

• 

  2 слайд

  Equivalence
  Translation equivalence (TE) is the key idea of translation.

  Equivalent means equal in value, amount, volume, etc. (A.S.Hornby)

• 

  3 слайд

  Equivalence
  Equivalence is the central issue in translation.
  Its definition, relevance, and applicability within the field of translation theory have caused heated controversy.
  Many different theories of the concept of equivalence have been elaborated within this field for the past fifty years.

• 

  4 слайд

  Equivalence
  The most innovative theorists (Vinay and Darbelnet, Jakobson, Nida and Taber, Catford, House, and finally Baker) have studied equivalence in relation to the translation process, using different approaches.

• 

  5 слайд

  Equivalence
  V.G.Gark and Y.Lvin distinguish the following types of equivalents: formal, semantic and situational.
  Formal equivalence
  Semantic equivalence.

• 

  6 слайд

  Equivalence
  Formal equivalence may be illustrated by speech cases as:
  The sun disappeared behind a cloud – солнце скрылось за тучей.
  Here we find similarity of words and forms in addition to the similarity.

• 

  7 слайд

  Equivalence
  The differences in the plane of expression are determined by overall structural differences between Russian and English.
  The use of articles in English, the use of perfective aspect, gender, forms, etc., in Russian.

• 

  8 слайд

  Equivalence
  Semantic equivalence exists when the same meanings are expressed in the two languages in a way.
  Example:- Troops were airlifted to the battlefield-
  Bойска были переброшены по воздуху на поле.

• 

  9 слайд

  Equivalence
  The English word “airfield” contains the same meaning as the Russian phrase перебросить по воздуху.
  Different linguistic devices (in Russian and in English /a word group and a compound word),.

• 

  10 слайд

  Equivalence
  “Situational equivalence”
  the description of the same situation.
  This description is not necessary semantically equivalent.

• 

  11 слайд

  Equivalence
  Texts in different languages can be equivalent in different degrees/ fully or partially equivalent/ in respect of different levels of presentation /equivalent in respect of context, of semantics, of grammar, of lexies, etc./ and at different ranks /word-for-word, phrase-for-phrase, sentence-for-sentence/.

• 

  12 слайд

  Equivalence
  Languages are different from each other; they are different in form having distinct codes and rules regulating the construction of grammatical stretches of language and these forms have different meanings.
  To shift from one language from another is to alter the forms.

• 

  13 слайд

  Equivalence
  There is no absolute synonymy between words in the same language.
  Something is always lost / or, might one suggest “gained”?/ in process and translators can find themselves being accused of reproducing only part of original and so “betraying” the authors intentions.

• 

  14 слайд

  Equivalence
  If equivalence is to be “preserved” at a particular level at all costs, which level is to be? What are the alternatives?
  The answer hinges on the dual nature of language itself.

• 

  15 слайд

  Equivalence
  Language is a formal structure – a code –which consists of elements which can combine signal semantic “sense” and, at the same time,
  a communication system which uses the forms of the code to refer to entities/in the word/and create signals which possess communicative “value”.

• 

  16 слайд

  Adequacy
  The notion of “adequacy” is closely connected with that of equivalence.
  Some scholars identify these terms and use them as completely interchangeable notions.
  For example:

• 

  17 слайд

  Adequacy
  J. Catford’s notion of “translation equivalence” is treated as “adequacy of translation”.
  R. Levitsky in his article “On the principle of functional adequacy of translation”.
  V. N. Komissarov, for instance, thinks that adequate translation” has a broad meaning and is used as a synonym for “a good translation” that guarantees sufficient interlinguistic communication.

• 

  18 слайд

  Adequacy
  “Equivalence” is regarded as semantic similarity of the S. and T. language and speech units.
  Adequate translation- is the translation performed at the level sufficient and necessary to convey the information and preserve the norms of the TL.

• 

  19 слайд

  Adequacy
  Everything said in one language can be said in another.
  We mean by contents not only logical-semantic contents but all the information inherited in the original message including its emotional and expressive charge and stylistic peculiarities.

• 

  20 слайд

  Adequacy
  Equivalently adequate translation- is the translation when the contents of the message and its stylistic function are expressed by the synonymous ways.
  E.g. bird cherry tree – черемуха.
  In English it’s only a botanical term.
  In Russian it has different emotional applications – “весна”, “любовь”.
  Apart from denoting a botanical tree the word “bird cherry tree” acquired additional stylistic meaning.

• 

  21 слайд

  Adequacy
  NB! Taking into consideration that equivalent is a constant correspondence that exists independently upon the context.

  We have the possibility to state that adequate translation may be non-equivalent and equivalent.

• 

  22 слайд

  Adequacy
  e.g. The fresh air revived most of the men and the thought of beer at the nearest pub stimulated sluggish pulses.
  The thought of beer – мысль о пиве – equivalent translation;
  — Mысль о кружке пива – adequate translation.

• 

  23 слайд

  Translation equivalents
  Y. Retsker differentiates:
  — Absolute equivalents – this is a case when a SL word is semantically, stylistically and emotionally synonymous to a TL word.

  E.g. geographical and proper names, technical terms, etc.

• 

  24 слайд

  Translation equivalents
  — Partial equivalents the range of meaning does not coincide in two languages.

  e.g. character (British – 2 meanings, Russian — 1 meaning);
  differentiation – рука: hand, arm.

• 

  25 слайд

  Translation equivalents
  Apart from equivalent lexis there are non-equivalent or culture loaded words.
  They define objects, processes, realia.
  e.g. the House of Commons, peerage.
  Equivalence is functional coincidence between the source and the target text.

• 

  26 слайд

  The levels of equivalence according to V.Komissarov
  The first level includes the translation in which the degree of semantic similarity with ST is the lowest.
  e.g. Maybe there is some chemistry between us that does not mix.
  Бывает, что люди не сходятся характерами.

• 

  27 слайд

  The levels of equivalence
  This translation contains information about the general intent of the message and it is called-
  1) The purport of communication- general intent of the message, its sense, orientation towards a certain communicative effect.

• 

  28 слайд

  The levels of equivalence
  The second level of translation shows that most of the words or syntactical structures of ST have no direct correspondences in TT. But there is a greater proximity of context.
  e.g. He answered the phone.
  Он снял трубку.

• 

  29 слайд

  The levels of equivalence
  So here we can find:
  1). The purport of communication.
  2). Identification of the situation.

• 

  30 слайд

  The levels of equivalence
  In the third level of translation the part of contents is largely retained.
  e.g. Scrubbing makes me bad-tempered.
  — От мытья полов у меня портится настроение.

• 

  31 слайд

  The levels of equivalence
  So in TT there are:

  1). The purport of communication.
  2). Identification of the situation.
  3). The method of its description.

• 

  32 слайд

  The levels of equivalence
  e.g. London saw a cold winter last year.
  e.g.You are not serious?

  — В прошлом году зима в Лондоне была холодной .
  — Вы шутите?
  Two preceding informative complexes as well as the method of describing the situation.

• 

  33 слайд

  The levels of equivalence
  This means that the translation is a semantic paraphrase of the original, preserving its basic semes and allowing their free reshuffle in the sentence.

• 

  34 слайд

  The levels of equivalence
  The fourth level of translation consists of 4 meaningful components of the ST. They are:
  1) The purport of communication.
  2) Identification of the situation.
  3) The method of its description.
  4) The invariant meaning of the syntactical structures.

• 

  35 слайд

  The levels of equivalence
  E.g. I don’t see that I need to convince you.
  — Не вижу надобности доказывать это вам.
  E.g. He was standing with his arms crossed and his bare head bent.
  — Он стоял, сложив руки на груди и опустив непокрытую голову.

• 

  36 слайд

  The levels of equivalence
  In the fifth level of translation we can find the maximum possible semantic similarity between ST and TT.
  e.g. I saw him at the theatre.
  — Я видел его в театре.
  e.g. The house was sold for 10 thousand dollars.
  — Дом был продан за 10 тысяч долларов.

• 

  37 слайд

  The levels of equivalence
  There are 5 levels of equivalence in this TT:
  1) The purport of communication.
  2) Identification of the situation.
  3) The method of description of the situation.
  4) The invariant meaning of the syntactical structures.
  5) The level of word semantics.

• 

  38 слайд

  The levels of equivalence
  E.g. the Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.
  — Организация основана на принципе суверенного равенства всех ее членов.

• 

  39 слайд

  The levels of equivalence
  The relative identity of the contents of the two texts depends in this case on the extent to which various components of the word meaning can be rendered in translation without detriment to the retention of the rest of the information contained in the original.

• 

  40 слайд

  PRAGMATIC ASPECT OF TRANSLATION
  Pragmatics is the relationships between the word and its users.
  Pragmatic relations are superimposed on semantic relations and play an equally important role in analyzing the original text and in producing an equivalent text in the TL.

• 

  41 слайд

  PRAGMATIC ASPECT OF TRANSLATION
  Semantically-equivalent messages do not necessarily mean the same thing to the source and target receptors and, therefore, are not necessarily pragmatically equivalent.

• 

  42 слайд

  Types of pragmatic relations

• 

  43 слайд

  PRAGMATIC ASPECT OF TRANSLATION
  NB! The translator should be aware of the fact whether the message is a statement of the fact, a request, an entreaty or a joke.
  Very often the speaker’s communicative intentions differ from what the message really states.

• 

  44 слайд

  The effect of the receptor to the text
  All kinds of texts were classified depending upon their orientation towards different types of receptors.
  1). Texts intended for domestic consumption:
  e.g. local advertising, local legislation, home news.
  2). Texts intended for foreign consumption – propaganda, advertising for foreign receptors.

• 

  45 слайд

  PRAGMATIC ASPECT OF TRANSLATION
  3). Texts intended primarily for SL receptors, but having also a universal human appeal.
  4). Texts without any specific national addressee (technical literature, instruction).

• 

  46 слайд

  PRAGMATIC ASPECT OF TRANSLATION
  Typically in written translation translator deals with texts intended for TL audiences and, therefore, subject to pragmatic adaptation.
  Each word or text is able to have certain pragmatic influence (communicative effect) upon the receptor.

• 

  47 слайд

  The character of such an influence depends upon three factors:

• 

  48 слайд

  Four types of pragmatic relations according to Nyberg
  1) the pragmatics of the ST is preserved in the fullest way, when this text is of the same interest both for the reader of the ST and of the TT (scientific literature);

• 

  49 слайд

  Pragmatic relations
  2) the pragmatics of the ST is preserved in the translation quite fully when the ST is created especially for the translation (different materials for foreign readers);

• 

  50 слайд

  Pragmatic relations
  3) the pragmatic adequateness is quite restricted while translating the literature which is oriented to the receptor of the ST but has sth to say to other people;

• 

  51 слайд

  Pragmatic relations
  4) the ST is oriented only for the receptor of the ST and does not have any relations towards the receptor of the translated text (governmental acts, political and economic press).

• 

  52 слайд

  Questions
  Text-book:
  Lectures 6, 7 – pp.49-54, 58-64.
  Questions – pp.55, 65.
  Ex-s: pp. 65-67.
  Presentation :”Different Approaches Of Translation Theorists To The Problem Of Equivalence”.

Найдите материал к любому уроку, указав свой предмет (категорию), класс, учебник и тему:

6 209 284 материала в базе

• Выберите категорию:

• Выберите учебник и тему

• Выберите класс:

• Тип материала:

  • Все материалы

  • Статьи

  • Научные работы

  • Видеоуроки

  • Презентации

  • Конспекты

  • Тесты

  • Рабочие программы

  • Другие методич. материалы

Найти материалы

Вам будут интересны эти курсы:

• Курс повышения квалификации «Основы управления проектами в условиях реализации ФГОС»

• Курс повышения квалификации «Организация практики студентов в соответствии с требованиями ФГОС юридических направлений подготовки»

• Курс повышения квалификации «Маркетинг в организации как средство привлечения новых клиентов»

• Курс повышения квалификации «Правовое регулирование рекламной и PR-деятельности»

• Курс профессиональной переподготовки «Организация менеджмента в туризме»

• Курс повышения квалификации «Организация маркетинга в туризме»

• Курс профессиональной переподготовки «Управление ресурсами информационных технологий»

• Курс профессиональной переподготовки «Организация технической поддержки клиентов при установке и эксплуатации информационно-коммуникационных систем»

• Курс повышения квалификации «Мировая экономика и международные экономические отношения»

• Курс профессиональной переподготовки «Деятельность по хранению музейных предметов и музейных коллекций в музеях всех видов»

• Курс профессиональной переподготовки «Гостиничный менеджмент: организация управления текущей деятельностью»

• Курс профессиональной переподготовки «Организация процесса страхования (перестрахования)»

• Курс профессиональной переподготовки «Организация и управление процессом по предоставлению услуг по кредитному брокериджу»

1. TYPES AND LEVELS OF EQUIVALENCE

Lectures # 4-5
By Dr. Dmytro Tsolin

2. What is equivalence in translation?

Equivalence in translation is a functional coincidence
between the source and the target text (А. Попович
1980).
Equivalent is an element of the target language whose
function coincides with other element of the source
language with the same function (О. Ахманова 1966).

3. Equivalence and Adequacy

Many scholars use these terms as synonyms (R.
Levitsky, J. Catford).
V. N. Komissarov considers “adequacy” as a
characteristic of translation in general, while
“equivalence” describes correlation between units of
SL and TL.
Adequacy as a kind of correlation between ST and TT
which takes into account the aim of translation has
been considered by K. Reiss and G. Vermeer.
In translation equivalence is set not between word-signs
as themselves, but between actual signs as segments of
the text (A. Schweizer).

4. Correlation between equivalence and adequacy according to A. Schweizer

equivalence
adequacy
object
object
Translation as a
result
Translation as a
process

5. Equivalence implies an adequate rendering of SL-codes by TL-codes; this process includes the following levels:

Adequacy of vocabulary (taking into account semantic
connotations of the words and their stylistic functions)
Grammatical adequacy
Correspondence between syntactic constructions of
SL and TL (literal rendering is not always possible)
Translation of idioms on the base of semantic
equivalence (they cannot be translated literally)
Contextual adequacy (at the level of macrotextual
elements cohesion)
Stylistic correspondence between ST and TL

6.

Equivalence of the text is more
important than equivalence of it
segments!!!

7. Adequacy of vocabulary

βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾽ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ
πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον· ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ
ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην. (1Co 13:12)
Literal translation of ο έσοπτρον – “a mirror”
For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to
face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I
am known. (1Co 13:12 KJV)
Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we
shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know
fully, even as I am fully known. (1Co 13:12 NIV)
Отож, тепер бачимо ми ніби у дзеркалі, у загадці, але
потім обличчям в обличчя; тепер розумію частинно, а
потім пізнаю, як і пізнаний я. (1Co 13:12 UKR)

8. Ancient mirrors

9.

‫ְך־ׁשם ִה ְרגִ יעָ ה ִל ִילית‬
ָ
ַ‫ל־רעֵ הּו י ְִק ָרא א‬
ֵ ַ‫ְש ִעיר ע‬
ָ ‫ת־איִ ים ו‬
ִ
ֶ‫ּופָ גְ ׁשּו צִ יִ ים א‬
‫ּומצְ אָ ה לָ ּה ָמנֹוחַ ׃‬
ָ
[ūṕāḡšū́ ṣiyyī́m ʔeṯ-ʔiyyī́m wəśāʕī́r ʕal-rēʕēhū́ yiqrā́ʔ ʔaḵšā́m hirgīʕā́ līlīṯ ūmāṣəʔā́ lāh mānṓaḥ]
The wild beasts of the desert shall also meet with the wild
beasts of the island, and the satyr shall cry to his fellow; the
screech owl also shall rest there, and find for herself a place
of rest. (Isa 34:14 KJV)
And the desert creatures shall meet with the wolves, the
hairy goat also shall cry to its kind; Yes, the night monster
shall settle there And shall find herself a resting place.
(Isa 34:14 NAS)
І будуть стрічатися там дикі звірі пустинні з гієнами, а
польовик буде кликати друга свого; Ліліт тільки там
заспокоїться і знайде собі відпочинок! (Isa 34:14 UKR)

10. Special terms from the ancient Mesopotamian mythology:

ṣiyyī́m – demos of desert
śāʕī́r – demon in the shape of goat
līlīṯ – lilith (night she-demon relating to sexual life)

11. What to do, if TL does not have equivalent counterparts for some lexemes of SL?

ṣiyyī́m – “wild beasts” / “the desert creatures” / «дикі звірі
пустині»
śāʕī́r – “the satyr” / “the hairy goat” / «польовик»
līlīṯ – “the screech owl” / “the night monster” / «Ліліт»
1. To create a neologism on the base of the SL-term (“Lilith”)
2. To find a word or phrase which describes the SL-term
approximately (“wild beasts”, “the desert creatures”)
3. To use a loanword (with similar meaning) which is wellknow in TL (“the satyr” from Greek σατυρος)

12.

Grammatical and syntactic equivalence
How to translate correctly the following English
sentences into Ukrainian?
My mum was baking an apple pie in the kitchen when a
shot rang out in the street.
I have just finished my homework.
If you hadn’t lost the key, we would have got the concert
in time.

13.

The problem is that in Ukrainian are not direct
equivalents for the following grammatical forms:
Past continuous (durative action in the past coincides
with минулий недоконаний).
Present Perfect (coincides with минулий доконаний).
Third conditional (second and third conditionals
coincide formally in Ukrainian: якби + минулий час.
дієслова, би + минулий час. дієслова).
Adequate translation is possible? Of course.
Моя мама пекла пиріг з яблуками, коли на вулиці
прогримів постріл.
Я тільки-но закінчив свою робити хатню роботу.
Якби ти не забув ключ, ми б встигли на концерт.

14.

In the first case the durative aspect is clear out of the
context: it is said about a short period of time in the
past, not about a habitual action.
In the second case the perfect aspect is highlighted with
the particle –но (which, however, is not obligatory
here).
In the third case it is quite clear that the speaker tells
about the past from the context.
It means that differences between the grammar of SL and
TL may be compensated with other linguistic factors:
syntax, context, particles, cohesion of text, etc.

15. Contextual Adequacy

Only limited number of words have one meaning, but
most of them have several semantic variants which may
be clarified from the context.
Words with one meaning are mainly special terms or
lexemes which designate specific items:
allusion, organization, technology, methodology,
dodder, dog-bee, etc.
Words with many meanings prevail in any language:
He received a special membership card and a club pin
onto his lapel.
One of them cleverly decorates a vase by drawing plant
leaves using a sharp pin, while another shapes small
frog-like figures to be put on ashtrays.

16.

She was very nimble on her pins.
A bolt from the blue.
A great bolt of white lightning flashed out of thin air.
Crossbow bolts and arrows passed like clouds across the
face of the sun.
The room is stacked with bolts of cloth.
Those leaves which present a double or quadruple fold,
technically termed «the bolt».

17. Translation of idioms:

The captain held his peace that evening and for many
evenings to come (R. Stevenson)
Literal (mechanical) translation: Капітан тримав свій мир
того вечора і протягом багатьох наступних вечорів.
Correct translation: Капітан мовчав / тримав язик за
зубами того вечора і протягом наступних вечорів.
Miss Williams will look after you well because she knows
the ropes (J. Aldridge)
Literal translation: Міс Уільямс догляне тебе добре, бо
вона знає мотузки.
Correct translation: Міс Уільямс потурбується про тебе
добре / належно, бо вона знає свою справу.

18.

Her father kissed her when she left him with lips
which she was sure had trembled. From the warmth of
her embrace he probably divined that he had let the
cat out of the bag (J. Galsworthy).
Literal translation: Її батько поцілував її, коли вона
покидала його, устами, про які вона була упевнена,
що вони затремтіли. Із теплоти її обіймів він напевне
здогадався, що випустив кота з мішка.
Correct translation: Її батько поцілував її, коли вона
йшла від нього, устами, які, здалося їй, затремтіли. Із
теплоти її обіймів він напевне здогадався, що видав
свої почуття.

19. Examples from Greek and Hebrew

τῶν ἄλλων νομοθετῶν οἱ μὲν ἀκαλλώπιστα καὶ γυμνὰ τὰ
νομισθέντα παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς εἶναι δίκαια διετάξαντο, οἱ δὲ πολὺν
ὄγκον τοῖς νοήμασι προσπεριβαλόντες ἐξετύφωσαν τὰ πλήθη
μυθικοῖς πλάσμασι τὴν ἀλήθειαν ἐπικρύψαντες. (Philo of
Alexandria, On the Creation of the World, 1:1).
Of other lawgivers, some have set forth what they considered
to be just and reasonable, in a naked and unadorned manner,
while others, investing their ideas with an abundance of
amplification, have sought to bewilder the people, by burying
the truth under a heap of fabulous inventions (Translation of
F. H. Colson and G. H. Whitaker).
Из законодателей одни просто и без прикрас узаконили
существовавшие у них обычаи, другие, придавая вид
многозначительности
[своим]
измышлениям,
обморочили людей, сокрыв истину под пеленой
мифических выдумок (Translation of A.V. Vdovichenko).

20. What has the English translator changed in the text?

The word order: (S)AOV of the Greek text became SVOA
in the English translation.
οἱ μὲν ἀκαλλώπιστα καὶ γυμνὰ τὰ νομισθέντα παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς
εἶναι δίκαια διετάξαντο
some have set forth what they considered to be just and
reasonable, in a naked and unadorned manner
They inserted subject “they” (it is implicated in the
article οι in the Greek text) and object “people”.
Some words and phrases in English translation are
changed:
τὰ πλήθη μυθικοῖς (literally: plenty / abundance of myths) –
an abundance of amplification
ἐπικρύψαντες (literally: concealed) – by burying
May we call this translation equivalent?

21.

The literal translation into Ukrainian
Із інших законодавців деякі без прикрас і голо ті, що
встановлені [звичаї] у них були, правильними
запровадили; інші ж, великої ваги думкам [своїм]
надавши, обманули, великою кількістю міфів плівкою
істину приховавши.
The adapted Ukrainian translation
Щодо інших законодавців, то деякі з них без прикрас і
не соромлячись законними оголосили ті звичаї, що в
них побутували раніше; інші ж, намагаючись надати
великої ваги своїм власним думкам, ввели в оману
людей, приховавши істину за ширмою численних
міфів.

22. Another example: translation from Hebrew syntactic construction finite verb + infinitivus absolutus

‫ֹׁשת הַ ַמיִם ֵמעַ ל הָ אָ ֶרץ׃‬
ֶ ‫ְׁשלַ ח אֶ ת־הָ עֹ ֵרב ַויֵצֵ א יָצֹוא וָׁשֹוב עַ ד־ ְיב‬
ַ ‫ַוי‬
[wayəšalláḥ ʔeṯ-haʕōrḗḇ wayyēṣḗʔ yāṣṓʔ wāšṓḇ ʕaḏyəḇṓšeṯ hammā́yim mēʕal hāʔā́reṣ]
And he sent out a raven, and it flew here and there until
the water was dried up from the earth. (Gen 8:7 NAS)
І вислав він крука. І літав той туди та назад, аж поки не
висохла вода з-над землі. (Gen 8:7 UKR)
Literal translation of [wayyēṣḗʔ yāṣṓʔ]: and it flew flying
Notional translation: and it flew here and there
(repetitive action)

23.

What is the main problems of
equivalence in translation?
1. How close must TT be to ST to avoid perversion
of the original meaning, form and intension?
2. How far may TT depart from ST to be perceived
adequately in TL?
How to find a balance?
23

24. Part 2

CONCEPTS OF EQUIVALENCE IN
TRANSLATION

25. Jean-Paul Vinay and Jean Darbelnet theory

Vinay and Darbelnet view equivalence-oriented
translation as a procedure which ‘replicates the same
situation as in the original, whilst using completely
different wording’ (1995, p. 342). They also suggest that,
if this procedure is applied during the translation
process, it can maintain the stylistic impact of the SL
text in the TL text.
According to them, equivalence is therefore the ideal
method when the translator has to deal with proverbs,
idioms, clichés, nominal or adjectival phrases and the
onomatopoeia of animal sounds.

26.

Later they note that glossaries and collections of
idiomatic expressions ‘can never be exhaustive’
(ibid.:256). They conclude by saying that ‘the need
for creating equivalences arises from the situation,
and it is in the situation of the SL text that
translators have to look for a solution’ (ibid.: 255).
Indeed, they argue that even if the semantic
equivalent of an expression in the SL text is quoted
in a dictionary or a glossary, it is not enough, and it
does not guarantee a successful translation.
26

27. Roman Jacobson’s Theory of Equivalence

“These three kinds of translation are to be differently
labeled:
1 Intralingual translation or rewording is an interpretation
of verbal signs by means of other signs of the same
language.
2 Interlingual translation or translation proper is an
interpretation of verbal signs by means of some other
language.
3 Intersemiotic translation or transmutation is an
interpretation of verbal signs by means of signs of
nonverbal sign systems” (1959, p. 233).

28.

“Most
frequently,
however,
translation from one language
into another substitutes messages
in one language not for separate
code-units
but
for
entire
messages
in
some
other
language. Such a translation is a
reported speech; the translator
recodes and transmits a message
received from another source.
Thus translation involves two
equivalent messages in two
different codes”.
28

29. Eugene Nida’s Theory of Translation

Nida argued that there are two different types
of equivalence, namely formal equivalence (or
formal
correspondence)
and
dynamic
equivalence.
Formal correspondence ‘focuses attention on
the message itself, in both form and content’,
unlike dynamic equivalence which is based
upon ‘the principle of equivalent effect’
(1964:159).
This theory is mainly expressed in the book
Nida, Eugene A. and C. R. Taber. The Theory
and Practice of Translation (Leiden: E. J. Brill,
1969 / 1982).

30.

Formal
correspondence
consists of a TL item which
represents
the
closest
equivalent of a SL word or
phrase.
Dynamic equivalence is
defined as a translation
principle according to which
a translator seeks to translate
the meaning of the original
in such a way that the TL
wording will trigger the
same impact on the TC
audience as the original
wording did upon the ST
audience.

31. The advantage of the Nida-Taber’s concept is in their interest in the message of the text or, in other words, in its semantic

quality.
• The disadvantage of this approach is in its
inability to render poetry: poetical text
demands not only semantic adequacy, but
aesthetic-emotional
aspects
of
communication.
31

32.

“It is hard, however, to empirically test whether
the translator has succeeded in producing a
dynamic equivalence. The methods suggested
by Nida-Taber provide means to make sure that
the translation is idiomatic, but they lack
reference to the source text regarding form and
semantics”.
Christoffer Gehrmann
32

33. John Catford’s theory

John Catford had a preference for a more linguistic-based
approach to translation. His main contribution in the field of
translation theory is the introduction of the concepts of types
and shifts of translation. Catford proposed very broad types of
translation in terms of three criteria:
The extent of translation (full translation vs partial
translation);
The grammatical rank at which the translation equivalence is
established (rank-bound translation vs. unbounded
translation);
The levels of language involved in translation (total
translation vs. restricted translation).

34. Only the second type of translation concerns the concept of equivalencewhich are based on the distinction between formal

correspondence and textual equivalence
An equivalent is sought
in the TL for each word,
or for each morpheme
encountered in the ST.
Equivalences are not
tied to a particular
rank, and we may
additionally
find
equivalences
at
sentence, clause and
other levels.
34

35. However, in the process of rendering from SL to TL a translator departs from formal correspondence. J. Catford calls these

departures “shifts”. There are two main types of
translation
shifts:
level shifts, where the SL item at one linguistic
level (e.g. grammar) has a TL equivalent at a
different
level
(e.g.
lexis),
and category shifts which are divided into four
types:
35

36.

• Structure-shifts, which involve a grammatical change
between the structure of the ST and that of the TT;
• Class-shifts, when a SL item is translated with a TL item
which belongs to a different grammatical class, i.e. a
verb may be translated with a noun;
• Unit-shifts, which involve changes in rank;
• Intra-system shifts, which occur when ‘SL and TL
possess systems which approximately correspond
formally as to their constitution, but when translation
involves selection of a non-corresponding term in the
TL system’ (ibid.:80). For instance, when the SL singular
becomes a TL plural.
36

37.

Catford was criticized very much for his linguistic theory
of translation. His critics denoted that the translation
process cannot simply be reduced to a linguistic exercise,
as claimed by Catford for instance, since there are also
other factors, such as textual, cultural and situational
aspects, which should be taken into consideration when
translating.
Linguistics is the only discipline which enables people to
carry out a translation, since translating involves
different cultures and different situations at the same
time and they do not always match from one language to
another.

38. Juliane Hause’s concept of equivalance

Juliane House (1977) is in favour of
semantic and pragmatic equivalence
and argues that ST and TT should match one another in
function. In fact, according to her theory, every text is in
itself is placed within a particular situation which has to
be correctly identified and taken into account by the
translator.
if the ST and the TT differ substantially on situational
features, then they are not functionally equivalent, and
the translation is not of a high quality.

39.

Central to House’s discussion is the concept
of overt and covert translations.
In an overt translation the TT audience is not
directly addressed and there is therefore no need at
all to attempt to recreate a ‘second original’ since
an overt translation ‘must overtly be a translation’
(1977, p. 189).
By covert translation, on the other hand, is meant
the production of a text which is functionally
equivalent to the ST. House also argues that in this
type of translation the ST ‘is not specifically
addressed to a TC audience’ (ibid., p. 194).
39

40. Mona Baker: different types of equivalence

Equivalence that can appear at word level
and above word level, when translating from one language
into another. Equivalence at word level is the first element to
be taken into consideration by the translator. In fact, when
the translator starts analyzing the ST s/he looks at the words
as single units in order to find a direct ‘equivalent’ term in the
TL.
Baker gives 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 translator should pay attention to a number
of factors when considering a single word, such as number,
gender and tense (ibid.:11-12).

41.

Grammatical equivalence. She notes that grammatical
rules may vary across languages and this may pose some
problems in terms of finding a direct correspondence in the
TL. In fact, she claims that different grammatical structures
in the SL and TL may cause remarkable changes in the way
the information or message is carried across.
Textual equivalence. The equivalence between a SL text and
a TL text in terms of information and cohesion. It is up to the
translator to decide whether or not to maintain the cohesive
ties as well as the coherence of the SL text. His or her decision
will be guided by three main factors, that is, the target
audience, the purpose of the translation and the text type.
Pragmatic equivalence. The role of the translator is to
recreate the author’s intention in another culture in such a
way that enables the TC reader to understand it clearly.

42. Five types of equivalence in accordance with Verner Koller:

Denotative: the main content of the text is preserved
(or “invariance of the content”)
Connotative: purposeful rendering of connotations of
the text by using of synonyms (or “stylistic
equivalence”)
Text-normative: rendering of genre and norms of
languages
Pragmatic:
orientation
to
a
receiver
(or
“communicative equivalence”)
Formal: rendering of formal specificities of the
original text (word play, pun, individual vocabulary of
characters, etc.).

43. Types (levels) of equivalence according to V.N. Komissarov (В.Н. Комиссаров)

V. N. Komissarov singles out four stages of semantic
commonality between ST and TT:
1. Goals of communication;
2. Identity of situations;
3. Modes of description of the situation;
4. Meaning of syntactic structures;
5. Meaning of word-signs.

44.

Goals of communication: at this level semantic
commonalities between ST and TT are very weak.
Maybe there is some chemistry between us doesn’t mix.
Literal translation: Напевне, якась хімічна речовина
між нами не змішалася.
Idiomatic translation: Буває, що люди не сходяться
характерами.
Identity of situations: the same situation is
describes, but in different modes in ST and TL.
Не answered the telephone.
Literal translation: Він відповів на телефон[ий
дзвінок].
Adequate translation: Він зняв слухавку.

45.

Modes of description of the situation: only general
notions are preserved
Scrubbing makes me bad-tempered.
Lit.: Від миття підлоги у мене характер псується
= В процесі «притирання» у мене псується характер.
Meaning of syntactic structures: resemblance and
invariance
I told him what I thought of him.
Я сказав йому свою думку про нього.
Meaning of word-signs: in the translation all parts of ST
are rendered in TT
I saw him at the theatre.
Я бачив його у театрі.

46. There are two extremes in translation: literalness and liberty – both of them distort the communicative context.

Literalness is the lowest level of translation which is
extended to the higher levels – textual and pragmatics.
In most of cases this extension is not justified: literal
translation is sub-transformed and quasi-adapted
translation.
An example:
I want something human.
Literal translation: Я хочу чогось людського.
Correct translation: Хочу, щоб поряд була жива душа.
(An old lady about her desire to get a puppy).

47. Different Types of Equivalence

Literal equivalence – the case when everything is
translated literally with the exception of the elements
which are impossible to translate. Originally used in the
translation of the sacred and poetical texts.
Contextual equivalence – the author renders every single
unit of the contents and preserves the norms of the target
language.
Adequate equivalence – the author renders all the
meaningful units and preserves the original language
means (units of translation)
Functional/dynamic equivalence – trying to achieve the
same reaction of the public. It may be denotative,
syntactic, connotative, and pragmatic.

48. Literal equivalence

This type of equivalence may be illustrated the best on the
translation of the Biblical text (first of all of the Old
Testament) into Indo-European languages. The translators
set the following tasks:
To translate the sacred text (which is considered as “the
God’s Word”) as literally as possible;
to make the text understandable for the potential readers;
to adapt the text for the needs of audience (to use
translated text in the liturgy, to support the religious
worldview).
Literal equivalence was a dominating approach to the
translation of the Bible till 1950-60, when the methodology
of Eugene Nide appeared.

49. It was a challenging task for the ancient translators because

• the source language (SL) belonged to the Semitic
branch of the Afro-Asia family of languages, but the
target language (TL) – to the Indo-European family;
• the biblical text contained different literary forms:
prose, poetry, juridical and prophetical texts;
• there were many special cultic terms in the Old
Testament which had not their counterparts in
Greek;
• the messengers and their audiences lived some
centuries before the translators.
49

50. The problems of grammar and syntax which had been set before the ancient translators:

• Hebrew verbs do not have
the grammatical category of
tense.
• Hebrew syntax is paratactic.
• Some grammatical forms
may have several meaning
(for example, nouns in
plural).
• Archaisms in vocabulary
(including borrowings from
Ugaritic, Akkadian and
Aramaic), grammar and
syntax
• Greek verbs have the
complicated tense system.
• Greek syntax is hypotactic.
• Clear, well-developed and
consecutive
derivation
system.
• Translation of the archaisms
demanded
from
the
translator
encyclopaedic
erudition and great insight.
50

51. The ancient translator tried to be careful in the translation:

They rendered each Hebrew lexeme with a corresponding
Greek word consequently (‫ = אלהים‬ο θεος [the God], ‫ = יהוה‬ο
κυριος [the Lord], ‫ = ברא‬ποιεω [to create], ‫ = יצר‬πλασσω [to
form], ‫ = משכן‬σκηνη [the tabernacle]);
They attempted to imitate the Hebrew syntax where it was
possible (the paratactic syntax, the word order VSO, the
syntactic parallelism in poetry);
They created new words (neologisms) in the cases when they
couldn’t find a Greek equivalent for a Hebrew word (for
example, the cultic term ιλαστεριον for ‫[ כפרת‬an atonement
cover]);
They used the hypotactic syntactic construction for the
infinitive construction in Hebrew and asyndetic relative
clauses.

52. Two approaches to the equivalence in translation: literal and dynamic (functional):

In the beginning God
created the heaven and
the earth. 2 And the
earth was without form,
and void; and darkness
was upon the face of the
deep. And the Spirit of
God moved upon the
face of the waters.
(Gen 1:1-2 KJV)
When
God
began
creating the heavens and
the earth, 2 the earth
was a shapeless, chaotic
mass, with the Spirit of
God brooding over the
dark vapors (The Living
Bible)

53. Literal and functional approaches in translation of poetry:

I will sing unto the LORD,
/for he hath triumphed
gloriously:
|| the horse and his rider
/hath he thrown into the sea.
I will sing to the Lord,
/for he has triumphed
gloriously;
|| He has thrown both horse
and rider into the sea.
The LORD is my strength and
song,
/ and he is become my salvation:
|| he is my God, and I will prepare
him an habitation;
/my father’s God, and I will exalt
him (Exo 15:1-2 KJV)
The Lord is my strength, my
song, and my salvation.
|| He is my God, and I will
praise him.
/ He is my father’s God—I will
exalt him.

54. Shakespeare’s sonnet 1 in Ukrainian translation by Dmytro Pavlychko

From fairest creatures we desire increase,
That thereby beauty’s rose might never die,
But as the riper should by time decease,
His tender heir might bear his memory:
But thou contracted to thine own bright
eyes,
Feed’st thy light’s flame with self-substantial
fuel,
Making a famine where abundance lies,
Thy self thy foe, to thy sweet self too cruel:
Thou that art now the world’s fresh
ornament,
And only herald to the gaudy spring,
Within thine own bud buriest thy content,
And, tender churl, mak’st waste in
niggarding:
Pity the world, or else this glutton be,
To eat the world’s due, by the grave and
thee.
Ми прагнем, щоб краса потомство мала,
Щоб цвіт її ніколи не зачах,
Щоб квітнула троянда нетривала,
Все наново постаючи в бруньках.
А ти, закоханий у власну вроду,
Її годуєш полум’ям своїм,
Розвалюєш — скажи, кому на шкоду? Душі своєї багатющий дім.
Ти, хто весні сьогодні пишна пара,
Пригноблюєш весняне почуття,
Як той багатий, та нещасний скнара,
Змарновуєш на вбогості життя.
Світ пожалій, не зводь красу до гробу,
Віддай природі борг — свою подобу!