Another scholar who supported this theory was John Catford who thought of translation as "the replacement of textual material in one language by equivalent material in another language" (20). As can be seen from these two definitions, proponents of the theory of equivalence regarded the source and target languages as being equivalent on some level; the absence of some kind of equivalence between the source and the target text meant that the target text was not a translation but rather a kind of adaptation. Equivalence was seen as the most important criterion to judge whether the translation was successful or not (Du 2190). These first
It is translator’s knowledge, experience and level of language finally decides the quality of translation of a text. Thus, translator has to be sensitive and professional. On the other hand, the object of translation aesthetics is the original text and translated text. The origin text should have value to be translated and include the aspects of informative, inspirational, enlightening and descriptive. After knowing the object and subject of translation aesthetic, the other important aspect people should know is that the aesthetic of translation has to suit the local culture.
Translation is the observable fact that has significant impact on routine life. It may include the translation of highly valuable international treaty or it may involve an advertising poster that provides some information to the customers or conveys some message to the visitors in a hotel or restaurant. (Hatim and Munday, 2005, p. 03). Problems in Translation The main problem faced by a translator is the lack of word by word matching between languages. This is fact that each and every language has its own manner of depicting incidents or reality and the translator have to take the unique aspects of both the source and target languages into account while translating.
All these concepts are looked upon as different ways of trying to make visible the textual category of translator. All these factors, explain why things have turned out the way they did. The answer is because the translator adhered to certain norms, ideologies and certain conceptions on interpretation of the source text. Then the question of why did he adhere to those particular norms comes into existence. In a nut shell, descriptive translational studies takes into its fold translator’s conception of the source text as it emerges from the target text.
A little later Bhabha says: “Translation is the performative nature of cultural communication” (Bhabha 228), and he goes on, in another new figurative equation, to speak of the residual cultural unassimilability of the migrant as an instance of what Benjamin called “untranslatability.” Here, as indeed at numerous other places, one may get the feeling that one is still trying to catch Bhabha’s shadow while already living in it. What is nevertheless clear and indisputable in Bhabha’s formulations of what he calls cultural translation is, firstly, that he does not at all by this term mean literary translation involving two texts from two different languages and cultures, and secondly, that what he means by translation instead is the process and
ABSTRACT The present paper examines ‘dynamic equivalence’ as a translation technique put forward by Eugene A. Nida through translatingMaamta: An Urdu Short Story by Ahmed Nadeem Qasmi (1916-2006). Nida defines translation as a process of reproducing the message in receptor language naturally equivalent to the message in source language.Through dynamic equivalent translation of Maamta, it has been highlighted that any theme or message in the translated text may have an impact on readers more similar to its impact on readers of source language. The power, purity and consistency of unconditional motherly love reflected in this story may have similar impact on the readers of any languageif dynamic equivalence is appropriately produced. Key words:
Nida. The concept of functional adequacy in translating has been described in a number of books and articles as “dynamic equivalence”. In Toward a Science of Translating (Nida, 1964) dynamic equivalence has been treated in terms of the “closest natural equivalent”, but the term “dynamic ” has been misunderstood by some persons as referring only to something which has impact. Accordingly, many individuals have been led to think that if a translation has considerable impact then it must be a correct example of dynamic equivalence. Because of this misunderstanding and in order to emphasize the concept of function, it has seemed much more satisfactory to use the expression “functional equivalence” in describing the degrees of adequacy of a translation.
This implies that a true translation is a diaphanous body and the original is the heart that shines through the pure language in the act of translation. Here the purpose of pure language is not to produce a literal copy of the original, but, rather to “harmonize” or to bring together the different languages in a way that allows a rebirth of the translation yet at the same time permits the continued growth of the original. This image represents a ghost that mediates between the original and the translation through pure language. That is, language has a soul and that soul has a body, namely, translation. This process is a complementary one which cannot unfold by treating only one
Without appreciation of the beauty, there is no literary and artistic creation. As a result, literary translation, as a literary art, is always accompanied by aesthetic activities. Although there are differences in the forms of expression of beauty in different languages, this does not hinder the transmission of the beauty of literary translation because there are some similarities in aesthetic characteristics and aesthetic interests. Translation aesthetics opens up a new path for translation studies from the perspective of Chinese traditional aesthetics. By virtue of this commonality, the translator recreates the aesthetic characteristics and aesthetic interests of the original with the target language so that the reader can get the same aesthetic feeling.
According to Pienkos (2003, p. 388), a translator needs accuracy, diligence, good ability to handle the stress and also excellent memory to do the translation. However, many people think lightly about translation. They think that translation is just change words and sentences from one language into another language. Practically, a translator should have enough knowledge about the concept and the structure of the source language and the target language so they can change it in the equivalent meaning in the target language. Koller (1995, p. 196) said that a translation is the process of transposing the source language to the target language which has a relationship which is defined as equivalence relation.