1. Eugene Nida

2. Nida and ”the science of translating”
Towards a Science of Translating (1964);
The Theory and Practice of Translation (with Taber) (1969)
incorporating insights from linguistics;
The theory of generative-transformational grammar (Chomsky 1957, 1965)

3. The nature of meaning: advances in semantics and pragmatics
Moving away from the idea that an orthographic word has a fixed meaning;
A functional definition: word acquires meaning through its context and can produce varying responses according to culture

4. The nature of meaning: advances in semantics and pragmatics
Meaning is broken down into:
linguistic meaning;
referential meaning;
emotive (referential) meaning;
Hierarchical meaning and componential analysis;
semantic structure analysis

5. Hierarchical structuring
Differentating series of words according to their level:
The superordinate animal and its hyponyms goat, dog, cow, etc.
vehicle, car, bus, etc.

6. Componential analysis
Identifying and discriminating specific features of a range of related words;
grandmother, mother, cousin, etc.
sex (male, female),generation, lineality (direct ancestor/descendant);
bachelor: +male, +unmarried

7. Semantic structure analysis
Separating out visually different meanings:
spirit (demons, angels, gods, ghosts, ethos, alcohol, etc.);
To demonstrate the semantic complexity of terms, how they vary and are conditioned by their context;
Varying emotive or connotative value depending on the target culture

8. The importance of context for communication
Metaphorical meaning;
Complex cultural idioms
Techniques of componential analysis as a means of clarifying ambiguities, elucidating obscure passages and identifying cultural differences

9. The influence of Chomsky
Phrase-structure rules generate an underlying or deep structure which is
Transformed by transformational rules relating one underlying structure to another (e.g. active to passive), to produce
a final surface structure, which itself is subject to phonological and morphemic rules

10. The structure relations – universal feature of human language
kernel sentences – most basic structures – simple, active declarative sentences – the minimum of transformation; ‘basic structural elements out of which language builds its elaborate surface structures’
Incorporating key features of Chomsky’s model into the ‘science’ of translation;
Technique for decoding the ST and a procedure for encoding the TT

11. Nida’s three-stage system of translation
analysis
Surface structure of ST is analyzed into the basic elements of deep structure
transfer
These are ‘transferred’ in the translation process
restruc.
And restructured semantically and stylistically into surface structure of the TT

12. Chomsky and TT From Nida & Taber (1969:33)

13. Kernels: four types of functional class
events (usually verbs);
objects (usually nouns);
abstracts (quantities and qualities, including adjectives);
relationals (inc. gender, prepositions and conjunctions)

14. Examples of analysis (Nida 1964)
Surface struture: will of God
Back transform: B(object, God) performs A (event, wills)
Surface structure: creation of the world
Back transform: B (object: the world) is the goal of A (event, creates)

15. From Nida (1964: 185-7)

16. Two Basic Orientations: formal and dynamic equivalence
Formal equivalence:
Formal equivalence focuses attention on the message itself, in both form and content… One is concerned that the message in the receptor language should match as closely as possible the different elements in the source language (Nida1964a: 159)

17. Bridging cultural and linguistic differences: Dynamic Equivalence
”The principle of equivalent effect: the relationship between receptor and message should be substantially the same as that which existed between the original receptors and the message”
‘Correspondence in meaning must have priority over correspondence in style’

18. ‘Four basic requirements of a translation’
Making sense;
Conveying the spirit and manner of the original;
Having a natural and easy form of expression;
Producing a similar response

19. Dynamic equivalence procedures include:
Substituting more appropriate TL cultural material for less accessible SL items;
Making references which are implicit in the ST linguistically explicit in TL;
Regulating redundancy in order to facilitate comprehension

20. Language, culture and society
Lamb of God rendered as Seal of God
Relate the receptor to modes of behaviour relevant within the context of his (sic) own culture

21. Adjustment techniques
Adding or taking away information;
Altering the material;
Providing footnotes;
Generally modifying the ST by removing any element likely to be perceived as alien, if not totally incomprehensible to the target audience

22. The importance of Nida’s work
Preoccupation with equivalence at word level;
Equivalent effect or response impossible to measure;
Is Nida’s theory really scientific?
Technique for effective preaching?

23. The importance of Nida’s work
Introducing a receptor-based orientation
Dynamic vs formal (dynamic v. structural) represents points on a cline;
More-or-less not either-or dichotomies;
The role and responsibility of the translator;

24. The importance of Nida’s work in subsequent TS studies
Dynamic equivalence may cause misunderstanding by adapting the source too far to fit into the receptor culture and thereby corrupt the message or remove a connotative force;
‘functional equivalence’ – ”a middle ground between dynamic and formal equivalence and emphasizes the communicative function of translating to avoid misunderstanding” Nida (1986)

25. Translating institutional texts
SOURCE TEXT ITEM
”Downing Street makes a decision”
FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENCE (French)
”Downing Street (residence officielle du Premiere Ministre britannique)”
CULTURAL EQUIVALENT IN A DYNAMIC SENSE
Hotel Matignon
el Palacio de la Moncloa

26. Peter Newmark: semantic and communicative translation
Approaches to Translation (1981)
A Textbook of Translation (1988)
Equivalent effect is illusory!
”the conflict of loyalties, the gap between emphasis on source and target language will always remain as the overriding problem in translation theory and practice”

27. Peter Newmark
”Communicative translation attempts to produce on its readers an effect as close as possible to that obtained on the readers of the original. Semantic translation attempts to render, as closely as the semantic and syntactic structures of the second language allow, the exact contextual meaning of the original”

28. What is Semantic Translation?
a mode of text transfer which involves using ‘the bare syntactic and semantic constraints of the TL to reproduce the precise contextual meaning of the author’

29. What is Communicative Translation?
a mode which seeks to produce the same effect on the TL readers as was produced by the original on the SL readers

30. Is semantic translation the same as literal translation?
Sem.T. respects context, interprets and even explains (e.g.metaphors);
L.trans. means word-for-word or at least sticks closely to ST lexis and syntax

31. Is communicative translation the same as dynamic translation?
Equivalent effect ”is inoperant if the text is out of TL space and time”;
Are readers to be handed everything on a plate?

32. Semantic translation: basic features
Focuses on the thought processes of the transmitter as an individual; should only help TT reader connotations if they are a crucial part of message;
Remains within the SL culture
Not fixed in any time or local space; translation needs to be done anew with every generation

33. Semantic translation: basic features
Always ‘inferior’ to ST; ‘loss’ of meaning;
If ST language norms deviate, then this must be replicated in TT; ‘loyalty’ to ST author;
More complex, awkward, detailed, concentrated; tendency to overtranslate

34. Semantic translation basic features
For serious literature, autobiography, ‘personal effusion’, any important political (or other) statement;
Accuracy of reproduction of the significance of ST

35. Communicative translation: basic features
Subjective, TT reader focused, oriented towards a specific language and culture;
Transfers foreign elements into the TL culture;
Ephemeral and rooted in its own contemporary context

36. Communicative translation: basic features
May be ‘better’ than the ST; ‘gain’ of force and clarity even if loss of semantic content;
Respect for the form of the SL, but overriding ‘loyalty’ to TL norms;
Smoother, simpler, clearer, more direct, more conventional, tendency to undertranslate

37. Communicative translation: basic features
For the vast majority of texts, e.g. non-literary writing, technical and informative texts, publicity, standardized types, popular fiction;
Accuracy of communication of ST message in TT

38. The role of ‘literal translation’
”In communicative as in semantic translation, provided that equivalent effect is secured, the literal word-for-word translation is not only the best, it is the only valid method of translation” (Newmark 1981: 39)

39. BUT!
In case of a conflict (semantic translation results in abnormal TT or would not secure equivalent effect in the TL then communicative translation should win out!

40. Übersetzungswissenschaft
Wolfram Wilss, Otto Kade, Albert Neubert, Werner Koller;
Research into the science of translation (Koller 1979)

41. Koller’s definition of translation (1995)
”The result of a text-processing activity, by means of which a SL text is transposed into a TL text. Between the resultant text in L2 and the ST in L1 there exists a relationship, which can be designated as a translational, or equivalence relation”

42. Equivalence relations
Subject to specific historical-cultural conditions;
SL/TL code properties, possibilities and limitations;
How reality is perceived and partitioned;
Linguistic, stylistic and aesthetic norms;
Translation traditions;
Client specifications

43. Equivalence Frameworks
Referential or Denotative Equivalence [SL and TL words referring to the same thing in the real world; equivalence of the extralinguistic content of a text];
Connotative Equivalence [SL and TL words triggering the same or similar associations in the minds of speakers of the two languages]

44. Equivalence Frameworks
Text-normative Equivalence [SL and TL words used in the same or similar contexts in their respective languages; related to text types and work by Katharina Reiss;
Pragmatic Equivalence [SL and TL words having the same effect on their respective readers; dynamic equivalence]
Formal equivalence [SL and TL words having similar orthographic or phonological features; related to the form and aesthetics of the text and its stylistic features]