 anything which can be said in one language can be

said in another, unless the form is an essential

element of the message (Nida & Taber)

dynamic equivalence
as a counterpart of formal equivalence
 formal replacement of one word or phrase in the SL by an
other in the TL
 different from literal translation in that it is almost always
contextually motivated*, i.e. formal features are preserved
only if they carry contextual values that become part of
overall text meaning (e.g. deliberate ambiguity in the ST)
 procedure purposefully selected in order to preserve a
certain linguistic/rhetorical effect

*the intention to produce certain rhetorical effects, using

language in a conscious, deliberate manner for that purpose
 the decision to opt for formal equivalence must be a
conscious decision (taken for a good reason and not
gratuitously)
 the aim to bring the target reader nearer to the linguistic
or cultural preferences of the ST

e.g.
[…] a face so ordinary as to approach anonymity, a mastery
of disguise so accomplished he could vanish without a
trace inside a role and a wary intelligence that allowed
him to reveal the deepest secrets of his characters while
slyly protecting his own. (from the obituary of Guinness)

Condonable diffidence or unforgivable arrogance?

 A translation which preserves the effect the ST had
on its readers and which tries to elicit a similar
response from the target reader
When
: Only after formal possibilities for conveying the
intended effect are exhausted
: a form of words that is not sufficiently transparent in
the TT is likely to pose a threat to comprehensibility
and therefore result in unintended and unmotivated
opaqueness
: form is not significantly involved in conveying a
particular meaning(e.g. in cases where there is no
contextual justification for preserving ST
opaqueness, ambiguity)
 caters for a rich variety of contextual values and
effects which utterances carry within texts
 ST explication and adjustment – for a wider
variety of texts, given a diverse range of readers
and purposes of translation
 not absolute techniques but general orientations
 experienced translators:
i) resort to a literal kind of equivalence initially,
ii) reconsider the decision in the light of a range
of factors,
iii) and ultimately make a choice from literal, formal
or dynamic equivalence in this order and as
appropriate.
 techniques for producing correct equivalents and
achieving dynamic equivalence in translation
 gradual move away from form-by-form renderings
and towards more dynamic kinds of equivalence
 to cope with the wider range of purposes which
translations might serve
 subsumes a set of techniques for restructuring the
ST message in the TL
 redundancy, explicating or repeating information
when appropriate for dense translation
 gisting for languages characterized by a high
degree of repetition of meaning
 re-ordering an entire sequence of sentences if the
ST order of events does not match normal
chronology, or proves too cumbersome to visualize
 compensation
 The more form-bound a meaning is (e.g. a case of
ambiguity through word play), the more formal the
equivalence relation will have to be.
Alternatively, the more context-bound a meaning is
(e.g. an obscure reference to source culture), the
more dynamic the equivalence will have to be.

FE <<<<<<<<<<<< adjustment >>>>>>>>>>>> DE

Form-bound meaning context bound
 the ST message is first broken down into its
immediate constituents (or kernels),

 then mentally transferred,

 ultimately to undergo a process of adjustment that

restores to the TT linguistic and stylistic
appropriateness
 : discover the kernels, that is, basic structural
elements to which syntactically more elaborate
surface structure of a language can be reduced
 analyze the SL message into its simplest and
structurally clearest forms (or kernels)

e.g. children of wrath

: ‘God directs wrath at the transgressors’
: ‘the transgressors suffers God’s wrath’
 consist of combinations of items from of four basic
semantic categories:
- Object words (nouns referring to physical objects
including human beings)
- Event words (actions often represented by verbs)
- Abstracts (qualities and quantities, including
adjectives)
- Relationals (including linking devices, gender
markers)
e.g. ‘Will of God’
: B(object, God) performs A (event, wills)
 the analyzed material is transferred in the mind of
the translator from language A to language B
 kernels as raw material are modified in
preparation for restructuring(the stage of putting
pen to paper)
 strategy are worked out, decisions regarding such
matters as register and genre are initially taken
 a dynamic process of ‘reconfiguration’ in the TL of
sets of SL semantic and structural components
 the input accrued is transformed into a ‘stylistic
form appropriate to the receptor language and to
the intended receptors’

 ensures that the impact which the translation is to

have on its intended receptors is what the ST
producer has intended
 Translation can be said to be dynamically
equivalent to its ST only when a translation
produces in the audience a response which is
essentially the same as that of the original
audience