In translation studies, for example, equivalence is defined as translation and translation, according to most of the definitions, representing an equivalence. Accuracy of translation formal equivalence v dynamic. Natural and directional equivalence in theories of translation. No dynamic equivalence in the kjv kjv textual technology.
The idea behind formal equivalence is to render the text in the same form as the original. Dynamic and formal equivalence are concepts from linguistics when a language is translated into another one, there is a problem. Carson, the limits of dynamic equivalence in bible translation, notes on translation 121 oct 1987 1, hails the triumph of dynamic equivalence in these words. Dynamic and formal equivalence simple english wikipedia. The concept of equivalence in translation one hour. Modern english translations of the bible follow one of two philosophies of translation. This can also mean using the same word order as the original language. Equivalence in translation theories academy publication. Admittedly, i am the only person in the world who refers to. The second type, interlingual, is the one where translation equivalence is classified in. The concept of equivalence in translation studies the concept of equivalence, which has an important role in translation studies, is a broad concept. The nature of dynamic equivalence in translating eric. One of the first decisions to be made when translating written work from one language to another is whether to translate literally wordforword or to translate thoughtforthought.
The limits of dynamic equivalence in bible translation which a translation is intended have priority over forms that may be traditionally more prestigious. Generally speaking, for english bibles, there are two dominant translation methodologies. Linguistic equivalence in translation one hour translation. Formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence caused heated controversy. Contextual consistency over verbal consistency dynamic equivalence over formal correspondence the aural form over the written form form which are understandable to audience over traditionally more prestigious ones.
The terms are not found in general linguistics or translation. Th e limits of dynamic equivalence the limits of dynamic. In such a translation one is not so concerned with matching the receptorlanguage message with the sourcelanguage message, but with the dynamic relationship mentioned in. His work and ideas had a lasting influence on many of the bibles on our bookshelvesand on the way that scholars today approach the task of translating scripture. The main advantage of optimal equivalence is the combination of accuracy and readability. Focuses on the message itself, in senseforsense translation. In contrast, a translation which attempts to produce a dynamic rather than a formal equivalence is based upon the principle of equivalent effect rieu and phillips, 1954. Among bible scholars there is a school which is always inquiring into the genres or rhetorical forms of speech represented in any given passage of the bible, and also the social settings which are supposed to be connected with these forms. Few if any languages are exactly parallel in terms of words, sentence structure. Therefore, theorists in the field of translation studies are. The use of formal equivalents might at times have serious implications in the tt since the translation will not be easily understood by the target audience fawcett, 1997.
Briefly stated, the theory of dynamic equivalence in bible translation emphasizes the reaction of the reader to the translated text, rather than the translation of the words and phrases themselves. In formalequivalence translations, translators attempt to translate each word in the original language into an equivalent english word. The only drawback is that some people prefer either a more formal equivalence or dynamic equivalence translation. We define translation as moving words from one language into another. With formal equivalence each word of the original language is represented by a word in the target or receptor language. The first language may also have words, phrases or grammatical structures that do not exist in the second language. Dynamic equivalence and formal correspondence in translation between chinese and english liu dayan school of foreign languages chongqing jiaotong university no.
Nevertheless, it has been a rather controversial one, causing many heated debates among translators as to. Stay connected to your students with prezi video, now in microsoft teams. The proper bible translation methodology has been called an essentially literal translation and a formal equivalence translation as opposed to dynamic equivalency. International journal of english and education issn. Nidas translation theory of dynamic equivalence and initiates a. One language may express an event as a verb, whereas another language may express that same event in noun form. Dynamic and formal equivalence synonyms, dynamic and formal equivalence pronunciation, dynamic and formal equivalence translation, english dictionary definition of dynamic and formal equivalence. Formal equivalence intends to achieve equivalence between original text and translation text, and to some extent reflect the linguistical features. An example of these differences can be found in john.
Nida establishes four priorities as guiding principles in translating and bases for judgment, namely contextual consistency. Equivalence in translation introduction dynamic equivalence, as a respectable principle of translation, has been around in the translation sector for a long time. Nida 1964 suggests formal and dynamic or functional equivalence. These studies can be grouped along the line between a linguistic approach and the functionally oriented one, in which translation equivalence is considered to be a transfer of the message from the source language culture to the target language culture leonardi 2000. It requires that the message in the target language should match as closely as possible the different elements in the source language p. The concept of equivalence can be said to hold a central position in translation studies. Formal equivalence, or complete equivalence, is also known as literal translation, or a wordforword translation. Obviously such a discussion cannot take place in the abstract so robert martin has focused on the niv translation that i was using when i was converted. Dynamic equivalence and formal correspondence in translation. As a direct result of the grammartranslation method, a standard approach in japanese junior high and high schools, translation is considered in the framework of grammatical and syntactic equivalents l1 x l2 x.
The terms dynamic equivalen ce and formal equival ence, coined by eugene nida, are associated with two dis similar transl ation approaches that are employed to achieve different levels of literalness between the source text and the target text, as evidenced in biblical tran slation the two have been understood basi cally, with dynamic e quiva lence as senseforsense t ran slation t ranslating the. With regard to equivalence, nida maintains that there are two basic types of equivalence. This post is me stating that i reject dynamic equivalence translation theory because of the logical outcomes of the method. By formal equivalence, we do not mean that a translation should follow the exact form verb for verb, noun for noun, exact word order, etc. In particular, nida argues that in formal equivalence. The terms dynamic equivalence and formal equivalence mask the fact that at least two distinct theoretical issues separate most translations. Formal equivalence, aimed at achieving equivalence as exact as possible, is the only legitimate goal in translation, and rough equivalence commonly mis represents the text, causing interpretation problems. Translation of idioms is very different from paraphrasing common to dynamic equivalence. In bible translation dynamic equivalence and formal equivalence are two approaches to translation. Functional equivalence is typically referred to as a thoughtforthought translation. They therefore suggest that these formal equivalents should be used wherever possible if the translation aims at achieving formal rather than dynamic equivalence.
Wordforword translation is known as formal equivalence while thoughtforthought translation is known as dynamic equivalence. By and large, formal equivalence translators work on the assumptions that. Formal and dynamic equivalence and the principle of. Accordingly, formalequivalence translators try to find english words that mean the same thing as the original hebrew or greek ones. Dynamic and formal equivalence are two methods or styles used to convert source text e. Second, dynamic equivalency says the translator must interpret. I sometimes refer to language translation as the science of poetry. Dynamic equivalence in subtitling translation directory. Although this concept is defined in terms of the relations between source and target texts by some scholars such as nida and jacobson, there are also some scholars, such as. Study of nida s formal and dynamic equivalence and.
Formal equivalence is more concerned with wordforword. The notion of equivalence is important because it is used in defining translation itself this also makes it problematic because it is circular translation is defined in terms of equivalence and equivalence is at the same time used for assessing and describing actual translation acts. Their purpose is to enable the receptors to understand the implications of the cognitive content or to make a corresponding emotive response without recourse to the original text. It is the method whereby the translators purpose is not to give a literal, wordforword rendition but to transfer the meaning of the text as would be best expressed in the words of the receptor native language. However, the concept of translation equivalence is sometimes distorted, and, perhaps, this is why some people deny its validity and necessity. Dynamic equivalence, as a respectable principle of translation, has been around in the translation sector for a long time. The method bothers me because god inspired the biblical authors to write certain words, and translations can only be identified as the word of god insofar as they faithfully represent the. The dynamic also known as functional method attempts to convey the thought expressed in the source text using equivalent expressions from a contemporary language like english thought for thought translating. 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. Translation theories eugene nida and dynamic equivalence. Eugene nida, the father of the dynamic equivalence bible translation philosophy, has passed away at age 96. To argue for the necessity of translation equivalence, we should first clarify its features.
The concept of dynamic equivalence has taken hold in the bible translation profession, and has spawned both developments and reactions. The concept of equivalence has been one of the key words in translation studies. The difference between literal and dynamic translations of. The new international version niv attempts to strike a balance between dynamic and formal equivalence. Natural and directional equivalence in theories of translation anthony pym universitat rovira i virgili, tarragona, spain equivalence was a key word in the linguisticsbased translation theories of the 1960s and 1970s, although its basic mode of thought may be traced back to. Formal equivalence is called a wordforword translation and attempts to translate the bible as literally as possible, keeping the sentence structure and idioms intact if possible.
Dynamic and formal equivalence definition of dynamic and. Even though the two issues are not the same, they are related, and we find the. Greeting and warm welcome to you all to this brief presentation on formal and dynamic equivalence, and semantic and communicative translation, the original concepts by eugene nida and peter. Nida 1964 has written that there are two kinds of equivalenceformal equivalence also known as formal correspondence and dynamic equivalence. Shortly after eugene nida published books that explained his theory of dynamic equivalence, beekman and callow published translating the word of god in 1974, in which they. The present study aimed to investigate which of these approaches are the main focuses of the translators in the translations of the two short stories. Equivalence problems in translation nansy ahmad daoud mosleh alfaori translation department, yarmouk university, irbid, jordan equivalence is an important notion in translation theory. Formal equivalence approach tends to emphasize fidelity to the lexical details and grammatical. It is reasonable to state that despite having completed at least seven. Against the theory of dynamic equivalence by michael marlowe revised and expanded, january 2012. The theory is to translate using formal equivalence where possible and dynamic equivalence where needed to clarify the text. Formal equivalence focuses attention on the message itself, in both form and content. I was surprised to find the extent to which these philosophies have consequences.