Eugene Nida 1914-2011

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 generativetransformational grammar
(Chomsky 1957, 1965)

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

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

Hierarchical structuring

Differentating series of words

according to their level:
The superordinate animal and its
hyponyms goat, dog, cow, etc.
vehicle, car, bus, etc.

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

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

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

The influence of Chomsky

1.

2.

3.

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

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 Chomskys
model into the science of translation;
Technique for decoding the ST and a procedure for
encoding the TT

Nidas three-stage system of

translation
analysis

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

Kernels: four types of functional

class

events (usually verbs);

objects (usually nouns);
abstracts (quantities and qualities,
including adjectives);
relationals (inc. gender, prepositions
and conjunctions)

Examples of analysis (Nida 1964)

I.
II.

III.

IV.

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)

From Nida (1964: 185-7)

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)

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

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

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

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

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

The importance of Nidas work

Preoccupation with equivalence at

word level;
Equivalent effect or response
impossible to measure;
Is Nidas theory really scientific?
Technique for effective preaching?

The importance of Nidas 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;

The importance of Nidas 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)

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

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

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

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

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

Is semantic translation the same

as literal translation?

Sem.T. respects context, interprets

and even explains ([Link]);
[Link]. means word-for-word or at
least sticks closely to ST lexis and
syntax

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?

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

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

Semantic translation basic features

For serious literature,

autobiography, personal effusion,
any important political (or other)
statement;
Accuracy of reproduction of the
significance of ST

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

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

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

The role of literal translation

In communicative as in semantic
translation, provided that equivalent
effect is secured, the literal wordfor-word translation is not only the
best, it is the only valid method of
translation (Newmark 1981: 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!

bersetzungswissenschaft

Wolfram Wilss, Otto Kade, Albert

Neubert, Werner Koller;
Research into the science of
translation (Koller 1979)

Kollers 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

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

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]

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]