Translation Theory

Overview

This chapter briefly explains the stages of translation theory: the linguistic stage,
the communicative stage, the functionalist stage and the ethical/aesthetic stage.
It also presents the notion of equivalence in translation theories, with reference
to the most prominent theories in translation, supported by examples.
The chapter covers the following topics:

Stages of translation theories

The notion of equivalence in translation theories
The following research works support the contents of this chapter:

1. Direct and Oblique Translation (Vinay & Darbelnet, 1958/2004)

2. Van Leuven-Zwart’s Comparative-descriptive Model of Translation
Shifts (1989)
3. Overt and Covert Translations (House, 1997)
4. Jakobson’s Equivalence (1959)
5. Dynamic Equivalence and Formal Equivalence (Nida, 1964)
6. Communicative and Semantic Translation (Newmark, 1981, 1988)
7. Form-Based and Meaning-based Translation (Larson, 1998)
8. Halliday’s Typology of Equivalence
9. Catford’s Typology of Equivalence (1965)
10. Mona Baker’s Typology of Equivalence (1992/2011)
11. Koller’s Notion of Equivalence
12. Popovič (1976) Types of Equivalence
13. The Cognitive Approach in Translation (Bell, 1991)
14. The Functionalist Approach
15. Non-Equivalence Approach (Skopos Theory)
16. The PolySystems Theory

© The Author(s) 2020 9

N. Abdelaal, Translation between English and Arabic,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-34332-3_2
10 2 Translation Theory

2.1 Stages of Translation Theories

In his discussion of translation theory, Munday (2009) explains that translation the-
ory was controlled by the West until recent times. He adds that, in Western Europe,
the topic of word-for-word or sense-for-sense translation was the subject of heated
debate until the twentieth century. Further, Munday (2009) states that ‘translation
studies’ as a discipline did not emerge until the second half of the twentieth cen-
tury; it arose from the branches of applied comparative linguistics and modern lan-
guages. The concept of translation studies was first introduced by James Holmes as
a substitute for ‘translation science’, or ‘translatology’, in 1972. However, Newmark
(2009) favours ‘translation theory’ over ‘translation studies’. He views theory as an
important framework that should be taught to translation students, though he states
that learning a theory is not fundamental to being a good translator. Peter Newmark
(2009) identified four stages of translation theory: linguistic, communicative, func-
tionalist and ethical/aesthetic. Each stage is marked with a unique approach.

2.1.1 Linguistic Stage

Covering the period up to 1950, this stage was basically concerned with literary
texts—that is, poetry, short stories, plays, novels and autobiographies. This stage
was predominantly concerned with the discussion of the word-for-word translation
(literal), as opposed to sense-for-sense translation (natural, liberal, or idiomatic).
During this period, there was preference for sense-for-sense or contextual trans-
lation over word-for-word translation. This, as Newmark states, marks the inter-
pretive theory of translation. The most prominent work of translation theory in
this period was Essay on the Principles of Translation by Alexander Tytler (1790).
Tytler (1797, pp. 14–15), as cited in Newmark (2009), defined a good translation
as one in which ‘the merit of the original work is so completely transfused into
another language as to be as distinctly apprehended, and as strongly felt, by a
native of the country to which that language belongs, as it is by those who speak
the language of the original work’. Newmark adds that what can be inferred from
Tytler’s statement is that a good translation should completely convey the message
of the ST; it should also follow the same style and manner of the original, and
should have all the ease of the original composition (p. 23). George Steiner’s After
Babel (1975) marks the end of this linguistic stage.

2.1.2 The Communicative Stage

Beginning in around 1950, this stage marked the application of linguistics to trans-
lation studies; it mainly covered non-literary and literary texts. It was concerned
with the categorization of text registers, the participation of a range of readership
groups (from the less well-educated to the expert) and the identification of types of
procedures for translating various segments of a text.
2.1 Stages of Translation Theories 11

2.1.3 The Functionalist Stage

Commencing in around 1970, this stage covered mainly non-literary texts—that is,
‘the real world’. It was concerned with the intention of a text and its essential mes-
sage, rather than the language of the ST. Translation in this period was concerned
with how to translate a text functionally.

2.1.4 The Ethical/Aesthetic Stage

Since around 2000, this stage has been concerned with authoritative and official
or documentary texts, and includes serious literary works. It highlights translation
as a truth-seeking profession. The truth is essentially twofold: the correspondence
of a factual text with reality; and the correspondence of an imaginative text with a
meaningful allegory—and, consequentially, the correspondence of the translation
with the respective type of text. Newmark concludes that these translation theory
stages are cumulative; in other words, they overlap, or, in Newmark’s words, they
‘absorb without eliminating each other’ (2009, p. 21). Having shed light on the
different stages of translation theories, we shall move on to the unit of translation.

Exercise

Explain the stages of translation theory.

2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories

Discussing the concept of ‘equivalence’ brings into the discussion the perspectives
of concepts. There are two main perspectives of concepts: the universality of con-
cepts, as proposed by Chomsky (1977), and the relativity of concepts. According
to Chomsky, all humans share the same basic brain structures and, thus, there are
deep similarities between all languages, even if these are not obvious in surface
grammar. Universalists believe all languages have a commonality, or universal
concepts, that are shared by all languages. Relativists believe that languages are
too disjointed and, hence, concepts are not common among languages (Steiner,
1998). In his book After Babel (1998), Steiner rejects Chomsky’s universality of
concepts. Steiner believes that language is relative and that, thus, languages are
too disjointed. Steiner takes the stance of the Relativists and opposes that of the
positivistic Universalists (Steiner, 1998). These variant stances of Universalists
and Relativists bring different understandings of the notion of equivalence. Simply
put, if we were to adopt the Universalist stance, we would say that equivalence is
achievable between languages because they are similar in deep structure, at least.
However, adopting the Relativist stance, it can be argued that real equivalence
12 2 Translation Theory

does not exist between languages. Those different stances created considera-
ble debate in relation to the concept of equivalence, which has always been a
source of disagreement among scholars and theorists of translation and linguistics
(Munday, 2009).
According to Munday (2009), equivalence is a thorny issue in the realm of trans-
lation studies; it is fuelled by the debate among theorists and scholars; some schol-
ars more or less reject the notion (e.g. Gentzler, 2001; Snell-Hornby, 1988/1995),
while others find it useful and helpful (e.g. Baker 1992; Kenny 1998). By con-
trast, some scholars perceive that translation without equivalence is impossible
(e.g. Koller, 1989, 1995; Nida and Taber, 1974/1982). However, Munday con-
cludes that equivalence is a principal issue in the world of translation, and that it
will remain essential to the practice of translation (Munday, 2008, p. 49). There is
clear evidence of the necessity for equivalence in translation; first, the definitions
of translation mainly revolve around the notion of equivalence (e.g. Catford, 1965;
Newmark, 1981, 1988); second, translation is basically a kind of communication,
hence equivalence between ST and TT is a requirement; third, difficulty of trans-
lation and untranslatability are always discussed with respect to finding equivalent
items in a TT (Yinhua, 2011). The concept of equivalence was dominant in the dis-
cussions of translation during the period during the 1960s and 1970s (Venuti, 2004).
Many scholars and theorists, adopting a variety of perspectives, discussed the
notion of equivalence. The notions of equivalence of Vinay and Darbelnet, Mona
Baker, Jakobson, Nida, and Newmark, together with the strategies proposed by
them, will be discussed in the following sections.

2.2.1 Direct and Oblique Translation (Vinay & Darbelnet,

1958/2004)

Vinay and Darbelnet (2004) were basically influenced by Catford’s (1965) shifts.
They identified two strategies of translation: direct and oblique. They argued that
changing the syntactic order and lexis of the ST in the TT is sometimes neces-
sary in order to transpose certain stylistic effects of the ST, so as to fill the gap
in the TL: oblique translation. Sometimes it is possible to transpose the ST mes-
sage elements into the TT individually, due to structural or metalinguistic parallel-
ism between the ST and the TT: direct translation. These strategies are subdivided
into seven procedures; three for direct translation and four for oblique translation.
Those for direct translation include: borrowing, calque, literal translation, transpo-
sition, modulation, equivalence, adaptation.

A. Borrowing, is where an SL word is transferred to the TT to fill a semantic gap

in the TL. One of the advantages of this strategy is that it keeps the same con-
notations of the SL (Ni, 2009). Moreover, this method adds the flavour of the
SL culture to the TL. Some of the borrowed items became a central core of the
repertoire of lexicons in the TL. For example, menu, coup d’état, café, alcohol,
sheik and Islam are part of the English language, though they basically
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 13

belong to other cultures and language. Similarly, Arabic words such

as ‫ أنترنت‬،‫ سوبرماركت‬and many others were borrowed from English. Also, many
words were borrowed from Arabic to English, such as: cotton, falafel, algebra,
sheriff, Mujahidin, Fedayeen, caliph, sheik, halal and many others. Using bor-
rowing as a translation strategy should observe the style and message to be con-
veyed accurately.
B. Calque, whereby an SL expression or structure is transferred with minimum
adaptation, is a special kind of borrowing and is subdivided it into two types:
lexical calque and structural calque.
1. In lexical calque, the SL lexis are transferred into the TT without violating
the syntactic structure of the TT; for example, translating the English expres-
sion ‘compliments of the season’ into French as ‘Compliments de la sai-
son!’. Other examples are ‘Secretary General’, which is translated into
‫ األمين العام‬and ‘life is a journey’, which can be rendered as ‫الحياة رحلة‬. Other
examples, respectively, include translating cornerstone, feedback, play a role
as ‫ تغذية راجعةو يلعب دورا‬,‫حجر الزاوية‬.
2. In structural calque, a new structure is introduced into the TL, translating the
ST lexicons literally. For example, translating the English expression ‘Science
fiction’ into French as ‘Science fiction’. In this example, the English structure
is introduced into the French language. To clarify, calque is a kind of
literal translation that sometimes observes the lexical features of the ST (i.e.
lexical calque), and at other times observes the structural features of the ST
(structural calque). Examples of structural calque between English and Arabic
rarely exist because the two languages belong to two different families.
C. Literal translation is a word-for-word translation; it is described as the most
common procedure between related or close languages and cultures (e.g. French
and Italian). For example, translating ‘Ahmed is a student’ as ‫ أحمد يكون طالب‬is a
literal translation that can be used for a didactic purpose only. However, literal
translation is sometimes possible at the lower level of language. For example,
translating ‘I love Rabiaa’ as ‫ انا أحب ربيعة‬is an acceptable literal translation.
Other examples are:

Example

• I drink tea.
• ‫أنا أشرب الشاي‬
• I speak English.
• ‫أنا أتجدث األنجليزية‬
• I bought a villa.
• ‫أنا اشريت فيلال‬

According to Vinay and Darbelnet (2004), if all the direct or literal translation
procedures, mentioned above have not yielded acceptable translations, oblique
translation offers an alternative. The unacceptability of translation as identified by
Vinay and Darbelnet refers to cases where ‘the message translated:
14 2 Translation Theory

1. gives another meaning;

2. has no meaning;
3. is structurally impossible;
4. does not have a corresponding expression within the metalinguistic experience
of the TL; or
5. has a corresponding expression, but not within the same register’ (p. 87).
Oblique translation procedures include: transposition, modulation, equivalence
and adaptation.

D. Transposition implies changing a part of speech (i.e. word class) without

altering the meaning. There are two types of transposition: obligatory and
optional.
1. Obligatory transposition, which is sought when the TL does not allow any-
thing other than a specific form. For example, the French expression ‘Dès
son lever’ must be transposed into the English expression ‘As soon as he
gets up’. This is the only permissible form in English. A further example is
translating ‫ أغتسل‬as ‘to wash up after having sex or ejaculation’. In this
example, the ST verb must be rendered as a clause in English due to a lack
of equivalence.
2. Optional transposition. An example of optional transposition is the English
expression ‘As soon as he gets up’; if it were translated back into French, it
would be translated as: ‘Dès son lever’, or ‘Dès qu’il se lève’. Hence, it is
optional to employ either transposition strategy (i.e. ‘Dès son lever’) or
calque strategy (i.e. ‘Dès qu’il se lève’). A further example is ‫الذين يؤتون الزكاة‬,
as it can be translated as ‘zakat payers’ or ‘those who pay zakat’. Transposi-
tion is similar to Catford’s categorical shifts. Other examples of optional
transposition are translating ‘she screamed when she saw the snake’ as
‫ لقد صرخت عند رويتها الثعبان‬and ‫المؤمنين‬, which may be translated into English as
‘those who believed’.
E. Modulation involves the changing of the semantics and point of view expressed
in the SL; this strategy is followed when literal translation or transposition can
result in unidiomatic or unsuitable text in the TL. Similarly to transposition,
there are obligatory and optional modulations. An example of an obligatory mod-
ulation is the phrase, ‘The time when’, which must be translated into French as
‘Le moment où’ (literally: ‘the moment when’). By contrast, optional modulation
turns a negative SL expression into a positive TL expression. In addition, a free
(optional) modulation can only be fixed (obligatory) when referred to in diction-
aries and grammar books. Other examples of modulation are the French phrase
‘peu profond’, which may be translated into English as ‘shallow’; ‘lend me your
ears’, which can be translated as ‫‘ ;اعرني اتنباهك‬a piece of cake’, which can be
translated as ‫ ;امر هين او سهل‬the translation of ‘ups and downs’ as ‫ ;تقلبات الحياة‬and
translating ‘you are going to have a child’ as ‫ستصبحين أما‬.
F. Equivalence is a strategy whereby different stylistic or structural means are
used by the SL and TL, respectively, as in idioms and proverbs. In other words,
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 15

the ST and TT can render the same message using different styles or different
structures. For example, the much onomatopoeia of animal sounds, e.g. the
sound of a donkey in English would be transcribed as ‘heehaw’, while in
French it would be transcribed as ‘hi-han’. Most equivalence is of a syntag-
matic nature (i.e. interchangeable); hence, equivalence mainly comprises a
fixed phraseological repertoire of idioms, clichés, proverbs, nominal or adjecti-
val phrases and so on. For example, the French proverb ‘Il pleut à seaux/des
cordes’ is an equivalent to the English proverb ‘It is raining cats and dogs’.
Vinay and Darbelnet (2004), however, warn against creating equivalences or
calques without having ready-made equivalences. For example, a translator
should not create an equivalent of the previous proverbs in Arabic because they
are not culturally accepted. Other examples are ‫شئت أم أبيت‬, which can be trans-
lated as ‘willy nilly’, and ‘let things slide’, which can be translated as
‫دع األمور تجري في أعنتها‬. Examples of proverbs are as follows:

Example

ST TT
All that glitters is not gold ً ‫ليس كل مايلمع ذهبا‬
A friend in need is a friend indeed ‫الصديق وقت الضيق‬

G. Adaptation is the last calque strategy proposed by Vinay and Darbelnet

(2004), and is the changing and/or explaining of cultural differences between
an SL and a TL. This strategy is employed to create situational equivalence.
For example, the English ‘hello’ can be adapted to be assalamu alikum in Ara-
bic, instead of its linguistic equivalent ‫أهال‬. This strategy is frequently used in
translating literary work. It is also used in translating movies. For example
translating swearwords (e.g. ‘fuck’, ‘damn’) as ‫اللعنة‬. Also, translating ‘boy-
friend’ and ‘girlfriend’ as ‫صديق و صديقة‬.
After their discussion of these seven strategies of translation, Vinay and Darbelnet
(2004) conclude that these strategies frequently overlap, as more than one strategy
can be used within the same text or even the same sentence. For example, as
suggested by Vinay and Darbelnet (2004), the translation of ‘private’ (as would be
written on a door) by ‘défense d’entrer’ can be considered as a simultaneous trans-
position, modulation, and equivalence. It is a transposition because the adjective
‘private’ is transformed into a nominal expression; a modulation because a state-
ment is converted into a warning; and an equivalence since it is the situation that
has been translated, rather than the actual grammatical structure. A working exam-
ple of the use of the above-mentioned translation procedures can be found in the
following example.
16 2 Translation Theory

Example

The principles guiding the development of information technology and sys-

tems within the federal Government are contained in a ‘Federated Architecture
Program’ run by the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat. The Committee is,
however, concerned that the child parliament project is run by civil society and
therefore is not provided with adequate support, especially financial support, to
enable the programme to be sustainable.
‫تردالمبادئالموجهةلتطويرتكنولوجياالمعلوماتونظمالمعلوماتداخلالحكومةاالتحاديةفي‘البرنامجاالتحاديللبنية‬
.‫األساسية’الذييديرشؤونهمجلسالخزانةالتابعلمجلسالوزراءالكندي‬
‫ تشعر اللجنة بالقلق ألن المجتمع المدني هو الذي يدير مشروع برلمان الطفل وال يحظى من ثم‬،‫ومع ذلك‬
.‫ لضمان استمراره‬،‫ ال سيما الدعم المالي‬،‫بالدعم الكافي‬

As seen in the Arabic translation in the example, some of the strategies suggested
by Vinay and Darbelnet (2004) have been used in the translation. For example, the
ST is reported in passive voice, while the TT is reported in active voice, which is
a modulation. Similarly, the ST begins with a verb, which is common in Arabic,
while the TT begins with a noun, which is also a modulation procedure.
Also, translating ‘The principles guiding the development of information tech-
nology and systems’ as ‘‫ ’المبادئ الموجهة لتطوير تكنولوجيا المعلومات ونظم المعلومات‬is a lexi-
cal claque where the ST words were rendered into Arabic, preserving the syntactic
norms of the TL. Another example of calque is translating ‫ مشروع برلمان الطفل‬as ‘the
child parliament project’—the ST adjectival word ‘concerned’ was translated to a
verbal phrase (i.e. ‫)تشعر بالقلق‬, which is a transposition. A further example that
explicates the use of Vinay and Darbelnet’s procedures is a segment of text from
Gibran’s Arabic work The Broken Wings (translated by Anthony Rizc Allah Ferris):

Example

Target text Source text

…and my beloved, beautiful Selma is ‫و سلمى – سلمى الجميلة العذبة قد ذهبت إلى ماوراء الشفق‬
dead and nothing is left to commemorate ‫األزرق ولم يبق من آثارها في هذا العالم سوى غصات أليمة‬
her except my broken heart and tomb ‫ فذلك‬.‫في قلبي وقبر رخامي منتصب في ظالل أشجارالسرو‬
surrounded by cypress trees. That tomb ‫القبر وهذا القلب هما كل مابقي ليحدث الوجود‬
and this heart are all that is left to bear (p. 101) ‫عن سلمى كرامه‬
witness of Selma. (p. ix)

In the translation above, there is a modulation in translating ‫و سلمى – سلمى الجميلة العذبة‬
(proper noun + proper noun + adjective + adjective) as ‘my beloved, beautiful Selma’.
Ferris opted to delete the repeated proper noun and to add the adjective ‘beloved’ to
translate ‫العذبة‬. The translation also exemplifies transposition, as the ST expression
‫( ذهبت إلى ماوراء الشفق األزرق‬literally: ‘went to the beyond of the red twilight’) refers to
death. Therefore, the translator rendered it as ‘dead’, which is a transposition that made
the translation lose the aesthetic feature used in the ST. Similarly, ‫ غصات أليمة في قلبي‬was
rendered as ‘broken heart’, which is a transposition.
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 17

Exercises

1. Translate the following text, explaining which of Vinay and Darbelnet’s

strategies were used in translating the text.
New satellite imagery shows that construction on an experimental reactor is
making ‘expeditious’ progress—just three months after the Kingdom
announced plans to build it, according to former director for nuclear inspec-
tions at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Robert Kelley.
Kelley estimated that the reactor could be completed in ‘nine months to a
year’.
The Kingdom has been open about its nuclear program with the IAEA,
which sent a team to Saudi Arabia last July to check on building plans.
It has repeatedly pledged that the program is peaceful. But Crown Prince
Mohammed bin Salman said last year that ‘without a doubt if Iran developed
a nuclear bomb, we will follow suit as soon as possible’ (Source CNN).
2. Explain the differences between oblique and direct translation
procedures.
3. As a translator, what procedures would you attempt first in a given
translation task? Why?
4. Does the employment of specific translation procedures depend on the
type of text? How?
5. Translate the following texts, stating the procedure used in your
translation.
a. There is a big living room in my house.
b. We have two ranch hands, who do everything in the ranch.
c. Amal is my true friend.

2.2.2 Van Leuven-Zwart’s Comparative-Descriptive Model

of Translation Shifts (1989)

Van Leuven-Zwart (1989) proposed a comparative model that aims to carry out
analysis above the level of a sentence. The model is primarily based on Vinay and
Darbelnet’s categorization of direct and oblique translations, and consists of a
comparative model and descriptive model. The comparative model aims to ana-
lyse an ST and its TT at micro levels, or based on microstructural shifts. Van Leu-
ven-Zwart divides texts into comprehensible units, which she called ‘transemes’.
For example, ‘I love my parents so much’ is a transeme because it is a comprehen-
sible unit. Its equivalent transeme in the TL is ‫أنا أحب والدي كثيرا‬. The identified
transeme is compared to what she calls an ‘architranseme’, the invariant principal
meaning of the ST transeme, but does not stand as a full equivalent for the ST
transeme. In the example ‘I love my parents so much’, ‘to love’ is the archi-
transeme. Then, each transeme is compared with its architranseme and the rela-
tionship between the two transemes is recognized (Munday, 2001). If the ST and
TT transemes are found to be synonymous in relation to the architranseme, then it
18 2 Translation Theory

can be deduced that no shift occurred. However, if they are found not to be synon-
ymous, then shifts are assumed to have occurred. The main shifts are modulation,
modification and mutation. Within each main category, there are subcategories.
Table 2.1 explicates these three main categories. Let us consider the following
example and its translation for purposes of clarification (Table 2.2).

Example

I speak English fluently.

‫انا أتحدث األنجلزية‬
With regard to the descriptive model, it is a macrostructural model that aims to
analyse the ST. It refers to the three metafunctions of language: ideational, inter-
personal and textual. The model, however, has drawbacks, as in practice it is diffi-
cult to apply to a long text. Also, tracking shifts does not seem to be easy.

Table 2.1 Transeme and architranseme relationship (based on van Leuven-Zwart’s compara-
tive-descriptive model of translation shifts, 1989)
ST TT
Transeme Speak English fluently ‫انا أتحدث األنجلزية‬
Architranseme To speak ‫أتحدث‬

Table 2.2 Main categories of van Leuven-Zwart’s comparative model (from van Leuven-Zwart
1989, pp. 159–169)
Shift Definition
Modulation One of the transemes corresponds with the
architranseme; however, the other differs either semantically or stylistically. In
the previous example, there is a modulation because the ST has an extra word
that does not exist in the TT; that is, fluently
Modification Both transemes show some form of disjunction (semantically, stylistically,
syntactically, pragmatically, or in some combination of these) compared to the
architranseme
Mutation It is impossible to establish an architranseme, either because of addition, dele-
tion or some radical change in meaning in the TT

2.2.3 Overt and Covert Translations (House, 1997)

House (1997) views equivalence as a relation between an ST and its translation.

In House’s words, translation is doubly bound: on its ST on one hand, and on its
recipient’s communicative condition, on the other hand. She adds that absolute
equivalence is impossible, and that an important term that should be discussed
is ‘invariance‘, which refers to dealing with equivalence according to each indi-
vidual case. Based on situational dimension and functional equivalence, House
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 19

differentiates between two types of translation: overt and covert. Overt trans-
lation focuses on the universal meaning of a text, without addressing the reader.
This kind of translation is employed for translating STs of an established value.
She also considers that the intelligibility of a text depends on the culture of a text.
Hence, according to her, if a text is indigenous, it needs overt translation, which
can be provided through annotations, insertions, or expansions (Venuti, 2004).
This applies to translating the Holy Quran, prophetic hadiths, president’s speeches
and so on. Overt and covert translations are examples of translation approaches (or
global strategies) that deal with the text at the macro level. To achieve this, transla-
tion strategies (local strategies) are always employed. In the case of overt transla-
tion, ST oriented strategies are used, such as borrowing, literal translation and the
like. The following is an example of overt translation:

Example

ST TT
The Fatah-led Palestinian Authority in the ‫ التابعة لكل‬،‫اتهمت منظمة هيومان رايتس ووتش قوات األمن‬
occupied West Bank and Hamas authori- ‫ باستخدام التعذيب‬،‫من السلطة الفلسطينية وحركة حماس‬
ties in the Gaza Strip routinely arrest and ‫ ضد منتقديها‬،‫الممنهج والتهديد واالعتقاالت العشوائية‬
torture peaceful critics and opponents, ‫ومعارضيها‬
Human Rights Watch says.

As seen in this example, the translation preserves the overtones and undertones of
the ST. To maintain the ST features in the translation, borrowing was employed;
for example, borrowing ‘Human Rights Watch’ as ‘‫’منظمة هيومان رايتس ووتش‬. Literal
translation was also employed throughout the text.
Covert translation, by contrast, makes translation equal to a ST in the target
culture. In other words, a translated text will appear to be original and not a mere
translation. Thus, in covert translation, the ST and its culture are not specifically
addressed. The most important consideration is to convey the ST message in a
functional manner. This approach can be used to translate novels, drama and such
texts. The following is an example of covert translation low:

Example

ST TT

Source: Alice in Wonderland and its translation by Amira Kiwan

20 2 Translation Theory

In the example above, the ST was adapted in the TL to sound natural and idio-
matic. For example, ‘get very tired’ was idiomatically translated as ‘‫’بدأت تضيق ذرعا‬.
Similarly, ‘she had peeped into the book’ was translated metaphorically as
‘‫’ألقت نظرة خاطفة‬. Adaptation was used in the translation to make the TT sound idio-
matic.
Based on the distinction between overt and covert translation), House proposed
a quality assessment model that offers criteria with which to assess a translation.
The model, which was revised in 2015, is based on Halliday’s Systemic-Func-
tional Theory (for details, see House’s Translation Quality Assessment: Past and
Present, 2015). The model is based on the fact that texts have functions, and those
functions should be conveyed in the translation. Therefore, the ST and the TT are
compared to find any mismatches between them. These mismatches can be dimen-
sional or non-dimensional. Dimensional mismatches result from pragmatic errors
that are pertinent to language users and language use. In contrast, non-dimensional
mismatches are mismatches between the ST and TT at the denotative level, and
they may breach the TL linguistic system. Non-dimensional mismatches are more
serious than dimensional ones. The final qualitative judgement on the translation
will then be based on the matches and mismatches between the ST and the TT, as
the functional components of the two texts will be compared. In this regard, it is
important to draw the attention of readers to the fact that functional equivalence is
possible only in covert translation. In contrast, overt translation is always depend-
ent on the SL culture, which makes functional equivalence difficult to achieve.
Overt and covert translations are approaches of translation that encompass many
translation procedures or strategies.

Exercise: Examine the STs provided below and their translations, and explain
whether the approach used in the translation is overt or covert

ST TT
1. The Philippines government has previously ‫ نفت الحكومة الفلبينية‬،‫وفي وقت سابق‬
dismissed claims of human rights abuses, saying ‫ وقالت إن‬،‫اتهامات بانتهاك حقوق اإلنسان‬
President Duterte had employed ‘lawful use of ‫الرئيس دوتيرتي استعمل ’االستخدامالمشروع‬
force’ against threats to the country. Eritrea has ،‫للقوة‘ ضد التهديدات التي تتعرض لها الفلبين‬
also strongly denied such allegations, and insists ‫ وتصر‬،‫كما نفت إريتريا بشدة تلك االتهامات‬
that it treats its citizens well ‫على أنها تحسن معاملة مواطنيها‬

Exercise

What is the difference between overt and covert translation?

1. In what types of text are we likely to adopt the overt translation approach? Why?
2. In what types of texts are we likely to adopt the covert translation approach?
Why?
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 21

3. Do you believe that overt and covert translation approaches lie at the
extreme ends of a range or on a continuum? Why? Why not?
4. House (1997, 2001, 2015) proposed a translation quality assessment model:
explain this model. Do you think that this model can be used to assess any
translation? Why? Why not?

2.2.4 Jakobson’s Equivalence (1959)

Jakobson (1959), a Russian linguist who studied linguistic meaning and equiva-
lence in meaning between different languages, observed many differences among
languages. He stated that meaning of any linguistic sign (i.e. word) can be con-
sidered a further translation of this sign. For example, the word ‘bachelor’ can be
converted into a more explicit sign, such as unmarried man. Jakobson differenti-
ated between three types of translation: intralingual, interlingual and intersemiotic.

1. Intralingual translation refers to rewording, using signs of the same language;

in this type of translation, another less or more synonymous word is used or cir-
cumlocution is employed in the absence of a synonym. Jakobson further men-
tions that each code unit (i.e. word) should be translated by an equivalent
combination of code units; for example, every ‘bachelor’ is an ‘unmarried
man’, and every ‘unmarried man’ is a ‘bachelor’. In intralingual translation, a
word is replaced by another that is a near synonym or near equivalent. For
example, celibate and bachelor can be near synonyms, but they are not com-
plete synonyms because every celibate is a bachelor, but not every bachelor is a
celibate. This applies to Arabic as well. A case in point would be ‫ ضياء‬and ‫نور‬,
which are near synonyms but they are not complete synonyms. The first word is
always used to refer to the light accompanied by heat, while the latter refers to
light without heat. These nuances in meaning, however, may not be realized by
laymen language users. In Arabic, teachers of translation attempt to develop the
skill of making their students able to choose the right word, which is not an
easy task because Arab students use their own local dialects in everyday lan-
guage use and, therefore, using standard Arabic is thought-provoking. Students
frequently know how to translate an ST into their local dialect, but they find it
arduous to translate their local dialect into standard Arabic.
2. Interlingual translation refers to replacing a verbal sign with another sign but of a
different language; on this level of translation, there is no full equivalence between
code units. Translation substitutes only messages but not code units. Similarly, on
the level of interlingual translation, there is no full equivalence between code
units, while messages may serve as adequate interpretations of alien code units or
messages. For example, the word ‘cheese’ in English does not have a complete
equivalent in the Russian language. Since languages converge in some linguistic
features and diverge in others, it is common to find complete equivalents for some
lexemes, phrases and clauses in some cases but not in others. Most universal lexis
(e.g. love, hate, play, laugh) and expressions (e.g. take upon one’s shoulders) have
22 2 Translation Theory

equivalents across many languages. For example, ‘take upon one’s shoulders can
be translated into Arabic as ‫يأخذ على عاتقه‬. However, some other expressions and
lexis are culture-bound and, therefore, equivalents do not exist. Take for example
the English expression ‘baby shower’, which does not have an equivalent expres-
sion in Arabic. However, some expressions that sound culture-bound may not be
and may have equivalents in other languages. For example, though the word ‘bap-
tism’ sounds culture-bound, it has an equivalent in Arabic as ‫التعميد‬.
3. Intersemiotic translation or transmutation refers to transmuting verbal to non-verbal
signs. In intersemiotic translation, the focus is on the message more than wording
(Jakobson, 1959/1966/2000). To clarify, a text (verbal sign) may be translated as a
picture, or dancing, or any other type of performance (non-verbal sign). This applies
to particular types of text, such as the translation of advertisements. So, intersemi-
otic translation implies a kind of creativity on the part of the translator and, there-
fore, a single text can be translated creatively and differently by different translators.

Jakobson stresses that full equivalence between any two linguistic codes (i.e.
words) is not achievable (Jakobson, 1959/2000). He does not view translation as
impossible; however, he argues that there are linguistic limitations that make full
equivalence impossible. Jakobson’s views are similar to Vinay and Darbelnet, in
that he considers translation is possible in spite of cultural and linguistic limitations.

Exercise: How would you translate the following words between English and Arabic?
And into which type of Jakobson’s types of translation do they fall?

1. ‫التقوي‬
2. ‫عيد الفطر‬
3. ‫الحج‬
4. ‫الرؤية الشرعية‬
5. ‫رؤية الهالل‬
6. Baby shower
7. Halloween
8. State of Union Speech

2.2.5 Dynamic Equivalence and Formal Equivalence

(Nida, 1964)

In 1964, Eugene Nida proposed his new notion of equivalence, which is considered
the first attempt to differentiate between pragmatic equivalence, on the one hand,
and linguistic and cultural (i.e. formal) equivalence, on the other hand. Nida pre-
sented two new types of equivalence; dynamic (which he later ‘functional’) and
formal equivalence (Munday, 2008). Nida developed dynamic equivalence Bible
translation theory. He proposed his own scientific approach to dealing with mean-
ing, equivalence and translatability. His theory is based on theoretical concepts and
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 23

terminology from semantics and pragmatics, and from Chomsky’s work on syntac-
tic structure. According to Nida, a word acquires its meaning through context and
can create varying responses according to culture (Munday, 2008).
Nida divides equivalence into two types: formal equivalence (or formal corre-
spondence) and dynamic equivalence.

1. Formal equivalence or formal correspondence is inclined to be more ST struc-

ture oriented. It is more concerned with the message in the TL, but it should
match as closely as possible the different elements in the SL (Nida, 2000). This
type of translation is called ‘gloss translation’, in which the translator seeks to
produce the closest approximation of the original. This translation requires a
reader to have moderate familiarity with the subject matter (Shakernia, 2014).
Yet, this type of translation has a drawback as it requires several footnotes to
make the text fully understandable. This type of translation orients the target
audience more towards the SL culture (Munday, 2008; Panou, 2013).
2. Dynamic equivalence is more concerned with the effect of the principle equiv-
alent, where the relationship between the receptor and the message should be
significantly the same as that which existed between the original receptors and
the message (Nida, in Venuti, 2004.). Dynamic translation is receptor oriented
and, therefore, aims at complete naturalness of expression, which requires
adaptations of grammar, lexicon and cultural references. Moreover, in dynamic
equivalence, the foreignness of the ST is reduced to an extent that this method
was criticized by culture oriented theorists (Munday, 2008). Nida proposed
certain techniques that could be applied for the purposes of adjustment in the
translation of texts: additions, subtractions,
(1) Additions: Nida postulates that additions are legitimate in translation, and
he states that additions can be of many types and for many purposes:
• Filling out elliptical expressions: it may be necessary to render some ST
ellipted expressions into explicit expressions to clarify the ST meaning
and to avoid ambiguity.
• Obligatory specification: this may be needed to clarify misleading refer-
ences; for example, pronouns.
• Additions required by grammatical restructuring: this may occur when
voice, word class, and reportedness are changed or restructured in the
TT. For example, changing indirect speech to direct speech, or passive
voice to active voice, is likely to result in amplifications and additions.
• Amplification from implicit status to explicit status: some implicit
semantic elements may be needed to be rendered explicitly, which
results in additions
• Answers to rhetorical questions: sometimes rhetorical questions should
be translated by providing answers to them in the TT, due to differences
between an SL and a TL.
• Classifiers: sometimes classifiers are a part of language, though they are
redundant and their translation should observe that. For example, trans-
lating Sohag into ‫( محافظة سوهاج‬Sohag governorate).
24 2 Translation Theory

• Connectives: repetition of segments of a preceding text is sometimes a

part of the nature of language, and they help keep the text coherent.
• Categories of the TL: when a TT has certain categories that are obligatory
or optional, it is necessary to add the obligatory categories in the transla-
tion and decide on the optional ones. For the optional categories, a trans-
lator may need to make explicit what is implicit in a ST, and this can be
done by using doublets (using semantically supplementary expression).
(2) Subtractions: they can be applied to many cases, such as repetitions, specifica-
tion of reference, conjunctions, transitionals, categories, vocatives, and formulae.
a. Repetitions: semantic supplementary expressions may be tautologi-
cal in some languages and thus deleting one of the two expressions
may be necessary; for example, in translating ‘answered and said’ as
‘answered’—deleting ‘said’, which is redundant. However, repetitions
that serve a specific purpose, such as ‘emphasis’, should not be deleted
in the translation.
b. Specification of reference: some languages do not require repetition of
a specification of reference; therefore, translating them should observe
that.
c. Conjunctions: conjunctions in some languages are used in a way that is dif-
ferent from the language into which a piece is being translated. For exam-
ple, conjunctions in Arabic may not need to be rendered into English.
d. Transitionals: they mark the transition from one unit to another. For
example, in the Arabic language, ‫‘( اذه‬this’) marks a transition from one
story to another and thus, in translation, it may be deleted.
e. Categories: some categories can be deleted in a translation. It is not
necessary to reflect all categories in a translation. For example, English
sometimes uses the plural form with proper nouns to refer to the fam-
ily of a specific person, which may not be needed to be reflected when
translated into Arabic.
f. Vocatives: Arabic, for example, makes use of the vocative particle,
which may be deleted when translated into English.
g. Formulae: some formulae may not be rendered into a TT; for example,
translating ‫ أصحاب الفخامة و السمو‬as ‘their excellencies’.
3. Alterations: Nida argues that any acceptable translation must undergo altera-
tions in sounds, categories, word classes, order, clause and sentence structure,
semantic problems involving single words and semantic problems involving
exocentric expressions.
4. The use of footnotes: they are used to explain cultural and linguistic differences
between an SL and a TL, and to add information that is necessary for historical
and cultural understanding of the ST concepts.
5. Adjustments of language to experience: a translator may need an old use of lan-
guage to a modern use of language based on experiences.

After having discussed the techniques that may be need for adjustment purposes,
Nida expounded the translation procedures that a translator needs to employ in his
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 25

process of translation. These procedures are broadly divided into technical and
organizational procedures. Technical procedures entail three phases: analysis of
the SL and the TL, careful study of the SL text, and determination of the proper
equivalents. Since the first phase is clear, I will now discuss the other two phases
of technical procedure, which relate to:

1. Analysis of the lexico-grammatical features of the immediate unit: this includes

analysis of all the semantic aspects of a ST: the syntactic, referential and emo-
tive.
2. Discourse context: it is important to understand any stretch of language in rela-
tion to its specific and general context.
3. Communicative context: it is important to analyse the communicative context
of an ST. this may include the background of the ST (e.g. the author), the way
it is written, the factual background of the ST and the circumstances that con-
tributed to the production of the ST.
4. Cultural context of the SL.
5. Cultural context of the TL.

Determination of equivalents is the second phase of technical procedure and can

be conducted by decomposing the ST into its simplest semantic structure and
recomposing such semantic structures into their nearest equivalents in the TL.
Overall, Nida stresses that correspondence in meaning must have priority over
correspondence in style, if an equivalent effect can be achieved (Panou, 2013). Nev-
ertheless, Nida’s theory was criticized by a number of translation theorists, such as
Van den Broeck and Larose, who questioned the measurability of the equivalent
effect (Shakernia, 2014). Whang (2004) also criticized Nida’s theory by proposing
the same question, which is how a translator can ascertain that his translation can
induce the same effect as the SL text. Nida’s theory is also rejected by religious
groups, who maintain that the word of God is sacred and unalterable; hence, making
necessary changes to attain dynamic equivalence is unacceptable (Gentzler, 2001).

Exercise

1. Translate the text below and explain into which of Nida’s translation
approaches your translation falls. Support your answer with examples
from your translation.
Saudi Arabia detained seven activists, including two US citizens, on Thurs-
day, sources tell CNN. It was the kingdom’s first sweep of arrests targeting
dissidents since the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi last year.
A State Department official confirmed to CNN on Friday that two US citi-
zens were arrested in Saudi Arabia, but declined to provide names.
‘We can confirm that two US citizens were arrested in Saudi Arabia’, the
official said. ‘We have already engaged the Saudi government in this regard.
Due to privacy considerations, we have no further comment.’
26 2 Translation Theory

Salah al-Haidar, a dual Saudi-US citizen, who is the son of prominent wom-
en’s rights defender Aziza al-Yousef, was one of those arrested, according
to two sources familiar with the events. Yousef was temporarily freed from
a prison in Riyadh last month and is on trial along with 10 other women’s
rights defenders (Source CNN).
1. Explain which of Nida’s types of equivalence is more frequently applied
by translators, including yourself. Why?
2. One concept that was proposed by Nida is ‘principle equivalent’. What
does this concept mean? Was this concept accepted by translation theo-
rists? Do you think that this concept is practical and achievable?

2.2.6 Communicative and Semantic Translation

(Newmark, 1981, 1988)

Newmark’s theory of translation is pertinent to the linguistic theory of translation,

as he follows Catford’s formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence; however, he
calls them ‘semantic translation’ and ‘communicative translation’ (As-Safi, 2011).
In translation, Newmark (1988) underscores the importance of referring to the tex-
tual level, referential level, cohesive level and the level of naturalness at the pro-
cess of translation. Textual level implies transposing the SL grammar and lexis
into TL equivalents. Referential level refers to keeping in mind the referential level
of a sentence during translation (i.e. what each sentence or word means in con-
text). Thus, referential level and textual level should go hand-in-hand. Cohesive
level denotes the smooth moving from one idea to another without breaking the
textual cohesion, so that a translator could observe the structure and moods of a
text. Naturalness is how to make a TT appear to be an original text. However, it is
beyond doubt that Newmark’s levels cannot be applied to any text. For example, a
sacred text such as the Holy Quran is not expected to be translated into a naturally
equivalent TT. Understanding Newmark’s four levels gives in-depth understanding
as to how the translation process should take place.
Newmark (1981), in his seminal work: Approaches to Translation, differenti-
ated between two main types of translation: communicative translation and seman-
tic translation. Communicative translation is TT oriented, whereas, semantic
translation is source text oriented. Communicative translation attempts to pro-
duce a similar effect on its readers to that of the original text, whereas semantic
translation attempts to render as closely as possible the semantic and syntactic
structures of the second language to allow the exact contextual meaning of the ST.
Thus, as Newmark argues, semantic translation is more detailed and complex, and
tends to over-translate to reach the nuance of meaning in the ST.
Newmark states that, of the different methods of translation (which will be dis-
cussed shortly) only semantic and communicative translations, out fulfil the two
aims of translation: accuracy and economy. In addition, a semantic translation
is written at the author’s linguistic level and is used for expressive texts. On the
other hand, communicative translation is written at the readership’s linguistic level
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 27

and is used for informative texts. Semantic translation is similar to Nida’s formal
equivalence, as it attempts to provide the semantic and syntactic structure of the
TL to achieve the exact contextual meaning of the ST. Communicative translation,
on the other hand, agrees with Nida’s dynamic equivalence, as the effect on the TL
audience should be equivalent of that effect of the SL. However, Newmark rejects
the idea of producing an equivalent effect, which was proposed by Nida, since
it is impossible to render the same effect in terms of space and time (Newmark,
1981/1982). Additionally, Newmark believes that literal translation is not only the
best, but is the only valid method of translation (Newmark, 1981). Newmark adds
that, if the two forms of translation (communicative and semantic) are in conflict,
then communicative translation should win out.
Newmark (1981) mentions some problems that are faced by translators. Among
these problems is the intention of a translator. In other words, the intention of a
translator affects their translation, whether they aim to convey the different aspects
of an ST, or want to convey the intended meaning alone. Another problem in trans-
lation is the quality of the writing and the authority of the text. Newmark (1998)
mentions that a well-written text needs a translator to observe the nuances between
words, stating that lexis is the major problem in translation, and not in grammar.
Lexis includes words, collocations and fixed phrases, neologisms and ‘unfindable’
words. He adds that problems may arise either from a lack of understanding of
lexis, or from finding them difficult to translate. A lack of understanding of the
lexis of some languages results from a translator’s inadequate knowledge of the
different meanings of a word (i.e. physical, technical, figurative, or colloquial
meanings). The difficulties in finding equivalents or translating an ST vary from
one text to another. These variations between texts led Newmark to differentiate
between translation as a scholarship, research, or art. A translation, according to
Newmark, may be considered as scholarship when an SL text is challenging and
demanding, or requires interpretation or additional explanations. Thus, translating
the Holy Quran is a scholarship rather than a profession.

Functions of Texts
Newmark, before discussing the different strategies of translation, discussed the
functions of sentences and the different types of text. He correlates the functions of
sentences to the types of text. Newmark lists six types of function in sentences: the
expressive function, the informative function, the vocative function, the aesthetic
function, the phatic function, and the metalingual function. The expressive function
relates to the meaning intended by the speaker, writer, or author; literary texts tend
to be a good example of expressive texts. The informative function relates to facts,
reality and knowledge, such as articles, newspapers, and scientific papers. The voc-
ative function is referred to sometimes as a pragmatic translation, as they are aimed
at the addressee or the readership. A typical example of vocative function texts
includes persuasion, propaganda or publicity writings. The aesthetic function is
concerned with pleasing senses through sounds, images, or figures of speech; one
example of this is translating poetry. However, in literary texts such as poetry, there
is always a conflict between the aesthetic function and the expressive function.
28 2 Translation Theory

Newmark (1988), unlike many other scholars, differentiates between transla-

tion methods and translation procedures. According to him, translation methods
deal with the text as a whole, while translation procedures deal with sentences and
the smaller units of language. He identified eight methods of translation: word-for-
word, literal, faithful, semantic, adaptive, free, idiomatic and communicative.

1. Word-for-word translation: In this method of translation, the SL is translated

into a TL, keeping the same word order and the words translated singly by their
most common meanings, out of context. This rarely happens between English
and Arabic due to the syntactic and semantic differences between the two lan-
guages. It is mostly valid between close languages.
2. Literal translation: This is similar to word-for-word translation, the differ-
ence being that SL grammatical constructions are converted to their nearest TL
equivalents.
3. Faithful translation: This tries to render the closest and most precise contextual
meaning to that of the original while, at the same time, observing TL grammati-
cal structures.
4. Semantic translation: This is similar to faithful translation; however, it attempts
to keep the aesthetic value of the SL text.
5. Adaptation: This is the freest form of translation, whereby the SL is adapted to
the TL culture. This method observes the TT culture; hence, it is applicable in
translating poetry and plays
6. Free translation: This attempts to produce the content of the ST text without
its form. It is usually longer than the original ST because it paraphrases the ST;
that is why it is called interlingual translation.
7. Idiomatic translation: This reproduces the message of the original but may dis-
tort nuances of meaning by preferring colloquialisms and idioms where these
do not exist in the original.
8. Communicative translation: This attempts to render the exact contextual mean-
ing of the original in such a way that both content and language are readily
acceptable and comprehensible to the readership.

As seen in the discussion above, some of these methods are source oriented: word-
for-word translation, literal translation, faithful translation and semantic trans-
lation. Others are TT oriented: adaptive translation, free translation, idiomatic
translation and communicative translation. However, as mentioned earlier, New-
mark believes that the only acceptable methods of translation are semantic transla-
tion (ST oriented) and communicative translation (TT oriented).
In relation to translation procedures, Newmark (1988), in A Textbook of Trans-
lation, proposed several general procedures to translate from SL to TL. Pro-
cedures, unlike methods, deal with the lowest levels of translation, such as the
sentence, clause and word. These procedures (or strategies) are: transference,
naturalization, cultural equivalent, functional equivalent, descriptive equivalent,
synonymy, thorough translation, shifts or transposition, modulation, recognized
translation, translation label, compensation, componential analysis, reduction and
expansion, and paraphrase.
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 29

1. Transference: This is the process of transferring an SL word to a TL text; this

translation process is similar to Catford’s transference, Vinay and Darbel-
net’s borrowing, and Harvey’s (2000) transcription. One of the methods used
to apply transference is transliteration. When necessary, a functional equiva-
lent should be added between brackets to clarify the meaning of some
semi-cultural words. For example, translating ‫ جهاد‬as jihad, or jihad (striving).
Other examples include words such ‫فالفل كشري برسيم كنافة القاعدة حالل‬, which can
be translated as falafel, koshri, berseem, al-Qaeda and halal. Examples from
English to Arabic include translating supermarket, radio and mobile
as ‫سوبر ماركت راديو موبايل‬.
2. Naturalization: This procedure succeeds transference and adapts the SL word
first to the normal pronunciation, then to the normal morphology (word forms)
of the TL. For example, translating ‫ سعودة‬as ‘Saudization’. Other examples
include translating televise, hallucination and hallucinate as ‫يتلفز و هلوسة يهلوس‬.
3. Cultural equivalent: This involves translating an SL cultural word by an
approximate TL cultural equivalent. This is not an accurate translation; it is
merely an approximation. For example, translating ‘ups and downs of life’
as ‫ ;صروف الدهر أو تقلبات الزمن‬and ‘he hit the nail on the head’ as ‫أصاب كبد الحقيقة‬.
4. Functional equivalent: This requires the use of a culture-free word, with a
new specific term; it neutralizes or generalizes the SL word. It is a kind of cul-
tural componential analysis. It is also the most accurate way of translating
(i.e. deculturalizing) a cultural word. This method can be employed when
there is no equivalent for an SL word. It occupies a middle position between
the SL culture and the TL culture. It can result in under-translation when the
SL word is translated into a TL word (on a one-to-one basis), or over-transla-
tion when translation occurs several times. For example, translating ‘it is rain-
ing cats and dogs’ as ‘‫’إنها تمطر بغزارة‬. Further examples are as follows:

Example

a. A piece of cake ‫سهل جدا‬

b. It is not my cup of tea ‫ال يروق لي‬
c. It is a pain in ass ‫مولم و محرج‬

5. Descriptive equivalent: This procedure is the explanation of the meaning of a

cultural term in several words. For example, translating ‫ بنت مخاض‬as ‘she-
camel in 2nd year’. Another example is translating the Arabic word ‫ بعثة النبي‬as
‘The Prophet’s appointment as messenger’. Other examples are as follows:
a. ‫ التقوى‬fear of Allah and abiding by His rules
b. ‫ عقيقة‬an occasion when an animal slaughtered in celebration of the birth of
a new-born
c. ‫ جنابة‬a state when someone has ejaculated and has not yet done ghusl.
d. ‫ غسل‬taking a bath, preferably in a ritual manner, after ejaculation or having sex.
30 2 Translation Theory

6. Synonymy: This is the use of a near TL equivalent in a context. This method

is employed when literal translation does not work properly, or when a lex-
ical item is not important for componential analysis (i.e. economy precedes
accuracy). This method should be used when a compromise is needed
because it can result in poor translation. For example, translating ‫ جح‬as ‘pil-
grimage’ for the purposes of economy. Other examples include the following
words:
a. ‫ صالة‬prayer
b. ‫ صدقة‬optional alms
c. ‫ زكاة‬compulsory alms.
7. Thorough translation: This translation procedure is calque or loan translation.
This kind of translation can be applied to acronyms and international names.
However, this translation procedure should only be used when the term is
common and can be recognized. For example, translating FAO as ‫الفاو‬. Other
examples include translating UNESCO as ‫اليونسكو‬.
8. Shifts or transposition: This procedure involves changing the grammar from
the SL to that of the TL; for example, changing a singular word in SL into a
plural word in the TL, due to the syntactic constraints of each language. This
procedure of translation is similar to Catford’s shifts. For example, translating
the Quranic word ‫ أصواف‬as ‘wool’. Other examples may include translating
‘Paradise’ as ‫الجنة‬. There are many other examples that exist between English
and Arabic. Consider the following examples:

Example

a. Ahmed is smart ‫أحمد ذكي‬

b. I have two blue cars ‫لدي سيارتان زرقاوتان‬

9. Modulation: ‘a variation through a change of viewpoint, of perspective and

very often of category of thought’ (Newmark, 1988, p. 89), which is similar
to Vinay and Darbelnet’s modulation. For example, using positive for dou-
ble negative, or double negative for positive. For example, translating the
negated French sentence ‘I1 n’a pas hesite’ to the positive English sentence
‘He acted at once’. This example indicates optional modulation. However,
sometimes, modulation is mandatory, as in the case when there is a lexi-
cal gap. For example, shallow can be only translated into ‘peu profond’ due
to there being no lexical equivalent in the French language. In translation
between English and Arabic, modulation is used extensively. For example,
translators tend to render the passive voice in English into active voice in
Arabic, because of the differences between English and Arabic in terms
of passivization. Arabic prefers the use of the active voice, while English
prefers to use the passive voice in many situations. Consider the following
example:
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 31

ST: It has been reported by informed sources that the Egyptian presi-
dent will run for presidency this year.
TT: ‫و قد أفادت مصادر مطلعة أن الرئيس المصري سيترشح ألنتحابات الرئاسة هذا العام‬
As seen in the example above, the passive voice in the English ST was translated
into the active voice in the Arabic TT as it sounds more idiomatic in this form.
Other modulation procedures include: abstract for concrete, cause for effect, one
part for another, reversal of terms, active for passive, intervals and limits, and
change of symbols.
(a) Abstract for concrete: for example, translating ‘sleep in the open’ (which
is abstract) as ‫( ينام في فندق جميل‬which is concrete);
(b) Cause for effect: for example, translating ‘You’re quite a stranger’ (which
is a cause) as ‘‫( ’انا لم أرك من قبل‬which is an effect);
(c) One part for another: for example, translating ‘from cover to cover’ as
‫;من أول صفحة الى اخر صفحة‬
(d) Reversal of terms: for example, translating ‘health insurance’ as
‫;تأمين على المرضى‬
(e) Active for passive: see the example given above regarding the Egyptian
president;
(f) Intervals and limits (in terms of space and time): for example, translating
‘I will come back in a minute’ as ‫ساعود في غضون عدة دقائق‬. In this example,
the time (‘minute’) was translated into ‫( دقائق‬minutes);
(g) Change of symbols: this can happen in the translation of fixed expres-
sions; for example, translating ‘you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours’ as
‫قدم السبت تجد األحد‬.
10. Recognized translation: this is used for translating official and institutional
documents that are accepted officially by institutions; for example, translating
‘BBC’ as ‫هيئة األذاعة البريطانية‬, or translating ‘student support fund’ as
‫ صندوق معين‬in the Omani context.
11. Translation label: this can be applied to translating new institutional terms, as
a translator attempts to create a new equivalent term in the TL for a new emerg-
ing term in the SL or the TL. For example, the ST word or acronym ‫ داعش‬was
first translated as ‘ISIS’ and subsequently other translators rendered it as ‘ISIL’.
12. Compensation: this occurs when a loss of meaning, sound effect, metaphor, or
pragmatic effect in one part of a sentence is compensated either in another part of
that sentence, or in a contiguous sentence. This procedure can be used in translat-
ing poetry and drama. For example, ‘Parting is such sweet sorrow’, a line of dia-
logue from Shakespeare, was translated as ‫ حزن يكتسي إشراقة األفراح‬،‫ هذا وداع الحب‬by
Anani.
13. Componential analysis: this implies the splitting up of a lexical unit into its
sense components, often anything from one up to as many as four transla-
tions; for example, translating ‫ ذاكر‬as ‘rememberer of Allah’. Another example
is the word ‫متقي‬, which can be translated as ‘fearful of Allah’.
32 2 Translation Theory

14. Reduction and expansion: this occurs when one lexical item is translated into
more than one item (expansion), such as when translating ‘linguistics’ into the
French ‘science linguistique’; or two items are reduced to one item (reduc-
tion), as when translating the French ‘science linguistique’ into ‘linguistics’.
Another example is translating ‫ يتوضا‬as ‘take ablution’.
15. Paraphrase: this is explanation of the ST item(s); for example, translating ‫تيمم‬
as ‘The Islamic act of dry ablution using sand or dust, which may be per-
formed in place of ritual washing if no clean water is readily available, or if
one is suffering from moisture-induced skin inflammation or scaling’.
After his discussion of these 15 of translation, Newmark proposes further proce-
dures, which are inferred from the procedures already presented. These procedures
are: couplets, and notes, additions and glosses.

1. Couplets: this procedure implies combining two (i.e. couplets), three (i.e. tri-
plets), or four (i.e. quadruplets) of the previous procedures to solve one transla-
tion problem, and can be used in translating culturally bound terms.
2. Notes, Additions and Glosses: these additions can be inserted within the text
between parentheses (brackets); they can be also added at the bottom of the
page, or at the end of the chapter, or even at the end of the book.

Exercise: Based on Newmark’s procedures, what translation procedures would

you adopt to translate the following lexis and expressions between English
and Arabic

1. ‫كأن على رؤسهم الطير‬

2. ‫ يوم لك و يوم عليك‬.‫الدنيا دول‬
3. Don’t judge a book by its cover.
4. I will do this when pigs fly.
5. You can’t sit on the fence. You should decide whose side you are on.

Exercise: Translate the text below, explaining the procedures you have
employed in translating it, based on Newmark’s procedures

The government seeks to open up Oman’s skies to facilitate more international

airlines and offer more options for travellers.
Air travel between Oman and Turkey could become affordable after the
recent signing of a pact between the two countries at the International Com-
mission for Air Navigation (ICAN) 2018 Conference in Kenya on air services
negotiations, said a statement from the Public Authority from Civil Aviation
(PACA).
The agreement opens up air space to operate any number of flights between
both countries as against the current limit of 28 weekly flights.
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 33

Exercises

1. Explain the following translation dichotomies, including in your answer

examples from your own work.
A. Overt vs. covert translation;
B. Semantic vs. communicative translation;
C. Direct vs. oblique translation;
D. Formal correspondence vs. dynamic equivalence.
2. Jakobson differentiated between three types of translation. Explain these
types, highlighting the difference between them and the other translation
dichotomies proposed by other scholars.

Exercise: Match Newmark’s communicative and semantic translation

methods, with the translations of the following English source texts

English STs and their translations Newmark’s

translation method
1. Ultra-processed foods linked to increased cancer risk
‫يعتقد بعض العلماء أن األطعمة المعالجة قد تزيد من خطر اإلصابة‬
‫بالسرطان‬
2. Theresa May faces ‘meaningful vote’ on her deal.
‫تواجه ماي تحديا صعبا إلقناع أعضاء البرلمان بالتصويت ألنسحاب‬
‫بريطانيا من االتحاد األوربي‬
3. Trumps postpones his State of the Union speech to an
unknown date
‫ترامب يؤجل خطابه عن حالة االتحاد ألجل غير معروف‬
4. Two heads are better than one
‫ما خاب من استشار‬
5. Egyptians demand that Mubarak open the Rafah cross-
ing-point into Gaza, break off diplomatic relations with
Israel, and even send weapons to Hamas
ُ ‫ويطالب المصريون أن يفتح مبار‬
‫ وأن يقطع‬،‫ك معب َر رفح المؤدي إلى غزة‬
‫ بل وأن يرسل بالسالح إلى حماس‬،‫العالقات الدبلوماسية مع إسرائيل‬
6. Carl Tiflin and Billy Buck came back in the evening and
they all had supper. After supper, Jody sat by the fireplace
and listened to his father
، ‫ وبعد ذلك‬.‫ وتناول الجميع العشاء‬،‫رجع كارل تيفلن وبيلي بك في المساء‬
‫جلس جودي قرب الموقد واستمع لوالده‬

2.2.7 The House, Nida, and Newmark’s Theories in a Nutshell

As discussed, it seems that most of the theories presented share certain features.
For example, Nida’s functional or dynamic equivalence is identical to Newmark’s
communicative translation, and may sound close to House’s covert translation.
However, House’s covert translation focuses more on the culture of the ST and
the TT, rather than the effect on a reader (Newmark, 2009). Similarly, Newmark’s
34 2 Translation Theory

semantic translation and House’s overt translation are almost identical, the only
difference being that Newmark places greater emphasis on the possibilities of lit-
eral translations (Newmark, 2009). Newmark (1991) mentions that texts should be
dealt with according to their nature; for example, the more important and serious
the text, the closer to the ST should be the translation, and vice versa. Most of
these theories, in spite of using variant terms, focus on differentiating between two
main types of equivalence: pragmatic equivalence and formal equivalence. Prag-
matic equivalence aims to communicate the message of the ST in the norms and
culture of the TT, hence making translation invisible. By contrast, formal equiva-
lence aims to convey the message of the ST with all of its linguistic and cultural
values (Venuti, 2004).
Overall, most translation approaches are two- or three-poled theories (Munday,
2008). For example, Catford (1965) identifies three ranks of translation—word-for-
word, literal and free translation, while Newmark distinguishes between two major
approaches to translation—semantic and communicative translation (Newmark, 1981).

Exercises

1. The translation theories mostly revolve around two or three poles.

Explain.
2. How similar and different are the translation dichotomies proposed by
House, Nida, Jakobson, and Vinay and Darbelnet?

2.2.8 Form-Based and Meaning-Based Translation

(Larson, 1998)

Larson (1998) identifies two main kinds of translation: form-based translation and
meaning-based translation. Within these two basic taxonomies, Larson makes
another subdivision in the form of a continuum that comprises seven kinds of
translation ranging from the ‘very literal’ translation to the ‘unduly free’. He states
that ‘unduly free’ translations are unacceptable translations for most purposes.
One reason for the unacceptability of unduly free translations is that they add extra
information that does not exist in the ST; hence, they change the meaning pre-
sented in the SL text (Larson, 1998). Similarly, he believes that literal translation
is not acceptable because it does not communicate the meaning; it is a mere string
of words translated. Additionally, Larson mentions idiomatic translation—which
reproduces the meaning of the SL in the natural form of the receptor language—as
the only acceptable translation; it reproduces the message of the ST in the TT
without retaining the form. Although Catford, Newmark, and Larson use different
theoretical terms, these terms are almost the same in application. An example of
literal translation that is not accepted by Larson is translating ‘Heaven forbid that
he should leave because of me!’ as ‫السماء تمنع أن يغادر بسببي‬. It should, however, be
translated idiomatically as ‫ال قدر هللا أن يغادر بسببي‬.
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 35

Exercises

1. What is the difference between meaning-based and form-based translation?

2. According to Larson, which type of translation is accepted? Why?
3. What are the differences between literal translation, free translation and
idiomatic translation? Support your answer with examples from your own
work.

2.2.9 Halliday’s Typology of Equivalence

Halliday (2001) argues that translation equivalence is the central organizing con-
cept of translation. Halliday proposes his typology of equivalence in terms of a
systematic functional theory. This typology centres on three vectors: stratification,
metafunction and rank, as illustrated in Fig. 2.1.
The first vector—stratification, according to Halliday—refers to the organiza-
tion of language in ordered strata. Such strata include the phonetic/phonological,
lexico-grammatical, semantic and contextual levels of the multi-coding system of
language. These strata do not carry the same value in equivalence in translation.
For example, semantic equivalence is more important than lexico-grammatical
equivalence. Hence, each stratum should be valued according to the specific trans-
lation task at hand. By way of illustration, let us look at two examples:

Example

A. Trump will deliver his State of the Union speech next Sunday.
.‫سوف يقوم ترامب بالقاء خطابه عن حالة األتحاد يوم األحد‬

In example A, equivalence has been achieved at the lexico-grammatical level as

well as the semantic level because the TT retains the same lexis and grammar of
the ST. In the same way, the message and meaning of the ST is conveyed in the TT.

Example

B. It is raining cats and dogs.

.‫إنها تمطر قططا و كالبا‬

In example B, equivalence was achieved at the lexico-grammatical level but not at

the semantic level. The lexis and grammar of the ST were retained in the TT but
the meaning was lost. Let us assume that the translation of example B was
‘‫’إنها تمطر كأفواه القرب‬. In this case, semantic equivalence was achieved; however,
lexico-grammatical equivalence was not achieved, and this explains why semantic
equivalence is the most important type of equivalence.
36 2 Translation Theory

Fig. 2.1 Halliday’s parameters of language

With regard to Halliday’s (2001) third vector—which is discussed first here due
to it having certain similarities with the first vector—which is rank, it deals with
how the formal strata (i.e. phonology and lexico-grammar) are organized. In other
words, it is concerned with how clause complexes, clauses, phrases, groups, words
and morphemes are organized. However, rank deals with morphemes, words,
clauses and sentences. Similarly, to strata, equivalence in ranks will differ in value.
It is expected that the higher value will be assigned to the highest formal level (i.e.
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 37

the clause). Put differently, if clauses are kept constant or equivalent, it does not
matter a great deal if the words vary. This, however, cannot be considered a rule
that can be applied to all texts. To return to example B: if it is translated as
‫إنها تمطر كأفواه القرب‬, equivalence is achieved at clause level, but not at word level.
Again, equivalence at clause level is the most important, which, in turn, affects
equivalence at the semantic level.
As for the second vector (i.e. metafunction), it includes three categories of
function that all languages share: ideational, interpersonal and textual. Ideational
function is about the ‘content function of language’ (Halliday, 2007, p. 183). Ide-
ational function refers to the use of language to express and talk about our expe-
rience of our inner and outer worlds. In this sense, language is a cording system
that deals with the relation between man and nature. In sum, this function serves to
communicate new or unknown information to the audience. The ideational func-
tion mainly consists of ‘transitivity’ and ‘voice’ (Wang, 2010). The transitivity
system is composed of six processes: material process, mental process, relational
process, behavioural process, verbal process and existential process. Let us con-
sider a variety of examples that explain these processes.

A. The material process

Material processes relate to doing or making things happen. This is expressed by
different types of verb, especially dynamic verbs (e.g. play, kill, hit), and is used
in the present progressive. So, if a verb does not allow the progressive aspect, it
means that the process cannot be material. Material processes refer to those pro-
cesses in which an action is done. Thus, they include an action verb, actor and
goal; for example, ‘Ahmed is eating meat’ (Zhuanglin, 1988). In this example,
‘Ahmed’ is the actor, ‘is eating’ is the verb, and ‘meat’ is the goal. In this process,
there are six main participants:
Actor is the person who is performing the action;
Goal refers to what is affected by the action;
Scope refers to what remains unaffected by the action;
Attribute refers to a quality ascribed or attributed to an entity;
Client refers to whom/what the action occurs, and usually takes the preposi-
tion ‘for’;
Recipient refers to the receiver of goods or services and usually takes the prepo-
sition ‘to’.

Examples of the material process

1. Ahmed was playing tennis yesterday.

2. The doctor gave some medicines to Ali.

In example 1, the actor is ‘Ahmed’, while the goal is ‘tennis’. In example 2, the
actor is ‘the doctor’, while ‘Ali’ is the recipient.
38 2 Translation Theory

B. The mental process

The mental process is more concerned with emotions, feelings, affection, cogni-
tion, perception, or desire. It is realized through the use of verbs such as ‘believe’,
‘love’ and ‘think’. The participants in the mental process are ‘the senser’ and ‘the
phenomenon’. The ‘senser’ is the term used to refer to the person who experiences
the feelings, emotions, or experience. ‘Experience’, on the other hand, refers to the
mental process felt or experienced by the ‘senser’. Mental processes express per-
ceptions or mind-related activities; for example, ‘I love Egypt’. In this example,
the senser is ‘I’, while the experience is the feeling towards Egypt.

C. The relational process

There are two types of relational process: attributive (e.g. ‘Ali is clever’) and iden-
tifying (‘A horse is an animal’). In a relational process, the progressive aspect is
restricted. With regard to verbal processes, these include exchanging information
processes and they encompass all the modes of indication or process; for example,
‘Ali told Ahmad that Ali was absent today’. The participants in the verbal process
include the ‘sayer/the addresser’, the ‘receiver/the addressee, the ‘verbiage’; for
example, ‘the charts show a growth in economy’.

D. The behavioural process

Behavioural processes refer to psychological or physiological processes; for exam-
ple, ‘I breathe’. In behavioural processes, the main participant is the one behaving,
and the second participant (if any) is the behaviour. These are mostly intransitive
situations, and can be deemed to be a combination of mental and material pro-
cesses; for example, ‘the manager gave a black eye to the employee who came late’.

E. The existential process

Existential processes refer to the existence of something and are usually connected
with the verb ‘be’; for example, ‘there is a student in the class’ (Zhuanglin, 1988).

The process in a nutshell

• The existential and behavioural processes usually have only one participant.
• Mental processes are mostly used either in the simple present tense or the past
tense.
• The relational process must include two participants. In the relational-attribu-
tive clause, the participants are generally not reversible, or at least the gram-
matical functions are fixed while they are in the relational-identifying clause.
Reversibility includes the exchanging of positions, as well as passivization.
• The verb ‘be’ is used as the main verb in relational or the existential processes.
• Sometimes, the language is used figuratively; therefore attention needs to
be paid to the intended meaning; for example, ‘the road runs along the river’
shows a relational process and not a material process.
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 39

Interpersonal function
Interpersonal function, on the other hand, refers to the use of language to inter-
act with others, and to establish and maintain relations with them. It also implies
the use of language to influence people, to please them, or to anger them. Lan-
guage, in this sense, is a medium between individuals (Halliday, 1971). Mood and
modality are typically used to express the interpersonal function. For example, if a
speaker uses an imperative mood, he is assuming that a listener will obey the com-
mand; for example, ‘leave’. Modality embodies the intermediate ranges between
the extreme positive and the extreme negative (Wang, 2010). Modality can express
the speaker’s negative or positive judgement of a topic. Put differently, modality is
related in a direct way to the social functions of language. It can express different
semantic implications, such as permission, request, obligation, necessity, possibil-
ity and so on. Halliday views modality as a form of participation by the speaker in
the communicative act (Mishra, 2009).

Textual function
Textual function refers to how language functions as a system that organizes mes-
sages in a common manner. In this sense, it explains how the different messages
fit logically with those around them, and with the wider context in which the talk-
ing or writing is takaing place. For Halliday (1971, p. 334), ‘Language makes
links between itself and the situation; and discourse becomes possible because the
speaker or writer can produce a text and the listener or reader can recognize one’.
Unlike the previous two vectors, equivalence at the metafunctional level is not
hierarchical: there is no hierarchical relationship among the three metafunctions.
However, Halliday adds that ideational metafunction has the highest value in
translation, in the sense that translation equivalence is usually defined in ideational
terms, and that if a TT does not match the ST ideationally, it cannot be considered
a translation. Halliday concludes that a good translation is the text that is equiva-
lent in regard to the aforementioned linguistic features, which are the most valued
in the given translation context.

Exercises

1. Halliday proposes a typology of equivalence that is based on three vectors.

What are these three vectors? Support your answer with examples from your
own work.
2. Explain the process involved in the sentences below. Then, translate these
sentences, explaining whether the ST processes were maintained in the TT.
• She’s moving tomorrow.
• He was better after undergoing surgery on Saturday.
• Record profits were announced last week.
• Record profits were announced last week.
• We’re getting married next year.
• Next year, the museum is expecting even more visitors.
40 2 Translation Theory

• I was playing golf yesterday.

• Yesterday the atmosphere at the factory was tense.
• Ali donated ten thousand dollars to the Orphanage House in Cairo.
• My new wife is tall and blonde.
• I hate hypocrites.
3. Translate the following text highlighting the three vectors proposed by Halli-
day, and the extent they are maintained in the translation.

The death of a former president in most countries around the world would nor-
mally make headline news domestically. But not the case for Egypt, where
ex-President Mohammed Morsi died at the age of 67 on Monday after collaps-
ing in a courtroom during his trial on spying charges.
His sudden demise barely registered in Egyptian media—in fact, papers there
prioritised Egypt’s hosting of the forthcoming 2019 African Cup of Nations on
its front pages, and instead relegated Morsi’s death to the inside pages usually
designated for criminal affairs.
The state-run channels failed to even mention that Morsi—the first democrati-
cally-elected leader in Egypt—was a former president, instead referring to him
with his full name. (BBC: last accessed 19 June 2019).

2.2.10 Catford’s Typology of Equivalence

Catford is a British linguist who based his theory of translation on those of Firth
and of Halliday (Manfredi, 2008). Catford’s book, entitled A Linguistic Theory of
Translation (1965/1978), is his most famous book in translation. He, following
Halliday, deemed language as working functionally on a variety of levels (i.e. pho-
nology, graphology, grammar, lexis) and ranks (i.e. sentence, clause, group, word,
morpheme) (Manfredi, 2008). Catford (1965) argues that translation between any
two languages is possible, and that equivalences can exist with any kind of spa-
tial, temporal, social, or other relationship between them. He states that relations
between languages are bi-directional; however, the translation process is unidirec-
tional (i.e. from ST to TT).
Meaning, as seen by Catford, is the ‘property of language’, in the sense that
each language has its own distinctive meaning. Thus, values of meaning are not
carried over in translation. Catford (1965, p. 43) states: ‘That is to say, the “val-
ues” of TL items are entirely those set up by formal and contextual relations in the
TL itself. There is no carry-over into the TL of values set up by formal or contex-
tual relations in the SL’. Catford states that the only condition in which SL mean-
ings can be carried over into a TT is when using transference which, according to
Catford, is not a translation.
Catford argues (1965, p. 44) that transference can even occur at the level of
grammar, whereby ‘SL grammatical items are represented in the TL text by qua-
si-TL grammatical items deriving their formal and contextual meanings from the
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 41

systems and structures of the SL, not the TL’. Such transference implies the super-
imposition or creation of new terms that basically belong to the SL. Catford sug-
gests that this can be done through the use of old English, numbers, or the creation
of new items. However, Catford mentioned that transference does not imply that
the total meaning of the ST will be transferred.
Catford states (1965, p. 50) that SL and TL items can never linguistically have
the same meaning. However, they can function in the same situation and thus, in
total translation, the SL and TL items are interchangeable in a given situation. Cat-
ford states that ‘translation equivalence occurs when an SL and a TL text or item
are relatable to (at least some of) the same features of substance’. Catford catego-
rizes translation in terms of extent, levels and ranks. According to Catford, there
are two types of translation in terms of extent (extent refers to the syntagmatic
sense of the SL text that is submitted to translation): full translation and partial
translation. In a full translation, every part of the SL is translated to the TL; in
partial translation some parts of the SL text are left out in the translated text in
the TL, perhaps because they are untranslatable. Partial translation, as Catford
states, is not that easy as it may seem at first sight because some parts will remain
untranslatable. This kind of translation applies to literary texts, and surely applies
to the translation of canonical and authoritative texts such as the Holy Quran.
In relation to the levels of language involved in translation, Catford (1965, p.
22) differentiated between total translation and restricted translation. Total transla-
tion, to quote Catford, is ‘replacement of SL grammar and lexis by equivalent TL
grammar and lexis with consequential replacement of SL phonology/graphology
by (non-equivalent) TL phonology/graphology’. Thus, according to this definition,
replacement occurs only between grammar and lexis, while phonology and graph-
ology are not included. Restricted translation, on the other hand, is ‘replacement
of SL textual material by equivalent TL textual material, at only one level’. Cat-
ford stresses the importance of using ‘textual material’ in his definition because
not always the whole ST is translated to TT; sometimes it is only a process of
replacement, at other times simply the transference of SL material into TL text.
Thus, in restricted translation, SL grammar may be translated by equivalent TL
grammar, without replacement of lexis, or SL lexis is translated by TL lexis, with-
out replacement of grammar.
In terms of rank, Catford classified translation according to the grammatical
hierarchy, at which level equivalence is established. For example, in total trans-
lation, equivalence is assumed to be achieved at every grammatical unit (word,
clause, sentence). However, there could be a rank-bound translation, in which
equivalence can only be achieved at one level. For instance, in word-rank-bound
translation, we only select equivalents at the same rank (i.e. word).
In relation to equivalence, Catford (1965) differentiated between formal cor-
respondence and textual equivalence. In formal correspondence, any TL category
occupies the same place in the economy of the TL as the given SL category occu-
pies in the SL. In textual equivalence, any TL text (or portion of text is deemed to
be equivalent to a given SL text (or portion of text). The following is an example
of formal correspondence:
42 2 Translation Theory

Example

• Democrats are trying to oust Trump in 2020.

• 2020 ‫يحاول الديمقراطيون اإلطاحة بترامب في‬

In this example, the TT occupies the same place in the economy of the TL as the
given SL category occupies in the SL. The lexis used in the TT is even less than
the lexis used in the ST, conveying the same meaning intended in the ST. The fol-
lowing is an example of textual equivalence below:

Example

• I am 20.
• ‫ عاما‬20‫أبلغ من العمر‬

In this example, the TT underwent a shift, as some words were added to clarify the
meaning; however, the meaning of the TT was equivalent to the meaning of the ST.
In general, when formal correspondence and textual equivalence diverge, a
‘translation shift’ takes place. The term ‘translation shift’ was first introduced by
Catford (1965) (Ni, 2009), who introduced the term ‘shift’ to replace the thorny
term ‘equivalence’. Shifts are the process of departing from the formal correspond-
ence in the process of going from the SL to the TL. Shifts—which can be in lexis,
style, or grammar—are able to provide translation that is pragmatic, functional and
communicative. Catford states that it is impossible for translation to occur between
the levels of phonology and graphology, or any of them, on the one hand, and
grammar and lexis, on the other hand. He states that ‘relationship to the same sub-
stance [is] the necessary condition of translation equivalence’ (Catford, 1965,
p. 141). The only possible shifts are from grammar to lexis and vice versa. Catford
proposed two kinds of shift: level and category. A level shift refers to the proposi-
tion that something that is expressed by a linguistic level in one language (e.g.
grammar) can be equivalently expressed at a different linguistic level (i.e. through
vocabulary or different grammar) in another language. For example, the imperfect
verb in Arabic (e.g. ‫ )يتناهون‬is mostly translated into past simple or past continuous
in English (e.g. ‘forbade each other’). Another example is translating the English
present progressive into lexis such as ‫االن‬. Consider the following example:

Example

What are you doing? (‫ماذا تفعل )االن‬

I am watching TV. ‫أشاهد التلفزيون‬

In this example, the continuity aspect can be only translated by adding the word
‫االن‬, either in the question or its answer (for more details, refer to the translation of
tense in Chapter 4).
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 43

Category shifts are divided into four types: structural shifts, class shifts, unit or
rank shifts and intra-system shifts. Structural shifts imply a change of grammatical
structure; for example, in a translation between English and Arabic, there is often
a shift from AMH (article + modifier + head) to AHM (A + head + qualifier); for
example, ‘The White House’ (MH) is translated into ‫( البيت األبيض‬MHQ). Due to
the syntactic differences between English and Arabic, there are always structural
shifts in the translation of most texts.
Class shifts include a change of a part of speech, which could occur as a part of
a structural shift. For example, an adjective in the ST may have a noun as its
equivalent in the TT; for instance, translating ‘a medical student’ into Arabic as
‫ طالب طب‬or ‫طالب في كلية الطب‬. The class shift occurred from the adjectival word
‘medical’ into the noun word ‫طب‬, or to the adverbial clause ‫في كلية الطب‬. Similarly,
the noun ‫ الحق‬can be translated to the adjective ‘the real’, and the verb ‫ آ َمنُوا‬can be
rendered as a noun; for example, ‘believers’.
Unit shifts or rank shifts include replacing units of different size, such as a sen-
tence, clause, group, word or morpheme. To clarify, a word may be translated into
a sentence or phrase in the TL. A case in point would be translating the ST word
‫ أعتكاف‬into a string of words; for example, ‘staying in the mosque for a specified
period of time as an act of worship’.
With regard to intra-system shifts, these occur when an SL and TL have roughly
the same systems, but the translation involves choosing a non-corresponding item
in the TL (Catford, 1965). For example, English and French have the same system
with regard to plurality (singular vs. plural); however, in translation a singular Eng-
lish word may be translated into a plural one or vice versa. A case in point is trans-
lating the singular English word ‘advice’ into the plural French ‘des conseils’, or
the plural English word ‘trousers’ into the singular French ‘le pantalon’. Another
case of the intra-system shift is the article system in English and French. Although,
the two languages share the same system of articles, this is not the case in transla-
tion. Similarly, Arabic and English share some features; however, in translation, a
translator may opt to translate the ST item into a non-equivalent item in the TL.
This can happen so as to maintain idiomaticity in the TL. For example, the English
sentence ‘He is a teacher’ is likely to be translated into Arabic as ‫هو مدرس‬, where
the indefinite article is not translated. Catford states that it is linguistically difficult
to give a TL and SL the same meaning. Yet, we can consider two items in the SL
and the TL as equivalents when they are able to function in the same situation. In a
total translation, the items in the SL and the TL should be interchangeable in a
given situation. Another example is translating ‫ العلماء ورثة األنبياء‬into ‘scholars are
inheritors of prophets’, whereby the definite article in Arabic was left out in the
TT. A common example of intra-system shifts is the passive case, whereby the pas-
sive voice in English is often translated into the active voice in Arabic.

Exercises

1. What is the difference between level shifts and category shifts?

44 2 Translation Theory

2. Can a translation of a single phrase or lexeme convey the use of more than
one type of shift?
3. Translate the following text into Arabic, explaining the translation shifts
employed in your translation.

For decades, he was known as a godfather of excess. The wealthiest man in the
world for many years, the Sultan of Brunei knew how to spend the vast riches that
flowed from the oil deposits bestowed upon the tiny Southeast Asian nation he
controls with absolute power.

2.2.11 Mona Baker’s Typology of Equivalence

Mona Baker’s typology of equivalence is outlined in her seminal work In Other

Words, in which she discussed the different problems of equivalence in transla-
tion between any two languages. Equivalence has always been identified as a cen-
tral component of most of the definitions of translation (e.g. Catford, 1965; Nida,
1959; Wilss, 1982). However, other theorists avoided using the word ‘equivalence’
(e.g. Frawley, 1984; Jakobson, 1959). According to Baker (2004), the notion of
equivalence can be defined either normatively (i.e. the relation between source ele-
ments and target elements that are assumed to be achieved), or descriptively (i.e.
discovering a relation of equivalence between the source and target elements).
Baker (2004) argues that the notion of equivalence is problematic due to its
being circular—circular, here, in the sense that we define translation in terms of
equivalence, and we assess the quality of translation in terms of equivalence. Baker,
however, underscores the importance of this notion due to its interrelatedness with
other theoretical notions in the field of translation. For example, faithfulness to
the original is related to the desirability of equivalence. Also, the notion of ‘shift’,
which is an important notion in normative approaches, is based on an assumption of
equivalence that may or may not occur. Shift, as a notion, postulates the existence
of an ‘invariant’. Invariant refers to the extent of closeness to achieving equivalence
in translation; invariants ‘are not or should not be affected by shifts in the process
of translation’ (Baker, 2004). A further notion that is related to equivalence is the
notion of the ‘translation unit’. Translation units are usually discussed in relation
to what units (words, clauses, phrases, sentences and so on) are to be considered
as equivalents, or what translators in real life work with to produce an ‘equivalent’
version of the ST (Baker, 2004). Baker concludes that the notion of equivalence is
so important because other theoretical notions of translation are interlinked with it;
and that this is why the notion of equivalence should not be discarded or discred-
ited. However, one question that may surface is which perspective of equivalence
should be considered the most appropriate in translation. There are many perspec-
tives of equivalence. Equivalence can be regarded either as a semantic category, in
terms of the equivalence effect, or in terms of functional equivalence.
Baker (2004) explains that the notion of equivalence as a semantic category,
which is drawn from the representational theory of meaning, is static and close
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 45

Table 2.3 The gradual erosion of the notion of equivalence in translation studies
Source text/target text Same meaning
Source text/target text Same effect on respective readers
Source text/target text Same function
Target text Independent function, specified by commission
Target text Independent function acquired in the situation in which it is received
Source Baker (2004)

to the interlingual synonyms. It is dictated by the content of the ST, rather than
the communicative situation. This semantic view of equivalence, as Baker states,
is rejected in most disciplines, and it is not applicable or tenable in translation.
Another understanding of equivalence can be in terms of the ‘equivalent effect’,
which postulates producing the same effect on target readers as the ST produced
on its readers. This approach originated with translators of the Bible (Beekman
and Callow, 1974; Larson, 1998; Nida, 1964; Nida and Taber, 1969). This notion
of ‘equivalent effect’ resulted in the existence of other notions, such as ‘receptor’
as opposed to ‘target’ language, and dynamic equivalence as opposed to ‘formal
equivalence’ (Baker, 2004). Although this notion of ‘equivalent effect’ sounds
interesting and easier than the semantic notion of equivalence, it was also subject
to much criticism. Baker (2004) questions the measurability of achieving equiv-
alent effect. In addition, the effect is variable among different people and even a
person may perceive the same TT differently on a second reading. This notion of
equivalent effect seems to be imaginary: a translator cannot predict the effect of
his translation on its readers. Another problem with this notion, as mentioned by
Baker, is that a translator cannot identify with certainty the intention of the author
of the ST, especially in the case of a temporal gap between the ST and the TT.
Another point is that a translator’s job is to interpret text, rather than understand it.
Baker concludes that this notion can be hardly verified.
Another notion of equivalence is ‘functional equivalence’, which arose in the
1970s and 1980s (Baker, 2004). This notion postulates that translation should
produce an ‘equivalent message’ to that of the ST in its TT. In the 1980s, a new
notion of equivalence emerged, especially in Germany: the functional equivalence
of skopos. Skopos was established by Vermeer and Reiss, according to which they
regard the target of the translation as what matters (see this chapter, for details).
Baker concludes that there has been a gradual shift away from the notion of equiv-
alence over the course of time. Baker (2004) summarizes the debate on the notion
of equivalence shifted away in Table 2.3.
Baker (1992) identified various types of equivalence: equivalence at word level,
equivalence above the word level, textual equivalence and grammatical equivalence.

1. Equivalence at word level

The written word, as defined by Baker (1992/2005), is any sequence of letters with
an orthographic space on either side. Baker rejects the idea that the word is the
46 2 Translation Theory

smallest unit of meaning; she argues that meaning can be carried by more or less
than a word; for example, the ‘-er’ in builder has a meaning (i.e. the person who
does the job of building). Baker states that there is no one to one correspondence
between orthographic words and their meanings, either within the same language
or across languages.

2. Non-equivalence as a problem
Vocabulary, as seen by Baker (1992/2005), is a set of words that belong to seman-
tic fields. These semantic fields are abstract concepts. However, one problem with
these semantic fields is that, in terms of categorization, they are not that simple.
For example, there are some words (e.g. ‘just’, ‘only’) that can be filed under any
semantic field. Baker states that semantic fields can only work well with words
that have propositional meanings. In relation to the importance of semantic fields
in studying translation, Baker states that understanding the structures of semantic
fields is important in translation for two reasons: the first reason is either to assess
the value of a given item in a lexical set, or to understand the differences between
the structuring of semantic fields in the ST and TT; the second reason is to under-
stand the hierarchical classification of words in terms of hypernyms and hyponyms.
According to Baker (1992), it is important to distinguish between lexical items
and units of meaning to achieve good translation. Meanings, furthermore, differ in
the orthographic words that represent them from one language to another. A mean-
ing of one orthographic word in one language may be represented by several
orthographic words in another language, and vice versa. For instance, ‫ كسوف‬and
‫ خسوف‬in Arabic have only one equivalent representation in English: ‘eclipse’.
Another example is the English word ‘camel’, which is represented by many
words in Arabic (e.g. ،‫ جمل‬،‫ ناقة‬،‫لبون بنت زاملة‬, among others) (AL-Maani Online
Dictionary, n.d.). Consequently, this means that there is no one-to-one correspond-
ence between orthographic words and elements of meaning within or across lan-
guages. As mentioned earlier, Baker discussed equivalence at a variety of levels;
these concepts are unpacked in the following sections.

3. Non-equivalence at the word level

Equivalence is a crucial notion in translation between any two texts. However,
there are many causes that contribute to the problem of a lack of equivalence.
Baker categorizes the most common non-equivalences between languages at the
word level into 11 types: cultural specific concepts, SL concepts are not lexical-
ized in the TL, semantically complex SL words, different distinctions in mean-
ing in the SL and the TL, the TL lacks a superordinate, the TL lacks a specific
term (hyponym), interpersonal or physical perspective differences, differences in
expressive meaning, differences in form, differences in frequency and purpose of
using specific form and the use of loan words in the SL.
1. Cultural specific concepts: concepts that are culturally bound. There are many
examples of this, such as the Arabic words ‫غسل‬, ‫ولي العروس‬, ‫طهارة‬, ‫أعنكاف‬, ‫حج‬
‫وضوء‬, ‫صالة‬, ‫صيام‬, ‫جنابة‬. In English, Baker (1992) gave examples of words that
are culture-specific, such as ‘Speaker’ of the House of Commons.
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 47

2. SL concepts are not lexicalized in the TL: Some concepts may be well-known
and perfectly well-understood in the TL; however, they are not lexicalized
in it. For example, the word ‘standard’ in the sense of ‘ordinary’ is perfectly
well-understood in Arabic. However, it does not have an equivalent. Another
example is ‘landslide’, which is understood in many languages, but not lexi-
calized.
3. Semantically complex SL words: Sometimes one morpheme expresses a set
of meanings that may not be expressed by sentences. For example, the Arabic
word ‫ التقوى‬needs a sentence to convey its meaning.
4. Different distinctions in meaning in the SL and the TL: Languages can vary in
the number of distinctions in meaning they contain. For example, Arabic
makes a distinction in meaning between ‫ بخيل‬and ‫شحيح‬. The word ‫ بخيل‬is used
to refer to a person who does not like to spend money on others, which is
equivalent to ‘stingy’. However, the word ‫ شحيح‬refers to a person who does
not like to spend money on others or on himself. The distinction in meaning
between the two words does not exist in English. Another example is that Ara-
bic makes a distinction in meaning between ‫ خسوف‬and ‫كسوف‬. The word ‫خسوف‬
is used to refer to a lunar (of the moon) eclipse, while the word ‫ كسوف‬is used
to refer to a solar (of the sun’ eclipse. English does not make this distinction
by means of a single word; ‘eclipse’, is used to refer to both lunar and solar
eclipses. Arabic is rich with such examples. Take, for instance, how, when
referring to camels, the Arabic language makes a distinction in meaning
between nouns that are based on age. Arabic names for a camel that are based
on its age are diverse and many (e.g. ‫ مخلول‬،‫ لكي‬،‫ أبن لبون‬،‫)ابن مخاض‬. However,
all these words can only be translated into English as a ‘camel’, as English
does not make a distinction in meaning between camels based on age.
5. The TL lacks a superordinate: one language may have a superordinate for an
item, while another, instead, has many hyponyms. For example, mounting a
camel has two hyponyms in Arabic that are not represented in English:
‫حرذون‬: refers to mounting a camel with a saddle
‫شذاد‬: refers to mounting a camel without a saddle.
6. The TL lacks a specific term (hyponym): One language may have a hyponym
or hyponyms for an item that does not exist in another language. For exam-
ple, English has many hyponyms for ‘house’: ‘bungalow’, ‘cottage’, ‘croft’,
‘chalet’, ‘lodge’, ‘hut’, ‘mansion’, ‘manor’, ‘villa’ or ‘hall’. However, Arabic
does not have equivalents for these hyponyms. Similarly, the verb ‘jump’ has
many hyponyms: ‘leap’, ‘vault’, ‘spring’, ‘bounce’, ‘dive’, ‘clear’, ‘plunge’
and ‘plummet’. These hyponyms do not exist in Arabic.
7. Interpersonal or physical perspective differences: Physical perspective refers
to the relationship between things or people, which may differ from one lan-
guage to another. For example, Arabic makes differences between maternal
uncle and paternal uncle. In Arabic, there are two words that describe these
relationships, ‫ ;عم و خال‬in English, there is only one word, ‘uncle’.
48 2 Translation Theory

8. Differences in expressive meaning: Words may share denotative meaning in

two languages; however, they may not share the expressive meanings. For
example, the word ‘homosexuality’ is an inherently pejorative word in Arabic,
whereas it is not so in English. The same applies to words such as ‘lesbian’
and ‘gay’.
9. Differences in form: Equivalent forms in an SL and TL are rarely found. For
example, in English, adjectives are derived from verbs by adding certain suf-
fixes (e.g. work vs. workable); however, this is not so in Arabic. Hence, trans-
lation from English to Arabic must change the form to render the meaning,
depending on the context. Similarly, Arabic makes frequent use of prefixes.
A form is changed in meaning by adding or changing a prefix. For example,
the verb ‫‘( فتح‬opened’) can be changed to a different meaning by adding the
prefix ‘‫ ’است‬to become ‫‘ استفتح‬asked someone to open’. Also, in Arabic, the
meaning can be changed by adding infixes, which is not common in English.
For example, the verb ‫‘( أشار‬advised’) can be changed into different words and
different meanings by adding infixes or affixes. It can be changed to: ‫أستشار‬
(‘sought advice’), ‫‘( مستشار‬advisor/consultant/judge’).
10. Differences in frequency and purpose of using specific form: This occurs
when one form occurs with greater frequency—say, it occurs more frequently
in the SL than in the TL. For example, English makes use of ‘-ing’ more than
any other language.
11. The use of loan words in the SL: Loan words sometimes are used in an SL to
add an air of sophistication that may not be transferrable to the TT. For exam-
ple, the English loan word ‘dilettante’ does not have an equivalent in the Ara-
bic language. The use of loan words brings to attention the importance of
avoiding mistranslating the ‘false friends’. For example, ‘demander’ in French
is not an equivalent of ‘demand’ in English. Another example is the word ‫جهاد‬,
which can be either ‫ جهاد دفع‬or ‫جهاد طلب‬. However, the English word ‘jihad’
refers partially to only one type of jihad. Therefore, the English word ‘jihad’
and the Arabic word ‫ جهاد‬are not fully equivalent. Another example is the
word ‘harem’, which should not be confused with the word ‫حريم‬. The English
word is used to refer to ‘a Muslim man, who has several wives or sexual part-
ners living in his house’. Of course, this definition creates a false image in the
minds of non-Muslims, as Muslims cannot have sexual partners without their
being his wives. Anyhow, the English use of the word ‘harem’ should not be
confused with the Arabic word, which means ‘women’.
Non-equivalence problems at word level sometimes overlap. A culture-specific
word is a particularly semantically complex word. Also, some words can fall under
more than one type of non-equivalence. These problems of non-equivalence dis-
cussed require strategies that, according to Baker, are followed by professional
translators to deal with non-equivalence at the word level. These strategies affect
translation as a final product, and they are related to the problems of non-equiva-
lence at the word level.
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 49

4. Strategies followed by translators to overcome non-equivalence

Baker describes eight strategies—though this list may not be exhaustive—that
are used by professional translators for dealing with various types of non-equiv-
alence at the word level. Strategies of translation are particularly important as
some losses in translation can be attributed to employing improper strategies. The
strategies mentioned by Baker are: translation using a more general word (super-
ordinate), translation using a neutral/less expressive word, cultural substitution,
translation using a loan word or a loan word accompanied by an explanation, par-
aphrasing using a related word, paraphrasing using unrelated words, omission and
illustration.

1. Translation using a more general word (superordinate): This is typically used to

deal with non-equivalence at word level, especially when dealing with proposi-
tional meaning. For example, using the English word ‘money’ to render the
Quranic word ‫ورق‬/wariq/, which literally means ‘silver coin’; however, this
kind of strategy does not appear to work with all types of text. Texts such as the
Holy Quran are so precise and accurate that the outcome of using a general
word instead of the specific word is not an appropriate strategy.
2. Translation using a neutral/less expressive word: An example of this is translat-
ing the English word ‘standard’ into Arabic as ‫قياسي‬/qiaasi/, which is less
expressive than the SL word.
3. Cultural substitution: This strategy depends on how much licence has been
afforded to the translator by the commissioner, and the purpose of the transla-
tion. In this strategy, the SL specific item is replaced by a TL specific item that
is considered to create the same effect; for example, translating the English
item ‘Congress’ into the Arabic item ‫مجلس الشعب‬/majlisu ashshaAAb/, to create
the same effect for TL readers.
4. Translation using a loan word or a loan word accompanied by an explanation:
This strategy usually deals with culture-specific items, modern concepts and
buzz words. Thus, the translator sometimes intentionally uses loan words to
introduce the SL culture to the TL culture, rather than merely providing a
descriptive translation. For example, lexical items such as ‫مجاهدين‬/‘muja-
hedeen’/, ‘‫‘ القاعدة‬/al-QaAAidatu/, and ‫فدائيين‬/‘Fedayeen’/were transferred into
English without translation.
5. Paraphrasing using a related word: This strategy is mostly adopted when the SL
word is lexicalized in the TL, but in a different form. For example, the Arabic
Islamic word ‫يتوضأ‬/yatawdda’a/ is usually rendered into ‘do ablution’ or ‘do
wudo’ua’
6. Paraphrasing using unrelated words: This strategy is followed when the SL
word is not lexicalized in the TL. For example, the Arabic word ‫مرابط‬/murabet/
is not lexicalized in English; hence, paraphrasing can be adopted as strategy to
render it. It can be rendered as ‘guarding the borders of a Muslim state’.
7. Omission: This strategy is followed when the meaning can be rendered without
the omitted word. Hence, instead of creating confusion for readers of the TT,
omitting a word or phrase can be an option.
50 2 Translation Theory

8. Illustration: This strategy is followed by translators when the ST does not

have a one-to-one equivalent; the SL word requires considerable elaboration
to be rendered, and hence a picture can render the meaning more accurately.
This strategy is employed in translating advertisements. In fact, the strategies
discussed above overlap, and sometimes a translator may use two strategies
simultaneously. It is also the job of a translator to choose the best strategy for
translating an ST.

5. Grammatical equivalence
Baker defines grammar as ‘the set of rules which determine the way in which units
such as words and phrases can be combined in a language and the kind of infor-
mation which has to be made regularly explicit in utterances’ (p. 83). Baker adds
that grammar is organized according to two dimensions: morphology and syntax.
Languages have wide variations in the different aspects of grammar. These dif-
ferences, which pose the problem of a lack of grammatical equivalence, could be
in number, person, tense, or aspect, among others (Baker, 1992/2001). For more
details and examples, see Chapter 4.

6. Textual equivalence
Baker (1992) follows the model of cohesion in Halliday and Hasan (1976). Halli-
day and Hassan identified five cohesive devices in English, reference, substitution,
ellipsis, conjunction and lexical cohesion. Baker adds that the level of cohesion
differs from one language to another, or even within the same language from one
text to another. However, explicit markers of cohesion contribute to raising redun-
dancy in a text; absence of these markers lowers it.

Exercises

1. Baker (1992/2011) mentioned that non-equivalence at word level occurs for

many reasons. State these reasons, supporting your answer with examples
from your own work.
2. Baker (1992/2011) mentioned that non-equivalence as a translation problem
could occur at the grammatical level. Explain, with examples.
3. Apart from the strategies mentioned by Baker (1992/2011), can you think
of any other translation strategies that you use to deal with the problem of
non-equivalence at the word level?
4. Match the following translation strategies with the suggested translations
(there is one extra strategy):
• Paraphrasing using a related word;
• Paraphrasing using unrelated words;
• Translation using a more general word (superordinate);
• Translation using a loan word;
• Cultural substitution;
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 51

• Translation using a loan word or a loan;

• Omission.

Source and target lexis The translation strategy

1. Knesset
‫مجلس النواب‬
2. ‫يعتمر‬
do umrah
3. ‫لموقوذة‬
‘An animal that is hit fatally’
4. ‫مجاهدين‬
Mujahedeen
5. Pigeon
‫طائر‬
6. White supremacy
‫األعتقاد بسيادة و أستعالء اللون األبيض‬

2.2.12 Koller’s Notion of Equivalence

According to Koller (1979, 1989), equivalence can be ‘denotative’, depending

on an ‘invariance of content’; ‘connotative’, depending on similarities of register,
dialect, and style; ‘text-normative’, based on ‘usage norms’ for particular types of
text; and ‘pragmatic’, ensuring comprehensibility in the receiving culture (Koller,
1979, pp. 186–91; 1989, pp. 99–104). Munday, in his book Introduction to Trans-
lation Studies (2001), mentioned that Koller (1979, pp. 186–191; 1976/1989,
pp. 99–104) differentiates between five types of equivalence: denotative, connota-
tive, text-normative, pragmatic and formal.

1. Denotative equivalence: This is related to equivalence of the extralinguistic

content of a text, or ‘content invariance’.
2. Connotative equivalence: This is related to the lexical choices, especially
between near-synonyms, or ‘stylistic equivalence’.
3. Text-normative equivalence: This is related to text types and the fact that dif-
ferent types of texts behave in different ways; this is close to the work of Kath-
arina Reiss. According to this type of equivalence, the SL and TL vocabulary
leave the same effect on their respective readers.
4. Pragmatic equivalence: Also referred to as ‘communicative equivalence’, this
is oriented towards the receiver of the text or message. This is similar to Nida’s
‘dynamic equivalence’. According to this type of equivalence, the SL and the
TL words have similar orthographic or phonological features.
5. Formal equivalence: This is related to the form and aesthetics of the text, and
includes word play and the individual stylistic features of the ST. It is elsewhere
referred to as ‘expressive equivalence’ and is not to be confused with Nida’s term.
52 2 Translation Theory

2.2.13 Popovič (1976) Types of Equivalence

Popovič (1976) in his dictionary distinguishes four types of equivalence: linguis-

tic, paradigmatic, stylistic (translational) and textual (syntagmatic).

1. Linguistic equivalence: This is found when the SL text and the TL text are
homogeneous at the linguistic level; that is, word-for-word translation; for
example, translating short texts such as ‘I live in Cairo’ into ‫أنا أسكن في القاهرة‬.
2. Paradigmatic equivalence: This occurs when there is equivalence of ‘the ele-
ments of a paradigmatic expressive axis’. Popovič considers elements of gram-
mar as being of a higher category than lexical equivalence; for example,
translating ‘Egypt defeated Israel in 1973’ as 1973 ‫مصر هزمت أسرائيل في‬. In this
example, the syntactic and lexical features of the ST were maintained in the TT.
However, it is difficult to preserve this form in long texts due to the syntactic
disparities between English and Arabic.
3. Stylistic (translational) equivalence: This occurs ‘when there is functional equiva-
lence of elements in both of the SL and TL aiming at an expressive identity with an
invariant of identical meaning’ (Popovič, 1976, p. 33). In other words, the ST mean-
ing is conveyed to the TT, maintaining the expressive meaning. For example, trans-
lating Trump’s expression of ‘Iran’s downing of the American drones is new
wrinkles, a fly in the ointment’ as ‫أسقاط ايران لطائرتين أمريكتين بدون طيار هو زوبعة في فنجان‬.
In this example, the functional equivalence of the ST idiom was maintained, without
preserving the lexical items of it in the TT.
4. Textual (syntagmatic) equivalence: This occurs when ‘there is equivalence
of the syntagmatic structuring of a text, i.e. equivalence of form and shape’
(Popovič, 1976, p. 33). This is quite difficult to achieve between English and
Arabic due to the many differences between the two languages.

Exercises

1. Translate the following texts into Arabic, explaining which of Popovič’s

types of equivalence were applied in the translation.
• His presidential election was just a two-horse race.
• Election fever has started, there’s politics on every channel.
• His scandal will be a political hot potato.
2. Examine the ST and TT below, and explain which of Popovič’s types of
equivalence was applied (Source Reverso online).
ST: We have new wrinkles in the laws of war and accountability. What do
we do with things like unmanned slaughter?
TT: ‫لدينا تصادمات جديدة في قوانين الحرب و مسؤولياتهاما فائدة أشياء مثل مذابح بدون تدخل اإلنسان؟‬
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 53

2.2.14 The Cognitive Approach to Translation

Bell (1991) proposed a cognitive approach to translation, which is based on Hal-

liday’s SFL theory. In an attempt to understand how a translator understands the
meaning of a text, Bell posits that a text is a product of three types of choice and,
therefore, three types of meaning. According to Bell, there are three types of
meaning: cognitive, interactional and discoursal. These three types of meaning
are organized by three metafunctions—ideational, interpersonal and textual—and
they are realized by three language systems—logical, grammatical and rhetorical.
To clarify, the cognitive type of meaning is organized by the ideational function
and realized by the logical system of language; the interactional type of meaning
is organized by the interpersonal metafunction and realized by the grammatical
language system; and the discoursal type of meaning is organized by the textual
metafunction and realized by the rhetorical language system.
Cognitive meaning, which is what the text about, is expressed by the ideational
metafunction, which is represented through the grammatical system of transitivity.
Ideational, as discussed by Halliday, refers to the field (what the text about).
According to Bell, translation is a process of analysing and then synthesiz-
ing. Both the analysing and synthesizing include three major ‘stages’: syntactic,
semantic and pragmatic. The first process—the ST analysis—results in ‘lan-
guage-free semantic representation’ (Bell, 1991, pp. 56–57), which will be then
used as the starting point for its conversion into the TT. Analysis is carried out
through the functional and pragmatic categories of clause structure, propositional
content, thematic structure, register features, illocutionary force and speech acts.
Synthesis, on the other hand, encompasses purpose, thematic structure, style and
illocutionary force before obtaining the syntactic synthesis (Bell, 1991, pp. 58–60,
cited in Manfredi, 2014, p. 17).

Exercise

One of the techniques used to examine the cognitive effect in translation is

‘verbalization’. Based on this statement, translate the following text using a
‘speak aloud’ mode of translation. Then, explain the extent to which this tech-
nique was useful in enhancing the translation process.
The murder of Jamal Khashoggi was ‘gruesome’ but a United Nations report
into the journalist’s killing is ‘flawed,’ Saudi Arabia’s Minister of State for For-
eign Affairs Adel al-Jubeir said Thursday.
In an interview with CNN’s Christiane Amanpour al-Jubeir denied that
Riyadh should accept responsibility for Khashoggi’s murder, and said he dis-
agreed with the findings of a UN rapporteur who laid the blame on the govern-
ment.
‘This is a gruesome murder that took place without authorization, for which
the people who perpetrated (it) are being punished now,’ al-Jubeir said.
54 2 Translation Theory

In a much-anticipated report published Wednesday, UN investigator Agnes

Callamard said that there was ‘sufficient credible evidence’ that Saudi Arabia’s
Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman bears responsibility for Khashoggi’s
killing, and that he should be investigated for it.
Callamard said that Saudi Arabia was responsible under international law
for Khashoggi’s ‘deliberate, premeditated execution,’ and that current sanctions
on some senior officials do not go far enough (CNN, last accessed on 27 June
2019).

2.2.15 Functionalist Approach in Translation

(Non-equivalence Approach)

1. Katherina Reiss
The functionalist approach started in Germany in 1970s and 1980s. Katherina
Reiss looked at a text as the operating level of communication. She borrowed
Buhlerl’s of the classification of language functions. Reiss relates language func-
tions to their corresponding language ‘dimensions’ and to the text types or com-
municative situations in which they are used. The three types of texts are:

A. Informative texts
Informative texts are texts that transfer information, knowledge and opinions log-
ically and referentially. The main focus of communication is topic. Examples of
such types of text are news and scientific articles. The translation of these types
of text should retain the full message of the ST without redundancy. Explicitation
may be used if needed. The translation should be in terms of ‘plain prose’.

B. Expressive texts
This type of text uses aesthetic functions, such as is found in literary works. The
translation of this type of text should maintain the aesthetic and artistic form of the
ST. A translator needs to convey the view of the ST’s author, adopting the identify-
ing translation strategy.

C. Appellative or operative texts

One example of this type of text is found in advertisements. The translation of
such texts should be ‘adaptive’, in the sense that it should create the same effect as
that of the ST on it readers.

D. Audiomedial texts
These are texts that require non-printed media, such as movies and songs. In this
type of text supplementary methods are needed, such as words to translate pic-
tures, or vice versa.
According to Reiss (1971), the quality of a TT is assessed through intralinguis-
tic and extralinguistic criteria. Intralinguistic criteria include semantic, lexical,
grammatical and stylistic features; extralinguistic criteria include situation, subject
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 55

field, time, place, receiver, sender and affective implications. These intralinguis-
tic and extralinguistic criteria vary in terms of value depending on the text to be
translated. For example, in a news text, the semantic value is of greater worth than
any other value. This applies to all texts where the content is of great importance.
Although Reiss postulates that an ST function should be translated to a similar
TT function, she states that in some cases the function of the TT may be different
from the function of the ST. She gives an example of the book Gulliver Travels,
whose function was operative because it was a satire. However, when translated
the translation takes on the form of an ordinary function, and therefore, the func-
tion is expressive.

Relationship between an ST and a TT (Nord, 2005)

After her discussion of fidelity and equivalence between the ST and the TT, Nord
(2005) claims that the only valid way to offer an acceptable notion of equivalence is
to analyse the ST. Producing a functionally equivalent TT, which is based on anal-
ysis of the ST, is one of the purposes of translation. However, Nord considers that
functional equivalence is the exception, and not the normal skopos of translation.
Equivalence in the functional view of translation is not the be all and end all
but, rather, is subordinate to the translation (TT) skopoi (functions). The skopos
of translation is, thus, determined by the function it is intended to fill in the TL.
Fidelity is subordinate to the skopos rule, which may change according to the
needs of the TT. Two concepts need to be clarified here: the concept of fidelity
(intertextual coherence) and the concept of adequacy. The intertextual coherence
or fidelity in the functional perspective of translation is prioritized if it achieves
the functions intended in the TT; however, if it has not been possible to achieve
such fidelity, adequacy and acceptability will be the required standard. Nord
accentuates that a TT that is not based on or bound to a given ST cannot be con-
sidered a translation; rather, it should be considered as cross-cultural consulting
or a cross-cultural technical writing. Hence, the relationship between an ST and
a TT cannot be ignored. Also, if possible, there should be compatibility between
the intention of the ST and the functions of the TT. This compatibility implicates
loyalty to the ST author. Therefore, the job of a translator is double-bound, as he
needs to be loyal to the sender of the ST and, at the same time, should observe the
needs of the TT receiver.

Translating as a form of translational interaction

Communication among humans occurs through intentional actions through which
they communicate interpersonally to convey their messages; this justifies the
importance of action theory in explaining translational communication (Nord,
2008). Nord posits that the communication process occurs between a sender and
a receiver (or addressee) and that it is limited in time and space. In other words,
the translation process is conditioned by historical and cultural dimensions. This
implies that translation does not need to be literal to be accurate. For example,
a translator may diverge from the literal meaning of the ST expressions to more
functionally equivalent TT expressions to convey the intended meaning accurately.
56 2 Translation Theory

Nord differentiates between translation and translational action. The former

refers to what translators do when rendering a text; the latter refers to what goes
beyond translation. In Nord’s words: ‘Translating in the narrower sense always
involves the use of some kind of source text, whereas translational action may
involve giving advice and perhaps even warning against communicating in the
intended way’ (Nord, 2008, p. 17). Nord adds that translational action is inten-
tional and is voluntarily undertaken by the initiator of that action. This intention-
ality may be different from that of the ST originator. In this regard, the initiator or
the person commissioning the translation plays a role in the translational process
and action. The initiator is the person (possibly the client) who starts the trans-
lation process and asks a translator to translate text based on a specific need and
a specific translation brief. The translator also has an important role in the trans-
lational process, as they are the expert in the translational action who acts based
on the request of the initiator. The translator’s role includes the evaluation of the
translation brief economically, ideologically and legally. They are also the person
who checks whether the translation is really necessary and may advise the initiator
not to translate the ST because it does not serve the intended purpose. The transla-
tor may also decide to shorten the ST in the TL (Vermeer, 1986).
Nord (2008) also states that the producer of an ST has a role in the transla-
tion process, as he is the person who produced the text to be translated. In this
regard, Nord makes a distinction between a text producer and a text sender. The
text sender is the person or the institution that uses the text to convey a specific
message; the text producer is the person who creates the ST using his stylistic and
linguistic skills. However, sometimes both the sender and text producer are one
and the same.
Nord (2008) also mentions that the TT receiver has a role, as they are a part of
the translation brief. Nord discriminates between the receiver and addressee. The
receiver is the person or the institution that reads the translated text; the addressee
is the expected receiver from the standpoint of the text producer (i.e. the transla-
tor). Another important factor that should be considered in the translation process
is the TT user, who may use the translation for training, teaching or fun. Nord’s
model seems to be in line with the model proposed by Holz-Mänttäri (1984).
Table 2.4 summarizes the main concepts related to the translation action approach.

Table 2.4 Terms used in the translational action approach

Initiator The company or individual who needs the translation
Commissioner The individual who contacts the translator
ST producer Not necessarily always involved in the TT production
TT producer The translator
TT user Material or sales literature
TT receiver The final recipient of the TT; for example, the students in a TT user’s class,
or clients reading the translated sales literature
Source Holz-Mänttäri (1984, as cited in Munday, 2001)
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 57

Documentary vs. instrumental translation (Nord, 1988/1991)

Nord (1991) differentiates between two types of translation: documentary and
instrumental. Documentary translation ‘serves as a document of a source culture
communication between the author and the ST recipient’ (Nord, 1991, p. 72). It
is ST oriented, in the sense that the reader of the TT knows that what they read
is a translation. Strategies employed to apply this documentary approach include
word-for-word translation, literal translation and exoticized translation.
On the other hand, instrumental translation ‘serves as an independent message
transmitting instrument in a new communicative action in the target culture, and is
intended to fulfill its communicative purpose without the recipient being conscious
of reading or hearing a text which, in a different form, was used before in a differ-
ent communicative situation’ (Nord, 1991, p. 73). This type of translation is TT
oriented and, rather than sounding like a translation, the TT sounds as though it
is an original text.. The function of the ST and the TT may, however, be the same.

Nord’s Text Analysis Model

Nord (1997), in her Translating as a Purposeful Activity, proposed a model for
text analysis for translation. She highlights certain important concepts, such as
the translation brief (or commission), the importance of analysing the ST, and the
functional hierarchy of translation problems.

Translation brief
Nord postulates that a translator needs to compare the ST and the TT profiles
based on the translation brief, so as to identify any divergences between the two
profiles. The translation brief should include the text functions, the addressees
(sender and recipient), the time and place of text delivery, the medium (speech and
writing), and the motive (why the ST was written and why it is being translated).

The role of the ST analysis

After the identification of the ST and TT profiles, a translator needs to analyse the
ST in terms of the intertextual factors:

• subject matter;
• content: including connotation and cohesion;
• presuppositions: real-world factors of the communicative situation presumed to
be known to the participants;
• composition: including microstructure and macrostructure;
• non-verbal elements: illustrations, italics, etc.;
• lexic: including dialect, register and specific terminology;
• sentence structure;
• Suprasegmental features: including stress, rhythm and stylistic punctuation
(Nord, 1997, pp. 79–129).

The functional hierarchy of translation problems

Nord provides a functional hierarchy that a translator needs to follow during a
translation task:
58 2 Translation Theory

1. The translator needs to identify the intended function of the translation, which
can be either documentary or instrumental.
2. The translator decides what elements need to be maintained in the TT and what
elements need to be adapted, based on the translation brief provided by the
commissioner.
3. Based on the translation type, the translator decides whether the translation is
source culture oriented or target culture oriented.
4. The translator handles the problems of the text at a lower linguistic level.

Exercise

1. Following Nord’s model of analysis, analyse the following texts suggesting

the appropriate translation strategies. Then, translate the texts.
1. ‫أعلنت وزارة التربية والتعليم والتعليم الفني عن فتح باب التقدم لقبول دفعة جديدة من الطالب‬
‫الذين حصلوا على الشهادة اإلعدادية لاللتحاق بالمدرسة الفنية المتقدمة لتكنولوجيا الطاقة النووية ’بمدينة‬
،‫ من جميع محافظات جمهورية مصر العربية‬2019/2020 ‫الضبعة – محافظة مطروح’ للعام الدراسى‬
‫ وذلك عبر الموقع الرسمي لوزارة التربية والتعليم والتعليم الفني‬،2019 ‫ يوليو‬15 ‫ إلى‬1 ‫في الفترة من‬
.(Youm 7)
2. President Donald Trump approved retaliatory military strikes against Iran on
Thursday before changing his mind, US media report.
The New York Times, citing senior White House officials, says strikes were
planned against a ‘handful’ of targets.
They say the operation was allegedly under way ‘in its early stages’ when Mr
Trump stood the US military down. The White House has so far made no comment.
This comes after Iran shot down a US spy drone.
Tehran says the unmanned US aircraft entered Iranian airspace early on Thursday
morning. The US maintains it was shot down in international airspace.
Tensions have been escalating between the two countries, with the US recently
blaming Iran for attacks on oil tankers operating in the region. Iran has
announced it will soon exceed international agreed limits on its nuclear pro-
gramme.
Last year, the US unilaterally pulled out of a 2015 nuclear deal aimed at curb-
ing Iran’s nuclear activities.
What do US media say?
The New York Times first published details of the apparent planned strikes late
on Thursday night in Washington.
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 59

As late as 19:00 local time (23:00 GMT), it said, US military and diplomatic
officials still expected the strikes on agreed targets, including Iranian radar and
missile batteries, to take place.

Exercise

Examine the ST and TT below, and then analyse the texts explaining whether
the translation is documentary or instrumental. Justify the approach selected by
the translator.

ST TT
‫مثول أمير سعودي أمام إحدى محاكم القاهرة صرحت وكالة‬ Cairo puts Saudi Prince on Trial
‫أنباء الشرق األوسط أنه من المقرر مثول األمير السعودي‬ A SAUDI prince is to stand trial on March 12
‫أحمد بن تركي للمحاكمة يوم الثاني عشر من مارس الحالي‬ because his dangerous dogs mauled a five-year-
‫وذلك عقب قيام كالبه الشرسة بمهاجمة وتشويه وجه طفلة‬ old Egyptian girl while she was playing in the
‫مصرية تبلغ من العمر خمس سنوات بينما كانت تلعب‬ garden of a Cairo hotel. The prosecutor holds
‫ وقد تقرر أن يمثل‬.‫بحديقة أحد الفنادق الكبرى بالقاهرة‬ Prince Ahmed bin Turki Al-Saud responsible
‫األمير أمام المدعي العام حيث يعد مسئوال عما لحق بالطفلة‬ for causing the girl grievous bodily harm. The
‫من ضرر بالغ خضعت على إثره لسلسلة من العمليات‬ victim has undergone a series of operations
.‫الجراحية لمعالجة إصابات وجهها‬ done for facial injuries, the Middle East New
Agency (MENA) said
(Source Translators Avenue)

The skopos theory

There is another approach to translation that is the polar opposite to those men-
tioned hitherto; this approach focuses on the notion of ‘purposes’. Put simply,
translation is designated to achieve a purpose. Basically, this is the approach
adopted by functionalists such as Vermeer (1989). This approach adopts the notion
of non-equivalence. With a few exceptions (e.g. Reiss, 1971), most functionalists
(e.g. Vermeer, 1989) do not believe that equivalence between ST and TT is achiev-
able. According to this approach, the purpose (or communicative skopos), in rela-
tion to the TT is the dominant factor in the translation process and, hence, one ST
can be translated into different TTs to achieve different functions. Skopos theory
centres on the notion that translation is guided by its skopos (or purpose). In sko-
pos theory, the end justifies means. There are three types of purpose in translation:
the purpose of the translator, which may be to earn some money; the communica-
tive purpose, which is the aim of the TT and the target situation; and a particular
translation strategy or procedure. Vermeer (as cited in Nord, 2008) uses four con-
cepts in addition to the term ‘skopos’: aim, purpose, intention and function. Aim
refers to what an agent intends to achieve as a final result; purpose refers to the
provisional stage to achieve the aim; function refers to what the text is intended to
mean from the receiver’s perspective; and intention refers to an aim-oriented plan
of action. Nord differentiates between intention and function as follows:
60 2 Translation Theory

Intention is defined from the viewpoint of the sender, who wants to achieve a certain pur-
pose with the text. Yet the best of intentions do not guarantee a perfect result, particu-
larly in cases in which the situations of the sender and the receiver differ considerably. In
accordance with the model of text-bound interaction, the receivers use the text with a cer-
tain function, depending on their own expectations, needs, previous knowledge, and situ-
ational conditions. In an ideal situation, the sender’s intention will find its aim, in which
case intention and function would be analogous or even identical. (Nord, 2008, pp. 27–28)

Text in skopos theory is just an offer of information, whereby a reader selects what
they consider relevant. To clarify, an ST is an offer of information and, similarly, a
TT is offer of information made by a translator. Hence, there is no point in talking
about conveyance of the meaning of the ST. In other words, the translation process
is guided by the translation brief, whereby a translator selects some parts of the
information offered in the ST to introduce them in the TT. The TT readers then
select what is relevant to them in specific situations. The TT produced should be
meaningful and communicative to the TL readers, which is intratextual coherence.
Another important type of coherence is the intertextual coherence between the ST
information and the TT information. This intertextual coherence depends on the
translator’s interpretation of the ST and the skopos of the translation. This, how-
ever, does not exclude cases where the TT is faithful to the ST, which happens in
the translation of certain literary texts. It may also happen in the translation of the
Holy Quran. Vermeer puts it as follows:

It might be said that the postulate of ‘fidelity’ to the source text requires that e.g. a news
item should be translated ‘as it was in the original’. But this too is a goal in itself. Indeed,
it is by definition probably the goal that most literary translators traditionally set them-
selves. (Vermeer, 1989, p. 197)

According to Pym, ‘skopos’, which means ‘goal’, is the key to the functionalist
approach. In this kind of translation, the translator is more concerned with the
TT—in other words, how to create a communicative translation of an ST, regard-
less of the lexis. Pym sees that, according to skopos theory, a translator should
work hard to convey the intellectual and emotional intent of the ST. Reiss and Ver-
meer (1984) aimed to establish a general translation theory for all texts. The basic
underlying ‘rules’ of the theory of Reiss and Vermeer (1984), as cited in Munday
(2008), are:

1. A trunslatum (or TT) is determined by its skopos.

2. A TT is an offer of information in a target culture and TL concerning an offer
of information in a source culture and SL.
3. A TT does not initiate an offer of information in a clearly reversible way.
4. A TT must be internally coherent.
5. A TT must be coherent with the ST.

These five rules stand in hierarchical order, the skopos rule being predominant.
Thus, translation is viewed as non-directional. In other words, reversibility is not
a prerequisite for good translation. Vermeer and Reiss also underscore the impor-
tance of coherence and fidelity for a successful translation. The coherence rule
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 61

means that the TT must be interpretable as coherent with the TT receiver’s situa-
tion (Reiss & Vermeer, 1984, as cited in Munday, 2008). The fidelity rule merely
states that there must be coherence with the trunslatum. According to the hierar-
chical order of the rules, intertextual coherence is of lesser importance than intra-
textual coherence, which, in turn, is subordinate to the skopos (rule 1) (Munday,
2008, p. 80). Thus, based on skopos theory, the same text can be translated in dif-
ferent ways according to the purpose of the TT and the commission given to the
translator. Therefore, if a text is ambiguous, according to skopos theory it can be
translated literally and then explained in a footnote (Munday, 2008). However, this
theory is criticized as it supports the position that any translation can be justified
if a translator has declared his intention at the beginning of his translation process.
Skopos theory is also is criticized for locating coherence as the least important
rule (Hodges, 2009).
Reiss argues that ‘text’ should be considered as level of equivalence, rather than
the word or the sentence. Reiss links the three functions to their corresponding
language ‘dimensions’ and to the text, types or communicative situations in which
they are used (Munday, 2008). The main characteristics of each text type, accord-
ing to Reiss, are: plain communication of facts, creative composition, the inducing
of behavioural responses and audiomedial texts.

1. Plain communication of facts: These facts may include information, knowl-

edge, opinions and so on; and the language dimension used to transmit the
information whether it is logical or referential. The text type in this type of
information is informative.
2. Creative composition: In this kind of text, the aesthetic dimension of language
is used. Thus, the text type is expressive.
3. Inducing behavioural responses: This includes functions of appeal; that is, to
appeal to or persuade the reader or ‘receiver’ of the text to act in a certain way.
Reiss calls this text type ‘operative’.
4. Audiomedial texts: This includes films, and visual and spoken advertisements,
that supplement the other three functions with visual images, music and so
forth. This is Reiss’s fourth main characteristic of text type (Reiss as cited in
Munday, 2008).

Pym believes that the notion of equivalence is a ‘social illusion’, which people
believe in even though it does not have linguistic certainty; however, he states that
we have to deal with such ‘equivalence beliefs’. Pym makes a distinction between
two types of equivalence: natural equivalence and directional equivalence. Natu-
ral equivalence is basically based on the paradigm of equal value. In other words,
what is said in one language can be translated into another language, with the
same function or worth. As a result, the relation between an ST and a TT is one
of equal value at the level of form, function, or anything in-between. For example,
the English ‘Friday the 13th’ is a natural equivalent for the Spanish ‘Tuesday the
13th’ because the two terms function in the same way, as each of these days refers
to bad luck in their respective cultures. Another example can be adopted from
62 2 Translation Theory

Shakespeare: ‘she is as beautiful as a summer’s day’. This expression can be trans-

lated functionally into Arabic as ‫( رمقلاك ةليمج اهنإ‬she is as beautiful as a moon),
as it does not sound natural to liken a beautiful woman to any season in the Arabic
culture. In addition, ‘summer’ is not a favourable season in the Arabic culture, as
it is linked to the scorching sun and extreme heat. Pym supports his paradigm by
quoting Nida and Taber’s natural equivalent in their theorizing of Bible transla-
tion. Nida and Taber (1982, p. 12) state that ‘Translating consists in reproducing
in the receptor language the closest natural equivalent of the source language mes-
sage’. However, this claim, according to Wendland (2012), is not accurate because
Nida and Taber prioritize meaning over style, which is not the case in Pym’s the-
ory. This approach is likely to employ many strategies of translation. However,
this approach was critiqued for its ‘presupposition’ of a ‘non-existent symmetry’
between languages, its lack of a verifiable ‘psychological basis’, an underlying
‘imperialistic’ agenda, and the promotion of ‘parochialism’ that prefers meaning
over form (Wendland, 2012, p. 95).
Directional equivalence is an asymmetric relation in which, if an equivalent
was created in one direction, it does not necessarily that exist in the other. Con-
trary to natural equivalence, which assumes the existence of equivalence between
items bi-directionally, this approach assumes that equivalence can exist mono-di-
rectionally. This approach is likely to adopt two-opposed poles, such as literal
translation vs. free translation (Wendland, 2012, p. 95). Wendland observes that
there is no borderline between the two types of translation proposed by Pym, since
natural equivalence includes directional equivalence. In addition, there is no full
equivalence between any two languages unless they are culturally close. It seems
that Pym’s notion of equivalence is not clear.

Exercises

1. Explain, with examples, the differences between Pym’s ‘natural equivalence’

and ‘directional equivalence’.
2. Translate the following sentences, indicating whether the equivalence
achieved in the translation is ‘natural equivalence’ or ‘directional equiva-
lence’.
A. The Democrats showed several clips of Trump’s public comments about
the Ukraine scandal.
B. Governments should combat terrorism everywhere.
C. Egypt is a Mecca for learners from all over the world.
D. Australia has been ravaged by the worst wildfires seen in decades, with
large swaths of the country devastated since the fire season began in late
July.
2.2 The Notion of Equivalence in Translation Theories 63

2.2.16 Darwish’s Notion of Equivalence (2010)

In relation to the notion of equivalence, Darwish (2010) argues that equivalence

can be considered in terms of relative equivalence, rather than absolute equiva-
lence. He, further, proposes the terms ‘approximation’ and ‘alignment’ for the
practical consideration of equivalence. He argues that translation should aim at
achieving optimal approximation, rather than absolute equivalence. A translator,
then, should work on removing the language constraints to achieve such approxi-
mation. Those constraints can be seen in terms of transparency, opacity and trans-
latability. Transparency is how far an ST is lexically and structurally close to a TT
at the macro and micro levels, and, thus, that there is likely to be convergence. By
contrast, if an ST is lexically and structurally far from a TT at the macro and micro
levels, divergence occurs. Thus, transparency and opacity reveal how far a text is
translatable. Translatability, as defined by Darwish, is the extent to which a trans-
lation is possible without loss of meaning, and the relative ease of such translation.
Darwish adds that there are three problems of translatability with regard to an ST:
comprehensibility, digestibility and cultural dependency. Thus, if a text is not com-
prehensible to a translator, they will not be able to render its meaning. Similarly,
if a text has long clauses and sentences, and is packed with a great deal of infor-
mation, it will be difficult for a translator. Thus, digestibility relates to complexity.
Cultural dependency relates to the culturally bound terms.
As for untranslatability, it is defined by Darwish as the inability to render an
ST into a TT due to constraints, at the syntactico-symantic, pragmatic, or rhetor-
ical levels. Bassnett (2005) mentions that Catford identified two types of untrans-
latability: linguistic and cultural. Linguistic untranslatability occurs when there
is no lexical or syntactical substitute in the TL for an SL item. However, cultural
untranslatability occurs when a relevant situational feature for the SL text does not
exist in the TL.

2.2.17 The Polysystem Theory

This theory was first proposed by Even-Zohar in the 1970s; the English version
of the theory was published in his book entitled Papers in Historical Poetics in
1978. It started as a literature theory, and later developed into a translation the-
ory. Even-Zohar (1979, 1997) considered translation as a part of the polysystem
of literature, and it can occupy a primary position or peripheral position based
on different factors. Translated literature can occupy a primary position when lit-
erature is young, or weak, or when literature is facing a crisis (Venuti, 2000). In
other words, translations that occupy a central position in the literary polysystem
will not follow the norms of the TL. In contrast, those translations that occupy a
peripheral position in the literary polysystem will follow the TL norms. It views
translation from the TL literature perspective. It was developed basically for the
purpose of proposing a theory for translating Hebrew literature. Even-Zohar
64 2 Translation Theory

(2000) postulated that all literary and non-literary works are interrelated in a poly-
system. One weakness of this theory is that it ignored social factors and their influ-
ence on the forming of literature. The theory was then developed by Gideon Toury,
who presented it as the theory of norms in translation. Toury (1980) explored the
reasons behind choosing specific texts to be translated into Hebrew. He found that
the reasons are far from literary ones, as texts are mostly selected based on per-
sonal reasons, a translator’s preferences, and the purpose of translation. Toury’s
approach to translation was TT oriented. Toury argued that translation holds a
middle position between the SL and the TL; it can neither completely transfer the
ST cultural norms, nor can it be assimilated into the target culture. Toury rejected
the notion of complete equivalence and, at the same time, rejected the idea of nat-
uralness in the TL. As both are practically unachievable, he believes that ‘equiva-
lence’ cannot be disregarded because a translation is regarded as a representative
entity of the ST. However, he focused on what he termed ‘factual replacement’.
Toury called for consideration of the historical facts of the target culture, which
he called ‘translation norms’; the term ‘norms’ is thus used by Toury to refer to
a translator’s preferences and the factors that influence them. These factors are
mostly external ones, such as socio-cultural factors. Toury differentiated between
three types of norms: preliminary, initial and operational. Preliminary norms are
those that affect a translator’s adoption of a specific strategy or their translation
policy: which texts to choose for translation. Preliminary norms are not a part of a
translator’s preferences. Initial norms refer to those that reflect a translator’s pref-
erence for a specific translation approach or strategy (e.g. being faithful to the ST,
or adopting a TT oriented approach). Operational norms are the norms that govern
the actual act of translation.

Exercises

1. What are the drawbacks of Polysystem Theory?

2. Do you agree with Toury’s concepts of norms in translation? Why?

References
As-Safi, A. B. (2011). Translation theories: Strategies and basic theoretical issues. Amman: Dar
Amwaj.
Baker, M. (1992/2011). In other words: A coursebook on translation (2nd ed.). London and New
York: Routledge.
Baker, M. (2004). The status of equivalence in translation studies: An appraisal. In Z. Yang (Ed.),
English-Chinese comparative study and translation (p. 1). Shanghai: Foreign Languages
Education Press.
Bassnett, S. (2005). Translation studies. Vasa (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge (Taylor & Francis
e-Library).
Beekman, J., & Callow, J. (1974). Translating the word of god: With scriptures and topical
indexes. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.
References 65

Bell, R. T. (1991). Translation and translating: Theory and practice. London and New York:
Longman.
Catford, J. C. (1965). A linguistic theory of translation: Language and language learning (1st
ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chomsky, N. (1977). Recent contributions to the theory of innate ideas: Summary of oral pres-
entation. In J. Searle (Ed.), Philosophy of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Darwish, A. (2010). Elements of translation. Melbourne: Writescope.
Even-Zohar, I. (1979). Polysystem theory. Poetic Today, 1(1978), 1–2.
Even-Zohar, I. (1997). Itamar Even-Zohar: Polysystem studies 1990. International Journal for
Theory and Analysis of Literature and Communication, 11(1), 88.
Even-Zohar, I. (2000). The position of translated literature within the literary polysystem. In L.
Venuti (Ed.), The translation studies reader (pp. 192–197). London: Routledge.
Frawley, W. (1984). Prolegomenon to a theory of translation. In W. Frawley (Ed.), Translation:
Literary, linguistic, and philosophical perspectives. London and Toronto: Associated Univer-
sity Presses.
Gentzler, E. (2001). Contemporary translation theories. London and New York: Routledge.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1971). Linguistic function and literary style: An inquiry into the language of
William Golding’s The inheritors. In S. B. Chatman (Ed.), Literary style: A symposium (pp.
330–365). London and New York: Oxford University Press.
Halliday, M. A. K. (2001). Towards a theory of good translation. In E. Steiner & C. Yallop (Eds.),
Exploring translation and multilingual text production: Beyond content (pp. 13–18). Berlin
and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Halliday, M. A. K. (2007). Language and education. London: Continuum.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman Publishing
House.
Harvey, M. (2000). A beginner’s course in legal translation: The case of culture-bound terms.
ASTTI/ETI, 2(24), 357–369.
Hodges, P. (2009). Compare and contrast two theoretical approaches to translation in Zainur-
rahman. The theories of translation from history to procedures. Language and Education.
Retrieved from https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=enandq=De+Waard+NidaandbtnG=
Searchandas_ylo=andas_vis=0#8.
Holz-Mänttäri, J. (1984). Translatorisches Handeln. Theorie und Methode. Helsinki: Academiae
Scientarum Fennicae.
House, J. (1997). Translation quality assessment: A model revisited. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
House, J. (2001, January). Translation quality assessment: Linguistic description ver-
sus social evaluation. Meta: Journal Des Traducteurs, 46(2), 243–257. https://doi.
org/10.7202/003141ar.
House, J. (2015). Translation quality assessment: Past and present. In Translation: A multidisci-
plinary approach (pp. 241–264). London and Chicago: Palgrave Macmillan.
Jakobson, R. (1959/1966/2000). On linguistic aspects of translation. In R. A. Brower (Ed.), On
translation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kenny, D. (1998). Equivalence. In M. Baker (Ed.), Routledge encyclopaedia of translation stud-
ies. London and New York: Routledge.
Koller, W. (1976/1979). Einführung die Übersetzungswissenschaft. Heidelberg: Quelle and
Meyer.
Koller, W. (1989). Equivalence in translation theory. In A. Chesterman (Ed. & Trans.), Readings
in translation theory (pp. 99–104). Helsinki: Oy Finn Lectura Ab.
Koller, W. (1995). The concept of equivalence and the object of translation studies. Target, 7(2),
191–222.
Larson, M. (1998). Meaning-based-translation. Oxford: University Press of American Inc.
Leuven-Zwart, K. V. (1989). Translation and originals: Similarities and dissimilarities I. Amster-
dam: John Benjamins.
66 2 Translation Theory

Manfredi, M. (2008). Translating text and context: Translation studies and systemic functional
linguistics (Vol. 1) Translation theory (2nd ed., p. 97). Bologna: Centro di Studi Linguis-
tico-Culturali (CeSLiC). https://doi.org/10.6092/unibo/amsacta/2441. In: Quaderni del
CeSLiC. Functional Grammar Studies for Non-Native Speakers of English.
Manfredi, M. (2014). Translating text and context: Translation studies and systemic functional
linguistics. Volume 2: From theory to practice (p. 158). Bologna: Centro di Studi Linguis-
tico-Culturali (CeSLiC). https://doi.org/10.6092/unibo/amsacta/3219. In: Quaderni del
CeSLiC. Functional Grammar Studies for Non-Native Speakers of English.
Mishra, P. (2009, September). Strength for today and bright hope for tomorrow etymological
analysis of the English language words. Language in India, 12, 63–75.
Munday, J. (2001). Introducing translation studies. New York: Routledge.
Munday, J. (2008). Introducing translation studies: Theories and applications (2nd ed.). London
and New York: Routledge.
Munday, J. (2009). The Routledge companion to translation studies. London and New York:
Routledge.
Newmark, P. (1981). Approaches to translation. Oxford: Pergamon.
Newmark, P. (1988). A textbook of translation: Text. Hertfordshire: Pearson Education Limited.
Newmark, P. (1991). About translation. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Newmark, P. (1998). Approaches to translation. Singapore: Prentice Hall.
Newmark, P. in Munday, J. (2009). The Routledge companion to translation studies. London and
New York: Routledge.
Ni, L. (2009). For translation and theories. English Language Teaching, 2(2), 78–83.
Nida, E., & Taber, C. (1982). The theory and practice of translation (2nd ed.). Leiden: E.J. Brill.
Nida, E. A. (1959/1975). Principles of translating as exemplified by Bible translating. In A. S.
Dil (Ed.), Language structure and thought: Essays by Eugene A. Nida. Stanford: Stanford
University Press.
Nida, E. A. (1964). Toward a science of translating: With special reference to principles and pro-
cedures involved in Bible translating. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
Nida, E. A. (2000). Principles of correspondence. In L. Venuti (Ed.), The translation studies
readers (pp. 126–140). London and New York: Routledge (First published in 1964).
Nida, E. A., & Taber, C. R. (1969). The theory and practice of translation. Leiden: E.J.Brill.
Nord, C. (1989). Loyalty instead of loyalty. Proposals for a functional translation typology. Liv-
ing Languages, 34(3), 100–105.
Nord, C. (1997). Translating as a purposeful activity. Manchester: St. Jerome.
Nord, C. (2005). Text analysis in translation (2nd ed.). Amsterdam: Editions Rodopi B.V.
Nord, C. (2008). Persuading by addressing: A functional approach to speech-act comparison.
Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, 26(2), 283–293.
Panou, D. (2013). Equivalence in translation theories: A critical evaluation. Theory and Practice
in Language Studies, 3(1), 1–6.
Popovič, A. (1976). Dictionary for the analysis of literary translation Edmonton. Alberta:
Department of Comparative Literature, University of Alberta.
Reiss, K. (1971). Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Übersetzungskritik. Munich: M. Hueber
[Trans. E. F. Rhodes. (2000). Translation criticism: Potential and limitations]. Manchester:
St. Jerome and American Bible Society.
Shakernia, S. (2014). Study of Nida’s (formal and dynamic equivalence) and Newmark’s (seman-
tic and communicative translation) translating theories on two short stories. Merit Research
Journal of Education and Review, 2(1), 1–7.
Snell-Hornby, M. (1988/1995). Translation studies: An integrated approach. Amsterdam and
Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Steiner, G. (1975/1998). After Babel: Aspects of language and translation. Oxford and New
York: Oxford University Press.
Toury, G. (1980). In search of a theory of translation (p. 159). Tel Aviv: The Porter Institute for
Poetics and Semiotics, Tel Aviv University.
References 67

Venuti, L. (2000). Translation, community, Utopia. In L. Venuti (Ed.), The translation studies
reader (pp. 468–488). London: Routldge.
Venuti, L. (2004). The translation studies reader. London and New York: Routledge.
Vermeer, H. (1986). Übersetzen als kultureller transfer. In M. Snell-Hornby (Ed.) (1990), Lin-
guistic transcoding or cultural transfer? A critique of translation theory in Germany (pp.79–
86). In S. Bassnett & A. Lefevere (Eds.).
Vinay, J. P., & Darbelnet, J. (1958/2004). A methodology for translation. In J. C. Sager & M.-J.
Hamel (Trans.) & L. Venuti (Ed.), The translation studies reader (pp. 128–137). London and
New York: Routledge.
Wang, J. (2010). A critical discourse analysis of Barack Obama’s speeches. Journal of Language
Teaching and Research, 1(3), 254–261. https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.1.3.254-261.
Wendland, E. R. (2012). Framing the frames: A theoretical framework for the cognitive notion of
“Frames of Reference.” Journal of Translation, 6(1), 27–50.
Whang, Y. C. (2004). To whom is a translator responsible—Author or reader? In S. E. Porter
& R. S. Hess (Eds.), Translating the Bible: Problems and prospects (pp. 46–62). New York:
Continuum and T&T Clark International.
Wilss, W. (1982). The science of translation: Problems and methods. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Yinhua, X. (2011). Equivalence in translation: Features and necessity. International Journal of
Humanities and Social Science, 1(10), 1989–1991.
Zhuanglin, H. (1988). A course of linguistics. Peking: Peking University Press.