Equivalence and Equivalent Effect

花不是向我开

1. Core Concept & Foundational Theory

This chapter delves into the central concept of equivalence in translation theory. It moves beyond simplistic "literal vs. free" debates, focusing instead on the transfer of meaning between languages. The foundation is laid by Roman Jakobson's (1959) seminal essay, which posits that equivalence is not about word-for-word correspondence but about functional substitutability across linguistic systems. He famously argued that languages differ primarily in what they must convey (e.g., grammatical categories like aspect or gender) rather than what they can convey, making equivalence a matter of finding "difference in similarity."

2. Nida's Systematic Approach

Eugene Nida, heavily influenced by developments in semantics and Chomsky's generative-transformational grammar, introduced a more scientific methodology, primarily for Bible translation. His model involves a three-stage process:

• Analysis: Deconstructing the source text (ST) into kernel sentences (simple, core structures).

• Transfer: Converting these kernels into equivalent target language (TL) structures.

• Restructuring: Building these into a stylistically appropriate and natural text in the TL.

Nida crucially distinguishes between two key translation orientations:

• Formal Equivalence: Focuses on reproducing the form and content of the original as closely as possible, often resulting in gloss translations with extensive footnotes. It is ST-oriented.

• Dynamic Equivalence (later termed "Functional Equivalence"): Aims to create a equivalent effect on the TT reader, prioritizing naturalness and comprehensibility over literal accuracy. The goal is the "closest natural equivalent." It is receptor-oriented.

3. Key Debates and Criticisms

Nida's principle of "equivalent effect" became a major point of discussion and criticism:

• Subjectivity & Measurability: The idea of achieving the same response across different cultures and times is considered illusory and unmeasurable by many critics.

• Cultural & Ideological Bias: Nida's work is rooted in missionary projects, aiming to convert readers. This ideological standpoint influences the concept of "naturalness" and has been criticized as a form of cultural domination.

• Limitations of the Model: The model struggles with texts where meaning is intrinsically tied to form (e.g., poetry, wordplay, sophisticated literary prose). Critics like Qian Hu argue that dynamic equivalence can fail here.

4. Evolving Perspectives: Beyond Nida

Other theorists built upon and critiqued these ideas:

• Newmark (Semantic vs. Communicative): Peter Newmark, while influenced by Nida, distanced himself from the "equivalent effect" concept. He proposed Semantic Translation (adhering closely to ST meaning and form) and Communicative Translation (focusing on TT reader comprehension and effect), seeing them as a cline rather than a strict binary.

• Koller (Equivalence Typology): Werner Koller offered a more refined taxonomy, identifying five types of equivalence: denotative (content), connotative (stylistic), text-normative (text-type conventions), pragmatic (receiver-focused), and formal (aesthetic form). This acknowledged that equivalence is multi-level and hierarchical.

5. Case Studies & Applications

The chapter uses examples (e.g., Bible translations like the KJV vs. NEB, EU legal texts) to illustrate how equivalence strategies vary dramatically based on text type, purpose, and audience. A legal document requires formal equivalence for precision, while a promotional brochure might necessitate dynamic equivalence for persuasive impact.

6. Critical Summary and Conclusion

Chapter 3 demonstrates that "equivalence" evolved from a sought-after absolute to a relative, stratified, and context-dependent concept. While Nida's work was groundbreaking in moving theory towards a more receiver-aware and systematic approach, its limitations—particularly regarding literary texts, cultural power imbalances, and the subjective nature of "effect"—paved the way for the more culturally and descriptively oriented theories that followed. The chapter establishes that the type of equivalence sought is fundamentally determined by the skopos or purpose of the translation.