Translation Equivalence: Theory, Benefits, and More Things

One of the most essential ideas in translation is translation equivalence , which is generally the ideal place to start when describing the process of language translation.
Language translation is frequently referred to as the “science of poetry.” I admit that I am the only one on the planet who refers to it in this manner; it’s my creation, and I am probably overly fond of it.
However, I believe that is correct; whether there is an artistic or poetic aim or not, language is poetry: Words are magical, and they are used to explain equivalence translation and record our environment and modify it.
After all, simply writing or speaking about some part of the world transforms it. It’s similar to the concept in physics that just viewing something changes its nature; similarly, using words to describe something changes its character.
Maybe that’s going a bit too far, but it gets me to my main argument: the role of equivalency in translation.
Because it’s a powerful notion that’s reasonably straightforward to describe and a robust approach in translation work equivalence translation, I frequently utilize equivalent when discussing my work in translation services to those who don’t have any training or expertise in linguistics or translation.

Both encoding and decoding in Translation  Equivalence

Equivalence is a simple concept to grasp. There are two sets of language to consider when it comes to translation: Your source language and the destination language into which you’re translating. That’s self-evident.
However, many people believe that languages are all essentially the same – that all you have to do is swap words from one vocabulary for words from another and then clean up the grammar equivalence translation. It’s a lot trickier than that. Languages reflect the culture, history, and thought process of the people who created them, and this varies significantly between cultures.
You can’t always substitute words since you’ll wind up with a word salad. A simple method to observe an example of this is to use Internet-based or other automatic translation programs. A human brain must decode what a word or phrase in a sentence means, based on context and cultural knowledge, and then look for the appropriate encoding in the target language equivalence translation.

Translation Equivalence

That isn’t to say that concepts aren’t interchangeable between languages or cultures; they are. Equivalence occurs when a word or phrase implies the same thing in both languages, and it’s unsurprisingly one of the first things experienced translators check for.
This necessitates a thorough knowledge of both cultures, not simply the language. You may be competent in both languages, but if you don’t comprehend the idiom and culture that surrounds them, your translations will be, put it bluntly, wrong equivalence translation.
A literal translation is meaningless; you need to know what the words signify. Equivalence is a vital tool for achieving that aim, but only if you have a thorough grasp of the process.
Learn more like this: https://24x7offshoring.com/blog/

Translation Equivalence Problems

The idea of equivalence between a translation and the original language text is complex. There are three significant reasons why achieving a perfect equivalent or impact is challenging. For starters, even for the same individual on two times (Hervey, Higgins, and Haywood), it is difficult for a text to have consistent meanings equivalence translation (1995: 14). According to these experts on translation:
Before one could objectively examine textual effects, one would need to have access to a very complete and accurate theory of psychological impact, an approach capable of, among other things, predicting the effects of different texts, of describing the aesthetic experiences that are typically the most important in reaction to a book (Hervey, Higgins, and Haywood) (1995: 14).
Second, translation is a subjective interpretation of the source language material by translators equivalence translation. As a result, they are expecting the target text readers to have the same objective impact as the source text readers is an unreasonable assumption.
Third, translators may not establish how audiences reacted to the source work when it was first published (ibid, p. 14). Miao (2000) presents a concrete illustration of the equivalence relation’s impossibility:

Efforts to resolve Translation Equivalence issues

As previously stated, equivalency issues arise at numerous levels, ranging from the word to the textual level, due to semantic, socio-cultural, and grammatical variations between the source and destination languages equivalence translation. These three areas of equivalency issues are inextricably linked.
The meaning(s) of a word is culturally determined, and in most circumstances, the purpose (s) of a word can only be deduced from the context in which it is used. Therefore, the loss and addition of information in the translation are unavoidable due to semantic, socio-cultural, and grammatical variations between the source and destination languages.
According to Basnett-McGuire (1991), once the premise of non-identity between the two languages is established, the subject of loss and gain in the equivalence translation process may be addressed (p.30). It is possible to add information to the target language text not included in the source-language text.
Newmark (1988: 91) claims that materially contributed to the translation is usually cultural (to account for variations in SL and TL culture), technical (related to the topic), or linguistic (explaining wayward use of words).
The extra information can be included in the text (by placing it in brackets) or left out (i.e., by using a footnote or annotation). Such knowledge is viewed as a supplement to explaining culture-specific ideas (Baker, 1992) and is a requirement for understanding equivalence translation.
The name marhusip, for example, comes from the Batak Tapanuli language (the original language of the Batak population in North Sumatra). It means “to whisper.” However, when the word marhusip is employed in the context of a community’s discussion of marriage, it means more than ‘to whisper.’

Equality and Equal Effect in a translation theory

Translation equality is an important concept of translation theory. It is one of the fundamental principles of Western translation theory. Finding equivalent translation is one of the main problems of the translation process. As Catford puts it, “the main problem with translation work is the lack of access to TL. The primary function of translation theory is to define the nature and nature of translation equality. ” (Catford, 1965, page 21). From the middle of the twentieth century many of the leading scholars working in the field of translation theory incorporated the concept of equality in their theory and research. The concept of equality was used to distinguish the difference between free and literal translation. Roman Jacobson was the first to use this term in his work published in 1959. Many professionals later used the term in their work and made numerous attempts to divide the concept of equality. Prominent professionals such as Vinay and Darbelet Jakobson, Nida, Catford, House and Baker use the concept of equality in their studies. They all looked at this idea in terms of translation theory. Translation is a complex process that can be viewed from a number of perspectives. Some experts consider translation to be a process of language in which ideas from one language are translated into another. This team of experts considers equality as a literal translation of each word and concept. At the same time some scholars argue that the cultural context is crucial to translation because only the use of context can help convey the true meaning of the text. In their view, equality in translation should be concerned with conveying the meaning of the text. These scholars introduce the semantic or functional approach to translation. A third team of experts takes the middle ground and says equality is used to help translators. Bakers who share this approach say that equality is used “for simplicity — because most translators are familiar with it rather than with theoretical nature” (Kenny, 1998, p.77). Despite differences in attitudes toward equality, most experts pay close attention to its meaning in translation theory.

The Importance of Equality in Translation Theory:

It is important to understand the meaning of the word equality. In the English language it can be used as a technical term, which describes scientific ideas. For example, term equation is used in mathematics, At the same time term equation can be used in a general sense in everyday language. In translation the word equivalence is used in its general meaning because it is difficult to find words and ideas that are exactly the same in different languages. Different languages ​​have different phonetic structures, grammar, syntax and vocabulary. That is why we can only speak of a certain degree of equality when translating. Therefore, in our case we use word matching in the definition of similarity or equation and indicate the degree of similarity between the source and the target text. These similarities can be achieved at different levels.
Translation is a form of communication and that is why it is so important to find a balance between source text and target text. Nida defines translation as “reproduction in the language of the natural acceptance that is closest to the source language message, first in terms of definition and second in terms of style.” (Nida, 1982, p. 12). Clearly, equality is one of the basic concepts of translation that can be overlooked.

Opinion of Different Experts in Equality in Translation:

Roman Jacobson made a significant contribution to the development of the theory of translation. He introduced the concept of “equality of difference” which had a significant impact on further development of translation theory. Roman Jacobson distinguished three types of translations, including:
– intralingual (monolingualism)
– between languages ​​(bilingual)
-Intersemiotic (responsible for signal systems).
According to Jacobson, the translator searches for the same words when translating into the local language to convey the message. This means that language translation does not mean complete equality between language units. According to Jakobson: “translation involves two equal messages in two different codes” (Jakobson, 1959, p. 233). This means that the translator’s job is to achieve balance in the messages despite the different grammatical, lexical and semantic structures of ST and TT. Despite differences in grammar and dictionary structures, translation is possible with the required equilibrium. As he says: “whenever there is a shortage, words can be used and amplified by loan words or translation, neologisms or semantic shifts, and finally, by rotation” (ibid. P.234). Jakobson uses different examples to illustrate his point. He compares different language structures from the English and Russian languages ​​and shows situations where it is impossible to find a real equivalent with ST unite. In these cases the translator has to choose the most appropriate way to translate the text that is trying to achieve the highest possible accuracy.
Like Vinay and Darbelnet, Jakobson argues that the language system does not meet the need for translation theory. He emphasizes the limitations of language theory and outlines different approaches that help to make equality in translation the same. Jakobson relied on a semiotic method in which the translator had to deliver the message in the source language and select the most appropriate means to convey it in the target language.
Scholars later continued their research on translation theory and developed their understanding of equality. Nida and Tiber distinguished two types of equality – formal equality (communication) and dynamic equity. Strong equality is based on the same outcome, while formal equality is based on the message itself. As they say “Generally, formal communication distorts grammatical patterns and style of the recipient language, and thus distorts the message, so as to cause the recipient to misunderstand or work incorrectly” (Nida and Taber, 1982, p. 201). Despite detailed research of both types of equations, Nida prefers flexible equity, as it offers more opportunities for translators and seems to be more effective during the translation process. Nida showed other professionals the method and allowed them to move away from word-for-word translation and to make the translation process more dynamic and focused on learning.

Catford is another scholar who devoted much of his time to studying translation theory. His view of equality of translation differs from the idea presented by Nida and Taber. Catford method is based on the language method. Catford expands the theory of translation and adds new terms, such as the level of translation, the level of grammar and the levels of language involved in translation. According to Catford, grammar level determines the equality of translation.
Catford’s theory of translation was criticized by many scholars. Snell-Hornby became one of the most active critics of Catford’s ideas. He called equality in translation as deception and did not believe that translation could be considered a mere linguistic process.
The idea of ​​equality was changed and developed over time. Baker’s comments provided a new perspective on the problem. You evaluate the concept of equality at different levels and apply it to the translation process. Integrates language and communication techniques to make the translation process more efficient. Baker divides equity at word level, grammar level, and text level. The pragmatic equation is related to the purpose of communication and makes an important contribution to the translation process. All of these standards are important for the translator and should be considered during the translation process because only their combination can result in proper translation.
Peter Newmark is another expert whose ideas have had a profound effect on the development of translation theory. You deviate from Nida’s ideas for targeted translation and change the view of equality in translation. Newmark develops communicative and semantic translation ideas as opposed to word-for-word translations. Leaving aside the ideas of equality and literal translation, Newmark prefers semantic translation and communication. According to Newmark, translating is “translating the meaning of a text into another language in the way the author intended the text.” (Newmark, 1988, p. 5). His ideas had a profound effect on many other professionals who studied his works and used his method.

Equality in Translation: Good and Contrary:

Translating is a complex process that is difficult to explain. It helps to transfer meaning and structure from one language to another and equity is often the measure that helps define the success of this process. Many experts emphasize the important role of equity in translation. Mary Snell-Hornby even states that different interpretations of the translation process can be considered as variations of the definition of equality. It is difficult to overstate the role of equality in translation. Translating a bridge that helps connect people who disagree. Translation enables communication between people. In this way equity becomes the measure of the success of the translation process. The more similar the source and target text, the better communication goals will be achieved.
Many scholars and researchers emphasize the important role of equity in the translation process. At the same time some experts emphasize that the desire for superiority can create certain limitations and limitations. Therefore, equilibrium may cause excessive focus on the structure and structure and thus cause loss of meaning and message message. Experts who share this center of ideas instead of text message and do their best to pass it on to the recipient even if it may result in a reduction in the level of equality. Equality is often used by professionals who calculate the language method in the translation process. These professionals strive to achieve language equality, grammar and structural equity. Opponents focus more on the concept and definition than on the form and, therefore, do not play a more important role in equality or value equality in meaning than in context.

Conclusions

Equality is a complex term that describes events from different fields of human knowledge. In the field of translation it first appeared in the middle of the last century and has since become an important indicator of the translation process. Most translation theorists and researchers pay attention to equality in translation, despite the fact that their views on the situation may be different. Some experts believe that equality can be seen as the same concept of the translation process, others believe that equality should not cause the loss of the main text message. Apart from the various methods, equity is an important concept in the translation process and helps to get closer to the definition and value of the translation process in general.

The Concept of Equality in Translation

Equality is one of the basic concepts of translation, and it is often one of the best places to start when explaining the language translation process.
I sometimes refer to the translation of language as “the science of poetry.” Admittedly, I am the only person in the world who refers to you in this way; it is a small invention that I have developed and I am probably very happy to use it. I think it is accurate, though; Language is a poem whether it has an artistic or poetic purpose or not: Words are magical, and are used to describe and record our world but to transform it. Just writing or talking about a particular aspect of the world changes us, after all. It is like the physics’ perception that by simply looking at something that touches you – by using language to describe something, you change the nature of that object.
Maybe that’s too deep, but it leads me to my real point, which is a function of equality in translation. I often use equity when explaining my work in translation services to people who have no training or background in language or translation, because it is a powerful concept that is easy to define and a key approach to translation work.

Coding and coding

Equality is easy enough to understand. When working with translation, you have two language sets: your source language, which you translate, and your target language, which you translate into. That is clear enough. Many people think that languages ​​are the same, however that literally you just have to replace words from one language with another and then correct the grammar.
It is very complicated. Languages ​​reflect the culture, history, and thought process of the people who invented them, and this often differs greatly from one culture to another. Usually you can not just replace words, or save a word salad. Relying on the Internet or other automated translation tools is often an easy way to see an example of this – you need a human mind to determine what a word or phrase in a sentence means, using context and cultural understanding, and look for the correct text in the target language.

Equality

That is not to say that ideas are not equally valid in two different languages ​​or cultures – they exist. If a word or phrase means the same thing in both languages, we call it equality, and understandably it is one of the first things that professional translators want.
This requires a deep understanding of both cultures, not just language. You can speak both languages ​​fluently, but if you do not understand the meaning and the culture behind them, your translation will be bad, just in one word.
Literally lit translation is a useless translation – you have to understand the meaning of the words. Equality is a powerful tool in the implementation of that goal, but it only works if you have a deep, complete understanding of the process.
Equality in Translation: Features and Need

Features of Translation Equality

Translation equality is a key concept in Western translation theory. It is a constitutive aspect as well
a guiding principle of translation. As Catford points out, “the main problem with translation practice is
equilibrium acquisition of TL. An important function of translation theory is to define the nature and conditions of
equality of translation. ” (Catford 21: 1965) In fact, from the fifties of the twentieth century, many.
translation theory experts involved and explained in detail the equality of translation in their different perspectives. However,
the concept of equality of translation is sometimes distorted, and, perhaps, that is why some people deny it
authenticity and necessity. In order to counteract the need for equitable translation, we must first define its features.
First, we need to understand the meaning of the word “equality” itself.
According to Mary Snell-Hornby (17: 1988), for the past 150 years, the word “equivalence” has been in English.
used as a technical term for various types of specific science to refer to the number of scientific events or
procedures. In mathematics, for example, it shows the relationship of absolute equality that includes affirmation
going back. At the same time, however, it can also be used as a general term in the standard vocabulary of
English, too, in this sense, means “equal value”. In other words, the word “equality” is used in
English language both as a scientific term and as a common noun. As a key concept in translation theory,
“equality” cannot be interpreted in your scientific sense. It can only be understood by its common sense as a
general name. As J.R Firth points out in his translation of the text, it was a general concept and
common language the word “equivalence” was originally used in the English translation
vision. (Snell-Hornby: 17)
According to philosophy, no two things are exactly alike. Nida expresses this idea as follows:
No two stones are alike, no two alike are alike, and no two alike are alike. Although the
the structure of the DNA in the nucleus of their cells may be similar, but such individuals still differ in that
the effect of certain aspects of development. No two sounds are exactly alike, and they are the same
a person who utters the same words will never utter exactly the same words. (Nida 1986: 60)
Regarding languages, no two identical words are complete within the same language. Naturally, no
two words in any two languages ​​have exactly the same meaning. Since translation involves at least two
languages ​​and as each language has its own distinct features in phonology, grammar, vocabulary, methods
depicting experiences and reflecting different cultures, any translation involves a certain degree of loss or
distortion of the meaning of the source text. That is, it is impossible to establish a complete identity within
source text and target text. Therefore, we can say that equality in translation should not come close
as a search for similarities, but only as a type of similarity or speculation, and this naturally indicates that
which is possible to find a balance between source text and target text at different levels of language and progression
different levels. In other words, different types of translation equations can be achieved within the source
text and text intended as phonetic equilibrium, phonetic equilibrium, morphological equation,
lexical equilibrium, syntactical equilibrium and semantic equilibrium. (Le Meiyun 1989)

The Need for Equalized Translation

Since translation is a form of communication, the primary function in the translation process is to establish equity
of the original text in the target language. In other words, any translation involves a form of equality
between source text and target text; without the equality of certain degrees or certain features, i
The translated text cannot be considered as the original text.

1. The Need for Equality As Defined in the Translation Definition

Translating is so complex a type of work that defining it sufficiently is not an easy task. So far, variety
types of definitions are given, some of which are quoted as follows:
(1) E. Tanke, Director of the Siemens Translation Center, defines translation as “the process of
communication where the translator is connected between the sender and the receiver using a different one
languages ​​to make code translation between them. “(Huang Long 1988: 18), and later developed it as
“the transfer of text from the target language into the target language, with the goal being complete
the equality of meaning between the two texts. “(Huang Long: 18)
(2) Peter Newmark defines translation as “the rendering of text in another language in a manner
that the author intended the text. “(Newmark 1988: 5)
(3) Nida defines translation as “reproduction in the language of natural acceptance that is closest to
the message of the source language, first in meaning and second in style. “(Nida 1982: 12)
(4) Traditional definition: “the process of conveying a message conveyed in the source language to a
a message expressed in the target language, by increasing the equality of one or more levels
message content …. “(Huang Long: 19)
As is easily seen in the above, no matter how the translation is defined, the concept of equality is
it is inseparable and defined in one way or another. In a sense, each of the above definitions is built around
the basic concept of equality, or as Mary Snell-Hornby suggests that definitions of translation may be
it is considered a variation in the concept of equality. (Snell-Hornby: 15) The essence of the concept of
equality in any definition of translation adequately reflects the need for equality in translation.

2. The Need for Equality As Needed Translation Essence

Like the definitions of translation, there are also different ideas about the nature of translation h, such
called “Translation is a science.” “Translation is an art.”, “Translation is a work of language.”, Etc. However,
translation is, in fact, a form of communication. Throughout history, translation has been used as a
a bridge for people who do not know foreign languages ​​to understand the source text. In fact,
translators and translation theories around the world have long considered the concept of translation to be some sort
communication. Nida often says that translation means communication. Professor Fan Zhongying
he also expressed the same opinion, saying that translation is a function of language, its main purpose being
communication. (Fan Zhongying 1994: 9)
Since translation is actually a form of communication, the balance between source text and target text
naturally it becomes an essential requirement. It is generally accepted that a basic requirement of any kind
communication is to ensure that the message is transmitted adequately from the source to the recipient.
Similarly, in translating, the translator should make every effort to reproduce the exact message of
first text in target text so that target text reader can fully understand the source message;
otherwise, translating it as a form of communication would ultimately fail. Therefore, it may be safe to say that
the context of translation as a form of communication calls for the need for equality in translation.

3. The Need for Equality As Indicated by Limitations of Interpretation and Difficulty

Translation
When we say something is interpreted, in a sense, it means a certain degree of equality of
Source text can be accessed in the target language. Conversely, if we say something that cannot be translated, it is
means that no domain text match can be found in the target language. In other words, the
translation limitations are simply due to the need for equality in translation. (Catford, 93) Uma
the translation was not to demand equality, there would be no translation limitations, and any translated text
can be considered an appropriate version of the original text. Therefore, we can say that the existence of limitations
of translation well illustrates the need for equality in translation. Similarly, the difficulty of
translation sometimes arises from the need for equality in translation. It is generally accepted that
translation is much harder than the original creation, and this in particular results in the need for equality
in translation. In the original creation, the author is free to say whatever he wants to say and not to say anything
the ways he likes. However, in translating, the translator does not have the freedom to do so
what the author said in the original text and to say it almost or partially in the same way that the original author stated
done. Liu Zhongde, a Chinese professor, argues:
The difficulty of simply translating lies in the fact that both content and style already exist in
real and as a result, you will have to do your best to reproduce them as they are very different
language. “(Liu Zhongde 1991: 7) The need for equality in translation is also raised in a popular book.
Yan Fu stated: “It usually takes ten days or a whole month
establish a word in translation after repeated analysis and skepticism “(Liu Zhongde: 6) In fact,
it is the equation that connects the source text with the target text and only after seeing the equation
To some extent or in some respects we can say that the target text is a translation of the domain text; without
equality of some degree or in other respects, nothing can be considered a (successful) translation of
some text.

Let us consider the following example:

The rain falls on cats and dogs.

A: 正在 下 着 倾盆大雨。

B: 在 下雨.

C: 他 去 上学.

In this example, Version A and Version B can both be considered as translations of the first sentence, see
each reproduces one of the first sentence message and thus equals the original sentence
to some extent or in other respects: Version A is more equal while Version B produces the main repetition.
message. As for version C, it has nothing to do with the original sentence or, in other words, no
equality between them at all, therefore, cannot be taken as a translation of the first sentence.
This shows the need for equality in translation from another perspective.

Efforts to resolve Translation Equivalence issues

As previously stated, equivalency issues arise at numerous levels, ranging from the word to the textual level, due to semantic, socio-cultural, and grammatical variations between the source and destination languages equivalence translation. These three areas of equivalency issues are inextricably linked.
The meaning(s) of a word is culturally determined, and in most circumstances, the purpose (s) of a word can only be deduced from the context in which it is used. Therefore, the loss and addition of information in the translation are unavoidable due to semantic, socio-cultural, and grammatical variations between the source and destination languages.
According to Basnett-McGuire (1991), once the premise of non-identity between the two languages is established, the subject of loss and gain in the equivalence translation process may be addressed (p.30). It is possible to add information to the target language text not included in the source-language text.
Newmark (1988: 91) claims that materially contributed to the translation is usually cultural (to account for variations in SL and TL culture), technical (related to the topic), or linguistic (explaining wayward use of words).
The extra information can be included in the text (by placing it in brackets) or left out (i.e., by using a footnote or annotation). Such knowledge is viewed as a supplement to explaining culture-specific ideas (Baker, 1992) and is a requirement for understanding equivalence translation.
The name marhusip, for example, comes from the Batak Tapanuli language (the original language of the Batak population in North Sumatra). It means “to whisper.” However, when the word marhusip is employed in the context of a community’s discussion of marriage, it means more than ‘to whisper.’

Conclusion

Equality in translation cannot be defined by who you are in your scientific sense. As we know, there
no words have exactly the same meaning in the same language. Naturally, there are no two words in any two
Languages ​​are exactly the same in meaning. As for the whole text, it is simply not possible
convey the entire original text message to the target text. Therefore, equality in translation can be limited
understood as a form of similarity or speculation. This means that the balance between source and text
targeted text can be developed at different levels and in different aspects. As one of the three principals
concepts are a Western translation theory, equality is a fundamental element and a guiding principle of
translation. Without the equality of certain standards or aspects, the translated text cannot be considered
successful translation of the original text. In short, equality is a complete and fundamental requirement of translation.
Continue reading, just click on: https://24x7offshoring.com/blog/