The Concept of Equivalence in Translation Studies: Much Ado About Something
Sandra L. Halverson
University of Bergen
Within translation studies, there remains a certain amount of unnecessary discord concerning the use of the equivalence concept and its relevance for translation theory. In the interest of better understanding the various points of view, it seems helpful to consider different perspectives on this concept in light of the varying philosophical assumptions on which they are based. Analogies between the equivalence concept and a concept of scientific knowledge as it is and has been studied within the philosophy of science are highly informative in pointing out the philosophical issues involved in equivalence, translation, and knowledge. Rather than dismissing the concept as ill-defined or imprecise, it is in the interest of the field of translation studies to consider the origins and manifestations of this 'imprecision ' in order that we may be better informed and less inclined towards theoretical antagonism.
Academic discourse is often surprising and sometimes frustrating. Considerable column inches and lecture minutes are devoted to criticism of a perceived [ p. 208 ]lack of common objectives, methodological agreement, or conceptual consensus, or what is even worse, indulgence in disputes of such a nature which do not even recognize or admit their own origins. While it would be difficult to condemn all such reflection as wasted energy, it seems appropriate to recall that the tempest often originates in more deeply rooted, contending views of what we do or should be doing. The lacks and deficiencies which seem to cause such consternation are alternatively seen as a detriment to "progress" or a fact of life, depending on one's broader perception of what science and/or academic pursuits are or should be. Such is the situation in the field of translation studies. The loudest laments are those expressing despair at the field's lack of a clearly delimited object of study, an agreed methodology, a set of clearly defined concepts, and a clearly specified set of objectives (see e.g. Wilss 1982, Snell-Hornby 1988, Gile 1991, Koller 1995, Toury 1995). Perhaps the most divisive issue is that surrounding the concept of equivalence, whose role in the field has been the subject of considerable debate over the past 20 odd years.
[ p. 230 ]References
Broeck, Raymond van den
1990 "Translation Theory after Deconstruction". Translation Theory in Scandinavia : Proceedings from the Scandinavian Symposium on Translation Theory (SSOTT III), Oslo 11-13 August 1988. Oslo 1990 24–57.
ed.1989Readings in Translation Theory. Finland: Oy Finn Lectura Ab.
1994 "Karl Popper in the Translation Class". Cay Dollerup and Annette Lindegaard, eds. Teaching Translation and Interpreting 2: Insights, Aims,Visions. Papers From the Second Language International Conference. Elsinore, Denmark 4-6 June 1993. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins 1994 89–95.
1996 "On Similarity". Target 8:1. 159–164.
Collins English Dictionary
1984Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
1996a "Data Selection in Descriptive Translation Studies: The Status of Professional Translations". Paper presented at "Unity in Diversity": International Translation Studies Conference. Dublin, Ireland. 9-11 May 1996.
1996b "Conceptual Categories and the Object of Study in Translation Studies: Moving from Classical to Prototype". Paper presented at Transferre necesse est..., the Second International Conference on Current Trends in Studies of Translation and Interpreting, Budapest, 5-7 September 1996.
1981 "Formal Correspondence vs. Translation Equivalence Revisited".Itamar Even-Zohar and Gideon Toury, eds. Theory of Translation and Intercultural Relations. Tel Aviv: The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics 1981 51–59. [=Poetics Today 2:4.]
1991 "Automatised Processes in Professional vs. Non-Professional Translation: A Think-Aloud Protocol Study". Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit, ed. Empirical Research in Translation and Intercultural Studies. Tübingen: Gunter Narr 1991 89–109.
1968Zufall und Gesetzmässigkeit in der Ubersetzung. Leipzig: Enzyklopädie.
1992a "Investigating the Translation Process". Meta 37:3. 426–439.
1992b 'Process-Oriented Research into Translation and Implications for Translation Teaching". TTR 5:1. 145–161.
Nida, Eugene A
1969 "Science of Translation". Language 45. 483–498.
Nida, Eugene A. and Charles R. Taber
1969The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
1991Text Analysis in Translation. Amsterdam-Atlanta: Rodopi.
1945The Open Society and Its Enemies 2. London: Routledge.
1972Objective Knowledge. Oxford: Clarendon.
y 1975Mind, Language, and Reality: Philosophical Papers 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
1981Reason, Truth, and History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
1995 "European Translation Studies, Une science qui dérange, and Why Equivalence Needn't Be a Dirty Word".TTR VIII:1. 153–176
Quine, Willard van Orman
1960Word and Object. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
1989 "Text Types, Translation Types and Translation Assessment".Chesterma 1989: 103–115
Reiß, Katharina and Hans J. Vermeer
1984Grundlegung einer allgemeinen Translationstheorie. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
ed.1994Translation and the (Re)production of Culture: Selected Papers of the CERA Research Seminars in Translation Studies 1989-1991. Leuven: The CERA Chair for Translation, Communication and Cultures.
1980Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Oxford: Blackwell.
1994Language Engineering and Translation: Consequences of Automation. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
1981 "Meaning and Scientific Change". Ian Hacking, ed. Scientific Revolutions. Oxford: Oxford University Press 1981 28–59.
1988Translation Studies: An Integrated Approach. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
1990 "Linguistic Transcoding or Cultural Transfer? A Critique of Translation Theory in Germany". Susan Bassnett and André Lefevere, eds. Translation, History and Culture. London: Pinter 1990 79–86.
1994 "Translation into English in the USSR: Macrostructure Alterations". Robyns 1994: 95–106.
1980 "Understanding in Human Science". Review of Metaphysics 34. 3–23.
1989 "Professional vs. Non-Professional Translation: A Think-Aloud Protocol Study". Séguinot 1989: 73–85.
1990 "Professional vs. Non-Professional Translation: A Think- Aloud Protocol Study". M.A.K. Halliday, J. Gibbons and H. Nichols, eds. Learning, Keeping and Using Language: Selected Papers from the Eighth World Congress of Applied Linguistics, Sydney, Australia, 16-21 August 1987. Amsterdam: John Benjamins 1990 381–394.
[ p. 233 ]
1980In Search of a Theory of Translation. Tel Aviv: The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics.
1985 "A Rationale for Descriptive Translation Studies". Hermans 1985a: 16–41.
1995Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
1994 "Translation Studies: Some Recent Developments". Hermes 12. 9–28.
Vermeer, Hans J.
1978 "Ein Rahmen fur eine allgemeine Translationstheorie". Lebende Sprachen 23. 99–102.
Vermeer, Hans J.
1983Aufsätze zur Translationstheorie. Heidelberg.
Vermeer, Hans J.
1986Voraussetzungen für eine Translationstheorie: Einige Kapitel Kultur- und Sprachtheorie. Heidelberg: Selbstverlag.
Vermeer, Hans J.
1989 "Scopos and Commission in Translational Action". Chesterman 1989: 99–104.
Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary
1991Springfield MA: Merriam-Webster Inc.
1982The Science of Translation: Problems and Methods. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
1965 "Fuzzy Sets". Information and Control 8. 338–353.
1979Algunos conceptos básicos de la ciencia de la traducción. Trujillo: Universidad Nacional de Trujillo.