The Concept of Equivalence in Translation Studies: Much Ado About Something

Sandra L. Halverson

Abstract

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.

Table of contents

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.

Full-text access is restricted to subscribers. Log in to obtain additional credentials. For subscription information see Subscription & Price. Direct PDF access to this article can be purchased through our e-platform.

[ 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.Google Scholar
Brown, James Robert
1994Smoke and Mirrors: How Science Reflects Reality. London: Routledge.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Camp, Karin van
1994 "The Translation of Pippi Longstocking into Dutch: A Test Case". Robyns 1994 : 19–47.Google Scholar
Capelle, Annick
1994 "Translation in Nineteenth Century Belgium". Robyns 1994 : 7–16.Google Scholar
Catford, J.C
1965A Linguistic Theory of Translation: An Essay in Applied Linguistics.London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chesterman, Andrew
1993 "Theory in Translation Theory". The New Courant 1. 69–79.Google Scholar
ed. 1989Readings in Translation Theory. Finland: Oy Finn Lectura Ab.Google Scholar
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.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1996 "On Similarity". Target 8:1. 159–164. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Collins English Dictionary
1991Glasgow: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald
1984Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Encyclopedia Britannica
1975Chicago etc.: Helen Hemingway Benton.Google Scholar
Even-Zohar, Itamar
1990Polysystem Studies. Tel-Aviv: The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics. [= Poetics Today 11:1.]Google Scholar
Feyerabend, Paul
1987Farewell to Reason. London: Verso.Google Scholar
1993Against Method. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Filipec, J.
1971 "Der Äquivalenzbegriff und das Problem der Ubersetzbarkeit". Beiheft V/VI der Zeitschrift Fremdsprachen. 81–85.Google Scholar
Fraser, Janet
1996 "The Translator Investigated: Learning from Translation Process Analysis". The Translator 2:1. 65–79.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Frawley, William
1984 "Prolegomenon to a Theory of Translation". William Frawley, ed. Translation: Literary, Linguistic and Philosophical Perspectives. Newark: University of Delaware Press 1984 159–175.Google Scholar
Gile, Daniel
1991 "Methodological Aspects of Interpretation (and Translation) Research". Target 3:2. 153–174.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Halverson, Sandra
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.Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
[ p. 231 ]
Hartmann, R.K.K., F.C. Stork
1972Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. Amsterdam: Applied Science.Google Scholar
Hermans, Theo
1985 "Introduction: Translation Studies and a New Paradigm". Hermans 1985a: 7–15.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
ed. 1985aThe Manipulation of Literature: Studies in Literary Translation. London and Sydney: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Ivir, Vladimir
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.]Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman
1959 "On Linguistic Aspects of Translation". Reuben A. Brower, ed.On Translation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press 1959 232–239.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Janicki, Karol
1989 "A Rebuttal of Essentialist Sociolinguistics". International Journal of the Sociology of Language 78. 93–105.Google Scholar
Jääskeläinen, Riita
1987What Happens in a Translation Process: Think-Aloud Protocols of Translation. Savonlinna School of Translation Studies, University of Joensuu. [Unpublished Pro gradu Thesis.]Google Scholar
1989 "Translation Assignment in Professional vs. Non-Professional Translation: A Think-Aloud Protocol Study". Séguinot 1989 : 87–98.Google Scholar
1993 "Investigating Translation Strategies". Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit and John Laffling, eds. Recent Trends in Empirical Translation Research. Joensuu: Faculty of Arts 1993 99–120.Google Scholar
Jääskeläinen, Riita and Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit
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.Google Scholar
Kade, Otto
1968Zufall und Gesetzmässigkeit in der Ubersetzung. Leipzig: Enzyklopädie.Google Scholar
Koller, Werner
1989 "Equivalence in Translation Theory". Chesterman 1989: 99–104.Google Scholar
1995 "The Concept of Equivalence and the Object of Translation Studies". Target 7:2. 191–222.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Krings, Hans P.
1987 "The Use of Introspective Data in Translation". Claus Færch and Gabriele Kasper, eds. Introspection in Second-Language Research. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters 1987 159–176.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas
1970The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas S.
1991 "The Natural and the Human Sciences". D.R. Hilley, J.F. Bohman and R. Schusterman, eds. The Interpretative Turn. Ithaca-London: Cornell University Press 1991 17–24.Google Scholar
Kussmaul, Paul and Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit
1995 "Think-Aloud Protocol Analysis in Translation Studies". TTR VIII:2. 179–199.Google Scholar
Lambert, José and Hendrik van Gorp
1985 "On Describing Translations". Hermans 1985a: 43–53.Google Scholar
Levý, Jiří
1989 "Translation as a Decision Process". Chesterman 1989: 99–104.Google Scholar
Lörscher, Wolfgang
1991Translation Performance, Translation Process and Translation Strategies: A Psycholinguistic Investigation. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
[ p. 232 ]
1992a "Investigating the Translation Process". Meta 37:3. 426–439.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1992b 'Process-Oriented Research into Translation and Implications for Translation Teaching". TTR 5:1. 145–161.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nida, Eugene A
1969 "Science of Translation". Language 45. 483–498.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nida, Eugene A. and Charles R. Taber
1969The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden: E.J. Brill. Google Scholar
Nord, Christiane
1991Text Analysis in Translation. Amsterdam-Atlanta: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Popper, Karl
1945The Open Society and Its Enemies 2. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
1972Objective Knowledge. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Putnam, Hilar
y 1975Mind, Language, and Reality: Philosophical Papers 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, Hilary
1981Reason, Truth, and History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pym, Anthony
1995 "European Translation Studies, Une science qui dérange, and Why Equivalence Needn't Be a Dirty Word".TTR VIII:1. 153–176Google Scholar
Quine, Willard van Orman
1960Word and Object. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Reiß, Katharina
1989 "Text Types, Translation Types and Translation Assessment".Chesterma 1989: 103–115Google Scholar
Reiß, Katharina and Hans J. Vermeer
1984Grundlegung einer allgemeinen Translationstheorie. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Robyns, Clem
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.Google Scholar
Rorty, Richard
1980Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sager, Juan
1994Language Engineering and Translation: Consequences of Automation. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Séguinot, Candace
ed. 1989The Translation Process. Toronto: H.G. Publications. Google Scholar
Shapere, Dudley
1981 "Meaning and Scientific Change". Ian Hacking, ed. Scientific Revolutions. Oxford: Oxford University Press 1981 28–59.Google Scholar
Snell-Hornby, Mary
1988Translation Studies: An Integrated Approach. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
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.Google Scholar
Steele, Mary
1994 "Translation into English in the USSR: Macrostructure Alterations". Robyns 1994 : 95–106.Google Scholar
Taylor, Charles
1980 "Understanding in Human Science". Review of Metaphysics 34. 3–23.Google Scholar
Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja
1989 "Professional vs. Non-Professional Translation: A Think-Aloud Protocol Study". Séguinot 1989 : 73–85.Google Scholar
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.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 233 ]
Toury, Gideon
1980In Search of a Theory of Translation. Tel Aviv: The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics.Google Scholar
1985 "A Rationale for Descriptive Translation Studies". Hermans 1985a: 16–41. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1995Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Trosborg, Anna
1994 "Translation Studies: Some Recent Developments". Hermes 12. 9–28.Google Scholar
Vermeer, Hans J.
1978 "Ein Rahmen fur eine allgemeine Translationstheorie". Lebende Sprachen 23. 99–102.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1983Aufsätze zur Translationstheorie. Heidelberg.Google Scholar
1986Voraussetzungen für eine Translationstheorie: Einige Kapitel Kultur- und Sprachtheorie. Heidelberg: Selbstverlag.Google Scholar
1989 "Scopos and Commission in Translational Action". Chesterman 1989: 99–104.Google Scholar
Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary
1991Springfield MA: Merriam-Webster Inc.Google Scholar
Wilss, Wolfram
1982The Science of Translation: Problems and Methods. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Zadeh, Lotfi
1965 "Fuzzy Sets". Information and Control 8. 338–353.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zierer, E.
1979Algunos conceptos básicos de la ciencia de la traducción. Trujillo: Universidad Nacional de Trujillo.Google Scholar