Chapter 3

Equivalence and Equivalent Effect

0.3 Introduction
• In order to avoid the age-old opposition between literal and free
translation, theoreticians in the and 1960s began to attempt more
systematic analyses. The new debate revolved around certain key
linguistic issues.
• The most prominent those of 'meaning' and 'equivalence', discussed
in Roman Jakobson's 1959 paper. Over the following twenty years
many further attempts were made to define the nature of
equivalence.
• 3.1 Roman Jakobson the nature of linguistic meaning and equivalence
• The structuralist Roman Jakobson describes three kinds of translation:
intralingual, interlingual and intersemiotic, with interlingual referring to
translation between two different written sign systems.
• Jakobson goes on to examine key issues of this type of translation,
notably Lingusitic meaning and equivalence.
• Jakobson follows the theory of language proposed by the famous
Swiss linguist Saussure. Saussure distinguished between the linguistic
system (langue) and specific individual utterances (parole).
• Central to his theory of langue, he differentiated between the
'signifier" (the spoken and written signal) and the ‘signified' (the
concept), which together create the linguistic sign.
• In English the word cheese is the acoustic signifier which denotes' the
concept food made of pressed curds (the signified). Crucially, the sign
is arbitrary or unmotivated. Instead of cheese, the signifier could
easily have been bread, soup, thingummyjig or any other word.
• Jakobson also stresses that it is possible to understand what is
signified by a word even if we have never seen or experienced the
concept or thing in real life.
• Linguistic sign

“Signifier”
Something can
“Signified “ be seen,
Mental concept touched,
smelled or seen
• Jakobson then moves on to consider the thorny problem of
equivalence in meaning between words in different languages, part of
Saussure's parole. He points out that ‘there is ordinarily no full
equivalence between code-units’.
• Linguistic universalism considers that, although languages may differ
in the way they convey meaning and in the surface realizations of that
meaning, there is a (more or less) shared way of thinking and
experiencing the world.
• On the one hand, Linguistic relativity or determinism in its strongest
form claims that differences in languages shape different
conceptualizations of the world.
• For example, Eskimos have more words for snow because they
perceive or conceive of it differently.
• This claim, and indeed linguistic determinism itself, is firmly rejected,
amongst others, by Pinker who points out that the vocabulary of a
language simply reflects what speakers need for everyday life. The
absence of a word in a language does not mean that a concept
cannot be perceived - someone from a hot climate can be shown
slush and snow and can notice the difference.
• Full linguistic relativity would mean that translation was impossible,
but of course translation does occur in all sorts of different contexts
and language pairs.
• In Jakobson's description, interlingual translation involves
('substitutling) messages in one language not for separate code-units
but for entire messages in some other language'.
• For example, a translation of cottage cheese would not be the TT unit
for cottage plus the unit for cheese; the message cottage cheese
would be considered and translated as a whole.
• For the message to be 'equivalent' in ST and TT, the code-units will
necessarily be different since they belong to two different sign
systems (languages) which partition reality differently.
• In Jakobson's discussion, the problem of meaning and equivalence
focuses on differences in the structure and terminology of languages
rather than on any inability of one language to render a message that
has been written or uttered in another verbal language.
• For Jakobson, cross-linguistic differences, which underlie the concept
of equivalence, centre around obligatory grammatical and lexical
forms.
• 3.2 The influence of Chomsky
• Chomsky's generative-transformational model analyses sentences into a
series of related levels governed by rules, the key features of this model
can be summarized as follows:
• (1) Phrase-structure rules generate an underlying or deep structure which
is
• (2) transformed by transformational rules relating one underlying
structure to another (e.g. active to passive)
• 3) to produce a final, which itself is subject to phonological and morphemic
rules.
• The most basic of such structures are Kernel sentences, which are simple,
active, declarative sentences that require the minimum of transformation
(e.g. the wolf attacked the deer).
• Nida incorporates key features of Chomsky's model into his 'science'
of translation’. In particular, Nida sees that it provides the translator
with a technique for decoding the ST and a procedure for encoding
the TT . Thus, the surface structure of the ST is analysed into the basic
elements of the deep structure; these are 'transferred' in the
translation process and then 'restructured' semantically and
stylistically into the surface structure of the TT. This three-stage
system of translation (analysis, transfer and restructuring) is
presented:
• A (source language) B (receptor language)

analysis restructuring

transfer
• kernels are the basic structural elements out of which language builds
its elaborate surface structures.
• There are four types of functional class:
• (1) events: often but not always performed by verbs (e.g. run, fall,
grow, think).
• (2) objects: often but not always performed by nouns (e.g. man,
horse, mountain, table)
• (3) abstracts: quantities and qualities, including adjectives and
adverbs (e.g. red, length, slowly)
• (4) relationals: including affixes, prepositions, conjunctions and
copulas (e.g. pre, into, of, and, because, be).
• Kernels are the level at which the message is transferred into the
receptor language before being transformed into the surface
structure in a process of: (1) 'literal transfer‘(2) 'minimal transfer‘(3)
literary transfer‘. For example, The French merchant bought the ship
• Literal transfer: ‫الفرنسي التاجر اشتري السفينة‬
• Minimal transfer: ‫التاجر الفرنسي اشتري السفينة‬
• Literary transfer: ‫اشتري التاجر الفرنسي السفينة‬
• 3.3 The nature of meaning: advances in semantics and pragmatics
• Central to Nida's work is the move away from the old idea that a word
has a fixed meaning and towards a functional definition of meaning in
which a word 'acquires' meaning through its context and can produce
varying responses according to culture. Meaning is broken down into
the following:
• (1) Linguistic meaning: the relationship between different linguistic
structures, borrowing elements of Chomsky's model. Nida provides
examples to show how the meaning crucially differs even where
similar classes of words are used. For instance, the following three
expressions with the possessive pronoun his all have different
meanings: his house means 'he possesses a house', his journey equals
'he performs a journey' and his kindness is 'kindness is a quality of
him.
• (2) Referential meaning: the denotative 'dictionary' meaning. Thus,
son denotes a male child.
• (3) Emotive or connotative meaning: the associations a word
produces. So, in the phrase 'Don't worry about that, son', the word
son is a term of endearment or may in some contexts be patronizing.
• 3.4 Formal and dynamic equivalence and the principle of equivalent
effect
• According to Nida, there are two types of equivalence (1) formal
equivalence; and (2) dynamic equivalence. These are defined by Nida as
follows
• (1) Formal equivalence focuses attention on the message itself, in both
form and content. One is concerned that the message in the receptor
language should match as closely as possible the different elements in the
source language
• Formal equivalence, later called 'formal correspondence’, is thus keenly
oriented towards the ST structure, which exerts strong influence in
determining accuracy and correctness.
• Most typical of this kind of translation are gloss translations, with a
close approximation to ST structure, often with scholarly footnotes.
This type of translation will often be used in an academic or legal
environment and allows the reader closer access to the language and
customs of the source culture.
• (2) Dynamic equivalence: Dynamic, later 'functional', equivalence is
based on what Nida calls 'the principle of equivalent effect', where
the relationship between receptor and message should be
substantially the same as that which existed between the original
receptors and the message.
• The message has to be tailored to the receptor's linguistic needs and
cultural expectation and 'aims at complete naturalness of expression'.
'Naturalness' is a key requirement for Nida. Indeed, he defines the
goal of dynamic equivalence as seeking 'the closest natural equivalent
to the source-language message'. This receptor-oriented approach
considers adjustments of grammar, of lexicon and of cultural
references to be essential in order to achieve naturalness. The TT
language should not show interference from the SL, and the
foreignness' of the ST setting is minimized.
• For Nida, the success of the translation depends above all on
achieving equivalence effect or response: It is one of the 'four basic
requirements of a translation', which are:

(1) making sense.

(2) conveying the spirit and manner of the original.
(3) having a natural and easy form of expression.
(4) producing a similar response.
 Exercises
Q1: State if the following statements are True or False:
• 1- Fedinand de Saussure distinguished between the Linguistic System
(parole) and the specific individual utterances (Langue). ( )
• 2 - Linguistic Relativity Claims that differences in languages shape
different conceptualization of the world. ( )
• 3- kernels are Complex, Passive declarative sentences. ( )
• 4- Events often but not always performed by nouns. ( )
• Q2: Choose the correct answer:
• 1. Linguistic meaning is the relationship between
different……………………………….
A-Linguistic Structures
B-denotative meaning
• C- languages
• 2-The relationship between the signified and the signifier is……………..
A- arbitrarty
B- similar
C- Predicable
• 3- Nida’s three stages system of translation are………………….
A- analysis, rewrite, restructure
B- analysis, transfer, retranslate
C- analysis, transfer, restructure
• 4- Objects in generative transformational grammar performed by……..
A- verbs
B- quantities
C- nouns

• Q3: Define the followings:

• A. Formal equivalence
• B. Dynamic equivalence
• C. Emotive meaning