Creat App Theo EN 4

Chapter 4. Appropriateness Theory--A Critical Evaluation on Skopos Theory

适用性理论--对目的论的批判性评价 殷美达 Yin Meida, Hunan Normal University, China

Abstract

The skopos theory, after being constantly refined, has become a very powerful theory which could guide many translation practices and end the eternal debate over literal translation and free translation, domestication and foreignization. And it has provided a new perspective on the process of translating and the study of translation. But skopos theory isn’t without its deficiencies. In fact, there are some drawbacks such as being not appropriate for literary translation, the theoretical foundation being not solid enough, giving too much priority to target text and target audiences etc. Furthermore, skopos theory makes translation a way of obtaining money and wealth, thus makes it a commercial activity for utilitarianism. This article will focus on pointing out some deficiencies of skopos theory and giving opinions on the improvement of skopos theory that maybe helpful to the development of appropriateness theory as a general translation theory.

Key Words

skopos theory; deficiencies; appropriateness theory

Introduction

Skopos theory is an approach to translation firstly put forward by German scholars Reiss and Vermeer in 1970s, which reflects a general shift from predominantly LINGUISTIC and rather formal translation theories to a more functionally and socioculturally oriented concept of translation[1]. This theory is developed on the basis of action theory, text type theory, skopostheorie, as well as the theory of function plus loyalty by C. Nord. “Skopos” is a Greek word for “purpose”, ”aim” or “intention”. According to skopostheorie, the basic principle which determines the process of translation is the purpose (skopos) of the translational action[3]. The idea of intentionality is part of the very definition of any action (Nord,1997:27).

Functional translation theory originated in Germany in the 1970s. It provides a new perspective on translation action, which inherits the essence of traditional translation theories and at the same time, break away the shackles of traditional translation theories. Skopos theory is the foundation of the functional theory of translation whose development has gone through the following four stages. Stage one: Katharina Reiss first introduced functional categories into translation criticism, developed the connection among language functions, text types and translation strategies, thus put forward a model of translation criticism based on the functional relation between source text and target text. The functional translation theory began to take shape. Stage two: Hans Vermeer put forward skopostheorie, which freed translation studies from the bondage of traditional original-text-centered theory. According to skopostheorie, translation should follow three priciples, namely, the principle of purpose, the principle of intralingual coherence and the principle of interlingual fidelity, among which the principle of purpose takes the first place. Also, the criterion for translation criticism is transformed from “equivalence” to “adequacy” to fulfill the expectation of translation. Translators are given much rights in retaining, omitting and modifying the target text. Stage three: Jasta Hotz Mantari draws on the communication theory and action theory, and puts forward the behavioral theory of translation, which further develops the functionalist theory of translation. This theory regards translation as a purpose-driven, result-oriented interaction between people, and was later incorporated into skopos theory by Hans Vermeer. Stage four: Kristina Nord, for the first time in English, expounded systematically the internal and external factors that need to be considered in the text analysis of translation, and how to choose appropriate translation strategies based on the function of the original text. Nord sorted out various theories of functionalism and brought out the principle of “function plus loyalty”, which improved the skopos theory.

1.The core elements of skopos theory

1.1 Translation and translation action

Vermeer believes that translation and translation action are different concepts. In his opinion, translation action refers not only to the action of translating but also all the actions involved in the whole process of translating, such as the action of giving advice to the translator by the initiator. And translation is part of translation action.

1.2 Skopos and translation brief

Vermeer believes that skopos refers not only to the purpose of translation by the translator but all the purposes involved in the translating process by various people such as the initiator, the client, the target reader etc. And the most important purpose is the communicative purpose the target text. The concept of translation brief was put forward by Christina Nord, which originates from the German word "ubersetzungsauftrag". Nord compared the translator with a barrister who has received the basic information and instructions but is then free(as the responsible expert)to carry out those instructions as they see fit. So the term "translation brief"is used to refer to the definition of the intended purpose of the translation process.(Nord,1997:47). The translation brief should contain(explicit or implicit)information about: (1) the target text addresses, (2) the prospective time and place of text reception,(3) the medium over which the text will be transmitted,and (4) the motive for the production or reception of the text.(Nord,1997:47)

1.3 Principles of skopos theory

There are mainly four principles in skopos theory, namely, the principle of purpose, the principle of coherence, the principle of fidelity and the principle of loyalty, the last one being added by Christina Nord to improve the skopos theory.

1.3.1 Principle of purpose

Principle of purpose is the predominant one in skopos theory, in which the purpose determines the whole process of translating. Purposes of translation could be roughly devided into three kinds, namely, basic purposes for translators(such as make a living), communicative purpose of the source-text as well as the purpose of using a particular means of translation, the most important being the communicative purpose of the source-text. The purpose determines the process of translating.

1.3.2 Principle of coherence

Coherence rule refers to the intra-textual coherence in the target text, which means the translation should be readable, acceptable and understandable by the target readers

1.3.3 Principle of fidelity

Fidelity rule refers to the inter-textual coherence between the source text and the target text. This principle stresses the importance of the source text and claims that the target text should be loyal to the source text. But the degree of loyalty lies on the purpose of the target text and the understanding of the source text for target audiences.

1.3.4 Principle of loyalty

Principle of loyalty was put forward by Christina Nord to improve skopos theory. Loyalty refers to the interpersonal relationship between the translator, the source text sender, the target text addressees and the initiator[4]. Nord systematically summarized the functionalist approaches and then elaborated them with typical examples in Translating as a Purposeful Activity. To solve some problems in functionalism, she put forward the principle of loyalty and suggested that translators should follow the guiding principle of “function plus loyalty”. When there are clashes of interests among the initiator, the target text reader the source text author, the translator should act as a mediator to seek the consensus among the three parties. This principle makes up for the deficiencies of skopos theory to a large extent.

2. Deficiencies of skopos theory

Skopos theory has become a very powerful theory and made up for the deficiencies of equivalence-based translation theories. It was created under certain social and economical circumstances and fulfilled well some needs of translation. However, a lot of deficiencies of skopos theory have been discovered by many scholars when they found it inappropriate for some translations. Skopos theory was mainly criticized for allowing the purpose to justify the process of translating and paying not enough attention to the source-text, which made it not suitable for some translation types as literary translation and religious translation. Otherwise, as a purpose-driven translation theory, shopos theory may have gone off-course. As what has been pointed by some scholars, skopos theory makes translation a way of obtaining money and wealth, thus makes it a commercial activity for utilitarianism, thus the problems of morality and ethics are ignored.(Chen Daliang,2007(03):49-52)

2.1 A brief summary of criticism on skopos theory

A lot of western scholars have criticized skopos theory such as Newmark, Nord and House. Newmark criticized the theory harshly by saying that “ to translate the word ' aim ' into Greek , and make a translation theory out of it , and exclude any moral factor except loyalty , added on as an afterthought by Nord ( e.g. , Nord , 1997 ) to Vermeer ( who wrote that the end justifies the means , ( e.g. Vermeer ,1978 ) is pretending too much and going too far”(Newmark, 2000: 259-260) . Nord summerized ten pieces of deficiencies put forward by herself and other scholars: (1) not all actions have intentions, (2) not every translation can be interpreted as purposeful, (3) skopos theory is not an original theory, (4) functionalism is not based on empirical findings, (5)functional approaches go beyond the limits of translation proper, (6) functional translation theory does not show respect to the author of the source text, (7) functional approaches are not appropriate for literary translation, (8) functional theory of translation leads to the emergence of mercenary translators, (9) functional theory of translation puts forward the translation method of adaptation, (10) functional theory is characterized by cultural relativity (Nord, 1997; 109-122). House discovered four drawbacks on skopos theory: (1) The notion of function which is crucial to the approach is never made explicit in any satisfactory way (2) Its inability to determine the (relative)equivalence and adequacy of a translation (3) The indeterminacy of the linguistic realization of the skopos of a translation (4) Due to the role of the 'purpose' of a translation , the source text is considered as a mere offer of information.(Jabir J K,2006, 41: 2.)

Chinese scholar Wang Jinhai believes that skopos theory is not a general translation theory because it’s greatly restrained in literary translation. Li Longquan and Luo Peiya share the similar opinion that skopos theory is suitable for the translation of some special text types such as advertisements, business slogans, manual instructions etc, but it cannot be regarded as a general theory because it has deadly drawbacks such as confusing concepts like translation actions, the ambiguity of the definition of “skopos” and paying not much attention to the source text. Chen Daliang concludes that skopos theory possess a strong propensity for pragmatism and utilitarianism which is only applicable to the practical translations but not literary texts.(Wang Jinhai, 2014,15(03):124-125)

3.Appropriateness theory

“Appropriateness Theory” is the final theory of all translation theories. There may be different answers to the question of appropriateness in different times and from different actors, perspectives, disciplines, etc. Appropriateness theory, as an integrative theory, accepts all existing translation theories for certain aspects of the translation process(Moratto & Woesler, 2021). Appropriateness theory absorbs all the strengths of other translation theories and also include the advice for improvement of other theories. Therefore, appropriateness theory is a generous translation theory that could guide the translation of various kinds.

3.1 Appropriateness Theory and skopos theory

Appropriateness theory poses the question to what extent a translation can be called "appropriate" in certain sub‐aspects and as a whole. Skopos theory called for iconoclasm against the sanctity of the original, focused on the translator and the purpose of the text to functionally (or dynamically) achieve equivalence in the target culture. In fact, the focus of research is currently evolving more towards the processes in the translator's brain (neurological research), as this is to be mapped by AI. Moreover, the translator's environment, his relationship with translation tradition, principal, author (sender), reader (receiver) and their expectations.(Woesler, 2021)

3.2 Improvement of skopos theory on literary translation

Christina Nord suggests that loyalty should be one of the principles when translating literary texts, which, to some extent, greatly improved the quality of literary translation. She believes that when there are clashes of interests among the initiator, the target text reader the source text author, the translator should act as a mediator to seek the consensus among the three parties. But sometimes she disobeys this principle and change some units of translation without asking for the permission of the source text reader, and still, purpose remains to be the top principle of skopos theory. Nord’s principle of “function plus loyalty” may sound great, but it is not easy to be loyal to the client, the target text readers and the source text author at the same time, and sometimes impossible to meet all of their demands. If the purposes of the source text and the target text are similar, then the principle of “function plus loyalty” would function pretty well. But if the purposes are different, what should translators do? To be loyal to the target text reader, the client or the source text author?

Let’s take a look at an example, the Chinese novel《骆驼祥子》was written by a famous writer Laoshe in 1930s, which depicts the miserable life of the hero “祥子”, who is a representative of poor people and toiling masses at that time in China. This book was later translated by Evan King, titled “Rickshaw Boy”. But it is more like a rewrite, because the plots were changed, the tragic ending was turned into a happy ending, new characters were added and the main characters were different from the original. However, this version was accepted and welcomed by the target audiences at that time. So this is a successful translation under the guidance of skopos theory because the purpose and the expectation of the target readers are fulfilled. The translator is loyal to to the target text reader but not to the source text author.Vermeer pointed out that the most important factor in dertermining the purpose of translation is the audience or the intended recipient of the translation. However, this opinion raised several issues as whether readers can be a reasonable standard for judging the quality of translation, whether there is enough literariness in the translation, and also how can we choose a particular translation standard with regard to readers with different educational background and different aesthetic standards? It is not easy and sometimes impossible to fulfill all of the requirements from different reader types. Therefore, we have to think whether it is appropriate to justify the means by the purposes of the recipient of translation. The translation of the above-mentioned novel is inappropriate because in literary translation, the source text and the author should be respected. Unlike other kind of texts, literary translation emphasizes literariness and artistry rather than practicality. If translator’s subjectivity enjoys the highest state, it may affect the quality of literary translation.(Zhan Wannian,2018(05):78-82)

Although it is very important to help target reader better understand and accept the source text, it’s also of significant importance to be loyal to the author and the source text. Many scholars such as Yanfu and Luxun regarded “faithfulness” as the predominant principle in translation. Considering the huge cultural gap between China and western countries, it is impossible to achieve the absolute equivalence between the source text and target text, skopos theory may provide a new perspective on it. However, in literary translation, it is not the end that justifies the means but the purpose and the equivalence. And loyalty should be the top principle rather than skopos. No matter what purposes the translator tries to achieve, the source text should never be disregarded.

“Gone with the Wind” is a good example of fulfilling both standards. Translated by Fu Donghua, the name of people and places are localized and the plots and ideas are well protected, this version is widely accepted by Chinese people. The translator respects the source text and the author, which helps us have a better know of the life of people in the southern states of America before and after the American civil war. At the same time, we wouldn’t be so confused at so many strange names. In the “Rickshaw Boy” translated by Evan King, the target reader fail to appreciate the real life of Chinese people decades ago and the value and ideas that the author strived to express through the text, which makes the translation lose its value and significance. Therefore, it is not an appropriate translation but it’s a good rewrite. While in “Gone with the Wind”, the translator put the source text in the highest state, and the expectation of the target text is fulfilled. So it is a good translation under the appropriateness theory.

Therefore, in literary translation, translators should follow the principles of “loyalty plus function” and should regard loyalty as the guiding principle.

3.3 Translation ethics

Translation and interpreting theories can each explain particularly well individual aspects of translation processes and the creation of target texts. This allows the existing theories to be used eclectically. In addition, the eclectic use must be supplemented with an enrichment by the final judgment possibility of all theories on superordinate categories such as ethics and human dignity in the form of the theory of "appropriateness" (Woesler, 2021, p. 1-5). The Appropriateness Theory goes beyond the previous theories that measure the correctness of a translation by the content, semantics, grammar, situation of the principal, translator and reader. Here, an overall assessment is asked for, in which the principal, the equivalence in the source and target culture or the effectin the target culture are no longer a measure of translation quality. These translations must also be measured against even more general, human yardsticks. And this is where human dignity and ethics come into play(Woesler, 2021).  And there are some basic translation ethics that translators should take into consideration in the process of translating. Number one, don’t manipulate the source text with one’s ideologies or values to achieve some purposes or expectations. Number two, respect different cultures and overcome prejudices.

There are serious consequences if translators manipulate the source text to serve the interest of particular people or groups. For example, “龙” in China is the god of rain, a symbol of nobility and power, and we Chinese often proudly call ourselves “descendant of 龙 ”. However, when we think of “龙”, we usually translate it into “dragon”, which has different connotations in western cultures. In christian world, dragon is the incarnation of “Satan”, a symbol of evil and demon, and often reminds people of cruel and bloody scenes. This mistake in translation could be dated back to the Opium War in 1840s in China, when British missionary Morrison was translating Bible into Chinese, he couldn’t seem to find an equivalence of “dragon” in Chinese. But for the interest of British rulers and also under the influence of the ideology at that time, Morrison chose “龙”, the symbol of China, as the equal for “dragon”, a symbol of evil in western cultures. This translation brought serious consequences, for those who know little about China may develop a false image in China which could be deep-rooted for a long period of time. Those kind and industrious Chinese may be misunderstood as some kind of demons that are going to take up the world. This a perfect tool that could be used by some scheming politicians to instigate hatred among western people against Chinese, which is neither for both regions nor for the peaceful development the world. “龙” in China is nothing like “dragon” in western cultures, therefore, a preferred translation of “龙” would be “long” because it is unique and culture-loaded.(Guo Xuming,2009,30(04):143-145.)

Translation serves the purpose of promoting mutual communication and understanding, and would lose its value and significance if manipulated randomly. With the rapid development of globalization, communication and cooperation are the best choice for every nation. And all sorts of vicious competition and the cold war mindset will do us no good but hinder the development of the world and bring so much instability and hatred to the globe. Translation, which plays a significant part in bridging all kinds of gaps and promoting exchanges of various kinds, should stay beyond the control of any conspiratorial people or group. Translators should respect different cultures because no culture is superior to any other ones, it is those differences that make the world a more interesting and colorful place. In this case, translators are cultural ambassadors who help the world know each other. Therefore, translator should bear in mind some basic ethics when translating and shall never let some particular ideology or purpose get in the way.

4.Conclusion

Summing up, skopos theory is a very strong theory with great explanatory power and it has been embraced and welcomed in China. However, skopos theory, as the foundation of functional school, emphasizes purpose, effect and function, and shows a strong tendency for pragmatism and utilitarianism. It may have been well applied in many practical writings such as advertisement and manual instructions, but it is not appropriate for the translation of literary and religious works which pay much attention to the original text. Skopos theory is criticized for many reasons by scholars both at home an abroad, among them are Laurence Venuti, Christina Nord, Peter Newmark and Chen Daliang. In fact, no theory is perfect and can be regarded as a general theory, and this is when appropriateness theory comes into play. Appropriateness theory draws strengths on all of the translation theories and gives advice on the improvement of each theory. It sees deficiencies in skopos theory and try to come up with some solutions to make that up. With respect to the drawbacks of skopos theory, appropriateness theory believes that there are certain rules to be changed and others to be added. In literary translation, appropriateness theory suggests that loyalty should be the top principle, among which being loyal to the source text and the source text author is the most important matter. This does not mean that the target text should achieve the full equivalence to the source text, but that the idea and the value of the original work should be preserved. Also, with the rapid development of science and technology, the world is full of information, true or false. And we have strong desire to communicate and cooperate with other nations and peoples. Ideas, values and ways of thinking may clash against each other. In these cases, translation may be manipulated to serve certain interests and ideologies. Thus, problems and conflicts may arise and harm the peaceful development of the globe. Therefore, certain ethical rules should be obeyed by translators in order to avoid such incidents. This article proposes two sets of rules, number one, don’t manipulate the source text with one’s ideologies or values to achieve some purposes or expectations, and number two, respect different cultures and overcome prejudices. Artificial intelligence, as the future tendency for translation, must absorb such ethics in order to perform good translation actions.

5.References

[1]Schäffner C. Skopos theory[J]. Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies, 1998, 17: 235-238.

[2]Nord C(1997). Translating as a Purposeful Activity Functionalist Approaches Explained[M].Manchester: St. Jerome.

[3] Jabir J K. SKOPOS THEORY: BASIC PRINCIPLES AND DEFICIENCIES[J]. Journal of the College of Arts. University of Basrah No, 2006, 41: 2.

[4] Zhang Meifang 张美芳.功能加忠诚——介评克里丝汀·诺德的功能翻译理论 Function plus Loyalty--Evaluation on Functional Translation Theory by Christina Nord[J].外国语(上海外国语大学学报) Journal of Shanghai International Studies University,2005(01):60-65.

[5]Newmark , Peter (2000). The Deficiencies of Skopos Theory: A Response to Anna Trosborg. Current Issues in Language & Society , 7(3),259-260.

[6] Wang Jinhai 王金海.目的论在文学翻译中的局限性 Limitations of Skopos Theory on Literary Translation[J].长沙铁道学院学报(社会科学版)Journal of Changsha Railway University(Social Science Edition),2014,15(03):124-125.

[7]Woesler, M. (2021). Ending the “100-schools” dispute between translation theories by integrating them and measuring the “appropriateness”. Facing up to the challenges posed by ethics and artificial intelligence to the transformation of the translator’s and interpreter’s professional role.

[8] Zhang Wannian 张万年.从意识形态操控的视角看伊万·金译《骆驼祥子》A Study of Evan King's Rickshaw Boy from Perspective of Ideology Manipulation[J].阜阳师范学院学报(社会科学版)Journal of Fuyang Normal University(Social Science Edition),2018(05):78-82.DOI:10.14096/j.cnki.cn34-1044/c.2018.05.14.

[9] Li Longquan, Luo Peiya 李龙泉,骆裴娅.“目的论”的弊端与缺陷 Deficiencies and Drawbacks of Skopos Theory[J].英语研究 English Studies,2009,7(02):51-55.

[10] Chen Daliang 陈大亮.针对翻译目的论的一种批判性反思——兼论文学翻译主体性的困境 A Critical Reflection on Skopos Theory of Translation--The Dilemma of Subjectivity in Literary Translation[J].西安外国语大学学报 Journal of Xi'an International Studies University,2007(03):49-52.DOI:10.16362/j.cnki.cn61-1457/h.2007.03.009.

[11] Guo Xuming 郭旭明.从“Dragon”到“loong”——论意识形态对“中国龙”英译实践的操纵 On Manipulation of Ideology to Translation of Chinese Dragon/Loong[J].云梦学刊 Cloud Dream Journal,2009,30(04):143-145. Written by--Yin Meida (talk) 12:58, 13 December 2021 (UTC)