History of Translation Studies

History of Translation Studies

Link back to course homepage: Course Homepage Intro. to TS

Acknowledgement

I am indebted to the more than 300 students of the Master Course "Introduction to Translation Studies" conducted in the two fall terms 2019/2020 and 2020/2021 at Hunan Normal University, Foreign Studies College. They have enriched this monograph with their ideas, their creativity and the top students even have contributed short passages to this book on single aspects. They have also helped to arrange that the monograph could appear in different languages simultaneously. The Foreign Studies College is one of the top places of Translation and Interpreting Studies in China.

Foreword

Interpretation theories and interpretation studies are as old as human languages, since interpretation practise is not just necessary between full fledged languages, but is practised as soon as two different individuals meet, like a grandmother and her grandchild. The first lay interpreters naturally reflected on their interpreting work and this was the start of theories and studies. As soon as written language was invented, critical reflection also started and with it translation theories and translation studies.

The first thoughts about transponing the meaning of one language into a similar one of another language were prescriptive with precepts and principles, sometimes exaggerated into dogma and people not adhering to them being tortured or murdered.

In the 1960s, the translation studies started to become aware of itself as an academic discipline.

Skopos and Functional Equivalence

A Comparative Study between Functional Equivalence Theory and Skopos Theory and My thoughts on the Two Theories

Abstract：This paper first makes a brief introduction of the two very important translation theories, which are Functional Equivalence Theory and Skopos theory, put forward by Eugene Nida and Hans Vermeer respectively. Then the paper analyzes the similarities and differences between the two theories from many different perspectives. Through the analysis of the two theories, the author finally puts forwards its own thoughts on the two translation theories. Key words：Functional Equivalence Theory; Skopos theory; Eugene Nida; Hans Vermeer

(1)Introduction 1.1. Functional Equivalence Theory

In 1964, Eugene Nida, the famous American linguist and Bible Translator, first put forward the notion of “dynamic equivalence” in his book Toward a Science of Translating. According to Nida, “dynamic equivalence” refers to “ the closest natural equivalence to the source language message(Tan Zaixi, 1984: 10)”. In saying this, Nida means to appeal translators to put emphasis on expressing to the target readers both the messages conveyed in the source language and the forms and styles of the original text. Later, he realizes the name “dynamic equivalence” may confuse some translation learners and they may think he only focuses on translating the content and meaning of the source text and ignores its form and style, he then changes the name of “dynamic equivalence” into “functional equivalence”. Nida thinks that the response made by the target language receptor to the target text should generally be equivalent to the response made by the source language receptor to the source text, so when the translator cannot retain both the form and the content of the original text, he or she should give priority to the content of the original text and change the form of the source text. And in response to questions like how and to what degree the translator can change the form of the original text, Nida then points out that in translation, there are four aspects in dynamic equivalence, namely, lexical equivalence, syntactic equivalence, textual equivalence and stylistic equivalence respectively. If a translator can convey the language form, the content and the style of the source text in natural target language, and make the target readers give the same response to the target text as the source language made to the original text, then his translation can be said to have achieved the maximal equivalence. On the other hand, if a translation only transmit the content of the original text generally, then the translation can be said to have achieved the minimal equivalence. 

1.2. Skopos Theory Skopos theory was first put forward by Hans Vermeer in his book Framework for a General Translation Theory in 1978. According to Skopos theory, translation means to “produce a text at target setting for a target purpose and target addressee in target circumstances”(Liu Junping, 2009: 377). Based on this definition, Vermeer Hans concludes the three rules of Skopos theory, which are skopos rule, coherence rule and loyalty rule. Firstly, skopos rule, or purpose principle, is the primary principle to be followed in translation. It holds that the purpose to be achieved of the target text determines the whole process of translation, including the choice of the translator in translation skills and strategies, and that all translation activities are determined by its purpose. Generally speaking, the skopos rule has under its umbrella three types of purposes: the first one is the basic purpose of the translator; the second is the communicative purpose of the translation; and the third is the purpose of specific translation strategies or means. But at most of times, “purpose” refers to the communicative purpose of the translation. Secondly, coherence rule, also called intra-textual coherence, means that the translation must be understandable and readable to the receptors, and meaningful in the communicative environment of the target culture and the target text. Thirdly, fidelity rule, which means that there should be inter-textual coherence between the source text and the target text. Inter-textual coherence is similar to what is usually called “信” or “be faithful to the original text”. In the traditional translation theory, “faithfulness” is always regarded as the basic translation standard to obey, but in Skopos theory, to what degree the form and style of the target text should be faithful to the original text totally depends on the purpose of the translation and the translator’s understanding of the source text. Under Vermeer’ s Skopos theory, the skopos rule is the most important rule among the three rules, the coherence rule the second important, and the fidelity rule the least important. This indicates that in Skopos theory, the end justifies the means(Liu Junping, 2009: 377-378)

II.Similarities and Differences 2.1. The Similarities between the Two Theories 2.1.1. Both Attach Great Importance to the Target Receptor’s Status

    Functional Equivalence Theory is a receptor-oriented theory. As revealed by Nida’s definition of translation, that “translation consists in reproducing in the receptor language the closest natural equivalence of the source language, first in terms of meaning and second in terms of style”, Functional Equivalence Theory emphasizes that the primary aim of translation is such that the target text should bring the target receptors the similar or same response as the response made by receptors in the source language. Besides, to bring to the readers a similar or same response, Nida even put forward that, if it is necessary, different target texts should be made according to the needs of different receptors. All of the two points reflects that in Functional Equivalence Theory, the target receptor’s status is very important.

While the Skopos theory, too, put the reader’s needs on a high status. Of the three rules in Skopos theory, the most important one is skopos rule, which includes three purposes, the basic purpose of the translator, the communicative purpose of the translation, and the purpose of specific translation strategies or means. However, to take all the three purposes into consideration, a translator must first know what and who the target text serves, so he or she can immediately know the purpose of the translation task and do a corresponding and qualified translation. This, on the other hand, also means that in Skopos theory, the target reader’s needs indirectly determine the purpose of the translation, so it is also given priority to by the translator. 2.1.2. Both Emphasize the Communicative Function of Translation

    Under the Functional Equivalence Theory, the translation should achieve a functional equivalence, bringing the target readers the roughly same experience and making them give the responses as the receptors in the source language culture. In doing this, the translator is in fact trying to achieve the communicative function of the original text by shortening the distance of the source text receptors and the target text receptors, which, on the other hand, means that the process of translation is a communicative process between the original language culture and the culture of the target language.
    In Skopos theory, of the three purposes under the skopos rule, the communicative purpose is regarded as the most important purpose of a target text. Skopos theory holds that translation is a communicative activity with a purpose, and the process of translation is determined by the intended function or purpose of the target text.

2.2 The Differences between the Two Theories 2.2.1. Different Status of the Source Language and the Target Language

    From the perspective of Functional Equivalence Theory, a good translation achieving the goal of translation not only needs to provide another message similar to the original message conveyed in the source text, but also needs to clearly reflect the meaning and intention of the original text, bringing to the target readers similar or even same effects and making them give a same response. From this point, one can easily see that Functional Equivalence Theory is centered on the original text, which, to some degree, reflects that Functional Equivalence still put the source language on a high status. The status of the target language is secondary to the source language as the choice of the words, sentence structures of the target text still heavily depend on the source text.
     Skopos theory, on the other hand, gets rid of the point of view of the traditional text-centered translation theory, and focuses on the function and purpose of the target text. From the perspective of Skopos theory, a successful translation is not one that places the original text in a sacred and unattainable position. Vermeer further put forward the view of “subverting the source language” in Skopos theory. He stated that “the linguistic and stylistic features of the original text are no longer the only criteria to measure the translation”. All of these reflect that the source text enjoys a relatively low status in Skopos theory compared with its status in Functional Equivalence Theory. Besides, from the three rules of Skopos theory, one can easily know that, the most important one is the skopos rule, then the coherence of the target text, namely the intra-textual coherence and finally the fidelity of the target text to the source text, namely the inter-textual coherence. Therefore, we can see that the status of the source language actually lower than the target language in Skopos theory, which is different from the case in Functional Equivalence Theory.  

2.2.2. Different Translation Principles

    Nida believes that equivalence is the goal of translation. His translation standard is that the target text should be faithful to the original text in terms of content and style while also being expressive in the eyes of the target readers. As put forward by Nida that, “translation consists in reproducing in the receptor language the closest natural equivalence of the source language, first in terms of meaning and second in terms of style”, the translation standard of Functional Equivalence Theory include “equivalence”, which is the equivalence of meaning and style, namely be faithful to the meaning and style of the source text. Besides, in front of “equivalence”, there is also a word “natural”, which means the target text should be fluent and be in conformity with the habits of the target culture, namely “expressiveness” in traditional translation theory.
  In Skopos theory, however, “faithfulness” is no longer regarded as the primary translation criteria. As Skopos theory judges the success of a translation by its intended purpose, which reflects the requirements of the target readers. However, as the requirements of the readers are different, Skopos theory advocates the diversification of translation standards. Only when the communicative purpose of the translation requires the translation to have the same communicative function as the original text, equivalence becomes the standard of the translation process. Otherwise, the translation may be very different from the original text in its style and form.

2.2.3. Different Translation Skills and Translation Strategies Used in the Translation Process

     In Functional Equivalence Theory, as determined by its definition for translation, the translation skills and strategies used in the translation process are all for one common goal, which is to bring the target readers the roughly same or same response. In order to achieve the aim, some translation skills are frequently used under the Functional Equivalence Theory, including literal translation, liberal translation, domestication and borrowing translation. And among all these translation skills, domestication and borrowing translation are two translation strategies most favorably advocated by Functional Equivalence Theory. Here, I will list the translation of a phrase to briefly explain the reason why the two translation skills are often used in translation process. We all know that to grow like mushrooms is an English phrase which means to rapidly grow or increase in number. It vividly describes the scene that after the incessant rain in London, the explosive growth of the mushrooms. While in China, there is also a similar phrase “雨后春笋”, to describe the scene that after a spring rain, the bamboo shoots sprout overnight in the forest. Therefore, when doing a E-C translation, the translator often uses domestication and translate “to grow like mushrooms” into “雨后春笋”, so as to enable the Chinese readers give a same response as English readers did.
     However, Skopos theory is different. In Skopos theory, the end justifies the means, which means all the translation skills and strategies are determined by the purpose and use of the target text as well as the reader it serves. Therefore, it usually adopts different translation strategies to meet different translation purposes. Translators can freely choose the translation skills he wants to use, whether it is literal translation or liberal translation, domestication or foreignization, transliteration or borrowing translation, even simplifying translation and reduction translation, in consideration of the author's writing intention, the theme of the original text, the translator’s purpose and the needs of the readers. 

Here, I want to firstly compare the difference between Functional Equivalence Theory and Skopos theory in dealing with content with cultural characteristics. As I wrote before, the Functional Equivalence Theory emphasizes the same response between the original readers and the target readers and the presence of a natural text to the target readers, so it prefers to use the existed words, phrases, and cultural images in the target language to replace the expressions in the original text, which explains why domestication and borrowing translation are often use under the theory -- that is because by using the two ways, functional equivalence can be achieved. However, in Skopos theory, the translator enjoys a higher degree of freedom. He can select translation skills flexibly according to the skopos of the text. For example, when it comes to cultural translation, the translator should carefully consider the cultural differences between the two languages and have full understanding of the purpose and usage of the original text. If the purpose of a translated text is to diffuse the language characteristics of the original author, the author’s writing intention, or the language characteristics of the source language culture, then the translator can adopt the strategy of foreignization or the strategy of literal translation with some annotations in the target text to help the target readers better understand a foreign concept. For example, in order to maintain the cultural characteristics of Chinese, the Chinese proverb “谋事在人，成事在天” should be translated as “man proposals, heaven disposes." instead of “man proposals, God disposes”. This is because the translator wants foreign people to know our beliefs -- we Chinese believe in Heaven rather than God. At the same time, sometimes, to meet the needs of some special readers, simplifying translation and reduction translation are also used in the translation process. For example, there are some publishers in China which publish the simplified version of those foreign classics to meet the the children’s needs in reading. 2.2.4. Different Status of the Translator In what Nida thinks of, the translator is only a cultural envoy, transmitting the idea of a culture to people in another culture. Nida believes that as the second source of information, the translator’s role is mainly to convey the original author’s intention to the readers. Therefore, the translator must understand what the original author thinks. The translator’s role is mainly to convey the original author’s intention to the readers. In addition, the translator should not introduce any personal ideas into the translation of the original text, no matter whether the original point of view is consistent with his own. “The translator should not intervene in, edit or rewrite the original text even if it has shortcomings and errors, nor should he improve the original text even if he has the ability”(Tan Zaixi, 1984). Of course, we can critically accept Nida’s words. When there are obvious mistakes in the original text (such as the original text not conforming to the facts), we should correct them in the translation. Skopos theory improves the position of translator. The translator is the receptor of the original text and transmits the information of the original text to the reader. Skopos theory allows the translator to determine the faithfulness of the translation to the source text and determine the proportion of the faithfulness of the target text to the original text. It adopts the translation strategies such as “modification, abridgement and reduction”, and denies that there is only one “correct or best” translation of the source language. Therefore, the translator has more freedom in the process of translation, and can transfer the original text according to the needs, expectations and knowledge background of the readers, so as to achieve the purpose of a translation task. 2.2.5. Different translation processes In order to achieve functional equivalence, Nida proposed the famous back translation theory by referring to the concepts of core sentence, non-core sentence and transformation. In Functional Equivalence Theory, translation is a complicated process, which includes four stages: analysis, transfer, reconstruction and test (Tan Zaixi, 1984, 144). Specifically speaking, as far as Nida is concerned, when doing a translation task, the translator needs to transform the original text from the surface structure to the deep structure or pseudo-deep structure on the basis of grammatical and semantic analysis, and then translate the deep structure or pseudo-deep structure of the original text to the deep structure of the target text, and finally from the deep structure of the target text to the surface structure of the target text. After the translation is done, the translator needs to re-examine and test the translation.(Peng Changjiang, 2017: 09) Skopos theory, however, unlike the Functional Equivalence Theory, it does not put forward specific translation procedures. The Skopos theory does not give detailed guidelines for the translation of words, phrases, paragraphs and texts, but it do gives some guidance to the translator from the macro perspective, giving the translator more autonomy to do translation and enabling them freely translate a text.

III.My Thoughts on the Two Theories 3.1. My thought on Functional Equivalence Theory 3.1.1. Strengths and Contributions of Functional Equivalence Theory Firstly, the Functional Equivalence Theory brings modern linguistics, communication studies, information theory, semiotics and aesthetics into the field of translation. From the macro perspective, it breaks through the limitations of the traditional thoughts on translation and provides a new perspective for translation research. It studies translation in a more detailed way from multiple perspectives, applies new thoughts, concepts and methods to translation studies, and provides many new methods for translation research. Besides, it also lays a solid foundation for modern translation studies. Secondly, it must be emphasized that, Functional Equivalence Theory has given many constructive suggestions to translators. From a micro perspective, Functional Equivalence Theory has solved the long-standing dispute between literal translation and liberal translation. It requires the translator use the target language to reproduce the meaning of the source language as fully as possible in different language structures, thus both breaking the restrictions of traditional word-for-word translation and limiting the free and random play of the translator. To some extent, Functional Equivalence Theory has greatly promoted the translation of some types of literary works, such as the translation of prose, help avoiding the creation of many pseudo--translation and translationese cases. At the same time, it eases the argument of domestication and foreignization from the perspective of language and culture, and seeks the balance point of domestication and foreignization from the perspective of multiple disciplines. Thirdly, Functional Equivalence Theory provides with the target readers a chance to know other country’s culture in their own language. Traditionally, translation is to transform the original language that are different from ours into the familiar language that we use. It can let the people who have not learned a foreign language also understand and appreciate the message under some phrases written in a foreign language. For example, if one has no common sense in English, he will regard “a piece of cake” as “一块蛋糕”. This example reflects the culture gap between the people of two countries. Good translation is one that overcomes these culture gaps and turn them into what the target readers is familiar with. So, it is better for the translator use the Functional Equivalence Theory to translate “a piece of cake” with the well-known Chinese proverb “小菜一碟” . 3.1.2. Deficiency of Functional Equivalence Theory

Although Functional Equivalence Theory has made many contributions to the translation studies, it is not without its deficiencies. Here I list three disadvantages of it.

First, Nida’s Functional Equivalence Theory is concluded from the translation of the Bible. It is, in fact, cannot be a guideline for all kinds of translation. For example, some texts, including some articles with profound historic significance and cultural characteristics, some scientific articles, some lyrical articles, movie subtitles, government reports, actually need different translation standards. Functional Equivalence Theory can play an important role in appropriate fields, but it is not universal or omnipotent rule. Though, in fact, there is nothing omnipotent and flawless in the world. Functional Equivalence Theory can play an important role in appropriate area. If it is used in the right place, it can help the translator present a more brilliant translation. Second, the Functional Equivalence Theory requires the target text to be written in a “common language”, which should be understood by the less educated readers and accepted by the readers with high literacy, but this turns out to be very difficult to achieve in practice. It can be said that the requirements of this theory are way too demanding. Although this is a goal worth pursuing, it is nearly impossible to achieve, as even in the same country, different knowledge levels, different regional cultures and even different life experiences will lead to different understanding abilities. In addition, Nida also ignores an important thing, that is, culture is very complex. The generation, evolution and creation of each nation and its culture are different from each other. Some cultural images in foreign works may be something the other country’s readers have never seen and cannot understand. In translation process, it is certainly ideal if the translator can find a corresponding cultural object in the target culture. But at most of times, it is in fact very difficult for the translator to find such a substitute. This makes the so called “functional equivalence” very difficult to achieve, and even show its loopholes -- which is also a difficulty in translation process -- it is usually difficult for translators to translate and explain certain words with special cultural meanings. In fact, the differences between different cultures are absolute and inevitable, while the similarities are rare and precious. For example, in order to avoid the danger and inauspicious emotions of the word “red” in western culture, some British translators translate the original title of the book 《红楼梦》 into “The Story of the Stone”. This kind of translation, however, fails to transmit the message of a rich, luxurious, dreamy life hidden in the original book name, let alone bring the western readers the same response. 3.1.3. My Point of View towards Functional Equivalence Theory The great influence of Functional Equivalence Theory on the whole translation field is obvious to all, but it is not a universal theory. The advantages and disadvantages of the theory of functional equivalence should be treated in a dialectical way. Functional Equivalence Theory is the product of a particular historical period, and it may have some inconsistencies with contemporary translation theories. Therefore, we should take a comprehensive view of Nida’s translation theory. On the whole, Nida’s translation thought can be regarded as a bright gem in the treasure house of western translation studies.

3.2. My thoughts on Skopos Theory 3.2.1. Strengths and Contributions of Skopos Theory

     Skopos theory has many advantages. First of all, as a major breakthrough in the study of contemporary western translation theory, Skopos theory breaks the limitations of Functional Equivalence Theory at the linguistic level and puts forward a translation standard dominated by skopos principle. Skopos theory provides the translator with another perspective in translation practice, which is more conducive to the choice of translation strategies.
     Secondly, Skopos theory focuses on the requirements of the translation client, points out the influence of the client on the translation process, and breaks the limitation of traditional translation theory, which only takes the original author, the translator and the target reader into consideration. From this perspective, Skopos theory can be called a real breakthrough in the history of translation studies.
     Thirdly, Skopos theory emphasizes the initiative and participation of the translator, and holds that the original text mainly plays the role of providing information. Therefore, it shifts the focus of translation from faithful reproducing the source text to the creation of the translation. It overthrows the central position of the original text and establishes the central position of the target text and the translator, which gives all translation learners and researchers a new insight towards translation studies.

Finally, Skopos theory further studies the development of translation from the perspective of culture. From the perspective of Skopos theory, translation is a kind of cultural comparison and a kind of cross-cultural communication in a certain cultural context, which benefits the target readers a lot. 3.2.2. Deficiency of Skopos Theory However, all thing is not perfect, Skopos theory is no exception, of course. Firstly, Skopos theory allows the translator to rewrite the original text to a certain extent, but it does not indicate the extent to which the translator can rewrite the original text. It gives the translator too much freedom, which may let the translator easily translate the source text out of its context. Besides, the original meaning and usage of the source text may be distorted if the translator unscrupulously use every means in order to achieve the so-called “purpose of translation”. Accordingly, the translator will fall into the whirlpool of random translation, which may violate the intention of the original text. Secondly, the Skopos theory overemphasizes the purpose of translation, the purpose of the translator and the purpose of the target language, so that the translator may easily change or omit many stylistic features of the original text in the target text. This makes it not suitable for some styles of text, such as poems. Because if a translator translates a poem into a prose or a descriptive passages out of the purpose of the translation client, he or she may be better said to rewrite or recreate something than translate. After all, translation is based on the original text, otherwise it cannot be called translation.

     Last but not least, there are tens of thousands of readers. To meet the needs of different people, a translation must adopt multiple standards. When there are contradictions among various standards, the translator will be at a loss and the multiple standards will be equal to no standards. For example, if a translator receives the mission of the translation client that he should translate a song faithfully but also retain the beauty of the original text for both the children and adults to appreciate it, then the translator may feel hard to do the translation task with the three contradictory translation requirements.    

3.2.3. My Point of View towards Skopos Theory There are more or less deficiencies in every translation theory, and Skopos theory is no exception. To some extent, the shortcomings of Skopos theory mentioned above are also a major feature of it. It is this distinctive theoretical feature that can make it stand out in many translation theories and attract the attention of many scholars and translation enthusiasts. The author believes that the contribution of Skopos theory to the development of translation theory and its guiding significance in translation practice is far greater than its shortcomings and deficiencies. People should treat it with a more objective and rational attitude and let it play its due role in the field of translation. Generally speaking, the Skopos theory put forward by Hans Vermeer is regarded as a major theoretical breakthrough in the study of western translation theory, and it also plays an important role in guiding the successful translation practice.

IV.Conclusion Through the above comparison, we find that both Functional Equivalence Theory and Skopos theory have their own advantages and disadvantages, and their differences are greater than their similarities. Functional equivalence pays attention to the equivalence between the form and content of the translation and the original text as well as the reader’s response. Skopos theory can solve some problems that can not be solved by Functional Equivalence Theory and widen the research perspective of translation theory, which is to some extent the inheritance and development of Functional Equivalence Theory. The scope of application of the two is different, but both of them have their own unique excellencies.