Equivalence in Translation: From Structural Fidelity to Ethical Negotiation

The Paradox of Equivalence

The Central Dilemma

Translation Studies has long been haunted by a conceptual paradox: equivalence. It is simultaneously theoretically impossible and pragmatically necessary. This tension sits at the heart of translation theory, guiding both scholarship and practice.

• If we deny equivalence entirely, translation becomes mere text production detached from meaning.
• If we insist on perfect equivalence, we ignore cultural, linguistic, and semiotic differences that necessitate translation in the first place.

The challenge, then, is not simply to achieve equivalence, but to understand how and why translators, clients, and machines pursue it, despite its philosophical elusiveness.

Provocation for the Reader

• Is equivalence a real possibility, or is it a context-dependent, negotiated requirement?
• Keep this tension—between the Ideal and the Real—at the forefront as you explore subsequent chapters.

Discussion:

• Reflect on a recent translation you encountered. Did it feel 'equivalent'? What elements were successfully transferred, and what was inevitably lost or altered?

Equivalence as a Structuralist and Linguistic Ideal

The Early Phase of Translation Studies

The initial approach treated equivalence as a technical problem, something measurable and stable—a property of linguistic encoding and decoding.

Jakobson’s Tripartite Schema

Roman Jakobson (1959) introduced three types of translation:

• Intralingual Translation: Rewording within the same language, such as paraphrasing or summarizing.
• Interlingual Translation: Translation between languages; the classic core problem of Translation Studies.

• Intersemiotic Translation: Translation between verbal and non-verbal sign systems, such as text to image, music, or film.
• Example: Localizing a video game requires syncing text, graphics, and dialogue—a case of intersemiotic equivalence.

Nida: Formal and Dynamic Equivalence

Eugene Nida (1964) emphasized the target reader’s response rather than source text form alone.

• Formal Equivalence: Faithful to source syntax and content.
• Example: Translating “It’s raining cats and dogs” literally preserves form but fails meaning.

• Dynamic Equivalence: Ensures the effect on the reader matches the original.

• Example: “It’s raining heavily” conveys meaning accurately in the TL.

Koller: A Diagnostic Tool

Werner Koller (1979/2011) expanded equivalence into five dimensions:

• Denotative Equivalence: Lexical meaning and factual content.
• Connotative Equivalence: Stylistic or affective meaning.
• Text-Normative Equivalence: Genre and textual conventions.
• Pragmatic Equivalence: Reader-oriented effects.
• Formal/Aesthetic Equivalence: Preservation of rhythm, rhetoric, or form.

Quine’s Philosophical Challenge

W.V.O. Quine (1960) demonstrated the indeterminacy of translation. Meaning is not fixed; multiple translations can be equally consistent with observable data.

• Implication: Perfect equivalence is unattainable; every translation involves interpretation.

Discussion:

• Given meaning’s indeterminacy, how should a translator ethically justify choosing dynamic over formal equivalence?

Functionalism: Equivalence Subordinate to Purpose

The Shift from Text to Function

Functionalist theorists argued that translation should serve purpose (Skopos) rather than slavishly reproduce source form.

Skopos Theory

• Translation strategy is dictated by the intended function of the text.
• Example: A Spanish medical report summarized for English-speaking lawyers prioritizes function over literal equivalence.

Nord: Ethical Functionalism

Christiane Nord (1997) introduced the Loyalty Principle:

• Translators owe ethical responsibility to source author, client, and audience.
• Purpose alone cannot justify misrepresenting the source.
• Example: A political speech cannot be softened to serve a client if it misrepresents the original message.

Provocation:

• Does Nord’s loyalty introduce a subtle form of formal equivalence back into functionalism?
• Can purpose and ethical fidelity coexist without contradiction?

Discussion:

• In sensitive translations, where would you draw the line between Skopos and ethical loyalty?

Descriptive Translation Studies (DTS) and Ideology

Descriptive Approach

DTS examines how translations actually happen, emphasizing systemic norms and cultural context.

Toury and the Polysystem

• Polysystem Theory: Translation is part of the target culture’s literary system.
• Law of Standardization: TTs conform to TL norms, sometimes at the cost of stylistic originality.
• Law of Interference: TT carries SL features into the TL.

Venuti: Ethics of Visibility

• Domesticating Translation: Smooth, fluent, translator invisible.
• Foreignizing Translation: Preserves foreignness, translator visible.
• Domesticating choices may reflect cultural power imbalances, while foreignizing resists them.
• Example: Translating Harry Potter names into culturally familiar forms (domesticating) vs. preserving original magic terms (foreignizing).

Critical Nexus:

• Toury sees trends as empirical tendencies.
• Venuti interprets the same phenomena as ethically and politically charged.

Discussion:

• Examine a classic literary translation. Identify domesticating and foreignizing choices. Are these pragmatic or ideological?

Methodological Intersections: Corpus and Technology

Corpus-Based Translation Studies

• Baker (1993) showed translators follow universal patterns:
• Explicitation: Clarifying implicit meaning.
• Simplification: Simplifying vocabulary or syntax.
• Normalization: Conforming to TL norms.
• Significance: Empirical evidence of systematic translation manipulations, supporting measurable equivalence.

Machine Translation and Post-Editing

• NMT systems: Good at Denotative and Formal Equivalence.
• Human post-editors: Ensure Pragmatic, Connotative, and Text-Normative Equivalence.
• Example: Legal text MT produces structural accuracy; human editors provide legal/cultural context.

Audiovisual Translation (AVT)

• Subtitling, dubbing, and localizations require intersemiotic equivalence: verbal, visual, auditory channels synchronized.
• Translators often sacrifice one type of equivalence to preserve another.
• Example: Video game localizations: jokes, text fitting, lip-sync, and cultural nuance.

Discussion:

• Choose a subtitled joke or pun. Which types of equivalence were preserved, which sacrificed? Ethical compromise?

Meta-Theoretical Synthesis: Equivalence as Negotiation

Equivalence is Lens-Dependent

Equivalence is not intrinsic; it is negotiated based on:

• Theoretical lens (structuralist, functionalist, ethical, descriptive, ideological)
• Methodology (corpus, MT, AVT)
• Ethical positioning (Nord, Venuti)

Key Insight

Equivalence persists because it is simultaneously:

• Philosophical problem (Quine)
• Pragmatic necessity (translators, clients, machines)
• Ethical negotiation (Venuti, Nord)

Provocation:

• There is no single, natural equivalent. The “closest equivalent” is a heuristic tool, revealing translation as a site of cultural, ethical, and methodological negotiation.

Task / Exercise

Instructions:

• Select a translation (e.g., political speech, Bible verse, poem, or video game script).

• Analyze using four lenses:

• Nida: Formal or Dynamic Equivalence? Gains and losses?
• Koller: Which equivalence types prioritized, which sacrificed?
• Toury: Standardization or Interference? Cultural implications?
• Venuti: Domesticating or foreignizing? Ethical and political consequences?
• Conclude with a thesis statement:
• "The translation of [Text X] demonstrates that equivalence is fundamentally a theoretical problem in [Nida/Skopos/DTS] but remains a practical necessity for [client/audience/machine]."
• Discussion:
• How did each theoretical lens reshape your understanding of equivalence and translation quality?

Recommended Reading

Philosophy: W.V.O. Quine – Word and Object (1960)
Structural/Linguistic: Eugene Nida – Toward a Science of Translating (1964)
Multifaceted Equivalence: Werner Koller – Einführung in die Übersetzungswissenschaft (1979/2011)
Functionalism / Skopos: Reiss & Vermeer – Grundlegung einer allgemeinen Translationstheorie (1984)
Ethical Functionalism: Christiane Nord – Translating as a Purposeful Activity (1997)
Descriptive / Polysystem: Gideon Toury – In Search of a Theory of Translation (1980)
Ideology / Ethics: Lawrence Venuti – The Translator’s Invisibility (1995)
Postcolonial Critique: Gayatri Spivak – “The Politics of Translation” (1993)
Methodology / Corpus: Mona Baker – Corpus Linguistics and Translation Studies (1993)

References

• Baker, M. (1993). Corpus Linguistics and Translation Studies: Implications and Applications. In M. Baker, G. Francis, & E. Tognini-Bonelli (Eds.), Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair (pp. 233–250). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
• Bell, R.T. (2000). Teoria și practica traducerii. Iași: Editura Polirom.
• Blum-Kulka, S., & Levenson, E. (1983). Universals of Lexical Simplification. In C. Faerch & G. Kasper (Eds.), Strategies in Interlanguage Communication (pp. 119–139). London & New York: Longman.
• Hatim, B., & Munday, J. (2004). Translation. An Advanced Resource Book. London & New York: Routledge.
• Holmes, J.S. (2000). The Name and Nature of Translation Studies. In Translated! Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies (2nd ed., pp. 67–80).
• Jakobson, R. (1959). On Linguistic Aspects of Translation. In R. Brower (Ed.), On Translation (pp. 232–239). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Mauranen, A., & Kujamäki, P. (Eds.). (2004). Translation Universals: Do They Exist? Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
• Meetham, A.R., & Hudson, R.A. (1969). Encyclopaedia of Linguistics, Information, and Control. New York: Pergamon Press.
• Riccardi, A. (2002). Translation Studies: Perspectives on an Emerging Discipline. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Shuttleworth, M., & Cowie, M. (1997). Dictionary of Translation Studies. Manchester: St. Jerome.
• Steiner, G. (1998). After Babel. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Vermeer, H. J. (1989). Skopos and Commission in Translational Action.