Equivalence and Equivalent Effect等值和等效.pptVIP

Although dynamic equivalence is aimed, it is also a graded concept since Nida accepts that the ‘conflict’ between the content and form cannot always be easily resolved. Nida underlines that ‘correspondence in meaning must have priority over correspondence in style’. 3.2.4 Discussion of the Importance of Nida’s Work The key role of Nida is to point out the road away from strict word to word equivalence, which introduces a receptor-based orientation to translation theory. However, both the principle of equivalent effect and the concept of equivalence have come to be heavily critic The criticism that Nida’s work is subjective raises the question of whether Nida’s theory of translation really is ‘scientific’. Whether a translator follows these procedures in practice . One of Nida’s fiercest critics is Edwin Gentzler whose Contemprary Translation Theories contains a chapter on ‘the “science” of translation’. Gentzler denigrates Nida’s work for its theological and proselytizing standpoint with the concept the dynamic equivalence serves the purpose of converting the receptor. Nida has been influential on many subsequent and prominent translation scholars. 3.3 Newmark: Semantic and Communicative Translation Newmark’s Approaches to Translation and A Textbook of Translation Newmark departs from Nida’s receptor-oriented line, feeling that the success of equivalent effect is ‘illusory’ and that ‘the conflict of loyalties, the gap between emphasis on source and target language will always remain as the overriding problem in translation theory and practice’. This description of communicative translation resembles Nida’s dynamic equivalence in the effect it is trying to create on the TT reader, while semantic translation has similarities to Nida’s formal equivalence. Newmark indicates that semantic translation differs from literal translation in that it ‘respects context’, interprets and even explains (metaphor) 3.3.1 Discussion of Newmark This may be because, they