Abstract : Controversial as it is, the abstract concept of translation equivalence is of effective use in translation studies as it makes the analyses of translation more specific and more accessible. This essay attempts to present a few in-depth reflections on translation equivalence, in which three categories of equivalence are put forward according to the understanding on the part of this writer, viz. equivalence before translating, equivalence in translating and equivalence after translating. This narration, in the final analysis, identifies and verifies the theoretical importance and significance of the term “translation equivalence” in translation studies.
Key words: equivalence; equivalent; translation; translating
ⅠIntroduction
Controversial as the term “equivalence” is, it is, as we may see, of much importance within the framework of theoretical reflection on translation and has been making its appearances in such terms as “textual equivalence”, “formal equivalence”, “dynamic equivalence”, “functional equivalence”, “grammatical equivalence” and “pragmatic equivalence” put forward by the well-known theorists, such as J.C. Catford, Eugene A. Nida, and Mona Baker, to name just a few, in their works on translation studies.
It is not by accident that the term “equivalence” has been used so often by those who are concerned with theoretical studies of translation. It is the soul of translation, if we may say so. Although it seems to be so intangible that we may even cast doubts on the necessity of its existence in the field of translation studies, it has so far identified itself as a concept giving much impetus to the theoretical analysis of translation. Like the translation principles, either the three-character principle of “信达雅” (faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance) formulated by the Chinese scholar 严复 (Yan Fu) or the well-known three principles advanced by the English theoretician Alexander Tytler, which are the guidelines on the concrete process of translating as well as the criteria for judging the validity or adequacy of translation works, the term “translation equivalence” makes the analyses of translation more specific and more accessible. On this point, I find my understanding has been confirmed by Professor Qiu, who, in his MA dissertation in 1988, indicated that “……all the … concepts about equivalence only further explained in modern linguistic terms the three famous principles of translation laid down by Alexander Tytler in 1790, i.e., ‘Ⅰ.That the translation should give a complete transcript of the idea of the original work. Ⅱ.That the style and manner of writing should be of the same character with that of the original. Ⅲ.That the translation should have all the ease of original composition.’”. (邱 2000: 330-331)
As a concept that merits sober reflection, “equivalence” has aroused my interest and enhanced my understanding of what is translation as well. The following is to submit some of my thoughts on this subject.
