王玨

Abstract： Eugene.Albert.Nida is an influential figure in linguistics and translation field. One of his most significant contributions is putting forward the theory of “dynamic equivalence”. And in this essay the author will discuss the questions， what could we learn from Nidas theory？ How can we apply this theory to translation practice and criticism？ What are its limitations？ Examples are employed in hope of providing some useful outcomes.

Key words： Nida; dynamic equivalence; source language; target language; criticism

1.Introduction

Eugene﹒Albert﹒Nida is one of the most well-known linguists and translation theorists of the contemporary era. He made great contributions to the translation field and accomplished a huge volume of works throughout his life. Among all his theories “dynamic equivalence” is the one that makes the whole world remember his name. This translation principle was put forward in the 1960s， which renovated the translation studies both in China and western world.

As we are aware， the translation practice came into being long before the existence of translation theories and no one ever thought that translation could be a form of science. However， Nida led us to a fresh new horizon by proposing dynamic equivalence which symbolized a progress from individual empiricism to a scientific and systematic generation in the translation studies.

2.The definition of translation by Nida and his translation theory

The definition of translation given by Nida himself in the article “Principles of Translation as Exemplified by Bible Translation” is as follows： “Translating consists in reproducing in the receptor language the closest natural equivalent of the source message， first in terms of meaning and second in terms of style.” In fact， along with his famous dynamic equivalence， he raised another term with it-formal equivalence. He illustrated that “Formal equivalence focuses attention on the message itself， in both form and content…One is concerned that the message in the receptor language should match as closely as possible the different elements in the source language.” While dynamic equivalence was defined as follows： “Dynamic， or functional， equivalence is based on what Nida calls ‘the principle of equivalent effect， where ‘the relationship between receptor and message should be substantially the same as that which existed between the original receptors and the message. The message has to be tailored to the receptors linguistic needs and cultural expectation and ‘a(chǎn)ims at complete naturalness of expression. ‘Naturalness is a key requirement for Nida. Indeed， he defines the goal of dynamic equivalence as seeking ‘the closest natural equivalent to the source-language message. This receptor-oriented approach considers adaptations of grammar， of lexicon and of cultural references to be essential in order to achieve naturalness; the TT language should not show interference from the SL， and the ‘foreignness of the ST setting is minimized in a way that would now be criticized by later culturally oriented translation theorists.”

3.?Practicability of dynamic equivalence

Obviously， Nida focused on dynamic equivalence rather than word-for-word translation. To him， the most crucial element is the similar response in the TL readers， which is reasonable in theory level but yet not very feasible on the practice level as response is so subjective a term that cannot be quantified. However， from my perspective， dynamic equivalence is applicable in many cases. For example， if we use formal equivalence to translate a sentence selected from Gone with the Wind “She could not desert Tara; she belonged to the red acres far more than they could ever belong to her.”， it would be “她不會(huì)放棄塔拉;她屬于這些紅土地，遠(yuǎn)比它們屬于她更加真實(shí)?！?In this way， it would cause difficulty in understanding the meaning among Chinese readers. Under this circumstance， dynamic equivalence is in favor--“她不能放棄塔拉，這塊紅土地是屬于她的，而她更是永遠(yuǎn)屬于這塊紅土地?！?/p>

Another example is from a famous movie Casablanca： “The drive back to my home in Edmoonton was an endless journey of destructive emotions and thoughts. In a truck-stop restaurant， I sat staring at a glass of cheap red wine. Of all the gin joints in all the towns in all the world， she walks out of mine.” Chinese readers would prefer the DE translation “在我開車回到埃德蒙頓的路上，我陷入了無盡的悲傷之中。隨后，我來到一家汽車旅館，端著一杯廉價(jià)紅酒出神，弱水三千，終究我已不是她那瓢中的一壺水了?！?rather than “在我開車回到埃德蒙頓的路上，我陷入了無盡的悲傷之中。隨后，我來到一家汽車旅館，端著一杯廉價(jià)紅酒出神，覺著這世上有那么多家旅館，她終究還是走出了我的那一家?！?The latter version keeps exactly the same form as the English source text， while the former one does not obey the word-for-word translation but sticks to sense-for-sense translation. This kind of practice perfectly conveys what contains in the original version under a new face in the Chinese culture. Thus it will easily remove obstacles caused by cultural gap and arouse same feelings from the target readers as if this story happened in their country.

3.1 Dynamic equivalence in daily expressions

More cases are here to prove the practicability of dynamic equivalence. Wed like to use it quite often when it comes to daily expressions in communication. If someone says “I was reliably informed.” Could you take it as “我被很可靠地告知?！保?And “那個(gè)演員有一個(gè)較小的欽佩者的圈子?！?for “The actor has a smaller circle of admirers.” ？ Apparently， we would not. If the translator is confined to the language form， there will not be authentic translation. The two translations are stubbornly shackled by one English grammatical concept-parts of speech. In fact， this concept is created to help us to understand the relationship among words in the sentences so that we can comprehend what is meant in them. In order to present the complicated relation among linguistic elements in a more clear way， Nida abandoned the long-established traditional concept and reclassified all the words into object， event， abstract and relations. Thus we get the translation that can make sense for the above two examples： “我得到的信息很可靠。” and “那個(gè)演員沒有那么叫座。”

As English language contains an enormous quantity of slang where words do not always accord with the meaning it meant to have， dynamic equivalence is quite appropriate under such a circumstance. Person A is bullied and he turns to Person B for help， most likely B would say “Dont worry， Ill clean his damn clock.” If we translate with formal equivalence as follows： “別擔(dān)心，我會(huì)擦他的那塊兒破表的”， it would be ridiculous and would fail to convey the correct message. To translate this right， a translator needs to obtain a solid grasp on the source language culture and then translate it in an understandable way despite the unfaithfulness on the form to the source text. This can be best supported by Chomskys generative-transformational model. Nida applied this to his translation studies. He believes this model equips translators with a technique for decoding the ST and a procedure for encoding the TT. Thus， the surface structure of the ST is analyzed into the basic elements of the deep structure; these are ‘transferred in the translation process and then restructured semantically and stylistically into the surface structure of the TT. Abide by this theory， the translation of the above example will be rendered naturally like this： “別擔(dān)心，我會(huì)好好收拾他的。” Similarly， “Its kinda embarrassing， so please keep it under your hat.” is rendered as “挺尷尬的，所以請(qǐng)別告訴別人.”

3.2 Dynamic equivalence in subtitle translation

Owing to the special language form of colloquial expression， dynamic equivalence makes its appearance frequently in subtitle translation. Another reason is that producers try very hard to impress the audience with up-to-date expressions as English movies and TV series have started to prevail in China in recent years. I will list some examples as follows：

1、There you are. Ive been looking for you forever.

--眾里尋他千百度，驀然回首，那人卻在，燈火闌珊處。

2、Youre so distinguished， but Im just an ordinary person. Im incapable of getting even a hint of what youre thinking.

--娘娘您是人中之鳳，奴婢只是常鱗凡介，試問又怎能猜得到娘娘的蕙質(zhì)蘭心呢？

3、Youd know， how the time flies. Only yesterday， was the time of our lives.

--莫道荏苒流歲月，余生所憶惟昨前。

4、Ive always wanted to travel.

--我一生放蕩不羈愛旅游。

3.3 Dynamic equivalence in advertisement translation

Also the same phenomenon is shown in advertisement translation. Generally speaking， the slogan of any advertisement needs to be concise， intelligible， catchy， novel and unique， topic-prominent. Accordingly， the translation version must meet those requirements as well. Given the readership of different cultures， which Nida laid much emphasis on， translators sometimes need to do some necessary recreations to achieve the goal. Some examples are listed below.

1、Good to the last drop. 滴滴香濃，意猶未盡。

-- Maxwell House Coffee

2、We lead. Others copy. 我們領(lǐng)先，他人仿效。

-- Ricoh Copier

3、No business too small， no problem too big. 沒有不作的小生意，沒有解決不了的大問題。

-- IBM Corporation

4、Ask for more. 渴望無限。

-- Pepsi-Cola

5、We integrate， you communicate. 我們集大成，您超越自我。

-- Mitsubishi Electrician

There is no doubt that we would prefer formal equivalence in some occasions， for instance， the translation of some proverbs. “Knowledge is power.” is commonly rendered as “知識(shí)就是力量?！?and “Time is money.” rendered as “時(shí)間就是金錢?！?/p>

4.?Criticism and limitations of “dynamic equivalence” theory

Not a single theory is all-purpose. Nor can “dynamic equivalence” theory have universal applicability. It gives guidance to the translation practices which give priority to conveying information while the form of expression is put in a less important position， such as the Bible translation， subtitle translation， advertisement translation and the translation of science and technology texts. That is because it can effectively and accurately convey information. But if the dynamic equivalence theory is used to guide all the translation practice， it is clearly not appropriate.

As his dynamic equivalence has enjoyed great popularity and applauded by many translators and translation theorists， it has gone through severe criticism in translation circle at the same time. After his theory was introduced into China， it exerted enormous influence upon the Chinese translation circle and many translation scholars started to take his theory as their criterion of translation practice. There was once a period when referring to translation everyone would speak of Nida. They think highly of him because they are set free from the fetters chained by the form of the original， shifting the main point of translation to the content of meaning and the response of the readers.

On the other hand， his dynamic equivalence received negative comments， in Chinese translation circle first witnessed by two articles named “The Significance and Limitation of Dynamic Equivalence” and “Should Readers Response be Considered as a Criterion in Assessment of Translated Works？” in 1988. It was stated that dynamic equivalence was initially intended for Bible translating and it was impracticable for literary translation. Literary work is so special and complicated kind of art that everyone feels differently towards the same work， just as the old saying goes “There are a thousand Hamlets in a thousand peoples eyes.” We cannot guarantee that the SL readers will have the same response， how can we manage to make the TL readers have the same response as the original receptors？ This is the theorys first limitation that the role of readers has been laid too much emphasis by Nida. As a matter of fact， translation is a complicated process involving in plenty of factors， such as SL， ST， the translator， TL， readers and the different cultures of SL and TL.

Second， the form and style of the original texts have been neglected. So when translators deal with texts where the style and form are the prominent factors of the original texts， poems in particular， dynamic equivalence losses its practicability. As we are concerned， classical Chinese poetry holds an extremely high position in Chinese culture and it is regarded as the essence of Chinese ancient wisdom. It contains a wide range of types， such as shi， ci， qu， fu， and so on. And each type can be classified further. For example， shi can be further divided into five-character quatrain， seven-character quatrain， seven-character octave， etc. Every type has a strict discipline on the number of characters， the rhyme， and also the images chosen to express different emotions. Let us look at one example below.

登鸛雀樓

唐 王之渙

白日依山盡，黃河入海流。

欲窮千里目，更上一層樓。

Tang Yihe applied dynamic equivalence to the translation of this poem， and his version is as follows：

Ascending the Stork Tower

The white sun sets behind mountains，

The Yellow River flows into the sea.

Go further up one flight of stairs，

And youll widen your view a thousand li.

Theoretically， this version of translation is a successful case applying dynamic equivalence. The position of the third and the forth line in Chinese has been exchanged when rendering into English. And this kind of treatment aims to accord with the English language code and thus enables English readers comprehend the poem clearly. The whole poem succeeds in preserving the meanings of the ST. However， since the form and the rhyme have been changed it fails to let the TL readers appreciate the aesthetic value in this famous poem.

Conclusion

In conclusion， Nidas dynamic equivalence has got both merits and demerits. When and how should we apply this theory into practice is quite flexible. After all， there is no perfect translation theory that is applicable to all types of texts till now.

References

[1] James S. Holmes. Translated！?： Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies [M]. Amsterdam： Rodopi B.V.， 1988.

[2] Munday， Jeremy. Introducing Translation Studies： Theories and Applications Second Edition [M]. London：Routledge. 2008.

[3] Nida， Eugene A. The Sociolinguistics of Interlingual Communication. [M]. Bruxelles： Editions du Hazard.?1996.

[4] 陳德鴻，張南峰.西方翻譯理論精選[M].香港：香港城市大學(xué)出版社，2000.

[5] 陳福康.中國(guó)譯學(xué)理論史稿[M].上海：上海外語教育出版社，1992.

[6] 郭建中.當(dāng)代美國(guó)翻譯理論[M].武漢：湖北教育出版社，2000.

[7] 李田心.不存在所謂的翻譯（科）學(xué)[J].中國(guó)翻譯，2000，（5）.

[8] 譚載喜.西方翻譯簡(jiǎn)史[M].北京：商務(wù)印書館，1991.

[9] 屠國(guó)元，肖錦銀.西方現(xiàn)代翻譯理論在中國(guó)的傳播與接受[J].中國(guó)翻譯，2000，（5）.

[10] 王東風(fēng).文化差異與讀者反應(yīng)——評(píng)Nida的讀者同等反映論[A].郭建中.文化與翻譯[C].北京：中國(guó)對(duì)外翻譯出版公司，2000.

[11] 張經(jīng)浩.與奈達(dá)的一次翻譯筆談[J].中國(guó)翻譯，2000，（5）.

[12] 張美芳.翻譯學(xué)的目標(biāo)與結(jié)構(gòu)——霍姆斯的譯學(xué)構(gòu)想介評(píng)[J].中國(guó)翻譯，2000，（2）.

[13] 張南峰.特性與共性——論中國(guó)翻譯學(xué)與翻譯學(xué)的關(guān)係[J].中國(guó)翻譯，2000，（2）.