尤金·奈达Eugene Nida翻译理论

Eugene Nida

Dynamic Equivalence and Formal Equivalence

Eugene A. Nida (1914-- ) is a distinguished American translation theorist as well as a linguist. His translation theory has exerted a great influence on translation studies in Western countries. His work on translatoin set off the study of modern translation as an academic field, and he is regareded as “the patriarch of translation study and a founder of the discipline” (Snell-Hornby 1988:1; Baker 1998:277)

Nida’s theory of dynamic equivalence is his major contribution to translation studies. The concept is first mentioned in his article “Principles of Translation as Exemplified by Bible Translating”(1959) (《从圣经翻译看翻译原则》) as he attempts to define translating. In his influential work Toward a Science of Translating (1964) (《翻译原则科学探索》), he postulates dynamic equivalent translation as follows:

In such a translation (dynamic equivalent translation) one is not so concerned with matching the receptor-language message with the source-language message, but with the dynamic relationship, that the relationship between receptor and message should be substantially the same as that existed between the original receptors and the message (1964:159) However, he does not give a clear definition of dynamic equivalence untill 1969. In his 1969 textbook The Thoery and Practice of Translation(《翻译理论与实践》), dynamic equivalence is defined “ in terms of the degree to which the receptors of the messages in the receptor language respond to it in substantially the same manner as the receptores in the source language”(1969:24)

The expression “dynamic equivalence” is superseded by “functional equivalencev” in his work From One Language to Another (1986, with De Waard)(《从一种语言到另一种语言》). However, there is essentially not much difference between the two concepts. The substitution of “functional equivalence” is just to stress the concept of function and to avoid misunderstandings of the term “dynamic”, which is mistaken by some persons for something in the sense of impact ( Nida 1993:124). In Language, Culture and Translating(1993)(《语言与文化:翻译中的语境》, “functional equivalence” is further divided into categories on two levels: the minimal level and the maximal level. The minimal level of “functional equivalence” is defined as “The readers of a translated text should be able to comprehend it to the point that they can conceive of how the original readers of the text must have understood and appreciated it”. The maximal level is stated as “The readers of a translated text should be able to understand and aprreciate it in essentially the same manner as the original readers did” (Nida 1993:118; 1995:224). The two definitions of equivalence reveal that the minimal level is realistic, whereas the maximal level is ieal. For Nida,

good translations always lie somewhere between the two levels (Nida 19954:224). It can be noted that “functional equivalence” is a flexible concept with different degrees of adequacy.

Dynamic Equivalence

A term introduced by Nida(1964) in the context of Bible translation to describe one of two basic orientations found in the process of translation (see also Formal Equivalence). Dynamic equivalence is the quality which characterizes a translation in which “the message of the original text has been so transported into the receptor language that the response of the receptor is essentially like that of the original receptors”(Nida & Taber 1969/1982:200, emphasis removed). In other words, a dynamically equivalent translation is one which has been produced in accordance with the threefold process of Analysis, Transfer and Restructuring (Nida & Taber 1969/1982:200); formulating such a translation will entail such procedures as substituting TL items which are more culturally appropriate for obscure ST items, making lingguistically implicit ST information explicit, and building in a certain amount of REDUNDANCY(1964:131) to aid comprehension. In a translation of this kind one is therefor not so concerned with “matching the receptor-language message with the source-laguage”; the aim is more to “relate the receptor to modes of behavior relevant within the context of his own culture” (Nida 1964:159). Possibly the best known example of a dynamically equivalent solution to a translation problem is seen in the decision to translate the Biblical phrase “Lamb of God” into and Eskimo language as “Seal of God”: the fact that lambs are unkown in polar regions has here led to the substitution of a culturally meaningful item which shares at least some of the important features of the SL expression (see Snell-Hornby 1988/1955:15). Nida and Taber argue that a “high degree” of equivalence of response is needed for the translation to achieve its purpose, although they point out that this response can never be identical with that elicited by the original(1969/1982:24). However, they also issue a warning about the limits within which the processes associated with producing dynamic equivalence remain valid: fore example, a comparison with the broadly simialr category of Linguistic Translaton reveals that only elements which are linguistically implict in TT-rather than any additional contextual information which might be necessary to a new audience—may legitimately be made explicit in TT. The notion of dynamic equivalence is of course especially relevant to Bible translation, given the particular need of Biblical translations not only to inform readers but also to present a relevant message to them and hopefully elicit a response(1969/1982:24). However, it can clearly also be applied to other genres, and indeed in many areas ( such as literary translation) it has arguably come to hold sway over other approaches (Nida 1964:160). See also Fuctional Equivalence. Further reading: Gut 1991; Nida 1964,1995: Nida & Taber 1969/1982.

奈达(Nida)(1964)在《圣经》翻译中所采用的术语,用来描述翻译过程的两个基本趋向之一(另见Formal Equivalence[形式对等])。动态对等指翻译性质而言,在这种翻译过程中,“原文信息转移到接受语言,译文接受者的反应与原文接受者的反应基本相同” (Nida & Taber 1969/1982:200,原文的着重号已取消)。 换言之,在动态对等的翻译中,译文的产生要经过三个步骤:分析[Analysis]、转移[Transfer]和重组[Restructuring] (Nida & Taber 1969/1982:200); 生成这么一篇译文需要采取如下程序:用在文化上更恰当的目标语成分替换隐晦难懂的源文本成分,使语言上内隐的源文本信息明晰化;以及使用一定的冗余[Redundant] 信息来帮助理解(1964:131)。因此,进行这类翻译,译者不必十分在意“接受语信息与源语信息的匹配“;译者的目的反而主要是“考虑接受者在自身文化情境中的行为模式”(Nida,1964:159)。用动态对等方法解决翻译问题的一个最为人知的例子,是把《圣经》用语“上帝的羔羊”译成某一爱斯基摩语中的“上帝的海豹”:在地球极地羔羊不为人知,因而在此将它替换成一个具有译语文化意义的事物,替换物至少拥有部分源语表达的重要特征(见Snell-Hornby 1988/1955:15)。奈达和泰伯(Taber)认为,要达到翻译目的,就需要获得在读者反应上的“高度”对等,但他们也指出,这种反应与原文引出的反应绝对不可能完全等同(1969/1982:24)。他们还指出,产生动态对等的相关过程使受到限制的,例如,把它与大致相同类别的语言翻译[Linguistic Translation]加以比较,发现源文本中只有语言上的内隐成分可以在目标文本中明说出来,而目标读者可能需要的任何附加语境信息则不可在目标文本中增加。毫无疑问,动态对等的概念对于《圣经》翻译特别有用,因为《圣经》翻译所需要的不仅是为读者提供信息,而且是要提供有用的信息,并希望引发某种反应(1969/1982:24)。但很显然,这一概念同时也能应用于其他文体。实际上,可以认为它已在很多领域(例如文学领域)表现得比其他途径更为优胜。

Formal Equivalence

Formal Equivalence ( or Formal Correspondence) Defined by Nida as one of “two different types of equivalence” (see also Dynamic Equivalence), which “focuses attention on the message itself, in both form and content”(1964:159). Formal equivalence is thus the “quality of a translaiton in which the features of the form of the source text have been mechanically reproduced in the receptor language”( Nida & Taber 1969/1982:201). Nida proposed his categorization in the context of Bible translation, and in many respects it offers a more useful distiction than the more traditional notions of free and literal translation ( Hatim & Mason 1990:7). The aim of a translator who is striving for formal equivalence is to allow ST to speak “in its own terms” rather than attempting to adjust it to the circumstances of the target culture; in practice this means, for example, using Formal rather than Functional Equivalents wherever possible, not joinning or spliting sentences, and preserving formal indicators such as punctuation marks and paragraphs breaks (Nida 1964:165). The frequent result of such strategies is of course

联系客服:779662525#qq.com(#替换为@) 苏ICP备20003344号-4