Channels, Fall 2020

Page 18 Beale • Equivalence in Translation Background Introduction to Translation Studies The topic of translation suffers no shortage of study in academic studies, and equivalence enjoys a wide breadth of literature dedicated to its analysis. However, one problem which Chesterman (1999) notes is the apparent lack of connection between translation studies and the actual practice of translating. According to him, actual translators “seem to find Translation Studies irrelevant, metaphysical n onsense” (Chesterman, 2017, p. 45). He cites the descriptive approach to translation studies as part of the problem, which study translations as they are, as opposed to the prescriptive approach, which attempts to pass down norms and practices for better translations (Chesterman, 1999, pp. 46-47). Chesterman (1999) finishes his essay with various propositions on how to close the gap between practice and theory: general cause and effect, causes and conditions leading to subpar translations, and causes and conditions leading to desirable translations (pp. 52- 54). This research is geared toward the last of these propositions, namely on factors beneficial for achieving an equivalent effect in translation, as will be defined below. Imperfect Nature of Translation Before delving into some of the main topics under equivalence, а brief note should be made on the nature of translation in general, which the reader is to keep in mind in the course of this research. The reality of translation as a human activity means that, despite continual improvements to the translation process over time, there will always be errors or misunderstandings even in quality translations. This may seem a bold statement to make, but one need only consider that even native speakers of the same language often misunderstand each other to realize that a perfect translation does not exist in any sense of the word (Buzaji, 2019; Reiss, 1981; Yaqub, 2014). Usacheva, Makhortova, Popova, and Novikova (2015), citing George Munen, put forward three factors in addition to lexical and syntactical elements that further complicate the translation process: the specificity of linguistic signs in each language, the incompatibility of worldviews arising from language in reflecting non-linguistic realities, and the differences in culture and civilization in which a language is spoken (p. 48). Considering all the above factors, the principal goal of the translator is not to search for a single optimal translation but to reduce the loss of understanding and information between the source text (ST) and the target text (TT), avoiding errors which seriously affect the principal understanding of the text (Hervey, Loughbridge, and Higgins, 2006; Buzaji, 2019). What is Equivalence? Determinin g how exactly to define the very term “equivalence,” is one of the initial difficulties encountered in researching the concept of equivalence and its implementation in translation, as it appears that no two authors can arrive at the same conclusion. Fortunately, some roughly common themes do exist across the literature. Reiss (1983) defines equivalence as achieving the same functionality of the target text (TT) compared to the source text (ST), and later in terms of the relation of linguistic signs in two different