Channels, Fall 2020

Page 26 Beale • Equivalence in Translation meaning, contrast one another. The translator determines these elements based on features of the text as a whole, such as intended reading audience (if one audience is intended), text-type, content, and priorities of the translator as given in a translation brief (Hervey et al., 2006; Panou, 2013). The purpose of having a hierarchy in place, to cite Lörscher (2005), is so that “a translation … not merely conveys the sense and/or function of the SL text into TL, bu t … (is) an adequate piece of discourse produced according to the TL norms of language use” (p. 604). The value of a hierarchical approach to maintaining equivalence thus lies in establishing ahead of time what elements can and should be carried over and which must be left out due to linguistic constrictions, especially when dealing with wordplay or culturally locked items. Ellipsis In dealing with certain grammatical or lexical features, the translator may need to employ ellipsis to maintain an equivalent dynamic in the reading of the text. Beekman and Callow (1979) define ellipsis as omitting words from a SL for economy or adding for idiomatic effect (p. 70). Yaqub (2014) offers a couple reasons why ellipsis might be necessary, including economy of space in a text, emphasis on one aspect of a text, and holding to the structure of the TL (p. 228). He also mentions several levels of ellipsis, from the word level to sentence and word, depending on the amount of exegesis or concision needed. Compensation One final topic worthy of note in this study is compensation, defined by Jones (2014) as a strategy for rectifying deficiencies caused by missing semantic or grammatical concepts in either the ST or TT (p. xiv). Hervey, et al. (2006) use a similar definition along the lines of translation loss: A technique of mitigating translation loss: where any conventional translation (however literal or free) would entail an unacceptable translation loss, this loss is mitigated by deliberately introducing a less unacceptable one, important ST features being approximated in the TT through means other than those used in the ST (p. 219). This definition connects to the remarks on the imperfect nature of translation made earlier in this research and how important initial assumptions are in developing a translation strategy for everyday use. Compensation also relates to ellipsis, as many instances of compensation are in fact forms of ellipsis, where implicit items are made explicit or vice versa, wordplay is lost, or concrete items are made abstract, which typically reduces the equivalent effect upon the reader (Hervey et al., 2006). This concept will come into play in the translations done later in this study in dealing with the German subjunctive I construction that has no grammatical equivalent in English and is typically expressed via idiomatic means. While compensation is a valid strategy, it requires careful implementation. Karpovskaya (2011) and Cozma (2019) both stress that whenever the translator deviates from the text, the move must be justified by the necessity of maintaining equivalence or in consideration of the understanding of the target audience.