Channels, Fall 2020

Page 32 Beale • Equivalence in Translation and English, missing categories and lexical considerations will always play a central role in translation at large and achieving equivalence in particular (Beekman & Callow, 1979; Jakobson, 1959; Kesić, 2015; Saeed, 2009). In this regard, one particular instance that I found somewhat difficult to successfully render naturally in English was the German “Kohlaussteig,” literally “coal exit.” While such compound words are per fectly normal in German, they can cause difficulties in translation. The mental image in English is clear enough, but sounds wholly unnatural, hence my rendering of “Leaving Coal Behind.” The main conclusion to draw from these results is the necessity of familiarity with the subject matter at hand to achieve an equivalent result. While the research does indicate a difference in changes necessary to achieve equivalence across the genres translated here, a hierarchy of priorities and knowledge of SL and TL usage norms are a much more fruitful line of approach than broad genre classifications when considering equivalence. Additionally, while the factors of equivalence listed in the literature serve as a helpful reminder of factors to keep in the back of one’s mind while working, they are obviously not to be a strict checklist which the translator must keep on hand while working. Future Research One natural vein of future research on this topic is evaluating the previously mentioned factors important to equivalence in relation to other languages, including into and from English. It is likely that, as one moves further from closely related languages within a linguistic family and eventually into other language families altogether, the factors important for equivalence are thrust into the foreground more clearly as word-for-word and phrase translation are made more difficult (Yaqub, 2014). Such research could be helpful in preparing translators of those language sets as to what they can expect in terms of difficulties of translation and achieving equivalent results in practice. Similarly, as Chesterman (1999) notes, further research is needed in the areas of applying theory to practice. One way which this research could serve as a platform off which to base said research is to look for other factors which contribute to equivalence in translation, which would ideally enable translators to render more natural sounding texts for their audiences. These factors, as noted above, likely vary from language to language, and given the number of language pairs in international translation (English aside), the field for research is rich in this regard. Conclusion The literature review of the present research addresses several categories which contribute to achieving an equivalent, i.e., natural, result in translation, here specifically looking at German to English translation, in an attempt to close the gap between translation theory and practice. I produced a series of six translations across what Jumpelt (1961) classifies as two genres, and Reiss (1981) classifies as one. After review by myself, Dr. Annis Shaver, and business students at Cedarville University, I concluded that thinking in terms of fixed genres was less effective in achieving equivalence than familiarity with TL norms of use. While genre is a useful tool in knowing what to expect in translating a text of a particular variety, there is no substitute for the multifaceted decisions one must make on