On-How-to-achieve-functional-equivalence-in-transl

Dec.2006,Volume3,No.12(SerialNo.36)Sino-USEnglishTeaching,ISSN1539-8072,USA71OnHowtoAchieveFunctionalEquivalenceinTranslationbetweenChineseandEnglishLISu-ju*(ForeignStudiesCollege,NortheasternUniversity,Shenyang,Liaoning110004,China)Abstract:BasedonNida’stheoryonfunctionalequivalence,thispapercontrastsformalcorrespondenceandfunctionalequivalenceandanalyzeshowtoapplyfunctionalequivalencetheorytotheinterlingualtranslationbetweenEnglishandChinese.It’sarguedthattranslatorsachieveequivalencefromthefunctionaltransferenceoflanguagestructures,textualcohesionsandculturalcontexts.Keywords:functionalequivalence;interlingualtranslation1.IntroductionInthecourseofthelanguageteachingpracticeofEFLinmainlandChina,it’scommonlyencounteredthattheEFLlearnershavemanyproblemsintheinterlingualtranslationbetweenEnglishandChinesethoughtheyhaveacquiredaquitelargeamountofvocabulary.Theteachersareperplexedabouthowtoteachtranslatingskills;thelearnershaveperformedpoorlyontranslationintheCET-4(CollegeEnglishTest-Band4).ItseemstomostEFLlearnersthatthewayoftranslatingistotransfereverywordorphraseofsourcelanguageintocorrespondingcounterpartsofthetargetlanguagewithouttakingotherconsiderationssuchasthefunction,orthecontextoftargetlanguage,whichwithoutadoubtcausesalotofbreakdown,ormisleadingevencompletelywrongmessageduringthetranslatingprocess.Equivalenceisusuallysaidtobethecentralissueintranslationalthoughitsdefinitionandapplicabilityinthefieldoftranslationtheoryhavecausedheatedcontroversy.Someforeigntranslationtheorists,suchasEugeneA.Nida,RomanJackoson,JohnCatford,PeterNewmarkandMonaBaker,tonameafew,viewthisconceptfromquitedifferentperspectives.Besides,ChinesetranslationtheoristsJINDiandTANZai-xialsocontributetotheliteratureofequivalencetheory.Thispaperistocompareformalcorrespondenceandfunctionalequivalence,presentthedifferentviewsonequivalence,andtrytostudyhowtoachievefunctionalequivalenceinEnglish-ChineseandChinese-Englishtranslation.2.TheDefinitionofFunctionalEquivalenceandItsSignificanceEquivalencecanbedividedintotwokinds:formalcorrespondenceandfunctionalequivalence.Asthetermsuggests,formalcorrespondenceistheequivalenceatthelevelofform.Nida(1964)saysthatformalcorrespondencefocusesattentiononthemessageinform.Oneisconcernedthatthemessageinthereceptorlanguageshouldmatchascloselyaspossiblethedifferentelementsinthesourcelanguage.Nidacallsthekindoftranslationguidedbyformalcorrespondencea“glosstranslation”,whichaimstoallowthereadertounderstandasLISu-ju(1953-),female,associateprofessorofForeignStudiesCollege,NortheasternUniversity;researchfield:pragmaticsandpedagogy.OnHowtoAchieveFunctionalEquivalenceinTranslationbetweenChineseandEnglish72muchofthesourcelanguagecontextaspossible.Itattemptstorendertheexactwordfromsourcelanguagetotargetlanguage.Ontheotherhand,functionalequivalencefollowstheprincipleofequivalenteffect,thatis,therelationshipbetweenthereceptorandthemessageshouldaimatbeingthesameasthatbetweentheoriginalreceptorandthesourcelanguagemessage.Itattemptstorenderreceptorwordsfromonelanguagetoanother,andcaterstothereceptor’slinguisticcompetenceandculturalneeds.AsDoctorNida(2001)views,“ingeneralitisbesttospeakof‘functionalequivalence’intermsofarangeofadequacy,sincenotranslationisevercompletelyequivalent.Anumberofdifferenttranslationscaninfactrepresentvaryingdegreesofequivalence”.Formalcorrespondencesometimesdistortsthegrammaticalandstylisticpatternsofthetargetlanguage,andhencedistortsthemessage,onlytocausethetranslationtobeambiguousorawkward.However,functionalequivalencesometimeschangestheformofthesourcetext,butpreservesthemessageofthesourcelanguage,becauseittransformsthemessageinthereceptorlanguage.Ofthetwo,DoctorNidaundoubtedlyfavorsthelatter.“Ifamoreorlessliteralcorrespondenceisfunctionallyequivalentinbothdesignativeandassociativemeaning,thenobviouslynoadjustmentsinformarenecessary.Butifthisisnotthecase,thetranslatorsshouldmakesomeadjustmentsinordertoachievetheclosestnaturalequivalence”.Thisimplicatesthatfunctionalequivalenceisactuallysupplementarytoformalcorrespondence.Theconceptsofformalcorrespondenceandfunctionalequivalencealsohaveattractedmanyothertranslationtheorists’interests.PeterNewmarkputsforwardhisfamoustheoryaboutsemantictranslationandcommunicativetranslation.“Communicativetranslationattemptstoproduceonitsreadersaneffectascloseaspossibletothatobtainedonthereadersoftheoriginal.Semantictranslationattemptstorender,ascloselyasthesemanticandsyntacticstructuresofthesecondlanguageallow,theexactcontextualmeaningoftheoriginal.”“Admittedly,alltranslationmustbeinsomedegreebothcommunicativeandsemantic….”(Newmark,2001).TANZai-xiisafollowerofNida’sfunctionalequivalencetheory.Hesaysthattranslationconsistsinreproducingthesourcelanguagemessagefrommeaningtostylebyrenderingtheclosestnaturalequivalentinthereceptor’slanguage.Translatorsareconfronted,allthewaythroughtranslating,withtheconflictsofformandcontent,meaningandstyle,equivalentandidentity,andsoon,butthemostimportantpointintranslationisthecontentofthemessageofthesourcelanguage,therefore,thetran