Does the theories of ecquivalence play a useful role in professional Essay

Does the theories of ecquivalence play a useful role in professional translation - look for ExampleThese theorists put up studied equivalence in relation to the translation process, using different approaches, and have provided fruitful ideas for further study regarding this topic.Our first study is on the speculation introduced and expounded by Nida and Taber about buckram correspondence and impulsive equivalence. dress correspondence focuses attention on the message itself, in both bring in and content, unlike dynamic equivalence which is based upon the principle of homogeneous effect (1964159). A more than critical explanation of each type of equivalence is provided in the second edition (1982) of their work, but a design analysis will be discussed in this paper.Nida, in consultation with other pioneers in the field, developed the theory of dynamic equivalence or functional equivalence, which stressed the importance of transferring meaning, not grammatical form (Poythr ess, 2004).Formal correspondence consists of a TL item which represents the closest equivalent of a SL word or phrase. can-do equivalence is defined as a translation principle according to which a translator seeks to empathize the meaning of the original in such a way that the TL give voice will depart the kindred impact on the TL audience as the original wording did upon the ST audience. (Nida and Taber, 1982 200)In dynamic equivalence, translation is done by the translators use of his/her own words and expressing it in the TL, the impact should be the same as it was in the ST. The sentences are not the literal interpretation, but rather a different wording seeking to arrive at the same impact as in the original text. Nida was also interested of delivering the fullest meaning instead of a bare minimum (Nida, 1947, cited in Poythress, 2004).The distinction between the two - glob correspondence and dynamic equivalence - is that in the former a word can have an equivalent to an SL word or phrase, whilst in the latter, equivalence is achieved by giving the meaning of the words or phrases from the original. twain can achieve equivalent effect. In formal equivalence, the problem lies in not getting an equivalent word in the two languages. Fawcett (1997) criticizes this theory because he argued that the use of formal equivalents might at quantify have serious implications in the TT since the translation might not be easily mum by the target audience. Formal correspondence distorts the grammatical and stylistic patterns of the receptor language, and hence distorts the message, so as to cause the receptor to misunderstand the message (Fawcett, 1007 201).Nevertheless, Nida and Taber argue that the form of the original text is changed but as long as the change follows the rules of back transformation in the source language, of contextual consistency in the transfer, and of transformation in the receptor language, the message is preserved and the translation is faithful (p. 200).Nida is in favour of the drill of dynamic equivalence, as a more effective translation procedure, considering that he has been into Bible translation. Nida is much more interested in the message of the text or, in other words, in its semantic quality. He strives to engender sure that this message remains clear in the target text (hence, dynamic equivalence).But herein lies the contradiction as far as Bible translation is concerned.