【導(dǎo)讀】translator;certainwords.like;translation.TLone.unnecessary.

　　

【正文】 l structures are also partly identical: E: He was never tired of old songs. H: Soha nem unta a r233。gi dalokat. a/ similar words and syntactic structures (SVO), b/ the TL structures are in a derivational relationship with the SL ones. ?We can say that here the translation conveys not only the ?what for”, the ?what about” and the ?what” of the original, but also something of the ?how it is said in the original”. Equivalence in Translation Theory XXV Komissarov’s views on equivalence VI 5/ Type V: maximum possible similarity E: I saw him at the theatre. H: L225。ttam ?t a sz237。nh225。zban. a/ the TL text retains the meaning of all the words used in the SL one, b/ the parallel syntactic structures imply the maximum invariance of their meanings. Equivalence in Translation Theory XXVI Komissarov’s views on equivalence VII offer a broader view of equivalence than other studies do. The role of the text, however, is absent from his analysis, too. The fact that the original and the translated sentence contain the same lexical units and syntactic structures does not at all make them equivalent. The system fails to take into consideration the idea that a TL sentence can only be equivalent with a SL one if it plays the same role or occupies the same position in the TL text as the SL sentence in the SL text. Equivalence in Translation Theory XXVII Kinga Klaudy’s views on equivalence I Three types of municatively equivalent translation: 1/ referential equivalence: the TL text should refer to the same segment of reality (facts, events, phenomena, etc.) as the TL text。 2/ contextual equivalence: individual sentences should occupy the same position in the whole of the TL text as their correspondences in the whole of the SL text。 3/ functional equivalence: the TL text should play the same role in the TL munity as the SL text in the SL munity (transferring information, provoking emotions, appeal, etc.) It is only TL texts that satisfy these three requirements can be considered municative equivalents of given SL texts. Equivalence in Translation Theory XXVIII Kinga Klaudy’s views on equivalence II 1/ Referential equivalence: a precondition of translation. If a TL text does not refer to the same segment of reality, it cannot be considered translation, therefore research on the causes of “bad” translation does not belong to the tasks of TT. 2/ Contextual equivalence has two angles: the sentence and the text. a/ Sentence: TL sentences should be connected and should participate in the anisation of the TL text in the same way as their correspondents do in the SL text. This is carried out by different means in different languages, there is a great deal of variation even within one language and differences between language users (writers, translators, etc.) b/ Text: in the TL text, produced as a result of translation, sentences should be connected to one another in the same way as in nontranslated TL texts representing a similar genre. Equivalence in Translation Theory XXIX Kinga Klaudy’s views on equivalence III How can equivalence depend on the degree to which translated TL texts are similar to original nontranslated TL? The answer: 3/ Functional equivalence (see above, slide 27) can only be realised if a translated TL text conforms to the patterns of other TL texts used by TL speakers (works of literature should not resemble legal documents, scientific texts should not sound like small talk). In literary texts form bees part of the referential ponent and has to conform to texts regarded as literature by the TL readers. Equivalence in Translation Theory XXX The importance of the concept of equivalence Despite views rejecting it, it has great 1/ theoretical significance: in translation totally different linguistic structures may enter into equivalence relations. Without translation their identical function would never be detected, which provides data for linguistic research into the relationship of function and form. 2/ Practical significance: it may provide scientifically sound criteria for translation criticism: see the (non)fulfilment of the three conditions of equivalence.