【正文】 definition , we can get three points: (a) what translators want to translate is message.(b) because of cultural and linguistic difference, the source text and the target text can only achieve the closest equivalence.(c) translation should be the most natural equivalence. The three points together aims to achieve one goal: “the response of the target receptor to the translation should be substantially the same as that of the original reader of the source text.” (ibid, 13)In GWR translation, translators should not only made translation “faithful” to the source text but also take into consideration its content and style, the reader’s response, and its munication effect, and adopt flexible techniques. Yanfu has set a good example for us. His translation of “Evolution and Ethic and Other Essays” as “天演論” is short in length but concise and to the point. His translation of “Survival of the Fittest” into “物競(jìng)天擇，適者生存” is also wellaccepted since, literarily longer it is, the translation not only fully conveys the connotation of the core but achieve a beauty of structure. His translations are well received and beneficial to the progress of society. From these examples, we know that faithfulness is not constrained in a formal equivalence. Requirements of the CE GWR Translation According to previous researches of GWR translation, there are generally three requirements for the translation, namely, accuracy, continuity and adaptation, and pletenessFirst, being accuracy both in content and language is the prime requirement of the GWR translation. Inaccuracy in language will not only lead to misunderstanding among target readers but also affect or even distort the content. As an authorized official documentation delivered at the People’s Congress, GWR is of great social and political significance and draws tremendous attention from audiences both at home and abroad. Therefore, every word, phrase and sentence is carefully weighed and repeatedly revised before going to press. However, because of the differences in culture and language, it is impossible to achieve absolute accuracy in translation. Translators, however, can still make attempts to bridge the gap by adopting various translation techniques. In a word, the principle cannot be too well emphasized in CE translation.The second requirement is continuity and adaptation. This seemingly selfcontradictory principle has its own justifications. First, translation should be continuous. Partly as a summary of the previous achievements, the GWR inevitably carries some fixed expressions of the previous Report, whose translation cannot be changed at will because it is associated with the international image of China. Any change of its expression usually cause inconvenience to the foreigners and thus must undergo the specialists’ discussions. Secondly, with the deepening of reform and openingup, many new sayings in some fields will keep surging into the vocabulary list of official document. Experts may, as times goes by, find that some of the fixed sayings are not adequatelytranslated, and, after discussion among authorized translators, they will replace them with better ones. A typical example is “龍頭企業(yè)”in the 2009 Report. “龍頭”, frequently used in several GWR, was first translated as “l(fā)ocative(火車頭) in 2002 (rather than “dragon’s head enterprise) and then changed into “pacesetting” in 2009. Therefore, it is the translator’s duty to find the equivalent expression in the target language and, even, in time of need, invent the closest counterpart.Thirdly, translators should ensure the pleteness of the translation. The GWR, as we know, is both a summary of China’s achievements in the previous years and a plan for the following years. So it carries much information and its writing is highly condensed. To interpret its connotation fully, background information should be added when necessary. Structure of the Thesis The paper makes a tentative study of the 2009 Report from the view of Nida’s FE theory in the hope that it can offer some guidance to related official document translation. The structures of the paper are as follows: The introduction discusses the necessity and possibility of applying functional equivalence to GWR translation and lists some requirements for its translation. Also, this part makes a convey of the content of each chapter. Chapter One introduces the FE theory. There are two basic orientations in translation, namely formal equivalence and dynamic /functional equivalence and the former enjoys priority over the latter. The FE theory undergoes a development in China and is put into the translation practice. Chapter Two makes a detailed analysis of stylistic features and functions of the 2009 government work report, reviews the related research of official document translation and points out a wrong tendency in the practice——Chinglish. This enables us to have a better understanding of GWR and its translation. Chapter Three tries to settle the question of how can translators make the translation the closest natural equivalent to the source language message. Analyses are made at three levels respectively: lexical level, syntactic level and textual level. The final part summarizes the whole paper and points out the meaning and limitations of the study.To be brief, the structure of the paper can be simplified into a set of questions1. Is it necessary and possible to apply the FE theory into the GWR translation?2. What is FE theory?3. What is GWR?4. How can translators make the translation the closest equivalent to the source language message?. Thesis Chapter 1 Functional Equivalent TheoryChapter 1Functional Equivalence TheoryA systematic introduction of FE theory can lay the foundation for the exploration in the following chapters. So this chapter tries to answer the question of what FE theory is.According to Nida, there are two basic orientations in translation, one