EQUIVALENCE IN TRANSLATION (TRANSLATION EQUIVALENCE)

Translation equivalence – is a measure of semantic similarity between the SLT and TLT. The degree of semantic similarity between the texts involved in the process of translation may vary /’veeri/. The equivalence between the SLT and TLT may be based on the reproduction of different parts of the ST contents. So, several types of translation equivalents can be distinguished:

1^st type of Translation Equivalence implies retention (утримання, збереження) in the translation of the purport (=the purpose, the general intent, the intention) of communication.

Ex. there is some chemistry between us that doesn’t mix – буває, що люди не сходяться характерами,

velvet paws hide sharp claws – м’яко стелять, твердо спати

A dissimilarity of language units is accompanied by the absence of any obvious logical link between the SLT and TLT. But the information retained in the translation (=the purport of com.) is enough to ensure an adequate communication. (It is the lowest type/level – only the purport of communication is preserved).

2^nd type of TE implies retention in the tr.of the purport of communication and the identification of the situation (=there are 2 meaningful components) Ex. he answered the phone – він підняв слухавку

Most of the words and syntactical structures of the original have no direct correspondences in the translation. But the SLT and TLT are based on the same situation which is described differently.

 

3^rd type of TE implies retention in the translation of the purport of communication, the identification of the situation and the method of describing the situation. The translation retains the same basic notions as the original. The translation may be viewed as a semantic paraphrase of the original which preserves its basic notions and allows their free reshuffle/rearrangement in the sentence.

Ex. scrubbing makes me bad-tempered – від миття підлоги в мене псується настрій

4^th type of TE implies retention in the translation of the purport of communication, the identification of the situation, the method of describing the situation and (the invariant meaning of) the syntactical structure.

Ex. I don’t think that I need to convince you – Не бачу необхідності переконувати тебе (Sentences look dif but syntactic structure is the same,

here the Eng. subordinate object clause corresponds to the Ukr.object)

He was sitting with his arms crossed – Він сидів склавши руки (The Propositional Nominative Participial Construction – with his arms crossed

corresponds to the adverbial modifier – склавши руки in the Ukr. sentence)

5^th type of TE implies retention in the translation of the purport of communication, the identification of the situation, the method of describing the situation, invariant meaning of the syntactical structure and word semantics (lexical meaning of words). (It is the highest type/level of TE)

Ex. The president signed a very important agreement – Президент підписав дуже важливу угоду.

Every translation can be regarded as belonging to a certain type of translation equivalence. Since each subsequent type of translation equivalence implies a higher degree of semantic similarity, every translation is performed at a certain level of translation equivalence. The level hierarchy doesn’t imply the idea of disapprobation and approbation because a good translation can be made at any level of translation equivalence.