View - Scholarly Commons Home
View - Scholarly Commons Home
View - Scholarly Commons Home
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
television series, a „dynamic equivalence‟ translation approach to subtitle translation<br />
will result in a more „effective translation‟, also from a pragmatic translation theory<br />
point of view (cf. Baker, 1992).<br />
In the researcher‟s view, Newmark‟s (1981) theories reflect the earlier theories<br />
proposed by Nida. Newmark proposes two quite different approaches to translation,<br />
labelling on Semantic Translation as opposed to Communicative translation. From the<br />
researcher‟s perspective, Semantic Translation could be said to resemble what Nida<br />
describes as Formal Correspondence, while Communicative Translation could be said to<br />
be similar to what Nida describes as Dynamic Equivalence. If one takes a careful look at<br />
Newmark‟s descriptions, one could say that Semantic Translation resembles more of a<br />
gloss, or word-for-word translation while Communicative Translation, which places<br />
more emphasis on the effect of the translation than the exact wording of the original text,<br />
resembles more of a sense for sense translation. Newmark (1981) suggests that<br />
strategies should be used according to the attributes of the text. For works of high<br />
literature, Newmark favours word-for-word translation in order to reflect the exact<br />
thought processes followed by the author of the original work. therefore, in translating<br />
serious literature, translation should respect the semantic and syntactic structures of the<br />
source language and should not allow omission and fundamental modification. In this<br />
circumstance, Newmark (1981) is interested in the integrity of the original work. For<br />
low level fiction (possibly including sitcoms such as Friends), Newmark would choose<br />
the message conveyed to the audience, rather than the literal wording, similar to what<br />
Nida called “the effect”. One could say that the type of textual discourse encountered in<br />
Friends might be described as a text that might warrant communicative translation,<br />
which could be said to warrant translation approaches that would enhance audience<br />
understanding. Again, in the researcher‟s view, a communicative translation approach<br />
would result in a more effective translation – hence one could say that Newmark‟s<br />
theories are still relevant today.<br />
In the late 1990s translation theorists started to place more emphasis on cultural<br />
studies, following Snell-Hornby (1988/1995), Aixelá (1996) Brisset (2000), Davies<br />
(2003). In the researcher‟s view, work by Aixelá (1996) and Davies (2003) in particular<br />
contains some very interesting taxonomies of translation choices in relation to the<br />
18