30.06.2013 Views

View - Scholarly Commons Home

View - Scholarly Commons Home

View - Scholarly Commons Home

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

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

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!