venuti

22 The Translator’s Invisibilityimpact and appeal for receptors”; it rather “means thoroughlyunderstanding not only the meaning of the source text but also themanner in which the intended receptors of a text are likely tounderstand it in the receptor language” (Nida and de Waard1986:vii–viii, 9). For Nida, accuracy in translation depends ongenerating an equivalent effect in the target-language culture: “thereceptors of a translation should comprehend the translated text tosuch an extent that they can understand how the original receptorsmust have understood the original text” (ibid.:36). The dynamicallyequivalent translation is “interlingual communication” whichovercomes the linguistic and cultural differences that impede it(ibid.:11). Yet the understanding of the foreign text and culturewhich this kind of translation makes possible answersfundamentally to target-language cultural values while veiling thisdomestication in the transparency evoked by a fluent strategy.Communication here is initiated and controlled by the targetlanguageculture, it is in fact an interested interpretation, andtherefore it seems less an exchange of information than anappropriation of a foreign text for domestic purposes. Nida’s theoryof translation as communication does not adequately take intoaccount the ethnocentric violence that is inherent in everytranslation process—but especially in one governed by dynamicequivalence.Nida’s advocacy of domesticating translation is explicitly groundedon a transcendental concept of humanity as an essence that remainsunchanged over time and space. “As linguists and anthropologistshave discovered,” Nida states, “that which unites mankind is muchgreater than that which divides, and hence there is, even in cases ofvery disparate languages and cultures, a basis for communication”(Nida 1964:2). Nida’s humanism may appear to be democratic in itsappeal to “that which unites mankind,” but this is contradicted by themore exclusionary values that inform his theory of translation,specifically Christian evangelism and cultural elitism. From the verybeginning of his career, Nida’s work has been motivated by theexigencies of Bible translation: not only have problems in the historyof Bible translation served as examples for his theoretical statements,but he has written studies in anthropology and linguistics designedprimarily for Bible translators and missionaries. Nida’s concept ofdynamic equivalence in fact links the translator to the missionary.When in Customs and Cultures: Anthropology for Christian Missions(1954) he asserted that “a close examination of successful missionary