THE BHOPAL SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES

Promoted by the Catholic Archdiocese of Bhopal

NAAC Re-accredited Autonomous College, affiliated to Barkatullah University, Bhopal

Learning Objectives:
After studying this module, students are expected to learn
(1) APPROACHES

NAME OF THE MAIN TOPIC-NO-1-APPROACHES

1. The sociolinguistic approach

According to the sociolinguistic approach to translation, the social context defines what is
and what is not translatable and what is or what is not acceptable through selection,
filtering and even censorship. According to this perspective, a translator is necessarily the
product of his or her society: our own sociocultural background is present in everything we
translate. This approach was developed by the School of Tel Aviv and by linguists and
professors such as Annie Brisset, Even Zohar, and Guideon Toury.
2. The communicative approach
This theory is referred to as interpretive. Scholars Danica Seleskovitch and Marianne
Lederer developed what they called the “theory of sense,” based chiefly on the experience of
conference interpreting. According to this perspective, meaning must be translated, not
language. Language is nothing more than a vehicle for the message and can even be an
obstacle to understanding. This explains why it is always better to deverbalize (instead of
transcoding) when we translate.
3. The hermeneutic approach(branch of knowledge that deals with interpretation, esp.
of the Bible or literary text)
The hermeneutic approach is mainly based on George Steiner’s research. Steiner believed of
any human communication as a translation. His book After Babel shows that translation is
not a science but rather an “exact art”: a true translator should be capable of becoming a
writer in order to capture what the author of the original text “means to say.”
4. The linguistic approach
Linguists such as Vinay, Darbelnet, Austin, Vegliante, or Mounin, interested in language text,
structuralism, and pragmatics, also examined the process of translating. From this
perspective, any translation –whether it is a marketing translation, a medical translation,
a legal translation or another type of text– should be considered from the point of view of its
fundamental units, that is the word, the syntagm, and the sentence.
5. The literary approach
The literary approach does not consider that a translation is a linguistic endeavor but instead a
literary one. Language has an “energy” revealed through words that the result of
experiencing a culture. This charge is what gives it strength and ultimately, meaning: this is
what the translation-writer should translate.
6. The semiotic approach
Semiotics is the study of signs and signification. A meaning is the result of a collaboration
between a sign, an object, and an interpreter. Thus, from the perspective of semiotics,

Subject : Name_of_the_Subject. 1
*Edited & Compiled for Reference Purpose for Students
 THE BHOPAL SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
Promoted by the Catholic Archdiocese of Bhopal
NAAC Re-accredited Autonomous College, affiliated to Barkatullah University, Bhopal

translation is thought of as a way of interpreting texts in which encyclopedic content varies

and each sociocultural context is unique.

NAME OF THE MAIN TOPIC-NO-1-THEORIES

THEORIES OF TRANSLATION
There are three types of theories of translation
1) Pre-linguistic theories.
2) Linguistic theories.
3) Cultural theories.
During 1950 and 1960 systematic study of translation was begun. It was
based on principles of linguistics. This study focused on key issues like
meaning, equivalence and shift.
In the earlier days, translation theories were concerned with sense &
word (interpretation and paraphrase).
In 1990, linguists showed role and importance of culture in translation.
This study moved beyond linguistics studies and considered translation as
rewriting.
Some select prominent theories of Translation are of
1) Dryden
2) Catford
3) Nida
4) Susan Bassenet and Andre Levefre
5) Venuti
Dryden’s Theory ofTranslation
Dryden was a successor of theories presented by Chapman,
d’Ablancourt and Denham.

But the few theories presented by the theorist during the period were
mainly based on the ancient views of Horace and Cicero. They have not much
added and developed in those existing theories.
The appearance of Dryden gave a new face and momentum to the theory
translation. He developed theory of translation elaborately.
Dryden was a poet, dramatist, and critic. He translated ancient classics
like Ovid’s Epistles (1680), The Sylvae (1695), Examen Poeticum (1693),
Virgil (1697).
Samuel Johnsan refers Dryden as the one ‘who gave just rules &
examples of translation’ and refers him as law giver of English English
Translation.
In his prefaces to translations of classics, mainly in the preface to Ovi’d
Epistles (1680) he presented three types of translation. He reduced to all
translations under these three heads.

Subject : Name_of_the_Subject 2
*Edited & Compiled for Reference Purpose for Students
 THE BHOPAL SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
Promoted by the Catholic Archdiocese of Bhopal
NAAC Re-accredited Autonomous College, affiliated to Barkatullah University, Bhopal

1) Metaphrase 2) Paraphrase 3) Imitation

1) Metaphrase refers to turning an author word by word and line by line
from one language into another.
2) Paraphrase refers to translation with latitude.
3) Imitation refers to presenting rewriting the text as he sees fit.
Dryden gave preference to second category- Paraphrase. Dryden
compared role of translator with the portrait painter. Because portrait painter
ought to paint a portrait, having a resemblance with the original.
J. C. Catford’s Translation theory
In the book ‘A Linguistic theory of Translation’, Catford analyzes what
translation is and sets a theory of translation. His approach is analytic. At first
he discusses ‘language’ and then he explains his idea of translation, because for
him the act of translation is an operation which is performed on two different
languages.
For him Language is
1) A type of patterned human behavior
2) A way in which human beings interact in social situation.
3) An activity related to vocal movements and actual events.
He assumes that translation may be performed between any two related
or unrelated languages. He defines translation as, the replacement of textual
material in one language(SL) by equivalent textual material in another
language(TL).”
Catford uses two important terms in his definition- textual material and
equivalent. According to Catfor d it is the central problem of translation
practice to find TL translation equivalence. He provides some broad types of
translation in terms ofextent, levels and ranks.

Total Restricted Rank bound unbounded

Full - If entire text is replaced from SL to TL; he calls it a full translation.
Partial- On the other hand during translation if some part of SI text remains
untranslated and included as a part of T1 text, yhen it is called Partial
translation. Sometimes to add local color items purposely used as they are.
Total- He calls total translation as misleading term because it refers to
translation of SL text into TL text on all levels. It refers to replacement of SL
grammar, lexis and graphology into TL text.
Restricted- If SL text is replaced into TL text at one level, then it is a
Restricted Translation. This level may be phonological or graphological. Even
restricted translation refers to replacement of SL grammar by TL grammar but
with no replacement of lexis and replacement of TL lexis with TL lexis but
with no replacement of grammar.
Rank bound- Rank Bound translation refers to translation between same
ranked SL texts into TL text i.e. sentence to sentence, word to word/group to
group.
- Unbounded- Unbounded translation is popularly named as free
translation, where equivalents freely shunt up and down.

Subject : Name_of_the_Subject 3
*Edited & Compiled for Reference Purpose for Students
 THE BHOPAL SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
Promoted by the Catholic Archdiocese of Bhopal
NAAC Re-accredited Autonomous College, affiliated to Barkatullah University, Bhopal

Catford was interested in exploring the potential.

“Catford, while elucidating his theories oftranslation in the light of
linguistic principles, focuses on the methods and strategies to be adopted by a
translator at the phonological, grammatical and syntactic levels. Keeping his
emphasis that there could be no one to correspondence between any two levels
in the forefront, he also explains how ‘rank shifts’ could be effected in
translation.”
i) A shift within the same level for instances in the semantic itself when
concepts like valour and chastity, differing from culture to culture and time to
time are to be translated.
ii) Shift from one level to another, for example, morphemic to syntactic.
As Catford argues, what is expressed by the original author in a single
morpheme might require one full sentence for a translator.”
I am agree with Catford’s view. Translator cannot all the time translate
within the boundries of a particular rank. While translating the select short
stories I really experienced the same.
Nida’s Theory of Translation
Eugene Nida, was a linguist. He began his career with American Bible
Society (ABS). He worked as Associate Secretaiy for Translation until his
retirement. His theories are mainly based upon the problems he faced during
the translation of Bible. His theory is most comprehensive while formulating
theory of translation, he considered linguistic, semantic, communicative theory
and anthropology. Nida’s ‘Science of Translating’ gives importance to the
communicative approach of meaning. He provides the communicative frame
which is a vital aspect of his theory. He gives a reference of a monolingual
normal communication situation and then he states that translation is
‘interlingual act’. He considered translation as complex communicative process
comprising two alternative processes of encoding and decoding.
S- Source, M- Message, R- Receiver of message.
In this process, of communication culture plays important role. The
sender and receiver of message share the same culture.
According to him,
“Translation is not a process of matching surface forms by rules of
correspondence but rather a more complex procedure involving analysis,
transfer and restructuring.”
With his translation theories Eugene Nida left powerful impression on
linguistics, especially his idea of Dynamic and Formal equivalence is
remarkable. He also developed a new technique to seek equivalence. This
technique is called Componential-analysis. It suggests split words into
components to help to determine equivalence in translation, (e. g . bachelor^
male+unmarried)
Nida has considered three basic factors while putting forth the difference
in translation
1) The Nature of message
2) The purpose of author/ translator

Subject : Name_of_the_Subject 4
*Edited & Compiled for Reference Purpose for Students
 THE BHOPAL SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
Promoted by the Catholic Archdiocese of Bhopal
NAAC Re-accredited Autonomous College, affiliated to Barkatullah University, Bhopal

3) The type of audience

He said that there is nothing which may be called identical equivalent,
so he suggested another term- Closest natural equivalence. He holds the view
that no translation can be exact equivalent of its original, because all types of
translation involves
i) Loss of information.
ii) Addition of information
iii) Skewing of information
Eugene Nida gave a model of translation process illustrates the stages
Involved
TRANSFER
According to Nida, the three stages- analysis, Transfer and
Reconstructing are involved in the translation. In the first stage analysis, he
considers grammatical relationship between constituent parts, the referential
meanings of the semantic units and connotative values of the grammatical
structure and semantic units.
In the second stage transfer, the analyzed SL text is transferred in the
mind of translator into the TL.
In the third and final stage of Restructuring- the transferred material is
reconstructed in the TL.
Though Nida’s theory is linguistic one, he admits the important role of
culture. He calls translation as much more complex communicative process
which includes, alternating processes of encoding and decoding.
The term equivalence is one of the most important key terms in
translation theories. This term gave birth to many controversies. Eugene
Nida’s theory of Dynamic equivalence or Functional Equivalence reveals the
importance of transferring meaning, not grammatical form. He discussed the
term translation and various complexities.
In the book‘The Theory and Practice of Translation’, Nida says that
translators were not able to convey the message ofthe Bible. He mentioned that
two different approaches suggested two different methods for translation. The
older approach gave importance to form. They tried to reproduce stylistically;
on the contrary the new approach gave importance to the response of the
receptor.
The idea of formal equivalence centers of the form and contort of the
message of SL. In other words it is reproduction of grammatical units,
consistency in word usage and meanings in terms ofthe source context.
The term Dynamic Equivalence or Functional Equivalence aims at
complete naturalness of expression.
Eugene Nida’s theory is basically related to two items, form and effect.
He expressed the impossibility of achieving a translation that includes both.
This theory of Dynamic equivalence gives importance you transferring
meaning, not grammatical form.

Subject : Name_of_the_Subject 5
*Edited & Compiled for Reference Purpose for Students
 THE BHOPAL SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
Promoted by the Catholic Archdiocese of Bhopal
NAAC Re-accredited Autonomous College, affiliated to Barkatullah University, Bhopal

Susan Bassnett’s Theory ofTranslation Susan Bassnett highlights the importance of

knowledge of culture or role of culture in the process of translation. Andre Levefere and
Susan Bassnett in the year 1990 move the theory of translation beyond the linguistic studies
and compares SLT/TLT to examine the way culture effects translation,
The book, ‘Translation, History and Culture’ takes into account the
influence of the publishing industry on ideology. It discusses feminist writing
and, examines translation in the context of colonization.
While discussing the topic ‘Translating prose’ in the book ‘ Translation
Studies’ she says that , as novel seems simpler in structure than poetry, it is
consequently easier to translate. She has observed the method oftranslation of
prose used by students. She mentions that they simply open the SL text and
begin at the beginning, without considering how that opening section relates to
the structure ofthe book as a whole. For her content cannot be separated from
form. At the same time previous close reading of the SL text and study is
necessary for translator.
To prove her statement she has given an example- an extract, the
opening of The Magic Mountain translated by H. T. Lowe-Porter
and discussed the problems with this translation against the original
German text, and the extent ofthe distance between the SL and TL versions.
Sussan Bemett along with Harish Trivedi, in Post colonial Translation:
Theory and Practice (1959) calls translation as an unequal struggle between
various smaller languages and English.
Andre Levefre
Andre Levefre (1945-19996) was a translation theorist. He looked at
translation as a form of rewriting produced and read with a set of ideological
and political constraints within the target language cultural system. He thought
translation is form of rewriting. In order to prove the power of rewriting he
gives example ofthe Greek Classics, which were rewritten repeatedly.
While talking about task of translator in his book ‘Translating Poetry:
Seven Strategies and Blue Print’ translators mentions that he has to replace all
the variations from SL text to TL text.
“The translation task is precisely to render the source text, the originally
author’s interpretation of a given theme expressed in a number of variations,
accessible to reader not familiar with these variations by replacing the original
authors variations with their equivalents in a different language, time, place and
tradition. Particular emphasis must be given to the fact that the translator has to
replace all the variations contained in the source text by their equivalents”.
Lawrence Venuti
He stresses the need to widen the boundaries of translation stidies and
consider cultural issues as a major part ofthe translation. Translation: Towards
an Ethics of a difference deals with ideas Domestication and Foreigrization i.
e. the relationship between SL and TL on the basis of culture.
According to Lawrence Venuti, “every translator should look at the
translation process through the prism of culture which refracts the source
language cultural norms and it is the translator’s task to convey them,

Subject : Name_of_the_Subject 6
*Edited & Compiled for Reference Purpose for Students
 THE BHOPAL SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
Promoted by the Catholic Archdiocese of Bhopal
NAAC Re-accredited Autonomous College, affiliated to Barkatullah University, Bhopal

preserving their meaning and foreignness; to the target language text. Every
step in the translation process- from the selection of foreign texts to the
implementation oftranslation strategies to the editing, reviewing and reading of
translations- is mediated by the diverse cultural values that circulate in the
target language.”
Edwin Gentzler has analyzed Lawrence Venuti’s views about translation
in the book “Contemporary Translation Theories”. He pointed out important
aspects ofVenuti’s works-theories ofTranslation
Venuti’s theories presents certain novel ideas-He thinks, Translators are
judged to be successful when they read “fluently”. This fluently means the
quality of the translated text which gives no appearance that they have not
been translated. Translations are expected to give the appearance of original.
He thinks two fold problems arouse in this situation.
The first problem he mentions is of marginalizing translator. It makes the translator
subservient to the author, and also defines their practice as derivative and secondary. It places
translation far below from creative writing.
Secondly it erases the linguistic and cultural differences of the foreign
text that the very act of translation supposed to carry over into the receiving
culture.
Venuti innovated the dichotomy between domestication and
foreignization as the ethical choice for translators to make. Domestication
means making the text closely confirm to the culture of the T. language. It
creates possibility of information.
Foreignization is the strategy of retaining information from the SL text
and it purposely breaks the conventions of target language to preserve meaning.
In simple words, Domestication refers to making the SL text domestic to TL
text, on the other hand foreignization refers to the quality of belonging to the
SL text.
He observed the theory and practice ofEnglish language translation and
found that it is dominated by submission domestication. He criticizes
translators who give priority to the domestication policy for reducing the
cultural value of the SL text. Venuti advocates the foreignization strategy, for
him adequate translation would be the one, which highlight the foreigness of
the source text and show the differences.

NAME OF THE MAIN TOPIC NO 3- Classification of Theories of Translation

According to Newmark (1981: 19), translation

theory is concerned mainly with determining
appropriate translation methods for the widest
possible range of texts or text-categories. It also
provides a frame work of principles, restricted
rules and hints for translating texts and
criticizing translations, a background for

Subject : Name_of_the_Subject 7
*Edited & Compiled for Reference Purpose for Students
 THE BHOPAL SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
Promoted by the Catholic Archdiocese of Bhopal
NAAC Re-accredited Autonomous College, affiliated to Barkatullah University, Bhopal

problem solving. Any theory should also be

concerned with translation strategies adopted to
address difficulties and problems in certain
complicated texts.
A rigorous theory of translation would also include
something like a practical evaluation procedure
with specific criteria. A good survey of the
theories of translation is perhaps best furnished
by E. Nida who asserts that due to the fact that
translation is an activity involving language
there is a sense in which any and all theories of
translation are linguistic (1976:66-79).
Classification of Theories of Translation
A good survey of the theories of translation is
perhaps best furnished by E. Nida (1976:66-79)
who avers that due to the fact that translation is
an activity involving language there is a sense in
which any and all theories of translation are
linguistic (ibid:66). He classifies these theories
into three main categories:
Philological theories
Linguistic theories and
Socio-linguistic theories
1. Philological Theories
Philological theories rely upon ‘philology’ as
the study of the development of language, and
the classical literary studies.
They are mainly concerned with the
comparison of structures in the native and
foreign languages, especially the functional
correspondence and the literary genres in
addition to stylistics and rhetoric.
Philological theories of translating deal with the
problem of the equivalence of literary texts by
comparing and contrasting the SL and the TL.
They also focus on the literary quality, i.e. the
form of the text and its stylistic features and
rhetorical devices.
Another major issue in philological theories of
translating is the problem of equivalence of
literary genres between the SL and the TL. The
question whether poetry should be translated as
poetry or prose or whether an epic in the SL
should be rendered as such in the TL was one of
the main obsessions of such theories.

Subject : Name_of_the_Subject 8
*Edited & Compiled for Reference Purpose for Students
 THE BHOPAL SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
Promoted by the Catholic Archdiocese of Bhopal
NAAC Re-accredited Autonomous College, affiliated to Barkatullah University, Bhopal

2. Linguistic Theories
Linguistic theories of translation, according
to Nida (1976: 69), are based on a
comparison of the Linguistic structures of
the STs and TTs, rather than a comparison
of literary genres and stylistic features of
the philological theories.
Thus, ‘Linguistic Translation’ ( or Linguistic
Approach ) is a product of these theories which
view translation as simply a question of
replacing the linguistic units of the ST (source
text) with “equivalent” TL units without
reference to factors such as context or
connotation.
According to Nida and Taber (1969:134) it is
only a linguistic translation that can be
considered ‘faithful’
, because it “is one which
only contains elements which can be directly
derived from the ST wording, avoiding any kind
of explanatory interpolation or cultural
adjustment which can be justified on this basis.”
One major difference between linguistic theories
of translating and philological theories of
translating is that linguistic theories are
descriptive rather than prescriptive. They
demonstrate how people translate rather than
how they should translate.
According to Nida (1976): The principal
differences between various linguistic theories
(or semi-theories) of translation lie in the extent
to which the focus is on surface structures or
corresponding deep structures. Theories based
on surface-structure comparisons involve the use
of more-or-less elaborate sets of rules for
matching roughly corresponding structures.
3. Sociolinguistic Theories
Sociolinguistic theories of translating emerged out of the
dissatisfaction with linguistic theories of translating, and
the growing interest in communication. Such interest
resulted from the work of anthropologists who recognized
the role of text recipients in the process of translating.
Sociolinguistic theories of translating relate linguistic
structures to a higher level where they can be viewed in
terms of their function in communication. When discussing

Subject : Name_of_the_Subject 9
*Edited & Compiled for Reference Purpose for Students
 THE BHOPAL SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
Promoted by the Catholic Archdiocese of Bhopal
NAAC Re-accredited Autonomous College, affiliated to Barkatullah University, Bhopal

a text, the sociolinguist is concerned particularly with its

author, its historical background, the circumstances
involved in its production, and the history of its
interpretation.
Nida and Taber (1969), have pointed out that the
old focus on the form of the message in
translation has shifted to the receptors, i.e. the
readers. Therefore, it is the reader's response to
the translated message that determines the
correctness of that message. They set the
average reader as the only criterion for
measuring correctness in translating.
Correctness, in their view, is not only the
possibility of understanding the message by
readers but rather the impossibility of
misunderstanding it.

REFERENCES :
1. Newmark, p. (1981). Approaches to Translation. Pergamon: Oxford.
2. Nida, E.A. (1976) 'A Framework for the Analysis and Evaluation of Theories of Translation’. In
R.W. Brislin,(ed.), Translation Application and Research. New York, pp. 47-91.
3. Nida, E. and Taber, C. (1969). The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden: E.J. Brill

Subject : Name_of_the_Subject 10
*Edited & Compiled for Reference Purpose for Students
 THE BHOPAL SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
Promoted by the Catholic Archdiocese of Bhopal
NAAC Re-accredited Autonomous College, affiliated to Barkatullah University, Bhopal

4. http://ir.unishivaji.ac.in:8080/jspui/bitstream/123456789/1995/7/07_Chapter%202.pdf

*Edited & Compiled for Reference Purpose for Students by :

FACULTY NAME:Dr Zohra Iqbal

Assistant Professor
Department of English
The Bhopal School of Social Sciences

Subject : Name_of_the_Subject 11
*Edited & Compiled for Reference Purpose for Students