Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In semantics, dynamic and formal equivalence are approaches to translation that prioritize either the meaning or literal structure of the source text respectively. The distinction was originally articulated by Eugene Nida in the context of Bible translation .
Eugene Albert Nida (November 11, 1914 – August 25, 2011) was an American linguist who developed the dynamic equivalence theory of Bible translation and is considered one of the founders of modern translation studies.
In 1964, [citation needed] Eugene Nida described translation as having two different types of equivalence: formal and dynamic equivalence. [14] Formal equivalence is when there is focus on the message itself (in both form and content); [15] the message in the target language should match the message in the source language as closely as possible ...
The theory first appeared in an article published by linguist Hans Josef Vermeer in the German Journal Lebende Sprachen, 1978. [2]As a realisation of James Holmes’ map of Translation Studies (1972), [3] [4] skopos theory is the core of the four approaches of German functionalist translation theory [5] that emerged around the late twentieth century.
GW uses a dynamic equivalence translation methodology it calls "Closest Natural Equivalence". [2] Its publishers believe that communicating the original meaning of the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts that comprise the Scriptures such that everyone can comprehend requires taking a completely new look at the original languages.
A dynamic equivalence (free) translation tries to clearly convey the thoughts and ideas of the source text. A literal translation, it is argued, may obscure the intention of the original author. A free translator attempts to convey the subtleties of context and subtext in the work, so that the reader is presented with both a translation of the ...
In the 1960s, Nida envisioned a new style of translation called dynamic equivalence. That is, the meaning of the Hebrew and Greek would be expressed in a translation "thought for thought" rather than "word for word". The dynamic theory was inspired by a Spanish translation for Latin American native peoples.
He estimates that the theory and practice of English-language translation had been dominated by submission, by fluent domestication. He strictly criticized the translators who in order to minimize the foreignness of the target text reduce the foreign cultural norms to target-language cultural values.