Towards The Legttimacy Of "equivalence"as Transl Ation Criterion

The concept of quivalence in translation studies has been manifested in many forms and has aroused many disputes and conflicts. Some people denounce it as something impossible to achieve due to great difference in culture and historical background. Some, though not denying its reasonable exigence still doubt whether it can be honored as a translation criterion. Admittedly, it is hard to achieve equivalence sometimes, yet quivalence is not ameness but a relative concept. A glimpse of the translation criteria proposed by theorists both home and abroad will show the idea of quivalence be it overtly stated or implied. We may also verify translatability from many perspectives, from where naturally resulted the fact that quivalence is possible to achieve. Besides, Chomsky and Nida theories have provided us a theoretical foundation where we may build our ideas on. Nida typology of quivalence formal equivalence and functional equivalence is used in developing this thesis. As the primary requirement for translation, formal equivalence to be discussed herein is different from what Nida suggests. Nida is not quivalence but opy which often results in word-for-word translation and therefore cannot be taken as translation criterion at all. Quite often, the meaning conveyed by a language lies not in what the words seemingly suggest but in the connotative meaning which is the true meaning or, say, the intention of the author. Functional equivalence, in that respect therefore, provides a solution to convey the true meaning closely related to certain linguistic fealures proper and cultural background. Functional equivalence studies the functions of the Source Language (SL) as employed by the author; and realizes the same functions in the target language (TL) in translating. Meanwhile, it stresses on same effects on the TL readers compared with those on the SL readers, which has always been accused of obstructing cultural exchange and many hold that it will only do when handling sheer linguistic problems. Actually, for something that exists in one culture but lacks in another, it is quite easy to deal with through ero translation When two cultures have the same concept but different ways of rendering, functional equivalence suggests domestication for an easy and smooth reading. To introduce new things, we may add notes and leave the readers to learn and compare. In a word, quivalence is legitimate in serving as translation criterion. While we have to admit that there is no sole criterion that can solve all problems, quivalence solves most and hence saves the best.