@article{ART001442252},
author={박정준},
title={Equivalence in Translation and its components},
journal={Cross-Cultural Studies},
issn={1598-0685},
year={2010},
volume={19},
pages={251-270},
doi={10.21049/ccs.2010.19..251}
TY - JOUR
AU - 박정준
TI - Equivalence in Translation and its components
JO - Cross-Cultural Studies
PY - 2010
VL - 19
IS - null
PB - Center for Cross Culture Studies
SP - 251
EP - 270
SN - 1598-0685
AB - The subject of the paper is to discern the validity of the translation theory put forward by the ESIT(Ecole Supérieur d'Interprètes et de Tranducteurs, Université Paris Ⅲ) and how it differentiates from the other translation theories. First, the paper will analyze the theoretical aspects put forward by examining the equivalence that may be discerned between the french and korean translation in relation to the original english text that is being translated. Employing the equivalence in translation may shed new insights into the unterminable discussions we witness today between the literal translation and the free translation.
Contrary to the formal equivalence the dynamic equivalence by Nida suggests that the messages retain the same meanings whether it be the original or a translated text to the/for the reader. In short, the object of the dynamic equivalence is to identify the closest equivalence to the suggested source language.
The concept of correspondence and equivalence defined by theoriticians of translation falls to the domain of dynamic equivalence suggested by Nida. In translation theory the domain of usage of language and the that of discourse is denoted separately. by usage one denotes the translation through symbols that make up language itself. In contrast to this, the discourse is suggestive of defining the newly created expressions which may be denoted as being a creative equivalence which embodies the original message for the singular situation at hand. The translator will however find oneself incorporating the two opposing theories in translating. Translation falls under the criteria of text and not of language, thus one cannot regulate or foresee any special circumstances that may arise in translation of discourse, the translation to reflect this condition should always be delimited. All other translation should be subject to translation by equivalence.
The interpretation theory in translation (of ESIT) in effect is relative to both the empirical and philosophical approach and is suggestive of new perspective in translation. In conclusion, the above suggested translation theory is different from the skopos theory and the polysystem theory in that it only takes in to account the elements that are in close relation to the original text, and also that it was developed for educational purposes opening new perspectives in the domain of translation theories.
KW - interpretation theory in translation;deverbalization;equivalence;correspondence;Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone
DO - 10.21049/ccs.2010.19..251
ER -
박정준. (2010). Equivalence in Translation and its components. Cross-Cultural Studies, 19, 251-270.
박정준. 2010, "Equivalence in Translation and its components", Cross-Cultural Studies, vol.19, pp.251-270. Available from: doi:10.21049/ccs.2010.19..251
박정준 "Equivalence in Translation and its components" Cross-Cultural Studies 19 pp.251-270 (2010) : 251.
박정준. Equivalence in Translation and its components. 2010; 19 251-270. Available from: doi:10.21049/ccs.2010.19..251
박정준. "Equivalence in Translation and its components" Cross-Cultural Studies 19(2010) : 251-270.doi: 10.21049/ccs.2010.19..251
박정준. Equivalence in Translation and its components. Cross-Cultural Studies, 19, 251-270. doi: 10.21049/ccs.2010.19..251
박정준. Equivalence in Translation and its components. Cross-Cultural Studies. 2010; 19 251-270. doi: 10.21049/ccs.2010.19..251
박정준. Equivalence in Translation and its components. 2010; 19 251-270. Available from: doi:10.21049/ccs.2010.19..251
박정준. "Equivalence in Translation and its components" Cross-Cultural Studies 19(2010) : 251-270.doi: 10.21049/ccs.2010.19..251
