being somewhere in between. Creating new terms such as closest natural equivalent translation may be helpful, but those who use them should describe them well enough so that it can be better understood how they relate to terms already in use such as idiomatic, dynamic, and meaning-based translation. For example, He is someone who means business. Ол мінезі салма? Ти адамдарди? 6ipi. Fernando has everything he needs. He's a real fat cat. Фернандода керекті н? Рселерді? б? pi де бар. Ол расинда да ба? Итти адамдарди?, Бірі. p align="justify"> equivalence translation literature newspaper
2. Definition of equivalence in translation
Vinay and Darbelnet view equivalence-oriented translation as a procedure which 'replicates the same situation as in the original, whilst using completely different wording . They also suggest that, if this procedure is applied during the translation process, it can maintain the stylistic impact of the SL text in the TL text. According to them, equivalence is therefore the ideal method when the translator has to deal with proverbs, idioms, nominal or adjectival phrases and the onomatopoeia of animal sounds.
With regard to equivalent expressions between language pairs, Vinay and Darbelnet claim that they are acceptable as long as they are listed in a bilingual dictionary as 'full equivalents'. However, later they note that glossaries and collections of idiomatic expressions 'can never be exhaustive'. They conclude by saying that 'the need for creating equivalences arises from the situation, and it is in the situation of the SL text that translators have to look for a solution'. Indeed, they argue that even if the semantic equivalent of an expression in the SL text is quoted in a dictionary or a glossary, it is not enough, and it does not guarantee a successful translation. br/>
2.1 Jakobson and the different concept of equivalence
Roman Jakobson's study of equivalence gave new impetus to the theoretical analysis of translation since he introduced the notion of 'equivalence in difference'. On the basis of his semiotic approach to language and his aphorism "there is no signatum without signum ', he suggests three kinds of translation:
Intralingual (within one language, ie rewording or paraphrase)
Interlingual (between two languages) (between sign systems) claims that, in the case of interlingual translation, the translator makes use of synonyms in order to get the ST message across. This means that in interlingual translations there is no full equivalence between code units. According to his theory, 'translation involves two equivalent messages in two different codes', Jakobson goes on to say that from a grammatical point o...
