English

Levels of equivalence

This problem was briefly discussed in the previous lecture in COnnection with the distinction between semantic and pragmatic equivalence. In the theory of translation different ideas have been put forward concerning the types and levels of equivalence in translation. For instance, V. Gak and Levin distinguish the following types of equivalents: formal, semantic and situational.
Formal equivalence may be illustrated by such cases as: the sun disappeared behind a cloud - Солнце скрылось за тучей.
Here we find similarity of words and forms in addition to the similarity of meanings. The differences in the plane of expression are, in fact, determined by the overall structural differences between Russian and English: the use of articles in English, the use of the perfective aspect, gender forms, etc. in Russian. Semantic equivalence exists when the same meanings are expressed in the two languages in a different way: i.e., Troops were airlifted to the battlefield - Войска были переброшены на поле боя по воздуху. The English verb airlift contains the same semantic components as the Russian phrase nepeбpocить no воздyxy. Although different linguistic devices are used in Russian and in English the sum of the semantic components is the same.
Situational equivalence is established between utterances that differ not only in linguistic devices but also in the semantic components and nevertheless describes the same extralinguistic situation: Car output registered a fifty-percent increase- Производство автомобилей возросло в полтора раза.
It should be noted that formal equivalence alone is insufficient. In fact the above examples pertain to two semantic equivalence

As to situational equivalence, it is , in our view, another variety of semantic equivalence that differs from the first type in that it is based not on the same semantic components but on the equivalence of meanings, made of different semantic components. In other words, sums of different semantic components may be semantically equivalent (a+b = c+d) : (upside down - вверх ногами ). We therefore shall speak of two types of semantic equivalence: componential (identity of semantic components) and equational (equivalence of different semantic components). The latter is preferable to “situational equivalence” for the descriptions of the same situation are not necessarily semantically equivalence.
Tabulated above are the following major types of translation equivalence (formal equivalence + semantic componential equivalence + pragmatic equivalence; semantic-componential or equational equivalence + pragmatic equivalence; pragmatic equivalence). Pragmatic equivalence which implies a close fit: between communicative intent and the receptor’s response is required at all levels of equivalence.