There is fundamental difference between formal equivalence, on the one hand and semantic and pragmatic equivalence, on the other. Formal equivalence may accompany semantic and pragmatic equivalence but is by no means mandatory. It has been pointed out that the translator does not set himself the task of preserving the syntactic relations of the original. Nor does he aim at formal equivalence between the original and the translation. Usually formal equivalence results from similarity of pragmatical forms and lexical items of the two languages. But it does not arise out of a deliberate effort. Adequate translation may be defined therefore as that which is determined, by semantic and pragmatic equivalence between the original and the TL text. Cases of formal equivalence without semantic or pragmatic equivalence are usually described as literal translation. Literal translation reproduces the linguistic form of the original without any regard for semantic-pragmatic equivalence. It may reproduce the morphological and sound form as, for instance, in Chukovsky`s famous examples: композитор for compositor, Черри Орчад (Cherry Orchard) instead of Вишневый Сад. It may also reproduce lexical items, overlooking the integral meaning of the phrase (a dozen times- дюжину раз, God, bless my soul - Боже, благослови мою душу.).
In other words, literal translation reproduces the form at the expense of the meaning and distorts the original. In some cases it may violate a stylistic norms as, for instance, in the reproducing of the syntactic torn of the original message: It was he who did it-Это был он,кто сделал это. Finally, it may reproduce both the linguistic form and the denotational meanings but ignore the pragmatic aspects of the message. As a result, the message will not get across, and the intended communicative effect will not be attained (e.g., the English sentence comparing the sky to Guiseley sandstone, translated as Heбo напоминало песчанник из Гайзли is pragmatically inadequate.
Free translation, on the other hand, consists in pragmatically unmotivated additions and omissions of semantic information. In literal translation the translator distorts the message by slavishly reproducing the form while in free translation he distorts it by overstepping his authority and assuming the role of a co-author. For instance, Irinarch Vvedensky sometimes added pages of his own to Dickens’ novels. He translated the phrase She burst out crying as Слезы показались на глазах прелестной малютки. And the word refugee as, приют, где наслаждался я счастьем мирных детских лет.

The ways of adequate translation

Grammatical and lexical parallelism between the SL and the TL makes it possible in some cases to retain formal equivalence without departing from semantic and pragmatic equivalence. Otherwise various lexical-grammatical transformations are used: transposition, replacement, addition and omission.

Назад