Equivalence and adequacy in translation: are they equivalent?, are they adequate?

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

The aim of translation, according to Marge E. Landsberg, is "to reproduce
in the TL, as faithfully as possible (i.e. at all levels: morphological, phonological, syntactic, lexical, semantic - and even stylistic) all the linguistic features of which the SL is composed".! In order to render all these features into the TL,
the translator, as we know, would have to bear in mind the concept of equivalence all the time. However, when it comes to defining what equivalence really means, it seems that it is one of the most controversial concepts in the
whole field of Translation Studies - in Peter Fawcett's words "a concept that
has probably cost the lives of more trees than any other in translation studies"2 - and this, needless to say, is due to the tendency either to speak about translation in general terms or to try to apply a sort of mathematical definition
that can not be reversed. And it becomes even more difficult to establish a clear definition of this key term when we find it related to the term"adequacy" because sometimes they are both treated as synonyms and at other times they are not
clearly differentiated.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationOn Translating French Literature and Film II
EditorsMyriam Salama-Carr
Place of PublicationAmsterdam
PublisherRodopi
Chapter7
Pages89-97
Number of pages9
ISBN (Print)90-420-1451-2
Publication statusPublished - 2000

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Equivalence and adequacy in translation: are they equivalent?, are they adequate?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this