8．5　Formal Equivalence and Dynamic Equivalence形式对等...

8．5　Formal Equivalence and Dynamic Equivalence形式对等和动态对等

Formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence are put foreword by Nida(1964)．Formal equivalence is the quality of a translation in which the features of the form of the source text have been mechanically reproduced in the receptor language．Nida proposed his categorization in the context of Bible translation，and in many respects it offers a more useful distinction than the traditional notions of free and literal translation．The aim of a translator who is striving for formal equivalence is to allow ST to speak in its own terms rather than attempting to adjust it to the circumstances of the target culture．The frequent result of such strategies is of course that，because of structural differences between SL and TL，a translation of this type distorts the grammatical and stylistic patterns of the receptor language，and distorts message．For this reason it is frequently necessary to include explanatory notes to help the target reader．Like its converse dynamic equivalence，formal equivalence represents a general orientation rather than an absolute technique，so that between the two opposite extremes there are any number of intervening grades，all of which represent acceptable methods of translation．However，a general tendency towards formal rather than dynamic equivalence is characterized by，for example，a concern for accuracy and a preference for retaining the original wording wherever possible．In spite of its apparent limitations，however，formal equivalence is sometimes the most appropriate strategy to follow．(Shuttleworth ＆ Cowie，2004: 61)

Dynamic equivalence is the quality which characterizes a translation in which the message of the original text has been so transported into the receptor language that the response of the receptor is essentially like that of the original receptors(Nida ＆ Taber，1969/1982: 200)．In other words，a dynamically equivalent translation is one which has been produced in accordance with the threefold process of analysis(分析)，transfer(转移)and restructuring(重组); formulating such a translation will entail such procedures as substituting TL items which are more culturally appropriate for obscure ST items，making linguistically implicit ST information explicit，and building in a certain amount of redundancy(冗余信息)to aid comprehension．In a translation of this kind one is therefore not so concerned with matching the receptor-language message with the sourcelanguage message; the aim is more to relate the receptor to modes of behavior relevant within the context of his own culture．(Shuttleworth ＆ Cowie，2004: 47)

In the country of the blind，the one-eyed man is king．

　Version 1:蜀中无大将，廖化充先锋。

　Version 2:盲人眼里，独眼为王。

Comments Version 1 belongs to dynamic equivalence，which is identified in terms of the degree to which the receptors of the message in the receptor language respond to it in substantially the same manner as the receptors in the source language．Version 2 is equivalent in form and sense．We can say that both versions can be used，but there exists a question that whether foreignizing or domesticating method is chosen．As far as the first version is concerned，the reader will probably think that the westerner also knows the characters in Three Kingdoms or Romance of The Three Kingdoms(《三国演义》)quite well and the message of the original is lost although it is a acceptable translation．About version 2，it is not only to convey the deep meaning of the original，but also is understandable．This example tells us that formal equivalence or dynamic equivalence has its own limits and we constantly consider the reader＇s reception and the original meaning in adopting translation methods．