*Equivalence and Translation

translation is not of a high quality in fact, she represent that ‘a translation text should not only match its source text in function, but it should employ equivalent situational – dimensional instrument to achieve that function’. House’s theory of equivalence in translation seems to be much more flexible than Catford’s. In fact she gives example, uses complete texts and more importantly, she relates linguistic features to the context of both source and target text (Leonardi 2000).

Roman Jakobson (1959 p.54) in his study of equivalence gave new perspective to the theoretical analysis of translation since he introduced the notion of ‘equivalence in difference’. On the basis of his semiotic approach to language he suggests three kinds of translation.

1- Intralingual (within one language, i.e. rewording of paraphrase)

2. Interlingual (between two languages)

3- Intersemiotic (between sign systems)

      Jakobson claims that, in the case of interlingual translation, the translator makes use of synonyms in order to transfer the ST message. 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 also says that from a grammatical point of view languages may differ from each other to a greater or lesser degrees, but this does not mean that translation can not be possible, in other words, the translator may face the problem of not finding a translation equivalent. He also says that ‘whenever there is deficiency, terminology may be qualified and amplified by loanwords or loan translations, neologisms or semantic shifts and finally by circumlocutions’.


  Catford, jhon c.(1965). A linguistic theory of translation: an essay        

   on applied linguistic, p.7-59, London: Oxford University press. 


 Crystal, D. (1995). Translation equivalence, p.68-120,        www.davidcrystal.com/DC_articles/Religion8.pdf


Collins English Dictionary. (1994), p.526, Glosgow : Hyper Collins .   


 Crookall ,D. & R.L.(1990) . Oxford. Linking language learning and simulation/ gaming. Simulation, gaming and language learning. New York: Newsbury House Publishers. 


Chung-ling, Sh. (2005). Using trados’s winalign tool to teach the translation Equivalence Concept, www.accurapid.com/journal/36 edu .htm 


   Fawcett, P. (1997). Translation and language: linguistic theories         

 explained, Manchester: St Jerome publishing.


Gerzimisch-Arbogast, H. (2001):”Equivalence prameters and                                                            

 evaluation”. Meta, V46, N2, P.227-242.







MA in TRANSLATION, great translation theoretician,mazandaran province ghaemsharcity,IRAN

Comments (4)

Lonnie Kimberly

May 16, 2012 at 3:30 PM

I absolutely love your blog and find the majority of your post’s to be precisely what I’m looking for. can you offer guest writers to write content for yourself? I wouldn’t mind producing a post or elaborating on a few of the subjects you write regarding here. Again, awesome web site!

Rush Limbaugh Racist

Apr 02, 2012 at 10:07 PM

Very good post! We will be linking to this great content on our site. Keep up the good writing.

Sparkle Gulden

Oct 25, 2010 at 3:16 AM

Good luck and thanks for the great article.I will are available back again.

x-tremely cheap gas powerd scooters

Aug 30, 2010 at 12:08 PM

Pretty good post. I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say that I have really enjoyed reading your blog posts. Any way I’ll be subscribing to your feed and I hope you post again soon.

Leave a comment