Types of Translation i) Word translation ii) Paraphrasing or meaning oriented translation iii) Sense-for- sense translation iv) Gloss translation reproduce literally and meaningfully the form and content of the original v) !y"rid translation - a mi#ing of languages$ archaism$ neologism$ slang$ collo%uial e#pressions vi) &adical translation into a language that is either classical or ne' vii) !uman translation ( machine translation computer( machine-aided translation Pro"lems in translation) i) The pro"lem of e%uivalence irreduci"le linguistic and cultural differences correspondence le#ical$ grammatical$ stylistic Settle for dynamic or functional e%uivalence ii) The pro"lem of history or period iii) The pro"lem of untranslata"ility nonsense rhyme$ poesie concrete glossolalia etc *asic re%uirements of translation ma+ing sense conveying the spirit and manner of the original - ,t must echo the original the intended effect having a natural and easy form of e#pression producing a similar response Translation as adaptation adapting to the local culture$ stage$ screen$ radio etc Translation as recreation poetry Translation as interpretation any translation is a +ind of interpretation -ethodology Literal Translation vs Li"eral Translation Practical translation .minima#/ strategy minimum effort ma#imum effect Some 0amous Translation Theorists 1 23 3artford/s short study of 1456 tac+led the pro"lem of linguistic and cultural untranslata"ility !e ma+es a distinction "et'een .literal/ and .free/ translation 7 8ugene 9ida tal+s a"out t'o types of e%uivalence in translation .formal/ and .dynamic$/ later replacing the 'ord .dynamic/ 'ith .functional/ : Levy$ the 3;ech translation scholar$ insisted that any contracting or omitting of difficult e#pressions in translating 'as immoral < &oman 2a+o"son discusses several types of translation in his 'or+ On Linguistic Aspects of Translation i) ,ntralingual translation$ or re'ording ii) ,nterlingual translation$ or translation proper iii) ,ntersemiotic translation$ or transmutation 1 6 =nton Popovic pu"lished his Dictionary for the Analysis of Literary Translations in 14>5 !e proposes four types of e%uivalence) They are i) Linguistic 8%uivalence ii) Paradigmatic 8%uivalence iii) Stylistic 8%uivalence iv) Te#tual (Syntagmatic) 8%uivalence !e calls for .e#pressive identity/ "et'een the SL and TL te#ts 5 =l"recht 9eu"ert/s point of vie' is that the translation e%uivalence must "e considered a semiotic category comprising semantic$ syntactic and pragmatic components > 0rench humanist 8tienne ?olet (16@4-<5) 'as e#ecuted for heresy after .mistranslating/ one of Plato/s ?ialogues in such a 'ay as to imply dis"elief in immortality A ="raham 3o'ley asserts that in his Pindaric Odes Bhe has ta+en$ left out and added 'hat , pleaseC- a manifesto for li"ertine translation or transcreation 4 2ohn ?ryden tal+s a"out three categories in translation) i) -etaphrase turning an author 'ord "y 'ord or line "y line ii) Paraphrase translation 'ith latitudeD sense for sense 3iceronian iii) ,mitation the translator can a"andon the original as he sees fit 1@ George 3hapman (1664-15:<) attempts to reach the .spirit/ or .tone/ of the original to "e recreated in another conte#t 'hich he calls .transmigration/ of the original te#t 11 = translation that is full of archaisms of form and language 'as condemned "y -atthe' =rnold 'ho coined the ver" to ne'mani;e after 0W9e'man$ a leading e#ponent of this type of translation 17 There are t'o "ranches of pure translation studies) (a) Descriptive Translation Studies (?TS) or Translation Description (T?) ( ") Theoretical Translation Studies (ThTS) or Translation Theory (TTh) 1: !ans Eermeer claims that skopos or aim is a decisive factor in a translation proFect = purposive action leads to a result Translational action leads to a translatum (that is the resultant translated te#t)$ a particular variety of a target te#t 1< George Steiner says that translation is .inflationist/ as every translation tends to "e longer than the original