The+Theory+and+Practice+of+Translation.doc

HELPS FOR TRANSLATORS
PREPARED UNDER THE AUSPICES OF THE UNITED BIBLE SOCIETIES
VOLUME VIII
THE THEORY AND PRACTICE OF TRANSLATION
i'O
t
THE THEORY AND' °9
PRACTICE OF TRANSLATION
BY
isriTffG ur:v^r.r "a. j
EUGENE A. NIDA I ."> i £ 11 AND CHARLES R. TABER

SECOND PHOTOMECHANICAL REPRINT

PUBLISHED FOR THE UNITED BIBLE SOCIETIES BY E. J. BRILL, LEIDEN
1982
PUBLISHED FOR THE UNITED BIBLE SOCIETIES BY E. J. BRILL, LEIDEN
1982

Helps for Translators prepared under the auspices of the United Bible Societies

Volume I Old Testament Translation Problems
Volume II A Translator's Handbook on Mark
Volume III Old Testament Quotations in the New Testament
Volume IV Section Heading and Reference System
Volume V New Testament Index
Volume VI Orthography Studies
Volume VII Bible Translations for Popular Use
Volume VIII The Theory and Practice of Translation
This volume was first published in 1969 First reprint 1974
ISBN 90 04 06550 4
Copyright 1969 by E.J. Brill, Leiden, The Netherlands
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or translated in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, microfiche or any other means without written permission from the publisher
PRINTED IN THE NETHERLANDS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Preface vu
i. A New Concept of Translating i
2. The Nature of Translating 12
3. Grammatical Analysis 33
4. Referential Meaning 56
5. Connotative Meaning 91
6. Transfer 99
7. Restructuring i20
8. Testing the Translation 163
Appendix: Organization of Translation Projects i?4
Bibliography. : . . . 187
Glossary i9fj
General Index 209
Biblical Index . . . 216

PREFACE
This volume on The Theory and Practice of Translation is the logical outgrowth of the previous book Toward a Science of Translating (1964), which explored some of the basic factors constituting a scientific approach to translation. This second volume presents certain of these same theories in a pedagogically oriented order, designed to assist the translator to master the theoretical elements as well as to gain certain practical sldlls in learning how to carry out the procedures. Though this present book treats the problems of translating primarily in terms of a scientific orientation to linguistic structures, semantic analysis, and information theory, it does not lose sight of the fact that translating is far more than a science. It is also a skill, and in the ultimate analysis fully satisfactory translation is always an art.
In this volume the illustrative data are drawn primarily from the field of Bible translating. This reflects both the immediate concerns of those for whom the book has been specifically prepared and the background experience of the authors. There are, however, certain ways in which this may be a distinct advantage to the reader interested in the broadest possible aspects of translating, for Bible translating has a longer tradition (it began in the third century B.C.), involves far more languages (1393 languages by the end of 1968), is concerned with a greater variety of cultures (Bible translators have worked in all areas of the world), and includes a wider range of literary types (from lyric poetrj- to theological discourse) than any comparable kind of translating. iVccordingly, even though the illustrative data may seem somewhat restricted, the total range of background experience is unusually wide, and hence the basis for observations on the essential problems of semantic analysis, discourse structures, and cultural transfers is particularly valid.
The first two chapters are essentially introductory, for they deal with certain of the broader issues and attempt to orient the reader with respect to the total task. The following chapters take up in a systematic order the fundamental procedures of translating: analysis, transfer, restructuring, and testing. Purely practical considerations of committee organization and procedures for carrying out the work of translating are treated in the Appendix. A glossary of technical terms is also added, as a kind of index, in which difficult w?ords are briefly defined. The reader is then referred to that particular place in the text where the subject is discussed in greatest detail and thoroughness.
This volume is the result of three different drafts, prepared over a period of approximately four years, and used in varying form in a number of translators' institutes and seminars held in various places throughout the w-orld. It has also benefited from the advice and counsel of a number
vn

VIII
PREFACE

of Translations Consultants working under the auspices of the United Bible Societies.
The Theory and Practice of Translation is not, however, to be considered exhaustive in the sense that it explores fully all the important areas and problems of the translator. In two respects especially there is need for further amplification: i. the presentation of structural semantics, including componential analysis, and 2. discourse analysis. As regards the first kind of problems, another volume is now in preparation, tentatively titled Introduction to Structural Semantics, which will deal much more fully with the theoretical and structural aspects of semantics. The whole matter of grammatical meaning will be treated there, including especially the important notions of "case" and "role" as discussed in recent writings of Fillmore and Langendoen. In the second area, research is also being carried out by the technical staff of the Bible Societies, which will lead to publications in the not-too-distant future.
Eugene A. Nida and Charles R. Taber
New York, 1969
CHAPTER ONE
A NEW CONCEPT OF TRANSLATING
Never before in the history of the world have there been so many persons engaged in the translating of both secular and religious materials. It is estimated that at least 100,000 persons dedicate most or all of their time to such work, and of these at least 3,000 are engaged primarily in the translation of the Bible into some Soo languages, representing about So percent of the world's population.
Unfortunately, the underlying theory of translating has not caught up with the development of skills; and in religious translating, despite consecrated talent and painstaking efforts, a comprehension of the basic principles of translation and communication has lagged behind translating in the secular fields. One specialist in translating and interpreting for the aviation industry commented that in his work he did not dare to employ the principles often followed by translators of the Bible: "With us," he said, "complete intelligibility is a matter of life and death." Unfortunately, translators of religious materials have sometimes not been prompted by the same feeling of urgency to make sense.
The Old Focus and the New Focus
The older focus in translating was the form of the message, and translators took particular delight in being able to reproduce stylistic specialties, e.g., rhythms, rhymes, plays on words, chiasmus, parallelism, and unusual grammatical structures. The new focus, however, has shifted from the form of the message to the response of the receptor. Therefore, what one must determine is the response of the receptor to the translated message. This response must then be compared with the way in which the original receptors presumably reacted to the message when it was given in its original setting.
Even the old question: Is this a correct translation ? must be answered in terms of another question, namely: For whom? Correctness must be determined by the extent to which the average reader for which a translation is intended will be likely to understand it correctly. Moreover, we are not concerned merely with the possibility of his understanding correctly, but with the overwhelming likelihood of it. In other words, we are not content merely to translate so that the average receptor is likely to understand the message; rather we aim to make certain that such a person is very unlikely to misunderstand it.
Posing the question of correctness in this manner naturally implies that there will be different translations which can be called "correct." In fact, for the scholar who is himself well acquainted with the original, even the most labored, literal translation will be "correct," for he will not misunderstand it. On the other hand, in most large linguistic com-

2 A NEW CONCEPT OF TRANSLATING
munities, especially when they employ so-called international languages spoken by millions of people, there are a number of socioeducational levels of speech and comprehension. This means that several different levels of translation, in terms of vocabulary and grammatical structures, are required, if all people are to have essentially equal opportunities to understand the message.
This test of comprehensibility is concerned primarily with discovering and eliminating two different types of expressions: (i) those which are likely to be misunderstood and (2) those so difficult and "heavy" (whether in vocabulary or grammar) as to discourage the reader from attempting to comprehend the content of the message. Such idioms as "children of the bridechamber" (Mark 2:19) and "heap coals of fire on his head" (Rom. 12:20) are typical of the first category. The average person unacquainted with Semitic idioms is simply not going to understand that the "children of the bridechamber" are the friends of the bridegroom, or wedding guests, and that "heap coals of fire on his head" means to make a person ashamed of his behavior, and is not a way of torturing people to death.
When a high percentage of people misunderstand a rendering, it cannot be regarded as a legitimate translation. For example, in Romans 1:17 most traditional translations have "the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith," and most readers naturally assume that this is a reference to God's own personal righteousness. Most scholars are agreed, however, that this is not God's own righteousness, but the process by which God puts men right with himself (cf. Today's English Version). It is the act of "justification" (to use a technical, and generally misunderstood word) and not the character of righteousness. But a translation which insists on rendering the Greek literally as "the righteousness of God" is simply violating the meaning for the sake of preserving a formal grammatical correspondence.
In addition to being quite misleading, a translation may also be so stylistically heavy as to make comprehension almost impossible. For example, in the American Standard Version (1901), 2 Corinthians 3:10 reads," "For verily that which hath been made glorious hath not been made glorious in this respect, by reason of the glory that surpasseth." The words are all English, but the sentence structure is essentially Greek. The New English Bible quite rightly restructures this passage to read, "Indeed, the splendour that once was is now no splendour at all; it is outshone by a splendour greater still."
Problem 1
Evaluate the following sets of renderings of Biblical passages in terms of how readily and correctly an ordinary reader or hearer is likely to understand them:
1. Matt. 3:15c: "Then he [John] suffered him [Jesus]" (kjv).
"So John agreed" (tev).

3
A NEW CONCEPT OF TRANSLATING
2. John 1:14: "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among
us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth"
(KJV).
"So the word of God became a human being and lived among us. We saw his splendour (the splendour as of a father's onlv son), full of grace and truth" (PhiUips).
"The Word became a human being and lived among us. We saw his glory, full of grace and truth. This was the glory which he received as the Father's only Son" (tev).
3. Rom. 3:21-22: "But now the righteousness of God without the law
is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe" (kjv).
"But, in these days, God's way of justification has at last been brought to light; one which was attested by the law and the prophets, but stands apart from the law; God's way of justification through faith in Jesus Christ, meant for everybody and sent down upon everybody without distinction, if he has faith" (Knox).
"But now God's way of putting men right with himself has been revealed, and it has nothing to do with law. The Law and the prophets gave their witness to it: God puts men right through their faith in Jesus Christ. God does this to all who believe in Christ" (tev).
New Attitudes with Respect to Receptor Languages
Some of the basic difficulties in Bible translation can be traced to the fact that people often have quite wrong views of the receptor as well as of the source languages. Hence, to produce texts which will approximate the goal of equivalent response, translators often need to change their view of the languages in which they are working. This includes not mere!}' a shift in some of the attitudes which tend to place the source languages on a theological pedestal and to bow down before them in blind submission, but it often requires quite a radical rethinking of one's attitude toward the receptor language, even when it is one's own mother tongue.
Each language has its own genius.
In the first place, it is essential to recognize that each language has its own genius. That is to say, each language possesses certain distinctive

4
A NEW CONCEPT OF TRANSLATING
A NEW CONCEPT OF TRANSLATING
0

characteristics which give it a special character, e.g., word-building capacities, unique patterns of phrase order, techniques for linking clauses into sentences, markers of discourse, and special discourse types of. poetry, proverbs, and song. Each language is rich in vocabulary for the areas of cultural focus, the specialities of the people, e.g., cattle (Anuaks in the Sudan), yams (Ponapeans in Micronesia), hunting and fishing (Piros in Peru), or technology (the western world). Some languages are rich in modal particles. Others seem particularly adept in the development of figurative language, and many have very rich literary resources, both written and oral.
To communicate effectively one must respect the genius of each language.
Rather than bemoan the lack of some feature in a language, one must respect the features of the receptor language and exploit the potentialities of the language to the greatest possible extent. Unfortunately, in some instances translators have actually tried to "remake" a language. For example, one missionary in Latin America insisted on trying to introduce the passive voice of the verb into a language which had no such form. Of course, this was not successful. One must simply accept the fact that there a