Nida's Contribution
Nida is but one of the many translation theorists but he is a very influential one. He gave a theoretical and scientific bent to translation that was thought to be a secondary and derivative activity in the U.S. But there are critics like Gentzler who point out: “The assumption that [the] higher, originary message not only exists, but that it is eternal and precedes language is always already presupposed by Nida, and it affects his science” (59). By reiterating the primacy of meaning what Nida is doing is privileging what he perceives to be the message of the SL text. He does not trust his readers to understand the text by themselves and polishes and prunes it according to his tastes. The result is a text that is doctored to avoid the inherent ambiguities and instabilities of all literary works. This is why Gentzler would say that Nida provides an “excellent model for translation” for a manipulative purpose (like the translation of the Bible) but that his theory fails to become a science.
In spite of this criticism we cannot deny that Nida has made valuable contribution to translation theory. He helped to focus attention on the socio-cultural contexts of language and literary texts. His concepts of formal and dynamic equivalence remain useful and relevant even today.
Assignments
- What are the four perspectives from which translation can be approached? Which, according to you, is the most balanced?
- Evaluate the contribution made by Eugene Nida to the field of Translation Studies.
References
Gentzler, Edwin. Contemporary Translation Theories. Second revised edition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 2001.
Nida, Eugene.”Theories of Translation”. < http://www.scribd.com/doc/49330223/Theories-of-E-Nida> |
