Nida’s Equivalent Theory

Eugene Nida, a pioneer of translation theories, proposes the equivalent theory including

formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence. The importance of formal equivalence focuses

on the inner message of the original version. For the formal equivalent theory, the form of

original version would be fully replaced by an exactly like form of translated version. The

purpose of formal equivalence is to find the equivalent words and formats from the original

version to keep the equivalent translation on message and language. On the other hand,

dynamic equivalent theory focuses on reaching the similar readers’ effects of original version

and target version. Translators have to try to understand the core meaning of source version as

well as possible, and then combine the original author’s thought into the translated version.

The words and forms of the original version are not the important concerns in this stage of

translating. They are not the same as the forms of the translated version. The main idea of

dynamic equivalent theory is to translate through creating the similarity of readers’ emotional

effects. Zi-Nan Ye mentioned, “It leads the discussion to concern the equivalence between the

S.T. and T.T. in translating. (167)”⁷. Message of original author and readers’ effects of original

version are the most important factors and purposes for translators’ reference. Translators

must translate different texts and different functions by applying different translation theories.

Jeremy Munday, the author of Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and Applications,

mentioned, “it is often applied to the "literal translation (41)”. Language is the basic unit of

translation, and information is the basic concern of translation that must be contained in target

language to create the readers’ emotional effects by particular way of translation.

According to Nida’s theory, there are three elements in formal equivalent theory including

grammatical units, consistency of word usage, and the core meanings in the original version.

The first element of formal equivalent theory is the grammatical units. To follow the

equivalent grammatical units, we have to consider how to translate the original version into

translated version and keep the original sentence structures. The second element is the

consistency of word usage, in which readers would prefer contextual consistency for

translating these specific terms of original version because they can easily comprehend the

equivalent meaning in the translated version. The last element is to translate the core

meanings from the original version, as Nida put it to reproduce meanings in the S.T., formal

equivalence translation will not do any adjustments for idioms and the readers can see the

cultural color of the S.T. in T.T. (165). However, sometimes the puns, assonance or the order

of words in the original language cannot find an equivalent rendering in target language, so

7 功能對等就是要讓譯文和原文在語言的功能上對等，而不是在語言的形式上對應。

that, a translator needs the footnotes to explain them in detail. Ye indicated that Nida defined

formal equivalence as a method, which helps readers comprehend the thoughts, the customs,

and the way to express the source version (169). The message of original version is always the

foundation of the translated version because readers always pay attention to the meanings and

language when they contact with a children literature of translated version.

Munday’s paper about dynamic equivalence is often referred to as “free translation”

(41). As Ye stated, “It means that this method helps readers to catch the true meanings or the

thoughts of the ST (168-169)”⁸. Nida presents dynamic equivalence as “the closest natural

equivalence to the source-language message (166)”. The closest connection links up two

orientations based on similarity. From Nida’s view, “There are tension areas between formal

equivalence and dynamic equivalence, and Nida divided the tension into three principal areas:

formal and functional equivalent, optional and obligatory equivalents, and rate of decidability

(171)”. The idea of dynamic equivalence is the very different concern to translation from

formal equivalent theory. Hence, a translator should treat two different equivalent theories as

supplemental. There are three areas in Nida’s dynamic equivalent theory including formal and

functional equivalence, the target language and target culture, and the rate of decidability.

2.2.1.1 Formal and Functional Equivalence

The first area in the dynamic equivalent theory that Nida has mentioned is the formal

and functional equivalence. The conflict happened in the following three situations of the first

8 翻譯就是要在接受語中以最自然的方式重現原文中的信息，首先是重現意義，

area, the formal and functional equivalence. First, there may be no corresponding objects or

terms in the target language and culture, but we can find other similar objects or terms in the

target language to achieve dynamic equivalence. Secondly, the target language and target

culture have the corresponding object or terms, but with very different functions. Thirdly, we

cannot find corresponding objects vs. terms and similar objects vs. terms to be translated into

the target language (172). For these problems, Nida applies four solutions. First, to describe

the function is through applying formal equivalence and using the footnotes, but sometimes

the footnotes may interrupt the readers’ reading enjoyment. Second, it is optional to apply the

dynamic equivalence and footnotes. Third, it is also optional to apply the borrowed terms and

descriptive classifier. Borrowing the terms from the target language tests the ability of one

translator, and it also must concern for reaching the standard of the dynamic equivalent theory.

For example, we do not have a corresponding Chinese word for the English term ‘Pooh’ so

the translator applied the sound effect from the source language and translated it into the target language 噗 (Pu). On the other hand, in order to help people catch the core meaning of

the word of source language easily, the translator added the classifier to the word 噗噗熊

(Pu-Pu-Xiong, 熊 means bear). Fourth, using the descriptive wording in the target language

is also a way for translation. The translator applied the sound effect of ‘Rabbit’ and imitated its pronunciation into 瑞比 (Rui-Bi). Then, the translator used a descriptive equivalent word

for the term 瑞比 (Rui-Bi)—an animal often loves to eat carrots.

2.2.1.2 Obligatory and Optional Equivalence

The second area of the dynamic equivalent theory that Nida had specified is the

obligatory and optional equivalence. The obligatory element is the special meaning in

languages that translators should pay attention to it. For example, ‘Was it Fond of Pigs at all?’

In the translation text, a Chinese version showed 他到底喜不喜歡猪呢？ (Ta Dao-Di Xi Bu

Xi-Huan Zhu Ni, 他 is a Chinese pronoun for ‘He’; 到底 is a term to ask for a question and

roughly equal to ‘What’. The Chinese phrase 喜不喜歡 represents for ‘Like it or not’ in

English. The Chinese word 猪 is related to the English word ‘Pig’. The Chinese word 呢 is

the word used for a question.) When translators translate the text from English into Chinese,

they have to consider the number of pronouns for the word ‘a pig’ or ‘pigs.’ Chinese will not

emphasize the numbers on the singular or plural form for the term ‘a pig or pigs’ in this kind

of sentence. In another word, it is a problem for the singular or plural form between the

source language (English) and target language (Chinese). Because of the existing obligatory

element, it is hard to achieve the entire equivalence between the original version and

translated version. The optional element is a specific term or an object because it has several

kinds of expression for the target language. Hence, translators have to be cautious. For

example, ‘Piglet’, the name of the best friend of Winnie-the-Pooh, has two different expressions in Chinese versions, one is 皮杰 (Pi-Jie, sound effect of ‘Piglet’) and another

one is 小猪 (Xiao-Zhu, the meaning of ‘Piglet’). The translators have to make the choice for

their target readers and make sure their readers can understand the message.

2.2.1.3 The Rate of Decidability

The third area of the dynamic equivalent theory that Nida has specified is the rate of

decidability. The rate of decidability with reference to how general readers decode the

message of a translated version without background knowledge of the content at a proper rate.

If the rate of decidability is low, the readers will feel bored soon and get tired because of

reading translated version. Nida points out that the degree of decidability is dependent upon

the communication load, consisting of both formal and semantic elements. In this regard, the

decidability of dynamic equivalent theory is better than its formal equivalence because

dynamic equivalence focuses on catching the core meaning from the source version.

Translators should offer readers the messages constructed by words. The example of original

version is presented as follow:

Because every Heffalump that he counted was making straight for a pot of

Pooh's honey, and eating it all.

It is a good example for the original and Disney version of Winnie-the-Pooh. The Disney

Version regards to the rate of decidability.

The Disney version rewrites the plot as follow:

He stomped to Pooh’s cupboard and guzzled up three pots of honey.

Whether Disney version is a good translation works or not, it helps people gain greater

understanding from the original version because the Disney one made the high rate of

decidability, which can help readers understand more.