Function-Oriented Approach

The proponents of this approach led by Reiss, Vermeer and Nord regard translation as a communicative process associated with serving a particular purpose in the TL. Translation equivalence in this approach is thus relevant to the function assumed by a translated text. That is to say, the purpose of the translation is the key factor according to which a TT correspondence is decided. This approach was introduced by Reiss (1989 and 2000), who views the typology and function of a ST as the principal factor governing the type and methods of translating the TT. As discussed in section 3.2, Reiss presents three main text types: “informative”, “expressive” and “operative”. The functions fulfilled by these three types of texts are viewed as the basic tool that guides the translator toward constructing the purpose of the TT text and the suitable procedures for rendering it. In other words, the function of the TT needs to be shaped

84

in accordance with that identified in the ST. Equivalence is therefore viewed as the ability to create a TL that functions to relay “the conceptual content, linguistic form and communicative function of a SL text” (Reiss, 1989: 112).

The significance of the translation functionality in deciding the translation equivalence further came to light with Vermeer’s Skopos theory (Reiss and Vermeer, 1984/2014). Translation in this theory is perceived as a process directed towards achieving a certain purpose fitting a certain target readership (ibid). In other words, the aim of translation stands as the foundation for establishing the type of TT and the translation methods that can constitute a purposeful TT for its respective readership. The evaluation of translation in Vermeer’s Skopos theory stands on two basic pillars. The first one is the coherence rule (intratextual coherence) which assumes that the TT needs to be rendered in such a way that it is apprehensible to the target reader through taking into account the knowledge and setting of that reader (ibid: 101). The second one is the fidelity rule which presumes that the TT has to be intertextually coherent with the SL text (ibid: 102).

Despite mentioning these two rules, Reiss and Vermeer (1984/2014) maintain that the assessment of translation adequacy is tied by constructing a TT that satisfies the function aimed at behind the translation in the TL. Moreover, the coherence rule in this theory precedes in importance the fidelity rule. This suggests that the function of translation and then the apprehensibility of the target text by the target readership in this theory gain much weight over the ST. In doing so, Munday (2001) assumes that this perception of equivalence is helpful in that a SL text is likely to be interpreted with various forms in the TT.

Nord (1997) acknowledges the significance of the target text purpose in the adequacy of translation. Nonetheless, she suggests that the source text needs to be given more emphasis in the functionalist-oriented approach. Nord maintains that the target text needs to be compared with the source text since this can direct the translator to determine the adequacy of the translation function; the elements of the source text that are related to the purpose of translation, and the translation methods that will make the target text satisfy the conditions of the translation brief (ibid: 62). The translation brief,

85

in Nord’s sense, counts as a basis for comparing the source and target languages, which includes information as to the intended purpose of the text, the type of readership, and other contextual elements related to that text.

The function-oriented approach is also identified in some cases shown in the current study. For example, the metaphor ABIOMEDICALENTITYISANANIMAL is translated literally in the Arabic version. However, the translator elaborates the metaphorical expression dinosaurs by shifting from a plural nominal case in the SL to a singular adjectival case in the TT, which is more acceptable in the Arabic language. The translator also makes this conceptual metaphor more explicit by providing the expression extinct in order to clarify the metaphorical sense of this metaphor and to avoid ambiguity, as if the metaphor is translated literally, the reader may think that the DNA here refers to dinosaurs where it is actually refers to old types of DNA. Consider the following example:

ST: And emerging evidence indicates that a few of these DNA dinosaurs may not be quite so dead after all. [SA 16]

TT: ئ لك مغرب وكت لا دق) يروصانيدلا( ضرقنملا إيوندلا تلاسلس لا هذه نم إلق ا تلا رارم ساب ةدياز ملا إلدلاا ريشتو لاضف إقفان . [MA 16]

BT: The increasing evidences indicate that a few of sequences of these extinct (dinosaur-like) DNA may not be actually dead after all.

In brief, equivalence in this approach is viewed from the angle of achieving a TT that suitably matches the purpose of translation in the TL. The function of translation and the TT readership in the TL have priorities in this approach. The possibility of preserving the ST is thus determined according to its suitability to the aim of translation in the TL. In other words, the focus on equivalence is then shifted from reproducing a similar form and content of the ST in the TT to producing a TT serving the purpose of translation in the TL.