The Notion of Equivalence in Its Historic Development and Contemporary Understanding

Background. The notion of equivalence is undoubtedly one of the most problematic and controversial areas in the field of translation theory. The term has caused, and it seems quite probable that it will continue to cause, heated debates within the field of translation studies. This term has been analyzed, evaluated and extensively discussed from different points of view and has been approached from many different perspectives. The first discussions of the notion of equivalence in translation initiated the further elaboration of the term by contemporary theorists. Even the brief outline of the issue given above indicates its importance within the framework of the theoretical reflection on translation. Purpose. The aim of the article is to follow the history of researching translation equivalence and to compare its classical and comparative definitions. The methods of the investigation correspond to the aims and tasks thereof, and include: contrastive, descriptive, qualitative methods and content-analysis. Results. The study of the field developed into an academic discipline only in the second half of the 20th century. Before that, translation had normally been merely an element of language learning in modern language courses. Despite the long history of translation process and continuous research of peculiar aspects thereof, some issues remain controversial and unsolved. The problem of translation quality assessment belongs to the given category. The question was as to the kind and degree of sameness which gave birth to different kinds of equivalence. In what follows, an attempt will be made to critically analyze the equivalence paradigm as was conceptualized by the following foreign and native scholars in the field, namely, J. P. Vinay and J. Darbelnet, R. Jakobson, E. Nida and C.R. Taber, J.C. Catford, J. House, W. Koller, P. Newmark, M. Baker, A. Pym, etc. The article regards and reviews the long processes of defining equivalence. For example, E. Nida distinguishes between formal and dynamic equivalence, P. Newmark between semantic and communicative translation, J. Catford between formal correspondence and textual equivalence, J. House between overt and covert translation, and Pym A. between natural and directional equivalence. The newest look at the notion of equivalence is a multilayered one. According to A. Korkuz, equivalence is a feature which is defined on three different levels. Discussions and Conclusions. Having investigated the main theoretical notions of the quality aspect of applied translation studies, and summarized versatile definitions and classifications of such phenomena as quality, equivalence and adequacy, we were able to arrive at a conclusion that translation equivalence is a complex notion which may be realized at above-word or even text level depending on the type of the source text and the objectives of a translator (provided that the translation remains adequate, does not violate the TL norms, and in no way disturbs the original “skopos” – the author’s intent). On the other hand, there are cases which clearly require equivalence at a word level, and any deviation from the original order of facts (including translator’s comments, personal interpretations and products of imagination) would constitute a serious error and, most probably, lead to rejection of a translation by the prospective customer.