Translation as a science

Five types of equivalence:
1.Denotative equivalence
The equivalence between SL and TL words is established on the basis that they refer to the same thing in the real world.Rabbit – Coniglio [Italian]
2.Connotative equivalence
The equivalence is established on the basis that the SL and TL words used trigger the same or similar associations in the minds of native speakers of the two languages. Bunny – Coniglietto [Italian]
3.Text-normative equivalence
The equivalence is established on the basis that the SL and TL words chosen are used in the same or similar contexts in their respective languages
4.Pragmatic equivalence
The equivalence is established on the basis that the SL and TL words used have the same effect on their respective readers. It is similar to Nida’s dynamic equivalence.
5.Formal equivalence
The equivalence is related to the form and aesthetics of the text. It includes words plays and stylistic features of the ST. It is not to be confused with Nida’s formal equivalence. Equivalence is said to be achieved if SL and TL words happen to have similar orthographic or phonological features.


Aspect of translation process.
Description of the translating process is one of the major tasks of the translation theory. Here we deal with the dynamic aspects of translation trying to understand how the translator performs the transfer operation from ST to TT.
Psychologically viewed, the translating process must include two mental processes – understanding and verbalization. First, the translator understands the contents of ST, that is, reduces the information it contains to his own mental program, and then he develops this program into TT. The problem is that these mental processes are not directly observable and we do not know much of what that program is and how the reduction and development operations are performed. That is why the translating process has to be described in some indirect way. The translation theory achieves this aim by postulating a number of translation models.
Although model theory is a field of study in itself, a comprehensive definition of the concept of model remains problematical. This is partly because models can be of very different kinds, ranging from iconic or diagrammatic representations (known as analogue models) to conceptual and theoretical models, and partly also because there is little agreement among theorists about the classification of models into types.
Theo Hermans distinguishes such common properties of models.
First, a model is always a model of something, called the object, or the original, or the prototype. In this sense, a model, when perceived in terms of its modeling function, is a vicarious object, i.e. a substitute. It represents, reproduces, refers to something else, which is necessarily anterior to it. Model and prototype therefore have a different ontological status which arises from the fact that one represents while the other is represented. Neither model nor prototype need to be physical realities: they can be abstract, mental or hypothetical entities.
Second, a modeling relation is not an objectively given fact or a state of affairs existing naturally between two entities. A model requires a human subject, who may be a collective, to recognize it as a model of something. That is, a model can only be a model of something if there is someone who perceives it as such, and who recognizes the appropriate relation between model and prototype. The modeling operation therefore involves three components: a prototype, a model, and a human subject.
Third, the model represents its prototype though approximation. It is not a reproduction of the prototype in its entirety and in all its aspects. The model reduces the complexity of the prototype by retaining only certain features of it, and in so doing establishes a certain similarities or correspondence between itself and the object to which it refers. The similarity is of a certain kind (for example isomorphic), deemed by the human subject to be functionally relevant; and the model exhibits this particular kind of similarity in a certain manner and to a certain degree.
Fourth, while from the point of view of the modeling relation only the representational aspects of a model are normally regarded as pertinent, every model of necessity also contains other, non-functional or ‘contingent’ features.
It is possible to consider the relevance of models in the context of translation from four different angles:
The use of theoretical models as heuristic tools in translation studies;
The use of diagrammatic or analogue models to represent certain aspects of translation;
The view of translating as a modeling activity;
The relation between models and norms.