1

Herbert P.Philips (in Nida, 1964:156) argues that ‘no statement of the principles of

correspondence in translating can be complete without recognizing the many different types

of translations’. As a result, the translator intends to begin the discussion with brief

introduction in terms of developing the terms and bringing them down into the TL

(Farsi/Persian) examples in order to assess and evaluate how applicable they are.

‘Traditionally, we have tended to think in terms of free or paraphrastic translations as

contrasted with close or literal ones’; however, there are many other types of translation

beside these popular expressions (Nida in Venuti, 2000: 153). Here, the main focus is on

‘Nida’s (1964) “dynamic” and “formal” varieties of “correspondence,” later replacing the

term “dynamic” with “functional” (Nida and Taber 1969)’ (ibid: 147-148). The most

translation theory discussed during these decades [1960s-1970s] is equivalence and in 1963

Georges Mounin argues that ‘equivalence is based on “universals” of language and culture

questioning the notions of relativity that in previous decades made translation seems

impossible. At the same time, the literature on equivalence is fundamentally normative,

2

aiming to provide not only analytical tools to describe translations, but also standards to

evaluate them. The universal is then shaped to a local situation’ (Venuti, 2000:147).

As a result, ‘since no two languages are identical, either in the meanings given to

corresponding symbols or in the ways in which such symbols are arranged in phrases and

sentences, it stands to reason that there can be no absolute correspondence between

languages. Hence there can be no fully exact translations’ (Nida inVenuti, 2000: 153). In

other words, equivalences perform contextually to convey and standardize the text close to

the original same as ‘the most direct form of commentary’ as D.G. Rossetti stated in 1874

(Fang: 1953) on the basis of ‘relatedness’ between STL and TTL (ibid; Venuti, 2000:147).

On the other hand, “there are, properly speaking, no such things as identical equivalents”

(Bellac 1931 and 1931a:37) to identify the text in detail but to study the equivalences as

analytical tools (Venuti, 2000:156; Nida, 1964:156).

In fact, ‘Equivalence is submitted to lexical, grammatical, and stylistic analysis; it is

established on the basis of text type and social function. By the end of the 1970s, so many

typologies of equivalence have been devised that Werner Koller can offer a nuanced

summary of the possibilities. Equivalence, he writes, may be “denotative,” depending on an

“invariance of content”; “connotative,” depending on similarities of register, dialect, and

style; “text-normative,” based on “usage norms” for particular text types; and “pragmatic,”

ensuring comprehensibility in the receiving culture (Koller 1979:186–91; Koller 1989:99–

104)’ (Venuti, 2000:147).

Having all this in mind, we are going to discuss the ‘relatedness’ between English (STL) and

Farsi/Persian (TTL). As a matter of fact, ‘Persian language is one of the Iranian languages

which form a branch of the Indo-European family and it is written in Arabic script with a

number of additional characters to accommodate special sounds and in Iran it is generally

referred to as Farsi’ (Katzner, 1986: 166-167). Therefore, not only differences of linguistic

affiliation exist but also highly diverse cultures are between mentioned languages.

3

Despite the fact that, English structure order is subject-verb-object; In Farsi as Farzad (2012)

mentions that the verb is always at the end of sentences. Obviously, if one intends to render a

sentence into Farsi, he/she has to break the structure even if the purpose is to translate

literally in order to make it intelligible1 and natural2 translation; however, ‘it is inevitable also

that when source and receptor languages represent very different cultures there should be

many basic themes and accounts which cannot be “naturalized” by the process of translating’

(Nida in Venuti, 2000: 164). Besides, the formality of the text also plays an important role.

Sometimes, in informal texts, Iranian translator disregards grammatical rules and renders in

(S) (V) (O) order which mostly applies in Farsi spoken language and informal written text.

1- Intelligible: ‘… human translations are more faithful and more intelligible than machine

translation of that era’ (Somers, 2003: 229). That is to say, if you for instance, use Google

translator to render a sentence from English into Persian (like interlinear renderings), the

result is segments without any order and fragmented unintelligibly.

2- Natural: ‘A natural translation involves two principal areas of adaptation, namely. Grammer

and lexicon. In general the grammatical modifications can be made the more readily, since

many grammatical changes are dictated by the obligatory structures of the receptor language’

(Nida in Venuti, 2004: 163)

On the other hand, ‘differences between cultures cause many more severe complications for

the translator than do differences in language structure’ (ibid: 157). Also, Nida (ibid: 163)

argues that D-E translation contains three dimensions: ‘(1) equivalent, which points the

source-language message, (2) natural: which points toward the receptor language and (3)

closest, which binds the two orientations together on the basis of the highest degree of

approximation. Basically, the word natural is applicable to three areas of the communication

process; for a natural rendering must fit (1) the receptor language and culture as whole, (2)

the context of the particular message, and (3) the receptor-language audience’. Therefore, an

Iranian translator is not always sure how the English audience responds or supposed to

respond and as a result, finding ‘dynamic equivalences’ is quite a challengeable task. For

instance, to translate a particular text and find a ‘pragmatic equivalence’ I referred to my

British neighbour to see how this line which is extracted from ‘The Secret Diary of Adrian

Mole’ written by Sue Towesend would effect on him: ‘My father, Stick Insect and Maxwell

4

House’. He said: ‘this is the first time I heard such expression, but I think this wants to tell he

was such a slim guy!’

In next paragraphs, the translator illustrated ‘dynamic equivalences’ through diverse contexts

of texts (represented in appendix) on the basis of decoding ability of audiences and their

potential interest, the nature of message and purpose of the author or the translator to produce

the TT meeting these criteria: 1) making sense 2) conveying the spirit and manner of the

original 3) having a natural and easy form of expression and finally, producing similar

response and effect (ibid: 154; ibid: 160).

As can be observed, abstract (1) is a poem in which the elements of visualization (white,

whitness, colorless and blank) and free-verse are obvious. The semantic area of the poem as a

whole idea is ‘the lightness of the feather and floating’. The translator keeps all mentioned

elements through rendering to convey the message in the same mould/form and same content

and esthetic appeal.

Also, there is alliteration in the poem which transferred to the TT (English); [r /ر ], [p /پ ] in ST

to [v], [f] in TT. In addition, equivalences in TT are that reader friendly as in ST for the

potential readership; here considered as young adults who can handle both oral and written

messages with relative ease.

WHITE

Found freedom of the color of white

And how flightless, have flown away

To the whitness of dove’s wing

White…

White…

Colorless…

5

Now…

Here I have landed

But it is not this straightforward always. Abstract (2) has acrostic features which transferring

them and finding co-suitable equivalences needs more creativity. As can be seen, per three

line initials build the word L.S.D. and the poem typically is the trip of emotions, thought and

experiences. No word in Farsi begins with the sound of ‘L’,’S’ and ‘D’ as in Farsi these

sounds are produced by two units as ‘el/ال’, ‘es/اس’ and ‘di/دی’. ‘The ultimate goal of the

translation, in terms of its impact upon its intended audiences, is a fundamental factor in any

evaluation of translation’ (ibid: 158). Thus, to convey the message, the form of the poem

plays a key role and to keep this element, the translator perfectly and strictly applied

‘dynamic equivalences’ to achieve this goal and make the same impression. In line (1)

Goddess of bonds/الهۀ وصل, Line (2) Septet of mysteries/اسرار هفتگانه, Line (3) Observing your

tomb/دیدار گورت, Line (4) Integration to the low/الحاق به پایین , Line (5) Welcoming sea / استقبال

Line (8) There is ,الهامی از عشق/Line (7) afflatus from love , دیار خویشتن/Line(6) own land ,دریا

no bondage/اسارتی نیست, Line (9) Afterlife/ دیار باقی, Line (10) I saw goddess/الهه دیدم, Line (11)

Disposition of dreams/استقرار رویا, Line (12) Meeting of icons/ دیدار تمثال, Line (13) the

necessity of the key/ الزام مفتاح, Line (14) Captivity of body / اسارت تن, Line (15) Demon

yelled/دیوی نعره زد, Line (16) the goddess Lucifer/ الهه شیطان, Line (17) Colonized/اسکان داده,

Line (18) deep-rooted drug / دیرینه افیون را.

Next, abstract (3) is a well-known poem by Edgar Allen Poe (1845) which is made up of

eighteen stanzas of six lines each. Generally, the meter is trochaic tetrameter that tends to

draw attention to the verses metricality, marking it off very clearly from ordinary speech and

Poe (1809-49) wanted poetry to have a mesmeric quality which carries the reader in a nearly

musical reverie, blurring the meaning of the words dreams. Thus, the poem bears a heavy

6

usage of alliterations ("Doubting, dreaming, dreary, …").The translator picked these last six

lines which rendered as the same form in Farsi, using a plenty of alliterations of [r/ر] and

[b/ and the rhymes pointed out in bold font with their underlined D-E translations in [ ب

discourses; indirect qoutation in line three and six, for more naturalness and solving the

problem of co-suitability(Nida in Venuti, 2000: 164; Wainwright, 2004: 76), while the other

remained the same as in original in line five as direct quotation.

تقریب لبخندی به زد مرا انگیز غم خیال فریب به چرده سیه ی پرنده این آنک

باوقار و سنگین بود گرفته خود به که هیبتی به

خواندمش با چنان تاج صیقلی رخشا فرومایه ای نمی توانی بود هاشا

آر دلهره شوم و پیر کالغ ای شبانه ساحل ی آواره

آر زبان بر شب؟ آتشفشانی ی کرانه بر اعظمت نام چیست

بفرموده کالغ، نه دیگر بار

Moreover, to render the title of Mayor’s (2003) book “Greek Fire, Poison Arrows & Scorpion

Bombs” which obviously contains ancient history of weapons, the translator considers that

the message should fit the receptor-language audience and the capacity for their decoding and

decided to avoid anachronisms for ‘scorpion bombs’ to choose a co-suitable, dynamic

equivalence and the result is ‘Balls of scorpions/گلوله های عقرب’.As the word ‘bomb’ always

corresponded with mechanical explosion and this D-E translation avoids further

misunderstandings whereas ‘balls’ have the same spirit and actual function.

Furthermore, abstract (4) is a thriller novel, namely Black Sheep written by Arlent Hunt

(2010). Basically a cop thriller without cops (!) And based in Ireland with Irish dialects and

social classes. This is a conversation between two working class people. The translator

applied the D-E equivalence for “a bit of craic” which is an Irish expression means “good

time/fun” as following and implemented colloquialism based on TL receptor language ‘to

have the same kind of indivisuality and personality as the author himself gave them in the

7

original message’(Nida in Venuti, 2000: 166):"منظورم اوناییکه اهل حالن" This is an equivalence

which has the same impression and value, manner and spirit. If the translator renders it

literally now, it would not convey the same meaning and the back translation as F-E

translation would not help in this regard – اهل/ inhabitant of حال/ present – But as a

meaningful idiom it means “fun”.

As has been pointed out, ‘when semantically exocentric phrases in the source language are

meaningless or misleading if translated literally into the receptor language, one is obliged

make some adjustments in a D-E translation’(ibid). For instance, in this metaphor "The rain

came down in long knitting needles." Written by Enid Bagnold, namely National Velvet

(1935) the children’s classic, the translator applied simile and idiomatic expression

simultaneously as following and considering children’s capacity of decoding: " باران مثل تیرهای

"کوچک فرود می آمد means ‘the rain fell down like tiny arrows’. This dynamic equivalence is

more familiar for the receptor language and also, reflects the point of view of the author

emotionally.

Next, this semantic phrase which is a proverb “Charity begins at home” has a D-E translation

as "چراغی که به خانه رواست به مسجد حرام است". Literally means ‘the light which is allowed to

home, it is illicit to mosque’ and for “Blood is thicker than water” this proverb has nothing to

do with measures of viscosity. The expression, meaning that family bonds are closer than

those of outsiders which one must change from an exocentric to an endocentric type of

expression "جورهمی وخون، خون ر" which literally means “blood seeks blood.”

Additionally, the translator aims at the more meaningful idioms in rendering in terms of

conveying the message perfectly to the receptor. For example, the Farsi expression,

"هوای گرگ و میش / dusk” literally means ‘wolf and ewe climate” and the F-E translation is

meaningless strings of words in English whereas the dynamic equivalence as ‘dusk’ convey

the message, in contrast, the English expression of “butterflies in stomach” may mean

nothing but ‘some insects in someone’s body’ if translated literally. To convey the message

which implies ‘fluttery/nervousness’, the translator used the D-E which is also a Semitic

8

idiom in Farsi “جوشیدن دل مثل سیر و سرکه” which literally means ‘boiling of stomach like garlic

and vinegar’.

In terms of applying meaningful idiom compared to absolute intelligible term, the translator

prefers to use “lonely Friday” instead of “lonely Sunday”. Because the people of the receptor

language acquainted the week ended with Friday in Iran and as a result, Saturday is a

working day for them and Friday plays the role that Sunday plays for British or better to say,

western countries.

The last but not the least, belongs to intraorganismic meanings which are the most

challengeable parts of translation for they are depended on cultural contexts. For example, the

words “son”, “lad” and “boy” they all only have one defined entry as “boy/پسر” in Farsi,

while in English there is only one word “patience” for “شکیبایی “ ,”صبر“ ,”حوصله“ that all

these words have different values of patience from less to more, respectively.

In comparison, Eco who argues that ‘Equivalence in meaning cannot be taken as a

satisfactory criterion for a correct translation’(Eco, 2001: 9), he clearly demonstrates that the

‘psychological sense’ of the text in terms of showing the cultural elements is more important

than trying to keep lexical and referential faithfulness ( ibid:15-16). ‘The idea of translation

as negotiation is developed by Eco (2003). Even in cases where a translation priority has

already been established – for example, a translator may have decided to attempt to recreate

in the translation the same effect as was intended in the original (dynamic

equivalence)…’(Baker, M and Saldanha, G.,1998: 97). That is to say, However, Eco

disagrees with term of ‘equivalences’, he considers the ‘effect’ which is the main

characteristic of ‘dynamic equivalence’ in terms of same impression of the receptor.

On the other hand, as Cary (1959) pointed out, ‘translating by literary artists, publishers,

educators, and professional translators indicates clearly that the present direction in toward

increasing emphasis on dynamic equivalences’ (in Venuti, 2000: 157); however, regarding to

mentioned ideas and theories it remains some veiled aspects for those languages which have

9

completely different roots and cultures, but still applicable and important. For instance, when

a text is too far from cultural, ideological, political or even topology contexts of the receptor

language, the translator gets that confused to choose even if he/she has to use dynamic

equivalence or not because the spirit and manner of the actual text will drown and the TT

seems as a corpse and this is the moment that broad orientalism would happen, like The

translator should keep in mind that the queen never tried ceremonial and traditional food plate

of the receptor language (Persian)! As a result, this may work widely between European

language translations or in contrast, Eastern language translations based on the relatedness.

Nevertheless, as an Iranian translator, I think this cultural gap will be less through

implementing Venuti’s theory of ‘foreignization’ postulated in 1988 to keep the effect and

spirit of the original text and facilitate the familiarization of target readership with message

and STL culture completely. According to the mentioned issues, sometimes it is better to hear

from the readership saying “I have learned something new” rather than “that is just the way

we would say it.” In other words, sometimes the degree of approximation of the two

orientations is that low that it is like commonality of a tent and a castle. ‘it is inevitable also

that when source and receptor languages represent very different cultures there should be

many basic themes and accounts which cannot be “naturalized” by the process of translating’

(ibid: 164)

For a good translation As ‘C.W. Orr (1941: 318) describes translating as somewhat

equivalent to painting, for, as he says, the painter does not reproduce every detail of the

landscape” – he selects what seems best to him. Likewise for the translator, It is the spirit, not

only the letter, that he seeks to embody in his own version’ (ibid: 168).As a matter of fact, a

good translation should be an overall concern of all theories and should meet the functional

requirements of an accepted and adequate translation theory to facilitate and naturalize the

task and transfer cultural elements from the SLT to the TLT as far as possible, and thus

achieve the same effect on the target receptors as on the original ones.

10

References

Bagnol, E., Jones, Lourian. (1935) National Velvet, New York: Avon Books

Baker, M., Saldanha, G. (ed.) (2009) Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, 2nd

edition, Abingdon/New York: Routledge

Farzad, N. (2012) Complete Modern Persian (Farsi): Teach Yourself, London: Hachette

Hunt, A. (2006) Black Sheep, London: Hodder Headline

Katzner, K. (1977) The languages of the world, 2nd

edition, London: Rountledge & Kegan

Paul plc

Mayor, A. (2009) Greek Fire, Poison Arrows, and Scorpion Bombs, 2nd

edition, London:

Overlook Press

11

Nida, E.A. (1964) Toward a Science of Translating, Leiden: E. J. Brill

Somer, H.L. (ed.) (2003) Computers and Translation: A Translator's Guide,

Philadelphia/Amsterdam: John Benjamin Publishing

Shirzad, B. (2011) love poems of naked wires, Tehran: Kouleh Poshti

Shirzad, B. (2008) L.S.D, [online], available: http://bahareshirzad.com/poems.htm [21 Apr

2012]

Venuti, L. (2000) The Translation Studies Reader, 2nd

edition, London: Routledge

Wainwright, J. (2004) Poetry: The Basics, 2nd edition, Oxon: Routledge

APPENDIX

12

Abstract (1)

سپید

يافتم سپيد رنگ به را رهايي

كشيدم پر پر، و بال بي چه و

كبوتر بال سپيدي در

...سپيد

...سپيد

...رنگ بي

...حال

آمدم فرود اينجا �

بهاره شيرزاد

Abstract (2)

L.S.D

Loyalty God

Seven signs

Dig a hole

13

Leave the edge

See the sea

Dive in me

Love to be

Set me free

Doors of heaven

Look at him

Sketch your dream

Divine brains remain

Losing keys

Suffering knees

Demon said:

Lucifer

Sends

Drugs

Bahareh Shirzad

Abstract (3)

Edgar Allen Poe

The Raven

[First published in 1845]

…

Then this ebony bird beguiling my sad fancy into smiling,

By the grave and stern decorum of the countenance it wore,

`Though thy crest be shorn and shaven, thou,' I said, `art sure no craven.

Ghastly grim and ancient raven wandering from the nightly shore -

Tell me what thy lordly name is on the Night's Plutonian shore!'

Quoth the raven, `Nevermore.'

….

Abstract (4)

Black Sheep Arlent Hunt (2010)

14

...

‘How many girls we talking about?’

‘Well say a couple of young ones that wouldn’t mind a bit of craic’

‘A couple?’

‘say five or six.’

...