The Skopos Theory - Essay Example

The Skopos Theory Name Institution The Skopos Theory The mastermind behind the Skopos Theory happens to be Hans Vermeer. Its fundamental concept is that translation tends to be a purposeful communicative action thereby giving the Skopos the opportunity to determine the translation procedure in its entirety. The translator must make a decision on the translation strategies depending on the intended role of the target language text (TLT) rather than on the role of the source language text (SLT) since the SLT plays a key role in offering information. Later on, Nord completed this theory through the proposition of the “Function plus Loyalty” rule. Therefore, this theory informs the translator in the aspects like: the translator must fully realize his or her duty in translation; it is necessary for translators to advance their cross-cultural sensitivity; it is necessary for the translator to put into consideration the acceptance, as well as expectations of the TLT readers, thereby respecting the sender’s expectation without allowing himself or herself to be restrained by the form, as well as the function of the SLT (Venuti, 2000). According to Vermeer (1996), considering that Skopos Theory happens to be a general theory of translation, it is applicable to not only translating, but also interpreting. The fundamental non-correctability is as a result of certain conditions of text reception, along with production. First, the SLT gets presented only once hence the interpreter is incapable of grasping it in full but only in successive bits. Second, both the SLT, together with the TLT happen to be transitory hence an interpretation gets recorded and replayed only after the completion of the translational situation. Finally, the source language, together with the target language communications occurs in the same situational conditions thereby coinciding with the interpretation situation. Examined from the viewpoint of Skopos Theory, interpreting has a number of features: first, interpreting seeks in achieving a communicative purpose that is the Skopos rule. Second, the outcomes of interpreting happen to be a target-culture offer of information concerning a source-culture offer of information. Third, the TLT has to conform to the principle of intratextual coherence that is the coherence Rule and lastly, the TLT must comply with its corresponding SLT that is the fidelity Rule. Nonetheless, apart from these rather common considerations, Skopos theory has failed in dealing with any explicit aspects of the interpreting process. Skopos Theory’s Basic Concepts Skopos turns out to be a Greek word for “purpose”. The main rule determining any translation process happens to be the purpose (Skopos) of the whole translation action. In the field of translation, there are three possible types of purpose within the field of translation: first is the general purpose intended by the translator within the translation process (perhaps in earning a living); second is the communicative purpose intended by the target text within the target situation (perhaps for instructing the reader) and finally, the purpose intended by a certain translation strategy or procedure (for instance in translating literally thereby showing the structural individuality of the source language). However, the term Skopos usually talks about the purpose of the target text (Thōma, 2006). As a result, there are four teleological notions that is aim, function, purpose and intention used under the generic notion of Skopos. According to Vermeer (1996), the difference between “aim” and “purpose” is that: “Aim” happens to be the outcome an agent intends in achieving through an action; for instance, a person might learn Chinese so as to read LI T’ai-po in the original. On the other hand, “Purpose” is a provisional stage within the process of achieving an aim; therefore, aim and purpose turns out to be relative concepts. For instance, somebody goes out to purchase a Basque grammar (purpose 1) with the intention of learning the language (purpose 2) so as to be capable of translating Basque short stories (purpose 3) thereby making Basque literature recognized by other language communities. According to Nord the difference between function and the intention is: “Intention” gets defined from the perspective of the sender who has the intention of achieving a specific purpose with the text; however, the best of intentions is not a guarantee of a perfect outcome, especially in cases whereby the situations of the sender, together with the receiver clash considerably. On the other hand, “Function” gets defined from the receiver’s perspective with the receiver using the text with a specific function, according to their own expectations, needs, prior knowledge, as well as situational conditions. Therefore, in a perfect situation the intention of the sender will achieve its aim whereby intention and function would end up being analogous or identical; thus the difference between function and the intention is especially helpful in translation, whereby the sender, along with the receiver by definition, comes from distinctive cultural and situational settings. Intentional interaction and related concepts Human interaction is a change of a state of affairs that is intentional, thereby having an effect on two or more agents. An interaction happens to be communicative when performed through signs produced intentionally via one agent, in most cases known as the “sender”, while, at the same time directed towards another agent, known as the “addressee” or the “receiver”. Communicative interactions occur in situations limited in time, as well as space. Therefore, every situation has historical, as well as cultural dimensions, which condition the agents’ verbal, together with non-verbal behavior, their comprehension and anticipations of one another, their assessment of the situation, along with the angle from, which they perceive one another and at the world. In a certain culture community, the situations of sender, along with the receiver normally overlap sufficiently for communication to happen. When senders and receivers come from distinctive cultures, the situations can be decidedly different thereby needing an intermediary who makes it possible for them to communicate through time and space. Therefore, translators, as well as interpreters facilitate the occurrence of communication between members of distinctive culture communities by playing the role of an intermediary (Venuti, 2000). Initiator and translation brief The initiator happens to be the person, grouping or institution starting off the translation process while determining its course through the definition of the purpose for which there is a need for target text. In most cases, translation gets done through assignment or commission. According to Vermeer (1996), commission is the instruction, specified by oneself or even by someone else, for carrying out a specified action. On the other hand, Nord uses “translation brief” in referring to “translation commission”. Apparently, pursue the translation brief of the initiator, who gives specifications on the translation required, and provides information about the source text to the target reader. In a perfect case, the initiator has to provide an explicit translation brief. Therefore, translation brief is the meaning of the communicative purpose needed for the translation. The translation brief tends to specify the translation required hence the initiator actually makes a decision concerning the translation Skopos albeit the brief as such might not be explicit concerning the condition. However, the translation brief fails in telling the translator how to perform their translating job, the translation strategy to apply, or the translation type for choosing. These decisions are wholly dependent on the translator’s responsibility, as well as competence. Adequacy and equivalence In Skopos Theory, “adequacy” is the traits of a target text regarding the translation brief; hence the translation must be "adequate to" the requisites of the brief. It is a vibrant concept with relations to the process of translational action, while referring to the goal-focused selection of signs that are suitable for the communicative purpose defined within the translation assignment. On the other hand, “Equivalence” happens to be a static, outcome-oriented concept explaining a relationship of equal communicative value present in two texts or, found on lower ranks, amongst words, phrases, sentences and syntactic structures. In this context, “value” denotes meaning, stylistic connotations or even communicative effect. Although “Adequacy” directly opposes the traditional idea of equivalence as a constitutive characteristic of translation, it does not negate equivalence completely. The Skopos of the translation ascertains the form of equivalence needed for an adequate translation (Kocbek, 2002). When fabricating an offer of information, it is necessary for the source-text author to consider the source-culture addressee despite the translation purpose. The translator is not responsible for the comprehension of the reader from another culture due to the lack of knowledge concerning the target-culture. Therefore, the translator happens to be the actual receiver of the source text within the target culture situation. It is the duty of the translator to provide the target audience with the latest target text, whose constitution is guided by means of the translator’s assumptions concerning their requirements, expectations and prior knowledge. However, as a result of distinctions between the source cultures, together with the target culture, it is not possible for the translator to present similar amount and information compared to the source text producer (Anderson & Elder, 2006). Rather, the translator is capable of offering another kind of information within another form. Three key rules of Skopos theory In Skopos Theory, there are three significant rules that is Skopos rule, coherence rule, together with fidelity rule. a) Skopos Rule This is the top-ranking principle for any translation which denotes that a translational action gets determined through its Skopos. According to Vermeer, in the Skopos Rule, every text is produced for a specified purpose hence must serve this purpose. Therefore, the Skopos rule reads like: translate / interpret / speak / write in a manner enabling your text / translation to the role in the situation whereby it is used, as well as with the people intending to use it and in accordance to the manner they wish for it to function. The aim of this rule is solving the eternal quandary of free vs. faithful translation, good interpreters vs. slavish translators and dynamic vs. prescribed equivalence. This signifies that the Skopos of a certain translation task might need a free or a faithful translation, or something between these two radicals, according to the purpose the translation is needed. This does not imply that a masterly translation must always conform or settle in to target-culture behavior or anticipations; rather the concept is in most cases misunderstood in this manner. The Skopos rule provides the translator a modern perspective for deciding the strategy to employ in the entire process (Vermeer, 1996). b) Coherence rule The sense or role of a text is not something intrinsic in the linguistic signs; as a result, it is impossible to simply extract it by anyone who discerns the code. Distinctive receivers or even a particular receiver at different times identify different denotations in the same linguistic material presented by the text (Enghild, 2001). This vibrant concept of text meaning, as well as function, happens to be common enough within contemporary theories of literary reception. According to Vermeer, any text happens to be an offer of information whereby each receiver chooses the items they perceive to be not only appealing, but also beneficial. With the guidance of the translation brief, the translator is capable of selecting specific points from the source-language offer of information, which was originally destined for source-culture addressees, while at the same time, processing them thereby forming a latest offer of information in TLT whereby the target-culture addressees is capable of selecting what they perceive as being meaningful in their own situation. It is essential to translate the TT in a manner that is coherent for the TT receivers, considering their circumstances, as well as knowledge. It is the duty of the target text to conform to the principle of intratextual coherence thereby allowing the receiver to understand it; make sense within the communicative situation, along with culture whereby it is received. Therefore, it is only possible to regard a communicative interaction as successful when the receivers are capable of interpreting it as being sufficiently rational with their situation (Duarte, Rosa & Seruya, 2006). Apart from that, the coherence rule denotes that a translation must be acceptable in a manner that it is rational with the receivers’ situation since being coherent happens to be synonymous with being present in the receiver’s situation. Subsequently, it is the duty of the translator to conform to the canons, as well as ethnic rules within the target language and culture, thereby reproducing the information within the SLT in a manner that is not only acceptable, but also accessible to the target reader by putting into consideration their background knowledge, together with situational circumstances. c) Fidelity rule Considering that a translation is an offer of information concerning a previous offer of information, there is an expectation that it will bear some form of relationship along with the corresponding source text; a relationship Vermeer (1996) refers to as intertextual coherence or fidelity. According to this rule, there must be coherence linking translation, together with the source text or particularly between the source text information obtained by the translator and the interpretation the translator established from this information along with the information, which is encoded for the intended text receivers. Therefore, fidelity rule is about intertextual coherence, together with the degree of faithful replication of the source text; however, there are times when fidelity rule requires a maximally faithful replication of the source text. Amongst these three rules of Skopos Theory, there is a perception that the fidelity rule is subordinate to coherence rule with both being subordinate to the Skopos rule. If the Skopos necessitates a change of function, the principle will not be intertextual coherence along with the source text; rather, there will be adequacy regarding the Skopos. On the other hand, if the Skopos requires intratextual incoherence, the principle of intratextual coherence happens to be invalid (Nicholls & Olohan, 1998). References: Anderson, J., & Elder, H. (2006). Literary translation in New Zealand. Wellington, N.Z.: School of Asian & European Languages & Cultures, Victoria University of Wellington. Duarte, J., Rosa, A., & Seruya, T. (2006). Translation Studies at the Interface of Disciplines. Baltimore: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Enghild, T. (2001). The skopos theory: a model for literary translations?.. Århus: The Aarhus School of Business, The Department of English. Kocbek, A. (2002). Language and culture in international legal communication. London: Routledge-Cavendish. Nicholls, S., & Olohan, M. (1998). Skopos theory and source text loyalty: practical applications of the approach examined. Manchester: UMIST. Thōma, C. (2006). Combining functional linguistics and Skopos theory: a case study of Greek Cypriot and British folktales. Frankfurt am Main: P. Lang. Venuti, L. (2000). The Translation studies reader. London: Routledge. Vermeer, H. J. (1996). A skopos theory of translation: (some arguments for and against). Heidelberg: TextconText Verlag. Read More