半轴漏油
Peter Newmark?(1916-2011) was an?English?professor?of?translation?at the?University of Surrey.[1]
[edit]Biography毕业生薪酬榜
He was one of the main figures in the founding of?Translation Studies?in the English-speaking world from the 1980s.
Lifeba是什么的缩写
Nida was born in?Oklahoma City,?Oklahoma?on November 11, 1914. He became a Christian at a young age, when he responded to the altar call at his church "to accept Christ as my Saviour."[2]
He graduated summa cum laude from the?University of California?in 1936. After graduating he attended Camp Wycliffe, where Bible translation theory was taught. He ministered for a short time among the Tarahumara Indians in Chihuahua, Mexico, until health problems due to an inadequate diet and the high altitude forced him to leave. Som
gift是什么意思etime in this period, Nida became a founding charter member of?Wycliffe Bible Translators, a sister organization of the?Summer Institute of Linguistics.
In 1937, Nida undertook studies at the?University of Southern California, where he obtained a Master's Degree in New Testament Greek in 1939. In that same year, Eugene Nida became interim pastor of Calvary Church of?Santa Ana, California, after the founding pastor resigned in 1939.[3]?In spite of his conrvative background, in later years Nida became increasingly ecumenical and New Evangelical in his approach.[4]
In 1943, Nida received his Ph.D. in Linguistics from the?University of Michigan, he was ordained as a Baptist minister, and he married Althea Lucille Sprague. The couple remained married until Althea Sprague Nida's death in 1993. In 1997, Nida married Dr. María Elena Fernandez-Miranda, a lawyer and diplomatic attache.
Nida retired in the early 1980s, although he kept on giving lectures in universities all around the world, and lived in Madrid, Spain and?Brusls,?Belgium. He died in Madrid on August 25, 2011 aged 96.[5]
bridesmaid
启德留学[edit]Career
staIn 1943, Nida began his career as a?linguist?with the?American Bible Society?(ABS). He was quickly promoted to Associate Secretary for Versions, then worked as Executive Secretary for Translations until his retirement.
Nida was instrumental in engineering the joint effort between the?Vatican?and the?United Bible Societies?(UBS) to produce cross-denominational Bibles in translations across the globe. This work began in 1968 and was carried on in accordance with Nida's translation principle of Functional Equivalence.
ics节目表[edit]Theories
hey you
Nida has been a pioneer in the fields of?translation theory?and?linguistics.
His Ph.D. disrtation,?A Synopsis of English Syntax, was the first full-scale analysis of a major language according to the "immediate-constituent" theory. His most notable contribution to translation theory is Dynamic Equivalence, also known as Functional Equi
valence. For more information, e "Dynamic and formal equivalence." Nida also developed the "componential-analysis" technique, which split words into their components to help determine equivalence in translation (e.g. "bachelor" = male + unmarried). This is, perhaps, not the best example of the technique, though it is the most well-known.
Nida's dynamic-equivalence theory is often held in opposition to the views of?philologists?who maintain that an understanding of the?source text?(ST) can be achieved by asssing the inter-animation of words on the page, and that meaning is lf-contained within the text (i.e. much more focud on achieving mantic equivalence).
This theory, along with other theories of correspondence in translating, are elaborated in his essay?Principles of Correspondence,[6]?where Nida begins by asrting that given that "no two languages are identical, either in the meanings given to corresponding symbols or in the ways in which symbols are arranged in phras and ntences, it stand
s to reason that there can be no absolute correspondence between languages. Hence, there can be no fully exact translations."?[7]?While the impact of a translation may be clo to the original, there can be no identity in detail.
Nida then ts forth the differences in translation, as he would account for it, within three basic factors: (1) The nature of the message: in some messages the content is of primary consideration, and in others the form must be given a higher priority. (2) The purpo of the author and of the translator: to give information on both form and content; to aim at full intelligibility of the reader so he/she may understand the full implications of the message; for imperative purpos that aim at not just understanding the translation but also at ensuring no misunderstanding of the translation. (3) The type of audience: prospective audiences differ both in?decoding?ability and in potential interest.archer什么意思
Nida brings in the reminder that while there are no such things as "identical?equivalents" in translating, what one must in translating ek to do is find the "clost natural equivalent". Here he identifies two basic orientations in translating bad on two different types of equivalence: Formal Equivalence (F-E) and Dynamic Equivalence (D-E).
