Chapter 2
Peter Newmark
李娜 英文Semantic and Communicative Translation
Guided Reading
Peter Newmark (1916) is an accomplished translation scholar as well as an experienced translator. He has translated a number of books and articles and published extaensively on translation. His publications on translation include Approaches to Translation (1981), About Translation(1983), Paragraphs on Translation段落翻译(1985), A Textbook of Translation翻译教程(1988), and More Paragraphs on Translation(1993).
In his work Approaches to Translation, Newmark propos two types of translation: mantic translation语义翻译 and communicative translation交际翻译. Semantic translation focus primarily upon the mantic content of the source text whereas communicative translation focus esntially upon the comprehension and respon of receptors. This dis
tinction results from his disapproval of Nida's 中国武装力量的多样化运用assumption假定，假设，设想；假装；承担，担任 that all translating is communicating, and the overriding最主要的，最优先的 principle of any translation is to achieve "equivalent effect". For Newmark, the success of equivalent effect is "illusory", and that "the conflict of loyalties, the gap between emphasis on source and target languages will always remain as the overriding problem in translation theory and practice"(1981:38). To narrow the gap, Newmark 系统地阐述，确切地表达；规划，构想出formulates his concepts of "communicative translation" and "mantic translation", which in a n从某种意义上说 are similar to Nida's "dynamic equivalent translation" and "formal equivalent translation". Newmarks admits "communicative translation" is a common method and could be ud in many types of translation. Nevertheless, he justifies证明……正当/有理，为……辩护lolly the legitimacy合法性，正当；合理性，妥当；嫡出，正统 of "mantic translation" in the following three aspects. Firstly, all translations depend on the three 一分为二，二分法；本质对立dichotomies, namely, the foreign and native cultures, the two languages, the writer and the translator. Hence, it is unlikely to have a universal theory that could include all the f
actors. Secondly, previous discussions on methods of translation, either Nida's "dynamic equivalence" or Nabokow's "literal translation", does not reflect the actual reality of translation method, for each of them either recommends one or 贬低，轻视disparages the other. Thirdly, the social factors, especially the readers of the cond language, only play a partial部分的；偏爱/袒/心的 role发挥部分作用 in translation. Some texts, such as an expressive one, require a "mantic translation"(1981:62). It can be en that可以看出海啸 英文 by proposing the coexistence of "communicative translation" and "mantic translation", Newmark suggests a ultimate是什么意思correlation相互关系，关联；相关性 between translation method and text type.
It should be pointed out that应该指出的是 Newmark's mantic translation differs from 英文小短剧literal translation直译relief是什么意思 becau the former "respects context", interprets and even explains while the latter sticks very cloly to source text at word and syntax level(1981:62). Literal translation, however, is held to be the best approach in both mantic and communicative translation, "provided that如果 equivalent effect is cured, the literal word-for-word translation百度快译 is not only the best, it is the only valid method of translation"(1981:39). Here N
ewmark ems to only 联合国观察员国take account of考虑到，顾及，体谅 literary translation rather than non-literary translation, which is often rendered more freely in order to communicate the meaning. But he also states that when there is a conflict between mantic and communicative translation, the latter would win out胜出. For instance, it is better to render communicatively the public sign公共标志 bissiger Hund and chien mechant into beward the dog! in order to communicate efficiently the message, but not mantically as dog that bites! and bad dog!(1981:39). Nevertheless, it is difficult for a translator to follow Newmark's translation methods in practice, which should be adopted flexibly according to the specific context and text type.
A Textbook of Translation is an expansion and a revision of Approaches to Translation in many aspects在很多方面. In this book, Newmark, follwing the German linguist Karl Buhler's functional theory of language, propos three main types of texts (i.e. expressive有表现力的，富有表情的简单易懂的英文歌, informative提供大量资料或信息的，授予知识的 and vocative呼格的) as well as methods of translating them (Chapters 4 and 5). Although he lists many translation methods from word-for-word translation to adaptation, he insists that "only
mantic and communicative translation fulfill the two main aims of translation, which are first, accuracy, and cond, economy". While mantic translation is ud for expressive texts, communicative translation is for informative and vocative texts although he admits that few texts are purely expressive, informative or vocative. By stressing the wide applicability of the two translation methods, Newmark ems to overlook the function of other translation methods frequently adopted in translation practice.
