However, it also has some shortcomings. Skopos Theory gives us a new way of thinking about the concept of translation and the role of translator and target reader in the translation process. Besides, Vermeer also puts forward the other two rules―the coherence rule and the fidelity rule and states clearly the hierarchical order of these 3 rules―skopos rule > coherence rule > fidelity rule. However, it also has some shortcomings, including the ambiguity of the “skopos”, the undervaluation of source text and writer, the unfalsifiability of Skopos Theory and the ambiguity of evaluation criteria for the target text.Skopos Theory, Critical Thinking, Significance, ShortcomingVermeer thinks that translation, as an aspect of human action, is purposeful or intentional, and that the purpose (skopos) of this translation action is very important as it determines the translation strategies and translation methods in the later translation activity of the translator, which is the most important rule of Skopos Theory―the skopos rule. It gives us a new way of thinking about the concept of translation and the role of translator and target reader in the translation process.
In his action theory, von Wright explains action from the perspective of the reason or purpose of a specific action, and the implementation of an action is deemed as the way to achieve a specific purpose. He regards action as consciously creating or intervening changes of the world. Von Wright puts forward the theory of action theory. Key Concepts in Vermeer’s Skopos Theory1G.H.
Enlightened by Wright 1, Vermeer regards translation as a mere linguistic process, but a communicative process, in which verbal and non-verbal signs is transferred (Nord, 2001). This book is Vermeer’s major work on Skopos Theory, in which Vermeer gives a detailed explanation of his Skopos Theory. In Groundwork for a General Theory of Translation, Reiss and Vermeer combine’s their two theories―Vermeer’s Skopos Theory and Reiss’s text-type model together, hoping to create a general theory for translation.
Vermeer claims that seeing translation as a mere linguistic process is not adequate, this is also an important significance of Vermeer’s Skopos Theory, a shift from previous linguistic translation theories. In his A Framework for a General Theory of Translation, Vermeer describes translation as a communicative action (intentional), in which communicative verbal and nonverbal signs are transferred from one language into another (Nord, 2001). In order to have a critical thinking about Skopos Theory and give a critical evaluation, we must firstly understand Vermeer’s Skopos Theory.Enlightened by Wright’s action theory, which regards human’s action as intentional, Vermeer sees translation as a human action, meaning that translation is an intentional action performed by human being.
In her book, she puts forward the translation action model, and defines “11 translation action” as “a complex action designed to achieve a particular purpose” (Holz-Manttari, 1984). Vermeer’s opinion is similar to another German functionalist―Justa Holz-Manttari. So, let’s look somewhere else.” (Vermeer, 1987). Secondly, because linguistic has not yet formulated the right questions to tackle our problems. First, because translating is not merely and not even primarily a linguistic process.
To state clearly and avoid confusions, in this article, the translation work performed merely by translators will be called translation work or translation activity, and “translational action” or “translation action” will be the special term for Holz-Manttari and Vermeer’s understanding of broader scope of translation.“Skopos” is a Greek word, meaning “aim” or “purpose” and is introduced by Vermeer into his “Skopos Theory”, implying that Hans J. So both Vermeer and Holz-Manttari regard translation as an intentional (purposeful) and communicative human action, and intention or purpose is the source of the word “skopos”. Vermeer’s Skopos Theory and Holz-Manttari’s translation model have a lot in common, so that Jeremy in his Introducing Translation Studies comments that “Although Skopos Theory predates Holz-Manttari’s theory of translation action, it can be considered to be part of that same theory, and it deals with a translational action which is ST-based, which has to be negotiated and performed, and which has a purpose and result” (Jeremy, 2001). She views translation as a communicative process involving a series of roles and players, including the initiator, the commissioner, the ST producer, the TT producer, the TT user, the TT receiver, in her translational action model (Holz-Manttari, 1984). Holz-Manttari expands the traditional thinking of the circle of the participations of translation.
The Coherence Rule Of Skopos How To Determine It
To differentiate his theory from Nida’s equivalence theory, Vermeer puts forward his new understanding of translation criteria―adequacy. In other words, the skopos of translation determines the translation methods and translation strategies in the later translation work of the translator. The commission is the source of the skopos of a specific translation action.According to different translation skopos or different translation commission, translators can choose their own translation strategies or methods to achieve their skopos. A commissioner needs to state clearly the commission of the translator, including the goal and the conditions under which the goal should be achieved (including the fee and deadline). So what’s the source of the skopos of a specific translation actin, and how to determine it?According to Vermeer, commission is the source of the skopos of a specific translation action.
In other words, the target text must make sense in the target language and it should be readable and fluent in the target language. Intratextual coherence rule, also the coherence rule, requires that the target text must be translated in such a way that it is coherent with the circumstances and knowledge of the target text receivers. Besides, there are other two important theories in Vermeer’s Skopos Theory, the intratextual coherence rule (or the coherence rule) and the intertextual coherence rule (or the fidelity rule). According to Vermeer, the skopos of a translational action determines the TT, which is the Rule 1―the skopos rule. And Vermeer and Reiss regard Nida’s equivalence as a special branch of adequacy if the skopos is the same for ST and TT (Vermeer and Reiss, 1984).
For coherence rule and fidelity rule, Vermeer puts coherence rule ahead of the fidelity rule and he gives the least importance to the fidelity rule, which is the most important reason for him being criticized.3. In other words, if the other two rules are contradicted to the skopos rule, translators should obey the skopos rule and can violate the other two rules, the skopos rule and the fidelity rule. The skopos rule is dominating and the most important rule in translation activity, and the other two rules are both subordinated to skopos rule. Vermeer claims that there is a clear hierarchical order of these three rules: skopos rule > coherence rule > fidelity rule. In detail, there must be coherence between the source text information received by the translator, the interpretation the translator makes of this information and the information that is encoded for the TT receivers (Jeremy, 2001).
In Pym’s Exploring Translation Theories, Pym gives a comprehensive and objective comment on Skopos Theory. The third one is that Skopos Theory does not pay sufficient to the linguistic nature of ST or to the reproduction of microlevel features in the TT (Jeremy, 2001). The second is that Reiss’s text type approach and Vermeer’s Skopos Theory cannot be lumped together. The first is that the “general” theory is in fact only valid for non-literary texts. Since the appearance of Vermeer’s Skopos Theory, it arises a lot of comments.Nord and Schaffner discussed some of the criticism of Vermeer’s Skopos Theory, mainly the following. It provides a new perspective to see translation, but unavoidably, it also has some shortcomings.
0 kommentar(er)
