Five Theories

1. Philological Theory
a. The method of ‘philological translation’ can be viewed as the first step on the way
to turn translation into an academic field. As studies have shown, on a certain
stage of the development of philological knowledge, the occurrence of new
translations of classical literature cannot be a result of individual inspiration or
taste. Every new translation of the classics should by all means take into
consideration the previous translations. By means of thorough comparison of the
original with the existing transpositions, based on philological generalizations, by
critically processing and analyzing the experience of the predecessors, one can
move on to the creatively most appropriate options of rendering in another
language of not only the ideas contained in the original but also of its verbal-
artistic fabric.

i. How do I love thee? Ibig mong mabatid, ibig

Let me count the mong malaman Kung
ways. paano kita
pinakamamahal?
Tuturan kong lahat
ang mga paraan,
Iisa-isahin, ikaw ang
bumilang.
2. Philosophical Theory
a. Steiner defined the Hermeneuitic Approach is a theory of interpretation of
meaning by investigating the meaning of understanding spoken or written texts.
This theory is used to diagnose the process of understanding meaning in general.
Since the 18th century, an investigative system has been designed about the
theory and process of translation, while Steiner focused on translation's
psychological and intellectual functions.
b. Steiner described hermeneutics motion in translation is as an act of meaning and
transfer of precise meaning. The concept of translation is not as a science but as
an exact art. Translation is done appropriately in the sense which can be carried
out not systematically.
c. Hermeneutic motion consists of four parts, namely (1) initiative trust; (2)
aggression (or penetration); (3) incorporation (or embodiment); and (4)
compensation (or restitution).
i. 1. Initiative trust
1. The first step in translation is “investment of belief”, which
considers and believes that the source language (SL) can be
understood. In the case of translation, SL is assumed to be
something real and can be translated.
 2. At this stage, rhymes and noncommunicative words may not be
translated. This stage contains two risks. The translation might
have the whole meaning like the medieval Bible translations to
convey the whole message. The translated word can be
meaningless because the form and meaning are closely associated
with not being translated.
ii. 2. Aggression
1. The second step, translation takes the core meaning (extract) from
SL by penetrating or finding the meaning. So, it can be understood
by the target reader.
iii. 3. Incorporation
1. The third step, the source language which has been taken in
essence is then brought to the target language (TL) which has its
own word or term and meaning. At this stage, there are two
different poles between the source language and the target
language. There is a possibility that cultural inconsistency exists
and even requires more efforts to translate, so creativity is needed
to produce the target language. It is also necessary to concern to
the danger of inequal meaning.
iv. 4. Compensation
1. The feedback from the core of the translation to the target culture
is not against ST. Text may be lost or added as transfer
consequences.
3. Manipulation Theory
a. According to this theory, translation implies a degree of manipulation of the ST
for a certain purpose, because the translation process brings the TT into line with
a particular model which should secure social acceptance in the target culture.
4. Aesthetic Communication Theory
a. The above theory, we propound, is creativity-oriented specifically for literary
translation, which is essentially an aesthetic communication between the
translator and the target reader. It is also based on the nature of literature be it
original or translated. It is perhaps conspicuously indisputable that literary
translation, just like literary original composition, is not only informative, i.e.,
conveys lexical meanings, but also expressive or emotive.
5. The Kloepfer’s Theory to Translation
a. This is the prioritization of texts through which the idea of the original text may
not be transferred to the target language in the same manner as the source
language. He defines translation as creative writing and not mere rewriting in a
random tradition. He regards it as the writer-ship of the writer.
b. Hence, a translator should reflect the language and culture of the source text in the
target text yet symbolic meanings in the source text should not be translated
causally. He believes that translation is the photocopy of the original text. That is,
the beauty of the original text must be retained after translation even if it involves
retaining some striking cultural luminance of the source text in the target text
language. This is also in favor of the faithful translation method.