Journal of Education and Educational Research

ISSN: 2957-9465 | Vol. 6, No. 3, 2023

A Comparative Analysis of Eugene Nida's and Peter

Newmark's Perspectives on Cultural Context in
Translation
Rui Wang
Department of Foreign Languages, Jilin University, Changchun, 130000, China

Abstract: Translation, as a bridge between languages and cultures, is a complex and engaging field. The task of a translator
goes beyond mere linguistic conversion; it involves the intricate process of transferring cultural contexts and meanings from one
language to another. A review of Western translation history reveals a rich diversity of translation thoughts and a multitude of
distinctive translators. Among them, two influential figures in the Western translation world, Eugene Nida and Peter Newmark,
introduced renowned concepts such as functional equivalence, communicative translation, and semantic translation. These
scholars have extensively studied translation theory, contributing significantly to the flourishing development of Western
translation circles. This paper aims to comparatively analyze the thoughts of these two translation theorists from different
dimensions, offering an analysis of the similarities and differences in perspectives on cultural context in translation and
discussing implications for modern translation education. The following sections will provide a detailed discussion of this topic.
Keywords: Eugene Nida; Peter Newmark; Comparative Analysis; Cultural Context.

1. Introduction
In the realm of translation studies, the pursuit of
understanding how cultures and contexts can be effectively
bridged through the art of translation remains a subject of
paramount importance.
Eugene Nida, an American linguist, is celebrated for
introducing the concept of 'functional equivalence' in
translation. His approach, deeply rooted in the understanding
of cultures and their intrinsic connection to language,
emphasizes the importance of conveying the same emotional
and cultural impact of the original text in the target language.
This perspective revolutionized how translators approached
texts, especially in the context of literary and religious
translations.
In contrast, Peter Newmark, a British scholar and one of
the foremost authorities on translation as a discipline,
proposed a more pragmatic approach. His theories, primarily
focusing on 'semantic' and 'communicative' translation,
highlight the delicate balance between fidelity to the source
text and the translator's responsibility to the target audience.
Newmark’s work has been instrumental in shaping
contemporary translation practices, particularly in the realms
of technical and academic translations.
Understanding Nida’s and Newmark’s perspectives is
crucial for several reasons. Firstly, it allows translators and
scholars to appreciate the complexity of cultural elements in
translation. Secondly, it offers practical strategies for handling
cultural nuances, which is especially vital in an increasingly
globalized world where cross-cultural communication is
commonplace. Lastly, this comparative analysis contributes
to the development of more refined and effective translation
methodologies.
The objective of this paper is to conduct a comparative
analysis of Nida's and Newmark's theories, exploring their
similarities and differences. Additionally, the paper seeks to
highlight the implications of these theories for translation
practice and education, suggesting areas for future research
and development.
The structure of the paper will first examine each theorist's
perspectives in detail, followed by Eugene Nida's and Peter
Newmark's perspectives on cultural context in translation.
Finally, we will reflect on the implications of these theories
for translation education.
2. Newmark's and Nida's Translation
Theory
2.1. Overview of Their Contributions to
Translation Studies
Eugene A. Nida, an influential figure in the field of
translation studies, made several key contributions that have
profoundly shaped the theory and practice of translation. His
work, particularly in the context of Bible translation, has had
a lasting impact on how translators approach texts, especially
in terms of achieving equivalence between source and target
languages.
Nida is best known for introducing the concepts of dynamic
equivalence (also known as functional equivalence) and
formal equivalence in translation. Nida's work has had a
profound impact on the field of Bible translation, where his
theories have been used to make biblical texts more accessible
and understandable in different cultural and linguistic
contexts. Nida emphasized the importance of understanding
both the source and target cultures in the translation process.
He advocated for a more nuanced approach that takes into
account the cultural and social contexts of both languages.
This approach helped translators recognize that languages
are deeply embedded in their cultural settings, and effective
translation requires more than just linguistic knowledge. He
believed that understanding the cultural nuances and the
communicative intent of the original text was crucial for
effective translation. Nida's theories were particularly
influential in the field of Bible translation.
His seminal works, such as "Toward a Science of
Translating" and "The Theory and Practice of Translation"

106
(co-authored with Charles R. Taber), are foundational texts in 2.2. Key Concepts
translation studies. These publications offer in-depth
2.2.1. Dynamic Equivalence and Formal Equivalence
discussions of his theories and practical insights for
Dynamic equivalence, also known as functional
translators. Nida's theories have influenced the training and
equivalence, focuses on conveying the essence or the 'spirit'
education of translators worldwide. His emphasis on cultural
of the original text in the target language. The primary goal
context and the significance of equivalence has become a core
here is to elicit the same response in the target audience as the
part of many translation studies curricula. Eugene Nida's
original text did in its audience. This approach often involves
contributions have not only advanced the theoretical
a degree of adaptation, where cultural and contextual nuances
framework of translation studies but have also provided
are taken into account to make the translation relatable and
practical methodologies for translators, especially in the
comprehensible to the target audience.
challenging task of translating texts across diverse cultural
A significant aspect of dynamic equivalence is the
and linguistic barriers.
adaptation of cultural references, idioms, and colloquialisms.
While Peter Newmark, a prominent figure in translation
For instance, an idiom in English might have no direct
studies, made significant contributions that have greatly
equivalent in another language, and thus, it requires a
influenced the field. His work is characterized by a practical
translation that captures its essence rather than a word-for-
and nuanced understanding of the complexities of language
word rendition. Dynamic equivalence allows for flexibility in
and translation.
sentence structure and word choice, ensuring that the
Newmark introduced the concepts of semantic translation
translation sounds natural in the target language. This
and communicative translation. Semantic translation
approach may sometimes lead to the translator moving away
emphasizes fidelity to the source text's literal and linguistic
from the literal structure of the source text.
aspects, prioritizing accuracy in conveying the original's
A classic example can be seen in the translation of literary
meaning.
works or poetry where the emotional impact and thematic
Communicative translation, on the other hand, focuses on
resonance take precedence over literal accuracy. In Bible
rendering the text in a way that has the desired impact on the
translation, where Nida’s work was predominantly focused,
target audience, often involving more idiomatic language use.
dynamic equivalence plays a crucial role in making the text
His theories are particularly relevant in the translation of
accessible and meaningful to a diverse global audience. In this
various text types, including titles, where the choice between
context, "Lamb of God" refers to a title for Jesus Christ. The
semantic and communicative approaches can significantly
phrase originates from the Bible and is rich in religious and
affect the translation's effectiveness. Newmark recognized the
cultural connotations. In the Bible, this phrase is used to
importance of flexibility in translation. He acknowledged that
symbolize Jesus Christ, representing purity, sacrifice, and
different texts and contexts require different approaches and
redemption. In many Christian cultures, the lamb is a familiar
that sometimes a communicative approach might be more
symbol associated with these qualities. Such a translation uses
suitable, especially when the source text needs corrections or
dynamic equivalence because it adapts the text to the cultural
clarifications. In translating literary titles, for instance, a
and religious context of the target audience. While it moves
communicative approach might be used to capture the essence
away from the literal translation, it preserves the intended
and appeal of the original, while a technical manual might
impact and symbolism of the original phrase. This approach
benefit from a semantic approach to ensure precise technical
takes into account that translation is not just about words but
information is conveyed accurately.
about conveying meaning, context, and cultural nuances. By
In his works, especially in "A Textbook of Translation,"
using dynamic equivalence, the translator ensures that the
Newmark went beyond theory to offer practical guidelines.
translated text resonates with the target audience in a way that
These guidelines serve as a valuable resource for students,
is meaningful and comprehensible within their cultural and
offering concrete strategies and methods for dealing with
religious framework.
various translation challenges. Newmark provided
In contrast to dynamic equivalence, formal equivalence
comprehensive theoretical frameworks that are fundamental
(also known as literal or word-for-word translation) aims to
to translation studies. His concepts of semantic and
stay as close as possible to the form and content of the source
communicative translation offer a nuanced understanding of
text. The emphasis here is on accuracy and fidelity to the
how different texts can and should be translated. This
original text's syntax, structure, and wording.
theoretical grounding is essential for students to develop a
This approach involves translating the words and phrases
deep understanding of the complexities involved in
of the source text as directly as possible into the target
translation. Newmark’s teachings effectively bridge the gap
language, maintaining the same order and structure as much
between translation theory and practice. He emphasizes the
as the target language allows. Formal equivalence strives to
importance of understanding the cultural and contextual
preserve the original style and nuances, making it especially
nuances of both the source and target languages, which is
relevant in contexts where the form and content of the text are
crucial for students learning to navigate real-world translation
of significant importance, such as legal documents, technical
scenarios.
manuals, and certain literary works. While formal
Peter Newmark's contributions, particularly his semantic
equivalence is valuable for its accuracy, it may result in
and communicative translation theories, provide valuable
translations that are awkward or unnatural in the target
frameworks for translators, helping them navigate the delicate
language. This approach can also overlook cultural nuances,
balance between fidelity to the source text and making the
potentially leading to misunderstandings or loss of impact.
translation accessible and effective for the target audience.
Each word is translated with its closest direct equivalent,
His legacy continues to influence translation practice and
retaining both the syntactic and semantic elements of the
theory, underscoring the importance of understanding the
original phrase. Analyzing this approach, Formal Equivalence
nuances of language and culture in translation
aims to stay as true as possible to the source language in terms
of vocabulary and syntax. While it ensures a high degree of

107
fidelity to the original text, it may sometimes fail to convey
the deeper cultural or contextual meanings, especially in
idiomatic expressions.
Both dynamic and formal equivalence offer valuable
methodologies for translation, each suited to different types
of texts and objectives. Dynamic equivalence excels in
capturing the essence and emotional resonance of the original,
making the translation engaging and relatable. Formal
equivalence, on the other hand, provides precision and
faithfulness to the source, preserving its stylistic and
structural qualities. Understanding and applying these
concepts allow translators to navigate the complex terrain of
translation, ensuring that they not only convey the message
but also respect the linguistic and cultural integrity of both the
source and target languages.
2.2.2. Semantic Translation and Communicative
Translation
In the context of the ongoing debate in the translation field
between literal and free translation, the renowned British
translation theorist Peter Newmark proposed the theories of
Semantic Translation and Communicative Translation.
Semantic Translation refers to the process of reproducing the
connotation of the source text as accurately as possible within
the allowances of the semantics and syntactic structures of the
target language, with a tendency towards the source language
culture. On the other hand, Communicative Translation places
greater importance on the reader's understanding and reaction,
striving to provide target language readers with the same
feeling as that of the source language readers, leaning towards
the target language culture.
An analysis of Newmark's translation theories reveals that
Semantic Translation is a critical concept. The core tenet of
this translation theory is to accurately replicate the ideas and
spirit contained in the original work, as far as the language
structure and semantics of the target language allow. The
essence of Semantic Translation lies in maintaining the
structure of the original work and the author's central ideas to
the greatest extent possible. Only then does it consider the
common expressions and cultural habits of the target
language readers, prioritizing the former over the latter in
cases of clear conflict. Thus, Semantic Translation especially
values maintaining the original flavor of the source text,
translating accordingly. However, when utilizing this
translation method, there occasionally arise conflicts and
ambiguities in meaning due to this approach.
Communicative Translation is another vital theory in
Newmark's translation framework. The primary goal of this
theory is to ensure that the translated language conveys
information to the target language readers equivalent to what
the original work conveys to the source language readers. In
other words, the process of Communicative Translation leans
more towards the target language readers, making the
translated text closer to their manner of expression and
cultural habits. This prevents target language readers from
facing significant difficulties in reading and communication,
facilitating smoother communication.
Semantic Translation places more emphasis on presenting
the "content of the original text," while Communicative
Translation focuses more on the "effect" of the translated text.
To better illustrate the differences between these two methods
of translation, specific translation examples are used for
explanation.
This method focuses on preserving the exact contextual
meaning of the original text as closely as possible. Semantic
108
translation prioritizes the literal and exact meanings of words
and phrases.
Consider a legal document or a technical manual. In these
documents, the precise terminology and specific phrases are
crucial for the intended meaning. When translating a legal
contract from French to English, a semantic translator would
meticulously ensure that every legal term is accurately
translated to maintain the exact legal implications in English.
Semantic translation is highly effective in contexts where
precision and adherence to the source text's exact wording are
vital. However, this approach can sometimes result in
translations that feel unnatural or overly literal in the target
language, potentially hindering fluid readability.
Communicative Translation aims to produce a text that is
fluent and easily understood in the target language,
prioritizing the "effect" of the translation over exact
adherence to the source text's wording. Consider a novel or a
piece of advertising copy. In such cases, the translator might
opt for phrases in the target language that convey the same
meaning but sound more natural or persuasive. For instance,
translating a Spanish novel into English, a communicative
translator would focus on capturing the tone, style, and
cultural nuances, ensuring that the English version resonates
with English-speaking readers as the original did with
Spanish-speaking readers.
Communicative translation is excellent for texts where the
emotional impact, cultural context, and readability are more
important than exact linguistic equivalence. However, this
approach can sometimes stray from the precise meaning of
the source text, potentially altering some nuances or specific
details. Even when faced with longer and structurally
complex texts, Communicative Translation uses common
expressions and idioms of the target language readers to
ensure they can comprehend and grasp the meaning. In
contrast, Semantic Translation, which maintains high fidelity
to the sentence structure, semantics, and form of the original
text, often presents significant comprehension barriers for
target language readers who lack the cultural background of
the source language, making it difficult to fully appreciate the
underlying meaning of the text and leading to potential
ambiguities.
3. Comparative Analysis
3.1. Nida's and Newmark's Views on Cultural
Context
Just as Newmark said, semantic translation prioritizes the
precise meaning of the source text, including its cultural
nuances. Communicative Translation emphasizes the
effectiveness of the message in the target language, adapting
cultural elements to make them more comprehensible to the
target audience. Newmark recognized the importance of
cultural context in both Semantic and Communicative
Translation. He argued that a translator must understand and
accurately convey cultural references, be they societal norms,
idioms, or historical contexts.
English idiom: “It’s raining cats and dogs.”
Semantic Translation: This might be translated literally,
retaining the bizarre imagery, accompanied by a footnote
explaining the idiom.
Communicative Translation: The idiom would be
translated to a culturally equivalent expression in the target
language that conveys the idea of heavy rain.
Nida introduced these concepts to address how cultural
context influences translation. Dynamic Equivalence focuses
on translating meanings and emotions rather than literal
words, emphasizing cultural relevance. Formal Equivalence,
meanwhile, prioritizes a direct translation of the text,
maintaining the source language's structure and words. Nida
believed that understanding and integrating the cultural
context of both the source and target languages is crucial. He
argued that the translator's role is to render the message into
the target language in a way that is culturally comprehensible
and resonant.
A significant application of Nida's theories is in translating
religious texts, like the Bible. Nida advocated for translations
that are culturally sensitive to the target audience. For
example, Biblical parables containing agricultural references
might be adapted to more urban or industrial analogies in
cultures where agriculture is not predominant. In dealing with
idioms or sayings, Nida's approach would involve finding an
equivalent saying in the target language that conveys a similar
meaning.
Proverbs are deeply rooted in cultural context. Under
Nida's approach, a proverb like the Spanish “Donde hay humo,
hay calor” (literally “Where there is smoke, there is heat”)
might be translated as “Where there’s smoke, there’s fire,”
adapting to an English-speaking context while preserving the
proverb’s intended meaning.
Literary Reference: Shakespeare’s “to be, or not to be.”
Nida’s emphasis on cultural context raises questions about
fidelity to the source text. Critics argue that over-adaptation
for cultural relevance might lead to the loss of original
nuances and cultural flavor. Literary works often embed
specific cultural and historical contexts that challenge the
application of Dynamic Equivalence. Translating such texts
requires a delicate balance between preserving the original's
cultural essence and making it accessible to the target
audience.
Eugene Nida’s perspectives on the role of cultural context
in translation have significantly shaped the field. His
emphasis on cultural adaptation and relevance in translation,
especially through the lens of Dynamic Equivalence,
underscores the importance of understanding and respecting
cultural differences in the translation process. While his
approach presents challenges, particularly in maintaining the
source text's integrity, it remains a foundational perspective in
the endeavor to make translated texts culturally resonant and
meaningful.
3.2. Similarities
3.2.1. Recognition of Cultural Context as Integral to
Translation
Eugene Nida and Peter Newmark share a fundamental
agreement on the significance of cultural context in the
translation process. They assert that the essence of a text is
often intricately tied to its cultural background, and
translators must navigate these cultural nuances to achieve a
successful translation.
Nida emphasized that understanding both the source and
target cultures is crucial. The translator must not only be adept
in the languages but also in the cultural nuances, beliefs, and
practices associated with these languages. He advocated for
translations that are culturally relevant to the target audience.
This often involves adapting cultural references in the source
text to equivalents within the target culture, ensuring that the
translation is comprehensible and resonant for the target
audience.
109
Newmark's approach to translation is categorized into two
main types: Semantic Translation and Communicative
Translation. While these methods focus on linguistic aspects,
Newmark also acknowledged the importance of cultural
context. He specifically addressed the challenge of translating
"cultural words". Newmark proposed various strategies for
dealing with these, including transference (retaining the
original word), naturalization (adapting the word to the target
language phonologically), and cultural equivalent.
In his view, a translator should be sensitive to the cultural
elements in a text, understanding that some aspects might
need explanation or adaptation for the target audience. This
sensitivity is crucial in both his semantic and communicative
approaches, as it impacts how faithfully a translation reflects
the source culture or how effectively it communicates in the
target culture.
Both Nida and Newmark agree on the significant role of
cultural context in translation, though their methods of
addressing it differ. They both see the translator as a cultural
mediator who must balance fidelity to the source text with the
cultural understanding of the target audience. Whether it's
Nida's dynamic equivalence aiming for a similar effect across
cultures, or Newmark's strategies for dealing with cultural
words, both approaches necessitate a deep understanding of
both the source and target cultures. This ensures that
translations are not only linguistically accurate but also
culturally coherent and resonant with the intended audience.
Both Nida and Newmark recognize that culture deeply
influences language and communication. They agree that
effective translation cannot ignore cultural context. And both
propose strategies to handle cultural differences, such as
adaptation or explanation, depending on the translation's
purpose and the target audience's familiarity with the source
culture. They understand that translation is a balance between
staying true to the source language and being effective and
appropriate in the target culture.
The role of cultural context in translation is a fundamental
aspect that both Eugene Nida and Peter Newmark, prominent
figures in translation theory, emphasize in their approaches.
Nida, with his dynamic equivalence theory, and Newmark,
through his semantic and communicative translation methods,
both acknowledge the translator's crucial role as a cultural
mediator. This mediation is not just about converting text
from one language to another but involves a deeper
engagement with the cultural nuances and contexts of both the
source and target languages. In this process, the translator
must navigate the intricate balance between maintaining
fidelity to the source text and ensuring the translated material
is culturally relevant and understandable to the target
audience. This balance is key to achieving translations that are
not just linguistically precise but also culturally resonant.
Nida's dynamic equivalence particularly highlights the
importance of translating meanings and emotions, rather than
just words. He advocates for a translation that produces the
same effect on the target audience as the original did on the
source audience. This approach requires a profound
understanding of the cultural contexts that shape how
audiences perceive and interpret texts. For instance,
translating idioms, humor, or proverbs necessitates a creative
adaptation that preserves the original's essence while making
it relatable to the target culture. Nida's method is especially
effective in translating texts where the emotional and cultural
impact is paramount, such as in literature or advertising.
On the other hand, Newmark's approach, dividing
translation into semantic and communicative categories, also
acknowledges the role of cultural context. Semantic
translation strives for closeness to the source text, including
its cultural nuances, making it suitable for texts where
precision and technical accuracy are essential, like legal or
scientific documents. Communicative translation, meanwhile,
prioritizes the effectiveness of the message in the target
language and culture, often requiring cultural adaptations or
substitutions to make the content more accessible and
engaging for the target audience. Newmark’s strategies for
handling cultural words—like transference, naturalization, or
cultural equivalent—highlight the necessity of a nuanced
approach to dealing with cultural differences in translation.
In conclusion, both Nida and Newmark underscore the
importance of recognizing and integrating cultural context in
translation. They agree that a text's meaning is deeply
embedded in its cultural milieu, necessitating that translators
not only transfer linguistic content but also adapt and convey
cultural nuances to the target audience successfully.
3.2.2. Cultural Adaptation and its Necessity
Eugene Nida and Peter Newmark both recognize that
cultural adaptation is a vital aspect of effective translation.
This process entails adjusting cultural references, idioms, and
social norms within the source text to align with and resonate
within the cultural framework of the target language.
Examples and Details:
Nida's Approach: Consider the English idiom "Spill the
beans," which means to reveal a secret. In a culture where this
idiom is unfamiliar, Nida would endorse finding a culturally
equivalent expression that conveys the same meaning.
Newmark's Perspective: While Newmark also
acknowledges the need for adaptation, he might suggest a
more direct translation followed by an explanatory note,
especially in his Semantic Translation approach. In this case,
he would translate "Spill the beans" literally and then provide
a contextual explanation in a footnote or bracket.
Cultural References in Literature:
Example (Nida's View): In translating a novel that
references the traditional "Qi Xi" festival, Nida would
advocate for adapting this reference to something more
familiar to the target audience or providing a brief explanation
within the text to convey the festival's significance.
Example (Newmark's Approach): Newmark, on the other
hand, might opt to retain the term "Qi Xi" and provide a
detailed footnote explaining the cultural and historical context
of this festival, particularly in a Semantic Translation.
In essence, both Nida and Newmark understand the critical
role of cultural adaptation in translation. They agree that
without such adaptation, translations risk becoming
incomprehensible or irrelevant to the target audience. Their
approaches, however, differ in the degree and method of
adaptation, with Nida often favoring more functional
adaptations and Newmark advocating for a balance between
direct translation and cultural contextualization.
3.2.3. Treatment of Non-Equivalent Cultural References
Eugene Nida and Peter Newmark, despite their differing
methodologies in translation theory, share common ground
regarding the treatment of non-equivalent cultural references.
These references can be challenging in translation because
they often lack a direct equivalent in the target language and
are deeply rooted in the source culture's social, historical, or
cultural context. Both Nida and Newmark offer approaches to
address this challenge, emphasizing the translator's role in
effectively bridging cultural gaps.
110
Nida's concept of dynamic equivalence focuses on
conveying the same effect or meaning in the target culture as
in the source culture. When faced with non-equivalent
cultural references, Nida advocates for adaptation. He
suggests that translators should find or create cultural
equivalents in the target language that can elicit a similar
response from the target audience as the original does from
the source audience. This approach often involves a degree of
creativity and deep cultural understanding, ensuring that the
translation remains accessible and meaningful to the target
audience, even if it means straying from a word-for-word
translation.
Newmark, in his semantic and communicative translation
theories, also acknowledges the complexities posed by non-
equivalent cultural references. In semantic translation, where
the focus is on the exact contextual meaning, Newmark might
suggest keeping the original cultural reference intact, possibly
with a footnote or explanation, to preserve the cultural
richness of the source text. In contrast, communicative
translation, which aims for maximal effectiveness in the target
culture, might involve substituting the non-equivalent cultural
reference with a more familiar concept in the target culture or
rephrasing it to convey a similar message in a culturally
appropriate way.
The similarity between Nida and Newmark in handling
non-equivalent cultural references lies in their shared
understanding of the importance of cultural context in
translation. Both recognize that a literal translation of these
references often fails to convey the intended meaning or effect
in the target culture. They agree that the translator must have
a deep understanding of both the source and target cultures to
navigate these challenges effectively. This may involve
cultural substitutions, adaptations, or explanatory notes,
depending on the translation's purpose and the intended
audience's familiarity with the source culture.
In summary, Nida and Newmark, through their respective
translation theories, emphasize the significance of
appropriately handling non-equivalent cultural references.
They both advocate for a translation strategy that respects the
source text's cultural essence while ensuring that the
translation is meaningful and engaging in the target culture.
This approach highlights the translator's role not just as a
language expert but as a cultural mediator, adept at navigating
and bridging cultural differences to achieve a translation that
is both faithful and resonant.
3.3. Differences
Translation standards may vary among different translators
and scholars. Beyond the universally recognized standards,
each has proposed their unique ideas, each with its strengths.
Eugene Nida believes that in language translation, the two
languages should correspond naturally without a trace of
translation. The best translations, according to him, are those
where the translated text doesn't resemble the original work.
Therefore, when translating the Bible, Nida used simple and
common language, making it understandable and not abstruse.
On the other hand, Peter Newmark asserts that the quality
of a translation depends on its accuracy and the extent to
which it remains faithful to the original text and author. In
translation, accuracy is paramount, and the best translations
are those where the translated text reads just like the original.
These perspectives of the two scholars on translation
standards are markedly different. Each viewpoint has its
merits, focusing on different aspects. It is these differences
and diversities that enable a more comprehensive, balanced,
and dialectical approach to the issue of cultural context.
Eugene Nida's approach, particularly his emphasis on
dynamic equivalence, reflects a deep consideration of the
cultural context in translation. Nida's belief that translations
should naturally correspond without a trace of the original
language's influence underscores his priority for the target
audience's cultural and linguistic context. By advocating for
translations where the text does not resemble the original
work, Nida emphasizes adapting the message to fit the
cultural and linguistic norms of the target audience. This
approach is particularly evident in his work on translating the
Bible, where he used simple and common language to make
the text accessible and relatable to contemporary readers,
regardless of their cultural background.
Peter Newmark's perspective, however, places a stronger
emphasis on semantic accuracy and fidelity to the original
text and author. His approach suggests a deep respect for the
source culture's nuances and context. By prioritizing
translations that read like the original, Newmark advocates
for maintaining the cultural and linguistic idiosyncrasies of
the source text. This method might preserve specific cultural
references, idioms, or stylistic elements that are intrinsic to
the source language, offering the target audience a closer
experience of the original cultural context.
The differences in these approaches highlight a
fundamental tension in translation theory: whether to
prioritize the source text's cultural context (as Newmark does)
or to adapt the translation to the target audience's cultural
context (as Nida suggests). Nida's method might involve
altering or omitting certain cultural references to make the
text more understandable to the target audience, potentially
losing some of the original's cultural richness. Conversely,
Newmark's approach might retain these elements, but at the
risk of making the text less accessible or relatable to the target
audience.
In conclusion, the contrast between Nida's and Newmark's
translation standards reflects a broader debate in translation
studies about the role of cultural context. Nida's approach
tends to prioritize the target culture's context, aiming for
accessibility and relatability, while Newmark emphasizes
fidelity to the source culture, aiming for authenticity and
preservation of the original context. This dichotomy
underscores the complexity and diversity of approaches in
translation, highlighting the need for a nuanced understanding
of both the source and target cultures in the translation process.
4. Implications for Modern Translation
Education
Nida's emphasis on dynamic or functional equivalence
focuses on conveying the essence of the original message in
a culturally relevant way for the target audience.
Therefore, translation education must teach students to go
beyond literal word-for-word translation. They should learn
to adapt messages so that they resonate culturally and
emotionally with the target audience. This involves exercises
in identifying and translating idioms, metaphors, and
culturally specific references.
Meanwhile, Nida’s approach underscores the importance
of understanding the cultural, historical, and social contexts
of both source and target languages.
Therefore, courses in cultural studies, anthropology, and
history should be integrated into translation programs. This
111
holistic approach ensures translators can navigate cultural
nuances and societal norms effectively.
Activity: Students translate historical Chinese texts, such
as excerpts from "The Art of War" by Sun Tzu or classical
Chinese poetry. They would need to research the historical
context, and societal norms of the period to accurately
translate the text.
Outcome: This deep dive into historical context enriches
students' understanding of the source language and culture,
improving their translation accuracy and cultural sensitivity.
Meanwhile, Newmark distinguishes between semantic
translation, which is more word-for-word and faithful to the
original, and communicative translation, which aims to evoke
the same response in the target audience as in the source
audience.
Translation education should cover both approaches,
teaching students when and how to apply each. This would
include training in various genres and contexts, from literary
to technical translation, providing a versatile skill set.
Newmark’s approach emphasizes the importance of
accurate word choice, reflecting the nuances of the source
language. And language courses focusing on advanced
vocabulary, syntax, and semantics are essential. Students
should engage in exercises that challenge them to find the
most accurate words while maintaining the integrity of the
original message.
Activity: Guide students to translate a diverse set of texts,
including a literary excerpt (e.g., a poem or a short story), a
technical document (e.g., a user manual), a promotional
material (e.g., an advertisement), and a journalistic piece (e.g.,
a news report).
Group Translation Task:
Part 1 - Semantic Translation: Each group first translates
their text focusing on a semantic approach — a more literal,
word-for-word translation that stays as close to the original
text as possible.
Part 2 - Communicative Translation: Groups then re-
translate the same text using a communicative approach,
focusing on conveying the same effect and meaning to the
target audience as the original text does to its audience. This
may involve more liberal translations, adaptations, or even
cultural localization.
Outcome: Through this activity, students learn to apply and
differentiate between semantic and communicative
translation strategies. They gain practical experience in
various genres, understanding the nuances and requirements
of each approach, thus building a versatile skill set in
translation.
5. Conclusion
Both Eugene Nida and Peter Newmark emphasize the
importance of cultural context in translation. They agree that
successful translation requires more than linguistic accuracy;
it also demands a deep understanding of cultural nuances,
idioms, and societal norms.
Nida focuses on conveying the essence and emotions of the
original text, advocating for cultural adaptation and relevance.
He supports modifying cultural references to resonate with
the target audience, even if it means moving away from a
literal translation. While Newmark distinguishes between
semantic translation (more literal and faithful to the original)
and communicative translation (more focused on the
effectiveness of the message in the target language). He
acknowledges the need for cultural adaptation but tends to
preserve the original cultural elements, providing
explanations where necessary. The application of Nida's and
Newmark's theories varies across different types of texts.
Nida’s approach is particularly useful in translating texts like
religious scriptures, where cultural relevance is crucial.
Newmark’s strategies are beneficial in literary and technical
translations, where maintaining the original's cultural essence
is often important. I suggest that researchers should explore
hybrid approaches that combine Nida’s emphasis on cultural
adaptation with Newmark’s focus on semantic accuracy. This
research could lead to more versatile translation
methodologies.
In conclusion, the comparative analysis of Eugene Nida's
and Peter Newmark's perspectives on cultural context in
translation highlights their significant contributions to the
field. Their differing approaches offer valuable insights into
the complex interplay between language, culture, and
meaning in translation. Future research in this area holds the
potential to further refine translation practices and enhance
cross-cultural understanding.
References
[1] CHAI Su & GUO Zhiyou. (2022). A Study on the Translation
Techniques of Long Sentences in the Science of Fairy Tales
Under Newmark’s Communicative Translation Theory.
Canadian Social Science (1), 1-12.
[2] Ziling Zuo. (2021). Subtitle Translation of “MFA Presenting
Chinese Province” from the Perspective of Communicative
Translation. Journal of Educational Research and Policies (6),
112
[3] Qianqian HU & Su CHAI. (2020). A Study on the Techniques
of the E-C Long-Sentence Translation in Our Wealth Is Loving
Each Other: Self and Society in Fiji under the Theory of
Communicative Translation. Canadian Social Science (2), 43-
49.
[4] ZHAO Yuying. (2019). A Comparison of the Translation
Theories of Nida and Newmark—Taking the Translation of
Nature as What We See as a Case Study. Translating China
(1.0).
[5] Yu Liwen. (2015). Research on the Business English
Translation Methodology under the Perspective of Dynamic
Cultural Equivalence. (eds.)
[6] Xiuping Geng. (2014). Eugene A. Nida vs. Peter Newmark--A
Dichotomy Comparison. (eds.) Proceedings of 2014
International Conference on Psychology and Public Health
(PPH 2014) Volume 4 (pp.37-41). Foreign Language &
Literature Department of Baoji Arts & Science University.
[7] Banafsheh Ghafel, Abbass Eslami Rasekh & Abdolreza
Pazhakh. (2011). Idiomatic Expressions of the Sewing Frame
in English and their Persian Counterparts: Nida's Dynamic
Equivalence Theory in Focus. International Education Studies
(2), 160.
[8] (2008). A Study of Korean Translations of Paradise Lost using
Eugene Nida's Formal and Dynamic Equivalence Theories of
Translation. The Journal of Modern British & American
Language & Literature (1), 133-155.
[9] E. Earle Ellis. (2003). Dynamic Equivalence Theory, Feminist
Ideology and Three Recent Bible Translations. The Expository
Times (1), 7-12.