HOLMES MAP OF TRANSLATION:

In the field of translation studies, the “Holmes Map” is a framework

developed by James S. Holmes in his 1972 paper, “The Name and
Nature of Translation Studies.” This framework systematically
categorizes the discipline of translation studies into various branches
and sub-branches, providing a structured approach to both theoretical
and practical aspects of translation.
Main Divisions of the Holmes Map:
1. Pure Translation Studies: This branch is dedicated to
understanding the nature of translation without immediate concern for
practical applications. It is further divided into:
• Descriptive Translation Studies (DTS): Focuses on describing
existing translations to identify patterns and norms. DTS is subdivided
into:
• Product-Oriented DTS: Examines the translated texts
themselves, comparing them to their source texts to observe
differences and similarities.
• Process-Oriented DTS: Investigates the cognitive processes
involved during translation, aiming to understand how translators
approach their work.
• Function-Oriented DTS: Looks at the role and function of
translations within the target culture and society.
• Theoretical Translation Studies: Aims to develop general
principles and theories to explain and predict translation phenomena.
This includes:
• General Theories: Seek overarching principles applicable to
all types of translation.
 • Partial Theories: Focus on specific aspects of translation,
such as medium (e.g., written vs. oral translation), text-type, or
language pair.
2. Applied Translation Studies: This branch deals with practical
applications of translation theories and includes:
• Translator Training: Developing methods and curricula for
educating translators.
• Translation Aids: Creating and evaluating tools that assist
translators, such as dictionaries and software. 
• Translation Criticism: Assessing and critiquing translations to
determine their quality and effectiveness.
• Translation Policy: Formulating guidelines and regulations
that govern translation practices within institutions or societies. 

Examples Illustrating the Holmes Map:

1. Product-Oriented DTS Example:
Consider the translation of the English novel “Pride and Prejudice” into
French. A product-oriented study would compare the original text with
its French translation to identify shifts in language, style, or cultural
references, providing insights into the translation strategies employed.
2. Process-Oriented DTS Example:
Researchers might conduct think-aloud protocols where translators
verbalize their thoughts while translating a text. This approach helps in
understanding the cognitive decision-making processes involved in
translation.
3. Function-Oriented DTS Example:
Examining how the translation of political speeches influences public
opinion in the target culture can shed light on the societal impact and
function of such translations.
4. Theoretical Translation Studies Example:
Developing a theory on how cultural nuances affect the translatability
of humor across languages contributes to the broader understanding of
translation challenges and strategies.
5. Applied Translation Studies Example:
Creating specialized training programs for medical interpreters ensures
that translators are equipped with the necessary skills and knowledge
to handle medical terminologies and sensitive patient information
effectively.
CONCLUSION:
Holmes’ framework has significantly influenced the academic study of
translation by providing a comprehensive structure that encompasses
both the theoretical underpinnings and practical applications of the
field. It serves as a foundational model for scholars and practitioners to
explore and understand the multifaceted nature of translation.

Word-for-Word and Sense-for-Sense Translation in

Munday’s Book:
In Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and Applications, Jeremy
Munday discusses the longstanding debate between word-for-word
(literal) and sense-for-sense (free) translation methods. This debate
dates back to ancient times and has significantly influenced translation
theory.

Historical Perspectives:
1. Cicero (106–43 BCE):
The Roman orator and philosopher Cicero emphasized translating ideas
and rhetorical styles rather than adhering strictly to the exact words.
He believed that a rigid word-for-word translation could result in
awkward and unnatural expressions in the target language.
2. St. Jerome (347–420 CE):
Known for his Latin translation of the Bible, the Vulgate, St. Jerome
advocated for a sense-for-sense translation approach. He argued that,
except in the case of Holy Scriptures, where even the syntax holds
significance, translators should focus on conveying the intended
meaning rather than translating each word literally.

Definitions of Both Approaches

• Word-for-Word Translation:
This method involves translating each word in the source text directly
into the target language while maintaining the original structure and
vocabulary. While this ensures accuracy, it can lead to grammatical
errors or culturally inappropriate translations.
• Sense-for-Sense Translation:
This approach focuses on translating the overall meaning of the text
rather than individual words. The goal is to make the translation natural
and fluent in the target language, even if some words or sentence
structures are changed.

Examples in English and Urdu

1. Word-for-Word vs. Sense-for-Sense Translation of an Idiom

• English Idiom: “It’s raining cats and dogs.”
• Word-for-word translation in Urdu:
• “‫( ”یہ بلیوں اور کتوں کی بارش ہو رہی ہے۔‬Yeh biliyon aur kuton ki
barish ho rahi hai.) → ❌ Incorrect and unnatural
• Sense-for-sense translation in Urdu:
• “‫( ”موسال دھار بارش ہو رہی ہے۔‬Mosladhar barish ho rahi hai.) →
✅ Correct and natural
Analysis: The literal translation is confusing for Urdu speakers because
the idiom does not exist in Urdu. The sense-for-sense translation
conveys the actual meaning of the phrase.

2. Word-for-Word vs. Sense-for-Sense Translation of a Proverb

• Urdu Proverb: “‫( ”نیکی کر دریا میں ڈال‬Neki kar dariya mein
daal)
• Word-for-word translation in English:
• “Do good, throw it in the river.” → ❌ Does not make sense!
 • Sense-for-sense translation in English:
• “Do good and forget about it.” → ✅ Correct and meaningful
Analysis: The literal translation is meaningless in English, whereas the
sense-for-sense translation conveys the intended message properly.

HUMANISM AND THE PROTESTANT REFORMATION:

Jeremy Munday, in his book Introducing Translation Studies: Theories
and Applications, discusses how Humanism and the Protestant
Reformation significantly influenced translation practices in the 14th
and 15th centuries.

Humanism and Translation:

• Humanist Movement: Originating in 14th and 15th-century
Europe, Humanism emphasized a return to classical Latin and Greek
texts, promoting secular and scholarly writings. This movement sought
liberation from the Church’s dominance over knowledge by reviving
classical languages and literatures. 
• Impact on Translation: Humanists advocated for translations
that captured the essence and style of original texts, moving beyond
literal translations. This approach led to more natural and culturally
relevant renditions, aligning with their emphasis on linguistic purity and
clarity.

The Protestant Reformation and Translation:

 • Martin Luther’s Contributions: Martin Luther’s translation of
the Bible into East Central German played a pivotal role in the
Reformation. His work made religious texts accessible to the common
people, challenging the Church’s control over religious knowledge. 
• Luther’s Defense: In his “Sendbrief vom Dolmetschen”
(“Circular Letter on Translation”) of 1530, Luther defended his
translation choices, such as adding the word “allein” (“alone”) in
Romans 3:28 to emphasize justification by faith. He argued that a word-
for-word translation would be incomprehensible and that his choices
conveyed the original meaning more effectively. 

Examples from Munday’s Book:

• William Tyndale: An English theologian and translator,
Tyndale was executed for heresy after his English translation of the
Bible was deemed divergent from accepted interpretations. 
• Étienne Dolet: A French humanist, Dolet was condemned for
adding the phrase “rien du tout” (“nothing at all”) in his translation of
Plato’s dialogues, leading to accusations of blasphemy. 

Key Takeaways:
• Shift in Translation Philosophy: The Humanist and
Reformation movements marked a shift from literal translations to
those capturing the original text’s meaning and style, promoting clarity
and accessibility.
• Linguistic and Cultural Impact: These movements influenced
translation strategies, making texts more relatable to contemporary
audiences and challenging traditional linguistic norms.
In summary, Humanism and the Protestant Reformation were
instrumental in transforming translation practices, emphasizing
meaning over literalness and making literature more accessible to the
broader public.

FIDELITY,SPIRIT AND TRUTH:

1. Fidelity in Translation
• Definition:
Fidelity in translation refers to how closely the translation adheres to
the source text in terms of meaning, structure, and wording. A
translation is considered faithful if it accurately represents the original
content without introducing significant changes, omissions, or
additions.
• Explanation:
Fidelity ensures that the original message and intent are preserved,
which is particularly important in contexts like legal or scientific
translations where accuracy is critical. While maintaining fidelity, the
translator must still ensure that the translation is grammatically correct
in the target language.
• Example:
• English: “The contract stipulates that payments must be
made within 30 days.”
• Urdu: “ ‫ دن کے اندر کی جانی‬30 ‫معاہدے میں کہا گیا ہے کہ ادائیگیاں‬
‫( ”چاہئیں۔‬Muaahiday mein kaha gaya hai ke adaigiyan 30 din ke andar ki
jani chahiyein.)
• Analysis: The Urdu translation is faithful to the English
source, preserving the key legal terms and meaning without deviation.
This example shows a high fidelity translation, ensuring that the legal
stipulations remain intact.

2. Spirit in Translation
• Definition:
Spirit in translation refers to conveying the emotional tone, intent, and
cultural nuances of the original text, even if it requires adjusting words
or structure to fit the target language. It focuses on capturing the
essence and feeling of the text, not necessarily the exact wording.
• Explanation:
When translating literary or expressive works such as poetry or fiction,
the spirit of the text is often more important than maintaining exact
words. The translator may choose to adapt expressions, metaphors, or
idioms in order to evoke a similar response in the target language.
• Example:
• English: “He felt on top of the world after receiving the
news.”
• Urdu: “‫( ”خبریں سن کر وہ بہت خوش ہوا۔‬Khabrain sun kar woh
bohot khush hua.)
• Analysis: While the phrase “on top of the world” might be an
idiom in English, the Urdu translation conveys the same emotional
feeling (“very happy”) in a culturally relevant way. The spirit of the
phrase is maintained even if the literal words are different.
⸻

3. Truth in Translation
• Definition:
Truth in translation refers to the accuracy and honesty of the
translation. It emphasizes that the meaning and intent of the source
text should be conveyed in the target text in a truthful and unbiased
manner. The translator should avoid distorting the original message or
omitting essential elements that alter the meaning.
• Explanation:
A truthful translation does not add, omit, or change the meaning of the
source text. It accurately represents facts, details, and events, which is
particularly important in historical, technical, and scientific texts where
precision is crucial.
• Example:
• English: “The research findings indicate a significant
correlation between the variables.”
• Urdu: “ ‫تحقیقی نتائج سے ظاہر ہوتا ہے کہ متغیرات کے درمیان ایک اہم‬
‫( ”تعلق ہے۔‬Tehqeeqi nataij se zahir hota hai ke mutaghireat ke darmiyan
aik aham talluq hai.)
• Analysis: The Urdu translation is truthful because it
accurately reflects the original scientific statement without changing or
distorting any of the factual information. The meaning remains
consistent with the original source.
Summary of Fidelity, Spirit, and Truth in Translation:
• Fidelity focuses on the exactness and accuracy of the
translation, ensuring that no significant changes occur.
• Spirit emphasizes emotion, tone, and the overall intent of
the original text, adapting words or expressions for the target culture.
• Truth is about honesty and accuracy, ensuring that the
translation remains faithful to the source text’s original message and
context.
CONCLUSION:
By balancing these three aspects, a translator can produce a high-
quality translation that not only preserves the meaning of the original
text but also captures its emotion, tone, and truthful representation in
a way that resonates with the target audience.

EARLY ATTEMPTS AT SYSTEMATIC TRANSLATION

THEORY:
Jeremy Munday’s Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and
Applications provides an insightful exploration into the early systematic
attempts at translation theory, focusing on figures like John Dryden,
Étienne Dolet, Alexander Fraser Tytler, and Yan Fu. Below is a detailed
yet simplified overview of each, incorporating relevant examples. 

1. John Dryden (1631–1700)

• Background: An English poet, translator, and critic, Dryden’s
perspectives on translation have significantly influenced translation
studies.
 • Translation Categories:
• Metaphrase: A literal, word-for-word translation. Dryden
viewed this approach as overly rigid, likening it to “dancing on ropes
with fettered legs.” 
• Paraphrase: A more flexible, sense-for-sense translation that
captures the original meaning while allowing for some adaptation.
• Imitation: A free adaptation where the translator reimagines
the original work, potentially altering both words and meaning. Dryden
cautioned that this method could betray the original author’s intent.
• Example: In translating Virgil’s Aeneid, Dryden aimed to
balance fidelity to the original text with the natural flow of English,
striving to “make Virgil speak such English as he would himself have
spoken, if he had been born in England.” 

2. Étienne Dolet (1509–1546)

• Background: A French scholar and printer, Dolet was among
the first to articulate principles of translation.
• Five Principles of Translation:
1. Understanding the Original: The translator must fully grasp
the author’s meaning, clarifying any ambiguities.
2. Proficiency in Both Languages: A deep knowledge of both
the source and target languages is essential to preserve the original’s
majesty.
3. Avoiding Word-for-Word Translation: Literal translations
often fail to convey the original sense; thus, they should be avoided.
 4. Steering Clear of Unnatural Forms: Using overly complex or
Latinate expressions can obscure meaning.
5. Ensuring Eloquence: The translation should be fluent and
natural, avoiding awkwardness. 
• Example: Dolet emphasized that a translator should not only
understand the original text but also render it in a manner that feels
natural and elegant in the target language.

3. Alexander Fraser Tytler (1747–1813)

• Background: A Scottish lawyer, scholar, and writer, Tytler’s
essay is among the earliest systematic studies of translation. 
• Three Laws of Translation:
1. Complete Transcript of Ideas: The translation should fully
convey the ideas of the original work. 
2. Correspondence of Style: The style and manner of writing
should mirror that of the original. 
3. Ease of Composition: The translation should read smoothly,
akin to the original composition.
• Example: Tytler suggested that a translator should “adopt
the very soul of his author,” capturing both the content and the spirit of
the original work. 

4. Yan Fu (1854–1921)
 • Background: A Chinese scholar and translator, Yan Fu played
a pivotal role in introducing Western ideas to China.
• Three Difficulties in Translation:
1. Faithfulness (Xìn): Ensuring the translation accurately
represents the original meaning.
2. Expressiveness (Dá): Capturing the style and tone of the
original work. 
3. Elegance (Yǎ): Rendering the translation in a refined and
graceful manner.
• Example: In his preface to the translation of Thomas
Huxley’s Evolution and Ethics, Yan Fu acknowledged these three
challenges, emphasizing the need to balance them in translation. 

These early theorists laid foundational principles that continue to

influence translation practices and studies today, highlighting the
balance between accuracy, style, and cultural adaptation.

ROMAN JAKOBSON’S THEORIES OF

LINGUITIC EQUIVALENCE AND
TRANSLATION:
Roman Jakobson, a structuralist linguist, talks about three types
of translation: intralingual (within the same language),
interlingual (between different languages), and intersemiotic
(between different sign systems like language and pictures). In
this context, he focuses on interlingual translation, which is
about translating between two languages, like English and
Russian.

Jakobson draws on Ferdinand de Saussure’s theory of language.

Saussure made a distinction between langue (the language
system) and parole (individual utterances). He also said that a
sign in language consists of two parts: the signifier (the word or
sound) and the signified (the concept or meaning). For example,
the word “cheese” is the signifier, and the idea of “food made
from pressed curds” is the signified.

Jakobson emphasizes that language signs are arbitrary, meaning

the word “cheese” could have been something completely
different, like “bread” or “soup.” He also explains that we can
understand the meaning of words, even if we’ve never
experienced the things they refer to, like “ambrosia” or “nectar”
from Greek myths.

Jakobson then discusses equivalence in meaning between words

in different languages. He explains that there is rarely a perfect
match between words in different languages. For instance, the
Russian word syr is not exactly the same as the English
“cheese,” because syr doesn’t include the concept of “cottage
cheese,” which has a separate word in Russian: tvarog. This
shows that languages partition the world differently, which is
important in translation.

Jakobson talks about the concept of linguistic universalism (the

idea that all languages share a similar way of thinking) versus
linguistic relativity (the idea that different languages shape how
we think). An example of linguistic relativity is the Sapir-Whorf
hypothesis, which suggests that language influences thought—
like the claim that Eskimos have more words for snow because
they perceive it differently. Jakobson argues that translation is
still possible because languages can express the same ideas,
even if the words are different.

Jakobson concludes that translation is not about perfect

equivalence, but about finding a way to convey the message,
even if the exact words differ. For example, translating “cottage
cheese” from English into Russian might involve using a term
that represents the concept as a whole, even if it involves
different words in each language. Jakobson believes that
translation is about adequacy (how well the message is
conveyed) rather than perfect word-for-word equivalence.

Examples of interlingual differences in translation:

1. Gender differences:
• In French, the word for “honey” is “miel”, masculine,
but in Spanish, it’s “miel” too, but not marked as masculine.
 2. Aspect (completeness of action):
• In Russian, the verb “to eat” has different forms
depending on whether the action is completed or not (like “ate”
vs. “eating”).
3. Kinship terms:
• In German, “Geschwister” means “siblings,” but in
English, it’s common to say “brothers and sisters.” In Chinese,
they specify the relationships even more, such as “eldest
brother” or “younger sister.”

These differences show that while languages may not always

have the exact same words or structures, the concepts can still be
translated, even if the words change.

Eugene Nida’s Theory of Translation:

Eugene Nida’s theory of translation developed through
his extensive work in translating the Bible starting from
the 1940s. He worked on training inexperienced
translators and developing methods for translating texts
accurately. Nida’s theory became formalized in the 1960s,
with two key publications: “Toward a Science of
Translating” (1964) and “The Theory and Practice of
Translation” (co-authored with Charles Taber in 1969).
Nida’s approach sought to make Bible translation more
scientific by integrating concepts from linguistics. He
used ideas from semantics (the meaning of words) and
pragmatics (the use of language in context) as well as
Chomsky’s generative grammar, which focuses on
sentence structures and rules.

Chomsky’s Influence on Nida:

Nida was influenced by Noam Chomsky’s generative-
transformational grammar, which breaks down sentences
into layers of meaning. According to Chomsky, sentences
have a deep structure (the core meaning) and a surface
structure (the way the sentence is expressed).
Transformations are used to convert one sentence form
into another (e.g., from active to passive).

For example:
• Active: The wolf attacked the deer.
• Passive: The deer was attacked by the wolf.

Nida adapted this model by focusing on breaking down

the source text (ST) into its basic structures (kernel
sentences). These structures are then translated and
restructured in the target text (TT). This process follows
three stages:
1. Analysis (understanding the source text),
2. Transfer (transferring meaning),
3. Restructuring (adjusting the translation into the
target language).

Nida’s Three-Stage System of Translation

Nida developed a method for translating text in a

systematic manner:
1. Literal Transfer: This is a word-for-word
translation.
2. Minimal Transfer: This is a more flexible
translation, maintaining the meaning but adjusting to the
target language.
3. Literary Transfer: This is the final translation
stage, where the translation becomes more natural and
idiomatic in the target language.

Example: A Bible verse, “There came a man, sent from

God, whose name was John.”
 • Literal Transfer: There became man, sent from
God, name to him John.
• Minimal Transfer: There came a man, sent from
God, whose name was John.
• Literary Transfer: A man named John was sent
by God.

This demonstrates how Nida’s system transitions from a

rigid structure to a more natural expression in the target
language.

The Nature of Meaning: Semantics and Pragmatics

Nida’s translation theory involves understanding meaning

at multiple levels:
1. Linguistic Meaning: The meaning derived from
the structure of the language. For instance, “his house”
means the house belongs to him, while “his kindness”
means he is kind.
2. Referential Meaning: The direct, dictionary
meaning of a word. For example, “son” refers to a male
child.
 3. Emotive Meaning: The emotional or connotative
meaning a word can have. For example, in the phrase
“Don’t worry about that, son,” the word “son” may
express affection.

Techniques for Understanding Meaning

Nida uses several techniques to analyze words:

• Componential Analysis: Breaking down words
into components. For example, words for family members
(father, mother, etc.) can be analyzed based on their sex,
generation, and lineage.

Example of componential analysis:

• Father: Male, First generation, Direct lineage.
• Grandfather: Male, First generation, Direct
lineage.
• Aunt: Female, Same generation, Indirect lineage.

Formal and Dynamic Equivalence

Nida introduced two types of equivalence:
1. Formal Equivalence: This type of translation
focuses on maintaining the structure of the source
language (SL). It’s very literal and often used in academic
or legal translations. For example, translating a technical
manual might require formal equivalence.
2. Dynamic Equivalence: This type of translation
focuses on conveying the meaning and effect of the
original text in a natural and understandable way in the
target language (TL). This is more common in translating
literary works or religious texts, where the emphasis is on
making the message resonate with the reader in the target
culture.

Example of dynamic equivalence:

• ST: “Give one another a hearty handshake.”
• TT: “Greet each other with a warm hug.”

The idea is to match the effect on the receptor (the person

reading the translation) with the original text’s effect on
its audience. In dynamic equivalence, naturalness in the
target language is key.
Criticism and Debate

Despite the success of Nida’s theory, it has faced some

criticisms:
• Subjectivity of Equivalence: Critics argue that
achieving an “equivalent effect” is subjective, as it’s hard
to ensure that different cultures will react the same way to
a translation.
• Cultural Differences: Some argue that Nida’s
approach doesn’t always account for the cultural context
sufficiently. For instance, translating cultural expressions
or idioms might lose some original meaning.

Despite these criticisms, Nida’s work is regarded as

foundational in translation studies. He emphasized the
importance of context and audience in the translation
process, making his method particularly useful for
translators dealing with culturally diverse texts.

Conclusion
Nida’s work shifted translation theory from being based
on word-for-word equivalence to focusing on achieving
the same effect on the reader. His focus on dynamic
equivalence paved the way for a more reader-oriented
approach in translation, which remains influential in
translation studies today.

NEWMARK:SEMANTICS AND
COMMUNICATIVE TRANSLATION:
Peter Newmark, a prominent figure in translation studies,
introduced the concepts of semantic and communicative
translation to address the challenges inherent in
translating texts from one language to another. These
approaches offer distinct methodologies for translators,
each with its own objectives and applications.
Semantic Translation
• Definition:
Semantic translation emphasizes fidelity to the source
language (SL) text, striving to preserve its exact meaning,
nuances, and stylistic elements. This method focuses on
the author’s original intent and the semantic content of the
message.
• Characteristics:
• Author-Centric: Prioritizes the author’s thought
processes and original expression.
 • Detailed and Precise: Aims to replicate the SL’s
nuances, often resulting in a more literal translation.
• Potentially Less Fluent: May produce text that
feels less natural in the target language due to its close
adherence to the original structure and wording.
• Example:
• Original (English): “The contract stipulates that
payments must be made within 30 days.”
• Semantic Translation (Urdu): “ ‫معاہدے میں کہا گیا‬
‫ دن کے اندر کی جانی چاہئیں۔‬30 ‫( ”ہے کہ ادائیگیاں‬Muaahiday
mein kaha gaya hai ke adaigiyan 30 din ke andar ki jani
chahiyein.)
• Analysis: This translation is faithful to the
English source, maintaining the key legal terms and
structure without deviation.

2. Communicative Translation
• Definition:
Communicative translation focuses on conveying the
message and effect of the source text in a manner that is
natural and easily understood by the target language (TL)
audience. This approach prioritizes the reader’s
experience and comprehension.
 • Characteristics:
• Reader-Centric: Concentrates on the target
audience’s expectations and cultural context.
• Natural and Fluent: Produces text that reads
smoothly and idiomatically in the TL.
• Adaptative: May involve rephrasing, cultural
substitutions, or omissions to achieve clarity and impact.
• Example:
• Original (English): “The contract stipulates that
payments must be made within 30 days.”
• Communicative Translation (Urdu): “ ‫معاہدے میں‬
‫ دن کے اندر مکمل کی جانی چاہئیں۔‬30 ‫”یہ کہا گیا ہے کہ ادائیگیاں‬
(Muaahiday mein yeh kaha gaya hai ke adaigiyan 30 din
ke andar mukammal ki jani chahiyein.)
• Analysis: The translation focuses on readability
and clarity, adjusting the expression in a way that feels
more natural to the Urdu-speaking audience.
3.Differences Between Semantic and Communicative
Translation
• Focus:
• Semantic: Emphasizes accuracy and fidelity to
the SL’s meaning and form.
 • Communicative: Emphasizes the effect on the
TL reader, ensuring the message is clear and engaging.
• Usage:
• Semantic: Suitable for literary works, legal
documents, and texts where precise meaning is crucial.
• Communicative: Ideal for advertisements, user
manuals, and materials aimed at a broad audience.
• Translation Approach:
• Semantic: Tends to be more literal, preserving
original structures and expressions.
• Communicative: Involves adaptation, rephrasing,
and cultural adjustments to resonate with the TL
audience.

4. Application of Semantic and Communicative

Translation
• Semantic Translation:
Legal contracts often require semantic translation to
ensure that every term and condition is accurately
conveyed, preserving the original’s legal intent and
specificity.
• Communicative Translation:
Marketing slogans are typically translated
communicatively to evoke the same emotional response
in the TL audience as the original, even if it means
altering the wording significantly.
CONCLUSION:
Peter Newmark’s distinction between semantic and
communicative translation provides valuable guidance for
translators, enabling them to choose the most appropriate
method based on the text’s purpose, audience, and
context. By understanding these approaches, translators
can effectively bridge linguistic and cultural gaps,
delivering messages that are both accurate and impactful.

VINAY AND DARBELNET’S MODEL:

Vinay and Darbelnet’s model of translation, developed in
the 1950s, categorizes translation strategies into two main
types: direct translation and oblique translation. These
strategies are designed to help translators choose the most
suitable approach based on the specific text, its purpose,
and the relationship between the source language (SL)
and target language (TL).
The primary focus of their model is to create a systematic
way of translating, emphasizing the translator’s role in
selecting the method that best conveys the meaning, tone,
and nuances of the source text while considering the
linguistic and cultural differences between languages.

Direct Translation Strategies

Direct translation strategies involve minimal changes to

the source text when transferring it into the target
language. These strategies are most appropriate when
there is a close relationship between the two languages,
and the message is straightforward. The three main direct
translation strategies are literal translation, borrowing, and
calque.

1. Literal Translation
• Definition: Literal translation, also known as
“word-for-word” translation, is the process of transferring
the exact meaning of words or phrases from the source
language to the target language without changing the
structure or form of the original text.
• Example:
• Source Text (English): “Two and two makes
four.”
• Target Text (Urdu): “‫( ”دو اور دو چار بنتے ہیں۔‬Do
aur do chaar bante hain.)
• Analysis: In this case, each word in the English
sentence is directly translated into the Urdu sentence,
maintaining both the structure and meaning of the
original.

2. Borrowing
• Definition: Borrowing involves taking a word or
expression directly from the source language and
incorporating it into the target language without any
translation. This is common for proper nouns, brand
names, or specialized terms that don’t have an equivalent
in the target language.
• Example:
• Source Text (English): “I am from the city of
Milwaukee, which is in the southeast corner of the state.”
 • Target Text (Urdu): “ ‫ جو‬،‫میں میلواکی شہر سے ہوں‬
‫( ”ریاست کے جنوب مشرقی کونے میں واقع ہے۔‬Main Milwaukee
sheher se hoon, jo riyaasat ke junub mashriqi konay mein
waqia hai.)
• Analysis: The name “Milwaukee” is borrowed
directly into Urdu since there is no equivalent term in
Urdu for this American city name.

3. Calque (Loan Translation)

• Definition: A calque involves translating a
phrase or expression from the source language into the
target language by analyzing its individual components
and recreating them in the target language.
• Example:
• Source Text (English): “Skyscraper”
• Target Text (Urdu): “‫”آسمان چھو لینے والی عمارت‬
(Aasman choo lene wali imarat.)
• Analysis: Instead of borrowing the term
“skyscraper” directly, a descriptive translation is used in
Urdu, which literally means “building that touches the
sky,” accurately conveying the meaning.
⸻

Oblique Translation Strategies

Oblique translation strategies are used when a direct

translation is not possible due to significant linguistic,
cultural, or conceptual differences between the source and
target languages. These strategies involve more
manipulation of the original text to ensure that the
meaning is conveyed clearly and naturally in the target
language. The four main oblique translation strategies are
transposition, modulation, equivalence, and adaptation.

4. Transposition
• Definition: Transposition involves changing the
grammatical structure of the sentence without altering its
meaning. This might involve changing word order, verb
tense, or parts of speech to make the sentence sound
natural in the target language.
• Example:
• Source Text (English): “He writes neatly.”
 • Target Text (Urdu): “‫”وہ صاف ستھرا لکھتا ہے۔‬
(Woh saaf suthra likhta hai.)
• Analysis: The adverb “neatly” in the English
sentence is transposed into an adjective phrase “ ‫صاف‬
‫( ”ستھرا‬saaf suthra) in Urdu, which sounds more natural.

5. Modulation
• Definition: Modulation refers to a shift in
perspective or point of view in the translation to make the
sentence more meaningful or natural in the target
language. This often involves a change in the form of
expression or a rewording of an idea.
• Example:
• Source Text (English): “It’s easy to understand.”
• Target Text (Urdu): “‫( ”سمجھنا آسان ہے۔‬Samajhna
aasan hai.)
• Analysis: The sentence is modulated to sound
more natural in Urdu. While the structure of the sentence
is different, the meaning is conveyed in a way that is more
comfortable for native Urdu speakers.

6. Equivalence
 • Definition: Equivalence involves translating an
idiomatic or culturally specific expression into the target
language using a similar idiomatic or culturally
appropriate expression that delivers the same impact, even
though the literal meaning may differ.
• Example:
• Source Text (English): “He is an idiot.”
• Target Text (Urdu): “‫( ”وہ بے وقوف ہے۔‬Woh
bewakoof hai.)
• Analysis: The expression “He is an idiot” is
translated into Urdu as “‫( ”وہ بے وقوف ہے‬woh bewakoof
hai), which is an idiomatic way of calling someone
foolish in Urdu, equivalent to the English expression.

7. Adaptation
• Definition: Adaptation involves changing
cultural references or other elements from the source text
to make them more familiar and relevant to the target
audience. This is often used for elements like jokes,
sayings, or cultural allusions.
• Example:
• Source Text (English): “They are without
doubt.”
 • Target Text (Urdu): “‫( ”وہ بال شبہ ہیں۔‬Woh bila
shuba hain.)
• Analysis: The phrase is adapted into a more
familiar expression for Urdu speakers, ensuring the target
audience can relate to the meaning without a loss of
cultural context.
CONCLUSION:
Vinay and Darbelnet’s model is a useful framework for
translators to understand the various strategies available
for translating between languages. By offering both direct
and oblique translation options, their model ensures that
translations are both accurate and culturally appropriate,
balancing the preservation of meaning with the natural
flow of the target language. This model remains
foundational in translation studies, helping translators
make informed decisions based on the specifics of the text
and the linguistic and cultural context in which it is being
translated.

SUPPLEMANTARY TRANSLATION:
the term supplementary translation procedures refers to
certain strategies that translators use to handle specific
challenges when translating a text. These procedures are
used when the standard translation methods (like direct
translation) don’t fully convey the meaning or the style of
the original text in the target language. These
supplementary procedures help make the translation more
accurate and natural for the target audience.

Some key supplementary translation procedures

mentioned in Munday’s book are:

1. Compensation
• What it is: Compensation happens when a loss in
one part of the translation is made up for in another part.
For example, if the original text uses a wordplay or a
cultural reference that cannot be directly translated, the
translator can make up for it by adding something else in
the translation.
• Example in English/Urdu:
• Source Text (English): “He couldn’t hold back
his laughter.”
• Target Text (Urdu): “‫”وہ ہنسی روک نہیں سکا۔‬
• Explanation: If there were a wordplay or cultural
reference that couldn’t be directly translated,
compensation might be used in another part of the text.
2. Explication
• What it is: Explication involves adding extra
explanation or information to make the meaning clearer
when there is no direct equivalent in the target language.
This is especially used when the concept or term in the
source text might not be familiar to the target language
audience.
• Example in English/Urdu:
• Source Text (English): “He got a ‘red carpet’
welcome.”
• Target Text (Urdu): “ ‫اسے وہ خوش آمدید کہا گیا جیسا‬
‫”کسی اہم شخصیت کو کہا جاتا ہے۔‬
• Explanation: Here, the term “red carpet” is
explained to the Urdu-speaking audience because they
might not be familiar with the exact meaning of this
cultural term.

3. Modulation
• What it is: Modulation means changing the
perspective or viewpoint in the translation to make the
sentence sound more natural in the target language. This
could involve changing the sentence structure or
switching the way the message is conveyed.
• Example in English/Urdu:
• Source Text (English): “I can’t wait for the
event.”
• Target Text (Urdu): “ ‫مجھے اس تقریب کا انتظار نہیں‬
‫”ہو رہا۔‬
• Explanation: The structure is changed so the
phrase sounds more natural in Urdu, and the sense of
excitement is conveyed in a way that fits the cultural
context.

4. Transposition
• What it is: Transposition is when the
grammatical structure is changed in the target language.
This might be done to make the translation sound more
fluent and natural, especially when a direct translation
would sound awkward.
• Example in English/Urdu:
• Source Text (English): “She’s fluent in French.”
• Target Text (Urdu): “‫”وہ فرانسیسی زبان میں ماہر ہے۔‬
 • Explanation: The sentence is transposed from
“fluent in French” to “‫( ”ماہر ہے‬proficient in French),
which sounds more natural in Urdu.

5. Substitution
• What it is: Substitution is when a translator
replaces one element of the source language with a
different one that carries the same meaning but is more
appropriate for the target language. This can include
changing an idiomatic expression to make it fit better in
the target language.
• Example in English/Urdu:
• Source Text (English): “He’s a couch potato.”
• Target Text (Urdu): “‫”وہ سست اور غیر فعال ہے۔‬
• Explanation: Instead of using the phrase “couch
potato” (which may not have the same impact in Urdu),
the translator replaces it with a descriptive phrase that
conveys the same idea.

Why Are These Procedures Important?

These supplementary procedures help ensure that the
meaning and nuances of the source text are maintained
while adapting the text to fit the target language’s
structure, culture, and idiomatic expressions. They are
necessary when a direct translation wouldn’t work well,
either because the concept is unfamiliar, culturally
specific, or grammatically awkward.

LEVELS OF TRANSLATION:
The concept of “levels of translation” is addressed as a way to
describe the different types or “layers” of translation involved
when transferring meaning from the source language to the
target language. Munday emphasizes that translation isn’t just
about word-for-word conversion; it involves multiple levels of
meaning, context, and cultural interpretation.

1. Linguistic Level
• Definition: The linguistic level focuses on the words,
grammar, and sentence structure of the text. This level deals with the
translation of individual lexical items (words) and syntactic structures. It
is the basic, surface level of translation, where the focus is on
accurately transferring the meaning of words and sentences without
losing the original message.
• Example:
 • Source Text (English): “She likes playing tennis.”
• Target Text (Urdu): “‫( ”وہ ٹینس کھیلنا پسند کرتی ہے۔‬Woh tennis
khelna pasand karti hai.)
• Explanation: Here, the translation maintains the
grammatical structure and vocabulary of the English sentence.

2. Textual Level
• Definition: The textual level deals with the coherence and
cohesion of the translated text. It is concerned with how sentences are
connected and how the entire text flows. This level ensures that the
translation is not just a collection of individual sentences but a well-
structured, cohesive text that makes sense as a whole.
• Example:
• Source Text (English): “It’s a beautiful day outside. Let’s go
for a walk.”
• Target Text (Urdu): “ ‫ ہم سیر کے‬،‫آج باہر بہت اچھا موسم ہے۔ چلو‬
‫( ”لیے چلتے ہیں۔‬Aaj bahar bohat acha mausam hai. Chalo, hum sair ke liye
chalte hain.)
• Explanation: The connection between the sentences is
preserved in Urdu, and the translation reads fluently as a continuous
thought, maintaining coherence.

3. Pragmatic Level
• Definition: The pragmatic level involves understanding the
intended meaning and purpose of the original text, taking into account
the cultural, social, and situational context. Translators at this level
must ensure that the message of the source text is appropriately
conveyed in a way that resonates with the target audience, considering
cultural differences and communication norms.
• Example:
• Source Text (English): “It’s a piece of cake!”
• Target Text (Urdu): “‫( ”!یہ بہت آسان ہے‬Yeh bohat aasan hai!)
• Explanation: While the phrase “piece of cake” is an idiomatic
expression in English, it might not make sense directly in Urdu. So, the
translator replaces it with an idiom or expression that conveys the
same meaning (“very easy”).

4. Cultural Level
• Definition: The cultural level refers to the need to consider
the cultural differences between the source and target languages.
When translating, certain terms, expressions, or references may be
deeply rooted in the source culture, and the translator must find
equivalent expressions or make adjustments for the target culture.
• Example:
• Source Text (English): “He’s the Big Cheese.”
• Target Text (Urdu): “‫( ”وہ بڑا آدمی ہے۔‬Woh bara aadmi hai.)
• Explanation: The phrase “Big Cheese” is an English idiomatic
expression meaning an important person. Since this might not be
understood in the same way in Urdu, the translator adapts it to a
culturally equivalent phrase, “‫( ”بڑا آدمی‬important person).
CONCLUSION:
In Munday’s discussion, these levels are presented as interconnected
layers that affect how translation should be approached. It’s not just
about translating words or sentences but about understanding the full
meaning at different levels, from individual language elements (words)
to the broader cultural and contextual considerations.

CATFORD’S TRANSLATION SHIFT:

According to Catford, translation involves certain “shifts” or changes
that occur when transferring meaning from the source language (SL) to
the target language (TL). These shifts are necessary because no two
languages are exactly equivalent, and often, adjustments must be made
in the translation process.
Translation shifts refer to the departures from formal correspondence
between the source and the target language. These shifts occur at
various levels, including grammatical, lexical, and cultural adjustments,
and help preserve meaning and naturalness in the target language.

Types of Translation Shifts

Catford categorized translation shifts into two main types: Level shifts
and Category shifts.

1. Level Shifts
 • Definition: A level shift occurs when a feature of the source
language at one level of linguistic structure is translated into a different
level in the target language. For example, a grammatical structure in
the source language might be translated into a lexical unit in the target
language.
• Example:
• Source Text (English): “She is a teacher.”
• Target Text (Urdu): “‫( ”وہ ایک استاد ہے۔‬Woh aik ustad hai.)
• Explanation: Here, the grammatical structure in English (“is a
teacher”) is shifted to a noun phrase in Urdu (“‫ )”ایک استاد‬while
maintaining the intended meaning.

2. Category Shifts
• Definition: Category shifts involve changes within the
syntactic structure or category of the words in the source language.
Catford identified four types of category shifts:
• Structure-shift: A shift in the grammatical structure between
languages.
• Class-shift: A shift from one part of speech to another.
• Unit-shift: A shift in the unit of translation (from words to
phrases, for instance).
• Intra-system shift: A shift within a system of the same
language (e.g., singular to plural).
• Examples of Category Shifts:
• Structure-shift:
 • Source Text (English): “I have a book.”
• Target Text (Urdu): “‫( ”میرے پاس ایک کتاب ہے۔‬Mere paas aik
kitaab hai.)
• Explanation: The structure in English (“I have”) changes in
Urdu, where the phrase “‫( ”میرے پاس‬literally “with me”) is used instead
of the direct equivalent “have.”
• Class-shift:
• Source Text (English): “She walked slowly.”
• Target Text (Urdu): “‫( ”وہ آہستہ آہستہ چل رہی تھی۔‬Woh aahista
aahista chal rahi thi.)
• Explanation: The adjective “slowly” in English changes to the
adverbial phrase “‫( ”آہستہ آہستہ‬aahista aahista), which is a form of
adaptation to fit the sentence structure in Urdu.
• Unit-shift:
• Source Text (English): “He gave her a ring.”
• Target Text (Urdu): “‫( ”اس نے اسے ایک انگوٹھی دی۔‬Us ne usay
aik angothi di.)
• Explanation: Here, the unit of translation shifts from a
simple noun phrase “a ring” in English to the unit “‫( ”ایک انگوٹھی‬a single
ring) in Urdu.
• Intra-system shift:
• Source Text (English): “The cat is on the mat.”
• Target Text (Urdu): “‫( ”بلی چٹائی پر ہے۔‬Billi chitai par hai.)
 • Explanation: In English, there is a choice between singular
and plural, but in Urdu, the word “‫( ”چٹائی‬chitai, mat) can be used in
both singular and plural forms, depending on the context. This is an
intra-system shift because it’s a change within the language’s system.

CONCLUSION:
In summary, Catford’s Translation Shifts are key to understanding the
complexities of translation. They explain how and why changes must
occur when transferring meaning from the source language to the
target language, making translation a dynamic and nuanced process.
These shifts—level shifts and category shifts—help translators manage
linguistic and cultural differences effectively.

Text Types in Munday’s Book:

Munday refers to the classification of texts based on their function,
focusing on the three main types proposed by Katharina Reiss (who is
often cited in translation studies). These text types are:
1. Informative Texts
2. Expressive Texts
3. Operative Texts

Each of these types presents different challenges for the translator, as

they serve different functions and require different methods of
translation to maintain the message’s integrity in the target language.
1. Informative Texts
• Definition: Informative texts are primarily designed to
inform or explain something to the reader. The purpose is to convey
factual information clearly and accurately without the need for
emotional involvement or persuasion.
• Examples: Texts like news reports, technical manuals,
scientific papers, and encyclopedias fall under this category.
• Translation Approach: These texts often require a semantic
translation approach, focusing on accuracy, clarity, and the faithful
transmission of factual content. The style and register of the original
are generally maintained, as long as it does not hinder the
understanding of the information.
• Example in English/Urdu:
• Source Text (English): “The Earth orbits the Sun.”
• Target Text (Urdu): “‫( ”زمین سورج کے گرد گھومتی ہے۔‬Zameen
sooraj ke gird ghoomti hai.)
• Explanation: The informative nature of this statement is
preserved in both languages with minimal change in structure or tone.

2. Expressive Texts
• Definition: Expressive texts focus on the expression of the
author’s personal feelings, thoughts, or creativity. These texts are
typically artistic or literary in nature, and their purpose is to evoke an
emotional or aesthetic response from the reader.
• Examples: Literary works, poetry, fiction, and personal
narratives.
 • Translation Approach: Translating expressive texts requires
attention to aesthetic and stylistic elements. Here, communicative
translation strategies might be employed to capture the emotional
tone, rhythm, and literary qualities, even if it requires some adaptation.
• Example in English/Urdu:
• Source Text (English): “The moon shone brightly over the
serene sea.”
• Target Text (Urdu): “ ‫چاند روشن تھا اور پرسکون سمندر پر اپنی‬
‫( ”روشنی ڈال رہا تھا۔‬Chaand roshan tha aur pursukoon samundar par apni
roshni daal raha tha.)
• Explanation: The translator has tried to maintain the
imagery and emotional tone of the English sentence in the Urdu
translation.

3. Operative Texts
• Definition: Operative texts are intended to influence or persuade
the reader to act in a certain way. These texts aim to bring about a
specific response from the reader, often related to changing attitudes,
behavior, or decisions.
• Examples: Advertisements, political speeches, legal
documents, and instructions.
• Translation Approach: Communicative translation is key in
translating operative texts. The translator needs to focus on the
intended effect on the audience, ensuring the translation maintains the
persuasive or influential nature of the original text.
• Example in English/Urdu:
 • Source Text (English): “Buy one, get one free!”
• Target Text (Urdu): “‫ دوسرا مفت پائیں‬،‫( ”!ایک خریدیں‬Aik
khareedain, doosra muft paain!)
• Explanation: The emphasis in the translation is on
maintaining the promotional tone and persuasive call to action.

CONCLUSION:
In summary, text type in Munday’s book refers to the classification of
texts based on their function (informative, expressive, or operative) and
how these functions impact the approach to translation. The translator
must consider the text’s purpose and target audience to select the
most appropriate translation strategy.