Riassunto esame Lingua e traduzione inglese, Prof. Zanotti Serenella, libro consigliato Fundamentals of translation , Colina

Lingua e Traduzione inglese 3

Libri: -Fundamentals of translation e -Jeremy Munday, Riassunto:

Who is Jeremy Munday?

Jeremy Munday is a leading scholar in Translation Studies, best known not for

creating a single translation theory, but for systematising and explaining the

field as a whole.

He is an academic interpreter of translation theories, not a prescriptive theorist.

What Munday DOES

Munday’s role is to:

map the development of Translation Studies

 explain why different theories emerged

 show how approaches relate to one another

 place theories in their historical and intellectual context

 Introducing Translation Studies

In his book , he:

organises the discipline into major approaches

 connects authors such as Nida, Toury, Vermeer, Venuti

 highlights strengths and limitations of each model



� He gives you the framework, not the rules.

What Munday does NOT do

� He does not propose a “Munday theory”

 � He does not tell you how to translate

 � He does not prescribe correct translation strategies

 “Munday’s theory”

So at the exam, saying is incorrect.

The correct formulation is:

“According to Munday, X theory argues that…”

Why Munday is central for your exam (Roma Tre)

Munday’s book is used because it:

provides a coherent overview of Translation Studies

 helps students understand connections between theories

 reflects the academic structure of the discipline



Examiners often follow:

Munday’s categories

 Munday’s progression of ideas



So thinking “like Munday” means:

showing theoretical awareness

 making connections

 avoiding simplistic answers



How to use Munday in an oral or written exam

You use Munday as:

a conceptual frame

 a reference voice

 a structuring tool



Example of a strong exam sentence:

“As outlined by Munday, early equivalence-based approaches focus on

linguistic correspondence, while later functional and descriptive models shift

attention to purpose, norms, and culture.”

This is exactly the level expected in a third-year L-12 exam.

One sentence to memorise (perfect answer)

“Jeremy Munday is a key scholar in Translation Studies whose work provides

a systematic overview of translation theories, contextualising them

historically and conceptually rather than proposing a single prescriptive

model.”

THE BIRTH AND SCOPE OF TRANSLATION STUDIES

1. Translation Studies as an academic discipline

For a long time, translation was not considered an autonomous academic

discipline.

Before the second half of the twentieth century, reflection on translation was:

fragmented

 scattered across different fields such as:

 linguistics

o literary criticism

o philosophy

o rhetoric

o

There was no unified object of study, no shared methodology, and no stable

terminology.

In Munday, this period is described as largely prescriptive: translation was discussed

should

mainly in terms of how it be done, often focusing on fidelity, correctness, or

(concept explained in Munday).

stylistic elegance

2. The emergence of Translation Studies in the 1970s

2.1 The turning point

According to Munday, Translation Studies emerges as a distinct discipline in the

1970s, with a decisive turning point marked by James S. Holmes and his 1972 paper

“The Name and Nature of Translation Studies” (concept explained in Munday).

From this moment on:

translation becomes a legitimate object of study in its own right

 how to translate well

scholars stop asking only

 what translation is, how it works, what role it plays in

and start asking and

 society

2.2 Holmes’s map of Translation Studies

Holmes proposes a structured map of the discipline, which Munday adopts as a

foundational framework.

Translation Studies is divided into:

Pure Translation Studies

 Applied Translation Studies



Pure Translation Studies includes:

theoretical studies (general principles of translation)

 descriptive studies (analysis of existing translations)



Applied Translation Studies includes:

translator training

 translation criticism

 translation aids (such as dictionaries and tools)



This map is essential because it shows that Translation Studies is:

systematic

 interdisciplinary

 (concept explained in Munday).

not limited to practice alone



3. What Translation Studies investigates

3.1 The object of study

Both manuals are very clear on one fundamental point:

Translation Studies does not study only “good translations”.

Its object of study includes:

the Source Text (ST)

 the Target Text (TT)

 the translation process

 the translator

 the socio-cultural context

 the norms and constraints governing translation



In Fundamentals of Translation, translation is explicitly described as a complex

activity involving:

linguistic factors

 cultural factors

 pragmatic factors

 (concept developed in Fundamentals of Translation) .

3.2 Translation as product, process, and function

A key conceptual distinction, strongly emphasized in Munday, is that translation can

be studied as:

1. Product

– the translated text itself

– its features, strategies, and textual characteristics

2. Process

– what happens during translation

– the cognitive and decision-making activity of the translator

3. Function

– the role the translated text plays in the target culture

– why it exists and for whom

This tripartite view breaks with earlier approaches that focused exclusively on the final

(concept explained in Munday).

text

4. Defining translation

4.1 Rejection of a mechanical view

Both books explicitly reject the idea that translation is:

word-for-word substitution

 a purely mechanical transfer between languages



In Fundamentals of Translation, translation is described as an activity based on:

interpretation

 selection

 decision-making



The translator does not simply replace linguistic units, but reconstructs meaning

(concept developed in Fundamentals of

within a new linguistic and cultural system

Translation).

4.2 Translation as meaning transfer

A central idea shared by both manuals is that translation involves meaning transfer,

not form transfer.

However, meaning is:

not fixed

 not stable

 context-dependent



This implies that:

there is no single “correct” translation

 multiple translations of the same ST may be valid, depending on context and

 purpose

Munday stresses that this insight is foundational for all later theoretical developments

(concept explained in Munday).

5. Source Text (ST) and Target Text (TT)

5.1 The ST–TT relationship

In modern Translation Studies, the relationship between ST and TT is not hierarchical

in absolute terms.

While the TT derives from the ST, it is not seen as:

a copy

 a secondary or inferior text



Instead, it is treated as a new text functioning within a different cultural system

(concept explained in Munday).

5.2 Autonomy of the Target Text

The TT must be:

coherent in itself

 appropriate for its target audience

 acceptable within the norms of the target culture



In Fundamentals of Translation, this autonomy is linked to the idea that a

translation may legitimately diverge from the ST if this helps fulfill its

(concept developed in Fundamentals of Translation)

communicative purpose .

6. Introducing the problem of equivalence

At this stage, both books introduce equivalence carefully, without fully theorizing it

yet.

Key point:

equivalence is not absolute

 it is relative and context-dependent



In Munday, equivalence is presented as the central concern of early theories, but

(concept explained in Munday).

already shown to be problematic

This prepares the ground for later theoretical developments.

7. The role of the translator

From the very beginning, both manuals emphasize that the translator is:

not neutral

 not invisible by nature

 not a passive mediator



Instead, the translator is a decision-maker who operates under:

linguistic constraints

 cultural expectations

 institutional and ideological pressures



In Fundamentals of Translation, this is a core idea: translation is defined by choice,

(concept developed in Fundamentals of

and every choice has consequences

Translation).

EQUIVALENCE-BASED APPROACHES

(early theories of translation and the centrality of equivalence)

1. Why equivalence becomes the starting point

In the early development of Translation Studies, translation is primarily understood as

a relation between two texts, the Source Text (ST) and the Target Text (TT).

The key question guiding the first theoretical models is:

How can the TT be considered equivalent to the ST?

According to Munday, this focus reflects the historical context in which translation

was still largely treated as a linguistic operation, concerned with how meaning is

(concept explained in Munday).

transferred from one language to another

As a result, equivalence becomes the core analytical concept of early translation

theory.

2. What “equivalence” means in early approaches

2.1 Equivalence as a relationship, not identity

Even in early theories, equivalence is not defined as identity between ST and TT.

Instead, equivalence is understood as:

a relationship

 established according to specific criteria

 between elements of two texts written in different languages



However, the underlying assumption remains that:

a translation should, in some way, correspond to its source



In Fundamentals of Translation, this is already problematized: absolute equivalence

(concept developed in

is impossible because languages encode meaning differently

Fundamentals of Translation).

2.2 Levels of equivalence

A crucial point emphasized in both books is that equivalence can operate at different

levels, such as:

lexical meaning

 grammatical structure

 textual organization

 communicative value



Early theories often attempt to identify which level should be prioritized, but they

(concept explained in

do not yet fully account for contextual and cultural variation

Munday).

3. Formal equivalence

3.1 Definition

Formal equivalence aims to preserve:

the linguistic form of the ST

 its grammatical structures

 its syntactic organization



The TT is expected to resemble the ST as closely as possible in terms of structure.

This approach is typically:

source-text-oriented

 concerned with fidelity to form



(Munday presents formal equivalence as historically influential but theoretically

limited.)

3.2 Limits of formal equivalence

According to Munday, strict formal equivalence often results in:

unnatural target texts

 reduced readability

 difficulty for the target reader



From the perspective of Fundamentals of Translation, formal equivalence fails to

account for:

pragmatic meaning

 contextual interpretation

 communicative effectiveness

 (concept developed in Fundamentals of Translation) .

4. Dynamic / functional equivalence (early shift)

4.1 Moving beyond form

In response to the limitations of formal equivalence, some theories begin to prioritize

effect over form.

The focus shifts to:

how the message is understood

 how the text functions for the reader

 (concept

This introduces a more reader-oriented conception of equivalence

explained in Munday).

4.2 Equivalence of effect

Dynamic or functional equivalence seeks to:

reproduce a similar response in the target audience

 even if this requires changes in form or structure



In Fundamentals of Translation, this is linked directly to the translator’s task:

assessing meaning in context

 deciding which aspects of meaning are most relevant

 (concept developed in Fundamentals of Translation) .

This marks an important transition:

from linguistic correspondence

 to communicative effectiveness



5. Meaning as the core of equivalence

5.1 Meaning over form

Both manuals stress that equivalence-based approaches increasingly recognize that:

form is secondary

 meaning is central



However, meaning itself is:

multifaceted

 context-dependent

 culturally embedded



This creates a theoretical tension: (concept explained in Munday).

if meaning is unstable, equivalence cannot be fixed

5.2 Translator’s interpretation

In Fundamentals of Translation, meaning transfer is explicitly described as

interpretative:

the translator selects one interpretation among many

 equivalence is therefore the result of a decision, not a given

 (concept developed in Fundamentals of Translation) .

This insight already undermines the idea of objective equivalence.

6. The role of the translator in equivalence-based theories

In equivalence-based approaches, the translator is primarily seen as:

a linguistic mediator

 responsible for identifying correspondences between languages



However, both books acknowledge that:

even in these models, the translator must choose

 and these choices affect the final text



In Fundamentals of Translation, this is framed as decision-making under

(concept developed in

constraints, a notion that will become central in later theories

Fundamentals of Translation).

7. Main limitations of equivalence-based approaches

According to Munday, equivalence-based approaches are limited because they:

focus almost exclusively on ST–TT relations

 neglect the target context

 ignore why translations are produced

 fail to explain variation across time and cultures



They are therefore insufficient to explain translation as a social and cultural

(concept explained in Munday).

practice

8. Why equivalence-based approaches still matter

A key exam point: these approaches are not rejected outright.

Both manuals agree that:

equivalence remains a useful analytical concept

 but it cannot function as the sole criterion for translation



In Fundamentals of Translation, equivalence is treated as:

one tool among many

 to be balanced against purpose, context, and audience

 (concept developed in Fundamentals of Translation) .

FUNCTIONAL APPROACHES AND SKOPOS THEORY

(the functional turn in Translation Studies)

1. Why functional approaches emerge

Functional approaches arise as a direct response to the limitations of equivalence-

based theories.

The core criticism is that earlier models:

focus too narrowly on ST–TT correspondence

 fail to explain why translations are produced

 overlook the context of use of the target text



As Munday explains, functionalism introduces a decisive shift in perspective:

translation should be analysed in terms of what it is meant to achieve in the target

context

(concept explained in Munday).

The guiding question becomes:

What is the purpose of this translation?

2. The concept of function in translation

2.1 Function of the target text

In functional approaches, every translation is seen as a purposeful communicative

act.

A translated text:

is produced for a specific audience

 in a specific situation

 with a specific communicative aim



This means that:

the same Source Text can legitimately generate different translations

 depending on the intended function of the Target Text



In Fundamentals of Translation, this idea is framed in practical terms:

the translator must first identify the communicative goal before making linguistic

decisions

(concept developed in Fundamentals of Translation) .

2.2 Shift from source-orientation to target-orientation

Functionalism marks a clear move:

away from strict source-text orientation

 toward target-text orientation



This does not mean that the ST becomes irrelevant, but that it is no longer the sole

authority guiding translation choices

(concept explained in Munday).

3. Skopos theory: core principles

3.1 Meaning of “Skopos”

The term Skopos comes from Greek and means “purpose” or “aim”.

According to Skopos theory:

the purpose of the translation determines the translation strategies

This theory is mainly associated with:

Hans J. Vermeer

 with early contributions by Katharina Reiss



(Munday presents Skopos theory as the most influential functionalist model.)

3.2 The Skopos rule

The fundamental rule of Skopos theory is:

A translation is adequate if it fulfils its intended purpose in the target context.

This implies that:

fidelity to the ST is not absolute

 different purposes justify different translation solutions



A translation may therefore:

diverge significantly from the ST

 and still be considered successful

 (concept explained in Munday).

4. Adequacy instead of e