1. What is headline?

19. Can we keep customs and traditions in translation? In what ways?

Yes, customs and traditions can be kept in translation. Translators must strive to maintain the cultural connotations of a language to ensure that the text they are translating accurately reflects the original sense of culture, customs and traditions. This means that words that have special meanings in one culture may need to be translated differently in another context. Additionally, syntax and idioms should remain similar in the source and target languages as much as possible so that phrases, references and expressions are not lost or distorted during the translation process. Finally, careful consideration should be given to any literal translations which may produce inappropriate comments about a person's culture or heritage when translated into another language
20. What is kept in the first ,second third types of equivalence?
Equivalence consists of the concept of sameness and similarity; it has the same or a similar effect or meaning in translation. Nida argued that there are two different types of equivalence, namely formal equivalence—which is referred to as formal correspondence—and dynamic equivalence. Formal correspondence ‘focuses attention on the message itself, in both form and content’, unlike dynamic equivalence which is based upon ‘the principle of equivalent effect’. Formal correspondence consists of a TL item which represents the closest equivalent of a SL word or phrase. Nida and Taber make it clear that there are not always formal equivalents between language pairs. They suggest that these formal equivalents should be used wherever possible if the translation aims at achieving formal rather than dynamic equivalence.


Dynamic equivalence is defined as a translation principle according to which a translator seeks to translate the meaning of the original in such a way that the TL wording will trigger the same impact on the TC audience as the original wording did upon the ST audience. Roman Jakobson introduced the notion of ‘equivalence in difference’. He suggests three kinds of translation: • Intralingual (within one language, i.e. rewording or paraphrase) • Interlingual (between two languages) • Intersemiotic (between sign systems) Jakobson claims that, in the case of interlingual translation, the translator makes use of synonyms in order to get the ST message across. This means that in interlingual translations there is no full equivalence between code units. According to his theory, ‘translation involves two equivalent messages in two different codes