Theory of Translation 1 Introduction

2.11 Theories of ‘Shift’ in Translation
In the traditional view of translation, original texts were believed to be sacred and 
their translations were condemned to be sacrilegious. It was based on the romantic 
notion of literature. It views the author as a divine ‘creator’ who possesses ‘genius’ 
for ‘creation’ which is original, unique, once and for all and hence, sacred. In the light 
of this view, translation is considered to be a mere imitation of the unique entity 

---

56 
which is by its very nature uncopy-able. The rationale behind this notion is that the 
translation can never be as good as the original, as it is bound to ‘alter’ the ‘original’.
The translated version of any text signifies changes in the source text. However, in the 
changed scenario, ‘translation-shifts’ are no longer referred to as ‘mistranslations’, 
gaps or deviations from the translation norms. On the contrary, some theorists have 
proved that shifts can be caused by some extra-linguistic factors like the function of 
the text in target culture. Certainly, this is a significant development in translation 
studies. It has drastically changed the prescriptive nature of translation theories in the 
contemporary era. As the present research work is primarily an observation and 
analysis of the ‘shifts of expression’ in the activity of translation, a few representative 
theories of ‘shift’ are briefly summed up in the following sections. 
2.11.1 Catford’s View of Translation Shifts
J. C. Catford, in his book, ‘
A Linguistic Theory of Translation
’ (1965), is the first to 
use the term ‘translation shift’ to denote “departures from formal correspondence” 
(qtd. in Venuti, Reader, 141). Catford’s theory of shifts is primarily a linguistic 
theory. While discussing correspondence, he makes distinction between formal 
correspondence and textual equivalence. By formal correspondence, he refers to a 
relationship between two linguistic categories. These categories are at the same place 
in the respective languages. Textual equivalence is between the source text and the 
target text. A textual equivalent which is not formally correspondent with its source is 
a translation shift, states Catford. Thus, ‘shifts’ are the departures from formal 
correspondence in translation process. He classifies the shifts into two types: level 
shifts and category shifts.