Theory of Translation 1 Introduction

2.11.3 James S. Holmes’s View of Translation Shifts
The translation studies until the 1970s focused on the notions of fidelity with the 
source text, untranslatablity and equivalence. However, James S. Holmes in 1969 
proposes translation as a ‘metatext’. “Metatext is a form of writing which makes 
statements about reality” (qtd. in Hatim, 57). However, ‘metatext’ includes some 
other discussions about literature like criticism and commentary. Thus, the poem or 
literature which in a sense is a “translation of a given chunk of reality” (qtd. in Hatim, 
57), is translated into another poem (a metapoem). So, the reality, the original poem 
and the metapoem are all related to one another. Holmes explains: 
The metapoem is a nexus of a complex bundle of relationships converging 
from two directions: from the original poem, in its language, and linked in a 
very specific way to the poetic tradition of that language; and from the poetic 

---

61 
tradition of the target language, with its more or less stringent expressions 
regarding poetry which the metapoem, if it is to be successful as poetry, must 
in some measure meet (p. 93).
It shows that the relation of the metapoem with the poem is same as that of the poem 
with the reality. Hatim opines that the translator, a metapoet, may be seen as: 
(1)
A critic, dealing with the norms and conventions embodied in the source. 
(2)
A poet, drawing on the norms and conventions of another literary system and 
attempting to reconcile the two sides source and target (Hatim, 57). 
Holmes holds that the definitions of translation which ‘postulate’ only correspondence 
in meaning as essential or correspondence in function (pragmatic correspondence 
definitions) or correspondence in form (syntactic correspondence definitions) are not 
‘valid’ definitions’ as all the translations do not conform to such a requirement. In his 
view, such definitions “are in reality no more than codifications of time, place and/or 
text type-bound norms of an individual or a smaller or larger group, mistakenly 
elevated to the position of universal translation laws (qtd. in Hatim, 56). 
A translator, as Holmes mentions, has to overcome a number of hurdles like source 
language diction and peculiar syntax. Also, he has to face the problem of dominance 
of a language in the concerned translation activity. A translation text in the dominant 
language, when read by the target reader, poses problems due to the absence of norms 
and models. Holmes has designed a meta-textual element which he calls ‘meta-
literature’ that can accumulate around a poem. These can be enlisted as follows: 
(1)
The critical essay written regarding the poem in the same language. 
(2)
The critical essay written in another language 
(3)
The poem translated into prose 
(4)
The poem translated in verse (Metapoem)
(5)
The imitation 
(6)
Poem translated partially
(7)
A translation inspired by the original poem (p. 92). 
This model offers a variety of choices to the translator. He may continue with the 
same form or can translate poetry into prose. Thus, he can move to a deviant form 
with the same content. Hatim comments that by studying the various forms, “a great 

---

62 
deal will be revealed not only about the nature of metapoetry, but also, and perhaps, 
more significantly, about the nature of interpretative process in general” (p. 59). 
As a matter of fact, the shifts in translation can be observed in three different aspects: 
linguistic, socio-cultural and literary. According to Holmes, the translator has to seek 
equivalence at every level, and the end result must satisfy two basic criteria: 
I.
It must match the original to a degree sufficient for the label ‘translation’ to be 
applied (the matching criterion). 
II.
It must be such that the end-result will be considered a poem (the poetic 
criterion) (qtd. in Hatim, 60). 
The model invented by Holmes applies to other literary genres also. In the translation 
process, the translator seeks not only textual, formal or semantic but functional 
correspondence as well. However, in the translation of a particular text, the focus of 
the translation could be on one of these. The most noteworthy thing about Holmes’s 
view is the model of metatext where he offers various choices to the translator, 
beyond the notions of fidelity and closeness to the text.