What is semantic translation?

What is semantic translation?

• Semantic translation attempts to render, as closely as the semantic and syntactic structures of the second language allow, the exact contextual meaning of the original (Newmark 1981: 39).

Let’s see how it works with the following example:

E.g. Outside exercise will be banned if “too many people” abuse the instruction to remain at home to curb the spread of coronavirus, Matt Hancock has said.

The semantic translation will be semantically, syntactically, and contextually following the original as closely as the semantic and syntactic structures of the TL allow :

سوف تحظر التمارين الخارجية "اذا اقدم عدد كبير من المواطنين" على خرق تعليماتنا في ملازمتهم منازلهم لوقف انتشار فايروس كورونا، هذا ما صرح به (وزير الصحة) مات هانكوك.

• It has similarities to Nida’s formal equivalence.
• It remains within the original culture and assists the reader only in its connotations if they constitute an essential element of the message of the text.
• Semantic translation emphasizes the precise flavor and the tone of the original and it traces not author’s intention but the author’s thought process, and preserve the author's idiolect. This has manifested itself well in the example above.
• Translation unit in semantic translation is small so that it can approach the original text in structure and order.
• Moreover, it strives to keep the language feature and the uniqueness of original works. Therefore, the translated text must be faithful to the original author, rhetorical devices and other formal factors.

Criticisms to Newmark’s theory.

• Semantic and communicative translation strategies are more or less similar to Nida’s formal/dynamic equivalence. Thus, there is no real contribution.
• The word “communicative” may give the impression that “semantic translation” is not a communicative strategy, i.e. incapable of carrying out communication. But Semantic translation is completely communicative as we have seen in the example above.
• There is an important problem with Newmark’s theory, at least for Arab researcher and students, namely, his theory is not designed to cover Arabic texts & and the problems that might arise thereof. I believe that Arabic texts do have unique characters different from non-Arab ones, creating thus some unique obstacles, when it comes to equivalence. Moreover, these problems might be unlikely to occur in English, French or German texts, incorporated in the study of Newmark.

Questions to answer by the students:

Q1. Differentiate between Newmark’s semantic and communicative translation and Nida’s formal and dynamic equivalence.

Q2. Translate the following semantically and communicatively:

• Cinderella had a wonderful time at the ball until she heard the first stroke of midnight! She remembered what the fairy had said, and without a word of goodbye she slipped from the Prince’s arms and ran down the steps. As she ran she lost one of her slippers, but not for a moment did she dream of stopping to pick it up! If the last stroke of midnight were to sound ... oh ... what a disaster that would be! Out she fled and vanished into the night.

Thank You & Good Luck