FAITHFULNESS VS SPIRIT IN TRANSLATION: RECONCILING FIDELITY AND FREEDOM IN THEORY AND PRACTICE
Keywords:
Fidelity, spirit, equivalence, adaptation, domestication, foreignization, translator visibility, translation ethics, Skopos theory, reader reception, cultural transfer, translation studies introductionAbstract
The perennial question of whether translators ought to remain loyal to the text's word or aim for capturing its spirit has characterized translation theory and practice throughout the centuries. ranging from Cicero's sense-for-sense method through Schleiermacher's advocacy of foreignization, the question has determined ideological, cultural, and ethical orientations toward translation. This article tackles the problem through the systematic examination of prominent translation theories, comparative case studies, and empirical evidence for reader reception within literary, religious, legal, audiovisual, and commercial contexts. Findings indicate that both word-for-word allegiance and free-spirited adaptation are conversely unviable universal priorities; effective translation relies upon communicative purpose, genre, and socio-cultural setting. The argument underscores the reality that translators are negotiators of culture and moral agents whose choices bear implications for meaning, reading public, and intercultural competence. The article concludes that what is paramount is an adaptive balance whereby fidelity and spirit are harmoniously integrated through contextual strategies.
References
Berman, A. (1985). “Translation and the Trials of the Foreign.” In L. Venuti (Ed.), The Translation Studies Reader (pp. 284–297). London: Routledge. 14 pp.
Cicero, M. T. (46 BCE/2001). On the Best Kind of Orators. Trans. H. M. Hubbell. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 213 pp.
Dryden, J. (1680/1992). “Preface to Ovid’s Epistles.” In L. Venuti (Ed.), Rethinking Translation (pp. 17–31). London: Routledge. 15 pp.
Eco, U. (2003). Mouse or Rat? Translation as Negotiation. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. 178 pp.
Hermans, T. (1999). Translation in Systems: Descriptive and System-Oriented Approaches. Manchester: St. Jerome. 232 pp.
Jerome, S. (395 CE/1997). Letter to Pammachius on the Best Method of Translating. In R. Rebenich (Ed.), Jerome. London: Routledge. 42 pp.
Nida, E. (1964). Toward a Science of Translating. Leiden: Brill. 331 pp.
Schleiermacher, F. (1813/2012). “On the Different Methods of Translating.” In L. Venuti (Ed.), The Translation Studies Reader (pp. 43–63). London: Routledge. 21 pp.
Steiner, G. (1975). After Babel: Aspects of Language and Translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 512 pp.
Toury, G. (1995). Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 311 pp.
Venuti, L. (1995). The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation. London: Routledge. 353 pp.
Vermeer, H. J. (1989). “Skopos and Commission in Translational Action.” In A. Chesterman (Ed.), Readings in Translation Theory (pp. 173–187). Helsinki: Oy Finn Lectura. 15 pp.
Weissbort, D., & Eysteinsson, A. (2006). Translation—Theory and Practice: A Historical Reader. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 646 pp.
Wilson, R. (2014). Translating the Spirit: Literature, Culture, and Faith. London: Continuum. 214 pp.
Wong, L. (2018). “Domestication, Foreignization, and Reader Response.” Meta, 63(2), 411–429. 19 pp.
