Natural or Directional: Criticizing the Persian Translation of Melville’s Moby Dick Using Pym’s Different Concepts of Translation(مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
حوزههای تخصصی:
Criticism of a translation evaluates its quality, accuracy, and effectiveness in communicating with the target readers. To ensure objectivity, such criticism requires a defined model. Pym’s (2007) model is based on two main concepts: directional equivalence and natural equivalence. Directional equivalence highlights the difference between the translation and the original, which is easily recognizable. In contrast, natural equivalence pertains to what different languages and cultures inherently produce within their own systems to convey a message, function, or referent. These two concepts make Pym’s model effective for broad evaluations of translations. This study applied Pym’s framework to objectively criticize the Persian translation of Melville’s (2021) Moby Dick to investigate the type of equivalence—directional or natural—the Persian translator employed. To do so, a comparison was made between the original and its translation to examine the translation techniques adopted by the translator at the micro-level, leading to the determination of his overall strategy at the macro-level based on Malone’s (1988) taxonomy of translation techniques, including matching, zigzagging, recrescence, repackaging, and reordering. The findings revealed that the translator employed all of Malone’s techniques but leaned toward those that prioritized naturalness over directionality. This approach enabled the production of a translation that maintained a close relationship between the source and target languages, ensuring effective communication with Persian readers. The findings of the current study offer pedagogical implications that may be beneficial for translation students, novice critics, and translation teachers.