Translation look at the history of translation theories, we

Translation Theory Before touching on Skopos theory, what is the theory, translationtheories will be more accurate to address the issues. The theory is abstract information handled independently ofapplications. It is abstract information handled independently of applications.A set of rules, laws, theories, that explain many events organized in asystematic fashion and that are a basis of knowledge.According to these definitions, we can evaluate theories, approaches, and information as methodical and scientificexplanations based on scientific aspirations and rules and gather under certain principles. When we lookat the history of translation theories, we see that different theories comeinto the foreground in every period. There is no single theory of translation.

Adhering to different approaches, scientists have developed different theories.It is also the fact that different interpretations of scientific andphilosophical, philosophical, artistic and intellectual constructions ofdifferent periods are created in each period, which also enables the differentopinions of scientists in the emergence of these theories. We will examinethese institutions under 3 headings.1.Communicative TranslationTheoryIt is based on the forms of natural, natural communication ofcommunicative translation theories. This is the strongest of the modelsdeveloped by the German psychologist, philosopher, communication scientist,linguist, and language theorist KarlBühler, who was influenced by Plato’s linguistic theory and developed in 1934as the “Linguin Organon Model”.In these models, there are three important elements. These are the”speaker” of the senderfunction, the “listener” in the receiver function and the”objects and phenomena” in the sender function.

A “sender” for a communication to occur and continue must be a”receiver” that meets the sender’s submissions. There are twodifferent senders that transmit the same message and two different receiversthat receive the same message.There is a SL editor/speaker on the sender side. Writer/speaker, code of information inaccordance with the information/message, SL/culture norms desired to be sent with written,visual or auditory signals. The SL receiver analyzes the sent information inits own language structure.

When you enter the translation business, thetranslator takes the position of the writer/speakerand re-encodes the source transmission, the destination, and brings it to thescene. The TL receiver analyzes the message according to its own knowledge,language, and cultural knowledge. In orderfor the translator to correctly transmit the message that the sender wants totransmit, it is first necessary for the translator to convey the messagecorrectly, then transferring the content of the message, paying attention tothe content and format of the message. Otherwise,the TL receiver can not analyze the message that this new sender hastransmitted. There is also a communicative dimension in terms of translation of the TTand TA to the foreground, due to the nature of linking different societies,different cultures, and differentlanguages. Translation is at the root of the communicative dimension is putforward an action request.

2. Functional Translation TheoryTranslation-based functional approaches have evolved through the work ofdifferent researchers. The common point of these works is to leave the theoriesthat regard it as a translational linguistic process and to present aperspective that sees it as a translational action, in particular, a communicative and social action.Holz-Mänttäri sees translation as an action aimed at a purpose,especially in the theory that it forms an explanatory model and a set ofprinciples appropriate for professional translation environments.  Holz-Mänttäri, who defines translation as acommunication process, states that in this process a number of actors areinvolved, such as initiating translation, translating work, translating text,interpreters, users of translation texts, recipients of translation texts.

Themain objective here is the text that will fulfill the function of the necessarycommunication to the recipient. What determines the ultimate form oftranslation is not the type and features of the ST but the anxiety ofperforming the function intended in the TC. The type of translation given inthe functional approach of Holz-Mänttäri is a non-literarytranslation.

These translations must be understood within thesociocultural contexts and especially the relevance between the interpreter andthe employer institution is given importance. Holz-Mänttäri has been criticizedby some translators for the complicated terminology he used to construct histheory and the fact that the ST in the translation process was entirely off thehook.  3. Skopos TheoryFunctional approaches to translation are among the most prominent GermanHans Vermeer’s Skopos theory. Vermeer developed this theory in his book, basedon his work on text types and functions, and in the book he received in aneffort to present a “general” translation theory with Reiss. Thefirst academic study in translation studies in Germany was entitled ” Translation Criticism- Potentials and Limitations”in 1971 when Katharina Reiss attempted toestablish an objective method of translation criticism. Reiss’s purpose was to classifythe text types.

Developed a tool to help evaluate the quality of thetranslation. There were three main types of text that Reiss identified: informative, operativeand expressive. Each of these text types requires the use of differenttranslation methods.According to Reiss’s approach, content ishighlighted in informative texts. Reiss provides training materialsas examples or reports. When this type of text is translated, thecontent of the text must be completely preserved and transferred. Expressivetexts are related in many ways to content.

In other words, these areartistic texts, such as literary works, which emphasize what you are talkingabout, not what you are talking about. According to Reiss, translatorsof narrative texts should not imitate the form of the ST blindly and should strive to create a similarresponse to readers by searching for a corresponding type on the ground. The thirdtype of text is the operative text type that presents the content that itpresents for a specific purpose. Examples of this type ofadvertising and propaganda texts are given in the text.In their translation,priority is the formation of a certain effect on the reader, that is, thefunction intended in the ST.

For this reason,Reiss states that this text may require that the translation of the text befurther removed in content and form from the text according to other texttypes. Reiss adds multi-tool text types to these three types. Theyconsist of texts such as scenarios, stage productions, and texts that requirethe use of non-verbal items such as music or visual aids. Reissstates that the translation of these texts is also a complex process, but themost important goal is to create the effectual text that the ST creates on thereader.

When talking about text types and their translations, it can’t be arguedthat text types are separated from one another by certain lines. Manytexts can be considered in the context of more than one species. Moreover,we can’t say that any method of translation requires a single approach and that no method other than thisapproach can be resorted to. Nevertheless, Reiss broke the linguisticframework of the 1960s and looked at texts as cases with socioculturalfunctions as well as linguistic levels, and in this respect, the function is called the pioneer of transcriptionism.Hans Vermeer, who presented a generaltranslation theory in the book he received together with Reiss in 1984, definedit as an intercultural communicative and operational space translated by”Skopos”, the first concept that comes to mind when functionaltransliteration is considered today. Vermeer leaned towards thephilosophical dimensions of the translation history and translation conceptwith his work conducted in the years 1990 and 2000 and published mostly inGerman, and moved away from the functional approach. Nevertheless, today the nameSkopos theory and function have become synonymous with transcription. Skopos isa Greek word and means “purpose”.

In this sense, as in the case oftranslation science, Skopos theory defines the translation process as a directly aimed process. In fact, more than onepurpose can be mentioned in the translation process. Christiane Nord says that in thetranslation process the general outcome the translator is aiming for (eg makingmoney), the goal that the text needs to reach in terms of communication (eg informinga reader in a particular context) and the target of the translation strategyused (eg attention to the structural characteristics of the SL to refer to thetranslation strategy for the word spoken). However, Skopos is often a termused to describe the purpose of the TT. There are two concepts that needto be paid special attention when talking about the function of translation and often mixed. One isthe intention of the individuals/institutionsthat initiate/sustains the translation,and the other is the ultimate function that takes place on the target mass ofthe translation text. Intent does not mean that it is closer to theconcept of purpose and that it will happen as intended. The function issomething that can only be detected by reading or researching the receivingaudience.

Each reader or group of readers understandand uses the translated texts in different ways according to theirexpectations, needs and context. According to Vermeer’sdefinition, translation action ends with “TT”, and this TT is adocument that is shaped according to the purpose adopted. The party thatdetermines the purpose of the translation is the person or organization that issupposed to initiate the translation process, mostly the employer.

The purposeof the translation must be stated in detail and clearly stated in thetranslation method to which it is applied. According to Skopos theory, thetranslator is an expert in translation action and is the person responsible forthe proper formation of the TT. This perspective has led to aredefinition of the relationship between the ST and the TT. Now the ST, orauthor, is one of the elements that determine the TT. The aim of the employerinitiating the translation process and the expectations and requirements of thetargeted group are more prominent than the complete transfer of the ST.

Forthis reason, some researchers suggest that skopos theory “destroys thesanctity of the ST”.Skopos theory has six basic rules. These canbe listed as follows:1. A translatum (or TT) is determined by its skopos.2. A TT is an offer of information in a TC and TLconcerning an offer of information in a SCand SL.  3.

A TT does not initiate an offer of informationin a clearly reversible way. 4. A TT must be internally coherent.5. A TT must be coherent with the ST. 6. The fiverules above stand in hierarchical order, with the skopos rule predominating. There isanother general rule in Skopos theory that determines the relation between the source and target texts.

These are cohesion and loyaltyrules. The coherence is that the text is consistent within itself andunderstandable to the target audience. Coherence between the target and the source text is handled withinthe scope of the loyalty rule.

According to the rule of loyalty, afterestablishing the correspondence between skopos and text, it is necessary toestablish a relation between intertextuality, that is, the source and thesource text. Since Skopos may differ according to the recipient of the text, it isconsidered natural that there is a purpose/functiondifference between the source text and the target text. Loyalty can only be onepurpose, but it can’t be the sole purpose. What determines the success of atranslation according to Reiss and Vermeer is that it is appropriate to bedetermined, and it translates it as a principle of “conformity”.According to Skopos theory, “conformity” leads to the “equivalence”relation between the source and target texts of the previously presentedlinguistic theories and defines it as a text that is formed appropriately inaccordance with the projected function, not by the characteristics of thetranscribed source text.Thefunctional point of view of Skopos’ theory brought a fresh breath to thetranslation process in the 1980s.

This viewpoint has a similar emphasis onfocusing on the target culture and the target audience, although it has beenseparated from many aspects of the descriptive translation research thatdeveloped in the same period and detailed in the following pages. Thefunctional approach as a process beyond being a product of translation haspositioned these product determinants in a much wider range and has therefore begun to deal with the translation processin a much more realistic and comprehensive manner. For example, skopos theoryhas distinguished the people and institutions that initiated the translationprocess, in other words, their employers, from the author or user of the sourcetext, as well as the users of the target text in the translation process. In thisprocess, the first approach has been to give the translator the status of atranslating agent in translational medicine, not only as a reader and writer but also as an “expert” whooffers consulting services to the employer. Of course, this specialist positionalso brought with it a series of responsibilities, leading to the emergence ofa new field of translation ethics.Skopostheory, which has been highly regarded in the academic studies carried out inour country and adopted as the theoretical framework especially in the studiesrelated to the translation of non-literary texts, has also been targeted atvarious criticisms. A large majority of these criticisms argue thatevery action can’t be the cause, andtherefore it can not be claimed that every translation is an aim. It has alsobeen pointed out that the Skopos theory has defined the translation toobroadly, that the source text is completely ignored.

Part of the criticism is to focus onthe notion that the concepts of function and purpose in literature areproblematic, as Skopos’ theory can’t beapplied in literary translation.To respondto some of these criticisms, Christiane Nord has created a new model called”work plus loyalty” to place the source and target textual relations,which Skopos theory sometimes loosens too loosely on a new level. According toNord, loyalty is defined as “the responsibility of translators to theparties in the translation interaction” and loyalty requires that thetranslator is equally distant from both the source and the target culture. Loyalty isa relationship created by people or cultures, and loyalty exists in thedimension of the text. Nord incorporatesthe concept of functional model loyalty, thus creating the trust between thesource author and the translator, as well as the view that translators areconnected to the source culture as well as the target culture.

Accordingto Nord, knowing this relationship of loyalty strengthens translators’ socialposition and their status as a reliable partner. The translation of atranslator with a source cultural/literarycommitment will not only be shaped by the target cultural expectations but will automatically limit thenumber of functions that will be performed in the source document’s intendedtarget text. In other words, the translator will not act in the translation processonly for the purposes that the employer has determined for him, but will alsotake into account the source text and the functions intended by the author. AlthoughNord admits that Skopos theory destroys the sanctity of the source text, the”function obsolete” model has the intention of restraining thetranslation process with some elements and purposes stemming from the sourcetexts and cultures.