This document is the introduction to a master's thesis written in Polish that analyzes the translation of functional texts from the perspective of Skopos theory. The introduction provides background on Skopos theory and its focus on the purpose and function of translation. It also discusses the complexity of translation due to differences in language and culture. The purpose of the thesis is to analyze how Skopos theory concepts can help address culture-specific issues that arise in translating various types of functional texts in practice. The introduction outlines the chapters to follow on Skopos theory, the concept of culture in translation theory, and example studies applying Skopos to resolve culture-specific challenges in domains like manuals, advertising, tourism and legal translation.

1. Uniwersytet Warszawski
Wвdгiał Neofilologii
Tomasz Stajszczak
Numer albumu: 255132
SKOPOS THEORY AS AN AID IN RESOLVING
CULTURE-RELATED DIFFICULTIES IN THE
TRANSLATION OF FUNCTIONAL TEXTS
Praca magisterska
na kierunku filologia
w zakresie filologia angielska
Praca wykonana pod kierunkiem
dr hab. Anieli Korzeniowskiej
Wвdгiał Neofilologii
Warszawa, maj 2011

2. 1
Oświadczenie kierującego pracą
OĞwiadcгam, że niniejsгa praca гostała prгвgotowana pod moim kierunkiem i stwierdгam, że
spełnia ona warunki do prгedstawienia jej w postępowaniu o nadanie tвtułu гawodowego.
Data Podpis kierującego pracą
Oświadczenie autora (autorów) pracy
ĝwiadom odpowiedгialnoĞci prawnej oĞwiadcгam, że niniejsгa praca dвplomowa гostała
napisana przeze mnie samodгielnie i nie гawiera treĞci uгвskanвch w sposób nieгgodnв г
obowiąгującвmi prгepisami.
OĞwiadcгam również, że prгedstawiona praca nie bвła wcгeĞniej prгedmiotem procedur
гwiąгanвch г uгвskaniem tвtułu гawodowego w wвżsгej ucгelni.
OĞwiadcгam ponadto, że niniejsгa wersja pracв jest identвcгna г гałącгoną wersją
elektronicгną.
Data Podpis autora (autorów) pracy

3. Streszczenie
Prгedmiotem pracв jest analiгa tłumacгenia tekstów użвtkowвch oraг wвstępującвch
międгв nimi konfliktów na tle kulturowвm, dokonana г perspektвwв teorii Skopos. Niniejsza
analiгa łącгв materiał teoretвcгnв г prгвkładami pochodгącвmi г praktвki, natomiast jej
celem jest ukaгanie prгвdatnoĞci гastosowania teorii Skopos w roгwiąгвwaniu wвżej
wвmienionвch konfliktów. Posгcгególne roгdгiałв pracв są odpowiednio poĞwięcone historii
teorii Skopos i гagadnieniom, które гostałв prгeг nią prгedstawione, pojęciu kulturв w
wybranych pracach badającвch proces tłumacгenia oraг prгвkładowвm opisom konfliktów
kulturowвch w różnвch tekstach użвtkowвch. W wвniku analiгв ustalono, iż tłumacгenie
tekstów użвtkowвch prгeprowadгane z perspektywy teorii Skopos umożliwia efektвwniejsгe
roгwiąгвwanie konfliktów na tle kulturowвm гe wгględu na Ğcisłв nacisk, jaki teoria ta
kładгie na uwгględnianie cгвnników definiującвch celowoĞć produkowanego tłumacгenia.
Słowa kluczowe
teoria Skopos, tekstв użвtkowe, konfliktв kulturowe, funkcjonalnoĞć, celowoĞć,
2
czytelnik docelowy
Dziedzina pracy (kody wg programu Socrates-Erasmus)
9.4 Translatoryka

4. TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 4
Chapter One: Skopos theory – a functional approach to translation ................................. 7
1.1 The origin of Skopos theory .............................................................................................. 7
1.2 The concepts of Skopos theory ....................................................................................... 12
1.2.1 Function, aim, purpose, and intention ............................................................... 12
1.2.2 The translation brief ......................................................................................... 13
1.2.3 Intertextual and intratextual coherence ............................................................. 14
1.3 Skopos theory and the translation of functional texts ....................................................... 16
1.3.1 Reiss‟s source text tвpologв ............................................................................. 16
1.3.2 Nord‟s amendment – a target text typology ...................................................... 18
1.3.3 Nord‟s classification of translations ................................................................. 20
Chapter Two: Culture in translation theory ..................................................................... 24
2.1 Defining culture from the perspective of functional translation ....................................... 24
2.2 The relation between the notion of culture and translation theory ................................... 29
2.2.1 Schleiermacher‟s dichotomy of translation strategies ....................................... 30
2.2.2 Humboldt and Jakobson – the relation between language and reality ................ 33
2.2.3 Nida‟s theory and the concept of culture .......................................................... 36
Chapter Three: Skopos theory, functional texts, and culture-specificity ......................... 41
3.1 Locating Skopos theory in practical functional translation .............................................. 42
3.1.1 The viability of a skopos-oriented approach ..................................................... 43
3.1.2 Skopos theory as a utility for practical translation ............................................. 45
3.2 Example studies on resolving culture-specificity issues within various domains of
functional texts .................................................................................................................... 48
3.2.1 Culture-specificity in user-manual translation .................................................. 48
3.2.2 Culture-specificity in translation for advertising ............................................... 51
3.2.3 Culture-specificity in translation for tourism .................................................... 54
3.2.4 Culture-specificity in legal translation .............................................................. 58
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 63
References .......................................................................................................................... 65
3

5. INTRODUCTION
Many a practising translator would agree that answering one specific question related to
translation requires as much effort as completing the most challenging assignments – how
should one go about translating in order to do it well? This enquiry seems to reappear
wherever translation is involved, whether it pertains to studies of literary works, translator
training, or even the moments when translators examine their newly assigned text for the first
time. Could it be the case that explaining how to translate well is difficult because there are no
practical means of accounting for the methods that enable successful translation? That is
unlikely, seeing as the question above does not in fact relate to anything abstract – many
ambitious literary works become translated, various institutions teach people how to translate,
and interlingual communication effectively takes place across the globe on an everyday basis.
Translation does work; it exists in practice and its results are tangible. It cannot be stated that
explaining what makes a good translation is difficult because translators cannot define their
methods and rely purely on luck and intuition. However, the sheer multiplicity of factors that
govern translation relate to the very same problem.
Languages are complex entities – their form is not only determined by their specific
grammar and vocabulary, but also by the reality in which they are used and the tradition and
history of the people who use them. Languages can express practically anything – from legal
notions to technical instructions to brief pieces of information on signs. Dealing with
languages, translation is greatly influenced by the very same diversity of factors. We translate
in order to communicate, and we do it for a variety of reasons, while the languages among
which we carry out this communication are not only different on account of their form but
also because of the varying cultural settings to which they belong. Skopos theory, whose
formulation is attributed to German translation scholar Hans Vermeer, is a framework which
combines the ideas of translation as a purposeful action and intercultural communication. The
following work investigates the application of Skopos-theory concepts to the translation of
various functional texts, thus constituting a combined study of theory and cases drawn from
practice. It is this author‟s belief that, as a framework specifically focused on both practice
and intercultural communication, Skopos theory holds potential for resolving translational
issues related to many culture-specific aspects of functional texts that belong to a variety of
4

6. fields. Therefore, the purpose of the presented work is to analyse the concepts of Skopos
theory and the notion of culture in translation, establish a connection between them and the
practice of functional-text translation, and indicate how translators may benefit from applying
a Skopos perspective to actual assignments. By exploring these issues, the work also seeks to
advocate Skopos theory as a prolific foundation for further methodological development in the
field of functional-text translation.
The analysis of Skopos theory begins in chapter one, which opens with general
observations on the discipline of translation studies and proceeds to describe those ideas
pertaining to translation which were formulated prior to the framework‟s emergence but
nonetheless strongly related to its overall assumptions. The chapter thus explores past ideas in
translation which directly or otherwise motivated the emergence of Skopos theory in the late
1970s. The following portion of the chapter describes some of the more prominent concepts
related to the framework. Notions such as aim, purpose, function, and translation brief are
explained and described as constant elements of the translation process. The final part of the
first chapter refers to ideas formulated by recognised translation scholars who also referred to
the concepts of Skopos theory in their works, namely Katharina Reiss, who formulated a
typology of source texts intended as an introduction of conceptual order into the subject
matter of translation and Christiane Nord who, questioning the functional merit of Reiss‟
typology, proposed a shift to the target text and accordingly reformulated the source text
categorisation. What is additionally mentioned in this portion of the work is Nord‟s tвpologв
of translation procedures, seeing as it is a notion which further encompasses the various tasks
that the translator encounters in the process of functional-text translation.
The second chapter of the work is devoted to the concept of culture in translation and
begins with an adaptation of the notion to the practice of functional translation. This is done
specifically for the purpose of providing culture with a definition which is both coherent and
relevant to the subject of this work. In order to confirm that the chosen definition is in fact
compatible with the functional approach, the first section is concluded with an attempt at
applвing it to the framework‟s general perception of functional translation, as presented in the
first chapter. What follows in the next section is an overview of selected considerations
pertaining to the notion of culture in translation which also relate to the idea of the
purposefulness of translation. Similarly to Skopos theory, the chosen discussions also display
that when it occurs, translation relates to the reality in which it takes place – Friedrich
Schleiermacher‟s two methods of translating, Roman Jakobson and Wilhelm von Humboldt‟s
5

7. thoughts on the relation between language and realitв, as well as Eugene Nida‟s notions of
formal and dynamic equivalence.
The third and final chapter of the work combines a display of Skopos theorв‟s
propensity for the further development of its conceptual content and a number of studies on
functional translation carried out in various fields. The first portion of the chapter presents a
discussion on the applicability of Skopos theory to the translation of functional texts as well as
a similarly-oriented dialogue between Andrew Chesterman and Emma Wagner, where the two
scholars arrive at the conclusion that Skopos theory holds a lot of promise to practising
translators and consequently present their own typologies which can be employed in practice
– classifications of translation purposes, processes, commissioners, and practical methods.
The second portion of the chapter is connected with practice, seeing as it presents example
studies on resolving culture-specificity issues within various domains of functional texts.
These studies relate to areas such as the translation of instruction manuals, translation for
advertising, for the tourist industry, and the translation of legal documents. The authors
elaborate on various culture-specific elements which are found in texts belonging to these
fields and suggest methods for resolving them and assuring that the produced texts are
communicative in the target cultural setting.
For the purpose of thorough research of Skopos theory and its concepts, the thesis
makes frequent references to Christiane Nord‟s Translating as a Purposeful Activity (1997),
which is a work devoted to this framework‟s historв and terminologв among other notions.
Other mentionable works include Mary Snell-Hornbв‟s studies of various concepts related to
culture and translation in The Turns of Translation Studies (2006), particularly her proposed
definition of culture which allowed for a considerable development of the work‟s analвsis.
Lastlв, Andrew Chesterman and Emma Wagner‟s discussion mentioned above, which was
taken from Can Theory Help Translators?: A Dialogue Between the Ivory Tower and the
Wordface (2002). It proved indispensible for indicating the possibilities that characterise
Skopos theory in terms of creating further concepts applicable to the practice of functional
translation.
6

8. CHAPTER ONE
SKOPOS THEORY – A FUNCTIONAL APPROACH TO TRANSLATION
One of the most notable characteristics of translation studies is the discipline‟s inclination
towards establishing strong and valid connections between its own theories and a vast number
of other scholarly fields. It would not even be a misconception to claim that many ideas in the
field of the translational craft would not have come into existence without the input of other
disciplines. This statement, however, is not meant to suggest that translation is in fact an
insubstantial activity, a mere element or aspect of a different field, as it is at times claimed
(Snell-Hornby 2006: 51). Rather, the essence of the above statement is that among its many
goals, the discipline of translation studies aims to establish the relation between translation
and a variety of perspectives that constitute human culture. Apart from addressing rather
obscure issues, such as whether translation is at all possible, the discipline also investigates
how the process of translation interacts with literary traditions, ideologies, history, societies,
and many other factors (Bassnett and Lefevere 1998: 1-2). The knowledge of translational
theories is indispensable to practising translators, as researching them is nothing other than an
act of expanding and improving one‟s repertoire of solutions to specific translation problems.
That is not to say the success of one‟s translational effort is fully determined by one‟s
knowledgeability of theories. The practice is dependent on experience, talent, and, quite often,
creativity, as in the case of many other occupations. Nevertheless, guided by specific
theoretical foundations, translators make firm, justified decisions as to why a given text
should be translated in one manner and not another. A similar kind of decision shall be made
in the following chapter of this work. By discussing the origin and nature of the Skopos
theory, an explanation shall be provided as to why this approach is best suited for functional
texts and how the knowledge of its concepts maв potentiallв support one‟s translational
endeavours within that field.
7
1.1 The origin of Skopos theory
The formulation of ideas characteristic to what is known as Skopos theory today was preceded
by a number of significant changes in the general orientation of translation studies. The
discipline used to be considered a subordinate of linguistics. This is for instance indicated by
the definition of translation found in the Encyclopaedia Britannica. It describes the activity as

9. an “act or process of rendering what is expressed in one language or set of sвmbols bв means
of another language or set of sвmbols” (Snell-Hornby 1995: 39). A definition such as this will
generally be accepted as a simple explanation of what the activity of translation entails.
However, in light of the developments that took place within translation studies in the second
half of the 20th century, it will certainly appear to be incomplete.
In the 1970s, translation scholars belonging to the German circles of the field began
introducing new views; ones that strictly opposed linguistically-oriented perspectives of
translation, as found in the encyclopaedic entry quoted above (Schтffner in Baker 1998: 235).
Mary Snell-Hornby summarises this trend, which at the time was innovative, under four
characteristics: first of all, the new concepts were to view translation as a process of cultural,
rather than linguistic transfer. This directly resulted in the second postulate – texts themselves,
whether source materials for translation or translations themselves, could no longer be
considered isolated products of a linguistic system. They instead had to be viewed through the
prism of constant interaction with the culture in which they had been created. Third,
translation was not meant to be considered an operation of substituting static elements. To the
proponents of this theory, it was an act of communication in which the form and tone of the
message were dependent on the reception of its addressees. Finally, the new trend sought to
dethrone the source text as the sole measurement model for the preciseness or acceptability of
the produced translation. This, arguably most radical, postulate sought to create space within
the field for discussing the variety of functions that texts fulfil. Individual functions of texts
were perceived as factors that determine the best translation strategy to be employed by the
translator (Snell-Hornby 2006: 52). It was this last concept of the new orientation that earned
it the name „functionalism,‟ while scholars who worked within its scope came to be known as
functionalists.
It is reasonable to expect that the questions addressed by functionalism had been
raised at some point prior to the emergence of the theory or even the discipline of translation
studies itself. This is in fact observed by Christiane Nord in a historical overview of
functionalist approaches that she presents in a work devoted to this translation theory. Nord
explains that the individual issues touched upon by functionalism were the subject of many
works on translation, dating back as early as the times of Roman philosopher Cicero (106-43
B.C.) who writes: “If I render word for word, the result will sound uncouth, and if compelled
by necessity I alter anything in the order of wording, I shall seem to have departed from the
function of a translator” (qtd. by Nord 1997: 4). Cicero considers the possibility of an
8

10. alternative approach to translation. However, the existence of two different strategies imposes
a dilemma – is a translation that introduces changes still a translation and will remaining
completely faithful to the original always result in a readable translation? Late 20th century
translation studies also shifted their focus to this issue. Elaborating on this matter will come
later, however, as more instances of such considerations can be found in later works.
The Bible is arguably one of the most delicate and controversial subjects known to the
translational craft of the Western world. It naturally came to be a source of considerations
dealing with faithfulness vs. readership conflicts, given the amount of detail which has been
devoted to preserving its message while simultaneously addressing the need to make it
readable to its intended audience. Many prominent figures among Bible translators such as
Jerome or Martin Luther claimed that “there are passages in the Bible where the translator
must reproduce „even the word-order‟ or keep „to the letter;‟ in other passages they believed it
was more important „to render the sense‟ or to adjust the text to the target audience‟s needs
and expectations” (ibid.). As we can see, even when working with such “delicate” material,
devoted practitioners of translation accepted the possibility of introducing changes during the
process for the sake of intelligibly rendering the sense of the given text.
Another instance of conceptual similarity to Skopos theory can be observed in Eugene
Nida‟s principles of equivalence. In his understanding of the equivalent effect, Nida argued
for a dichotomy that discerns between equivalence on the level of the source text‟s formal
elements (formal equivalence) and on the level of the source text‟s extralinguistic
communicative effect (dynamic equivalence) (ibid.: 5). Again, we encounter a duality of
translational approaches. On the one hand, Nida discusses the relationship between source and
target texts in purely linguistic terms but on the other, he allows for a different, separate point
of view which became one of the key issues of Skopos theory only two decades later – namely
rendering texts in such a manner that both the original and the translation are equivalent with
respect to the reception, interpretations, and impressions that they evoke in their respective
audiences. Seemingly on the path to functionalism, the theory of equivalence still constrained
translation to source text fidelity and purely linguistic notions, mainly owing to the reception
it received within the linguistics-dominated discipline of the 1950s and 1960s. Due to the
popularity of conceiving the process of translation as a linguistic operation, the academic
community focused on those aspects of Nida‟s theorв that corresponded to structuralist ideas,
leaving the notion of purpose-oriented dynamic equivalence largely insignificant (ibid.: 5-6).
9

11. Notwithstanding, the equivalence theory was highly important to the beginnings of Skopos
theory in translation.
Interestingly enough, the first functionalism-oriented concept of translation was
largely based on Nida‟s equivalence theorв. However, it also served as an initial response to
its linguistically-oriented limitations. In 1971, Katharina Reiss, an accomplished German
translator and scholar, introduced a model of translation criticism that evaluated translations
on the basis of their functionality. She claimed that ideal translations were equivalent to their
source texts as regards their “conceptual content, linguistic form and communicative
function” (ibid.: 9). What Reiss stresses here is that equivalence may refer not only to
language but also to the content and to the way that content is communicated to its audience.
Thus, translators can also relate to the source text in terms of transferring the function fulfilled
by the original onto the rendering. This observation bears significant consequences for formal
equivalence, as it accepts the possibility of faithful translation becoming an option under
certain conditions rather than a necessity at all times.
Reiss states that one such condition could be a translation that is intended to achieve a
different purpose or function than the original (ibid.). Consider for instance an advertisement
made by one company which was intended for an audience of one country. The company also
conducts its business abroad and wants to extend its campaign there. Instead of
commissioning the advertisement to be translated for the audience of that country, the
company may request for it to be translated as an explanation of its content. That way, before
commissioning its translation as an actual advertisement, the company may rely on its foreign
branch marketing experts to fundamentally revise the advertisement and avert any possible
inappropriateness or misinterpretations that may arise from releasing a literal rendering.
Obviously, an explanatory translation may be more schematic and less aesthetic in form – it is
not yet intended to exert its promotional influence on a group of consumers. It may also
present certain elements of information more directly than the original, actual advertisement.1
Another example presented by Reiss is when the target text is meant to address an
audience that is notably different from that for which the source text was originally intended
(ibid.). This pertains not only to (rather commonly associated with the practice of translation)
language differences between audiences. The addressees may prove diverse in various
regards. For example, certain bestsellers become translated into versions intended for
children. Such versions exhibit a variety of characteristics that are not found in regular
1 More considerations on the subject of heterofunctional translation, specifically within the domain of
advertising, available in 3.2.2 of this work.
10

12. translations. This applies both to situations when such books are transferred into different
languages and rewritten in their original one. In fact, translations for different audiences may
very well not involve interlingual transfer at all. Consider for example Wikipedia entries
which are written in a standard coined by the website which is known as „simple English.‟
The policy of applying it consists in rewriting English-language articles into texts with
shorter, simpler sentence structures and more common, undiversified vocabulary. This is
intended to make articles covering difficult or highly specialised topics and concepts more
accessible to users who have no higher education, experience in studying academic texts, or
interests in highly detailed information.
Reiss‟s initial attempts to break with purely linguistic translation were taken to the
next level by her student, Hans J. Vermeer. In a work entitled A Framework for a General
Theory of Translation, written in 1978 (Snell-Hornby 2006: 51), Vermeer specifies his
general approach to translation thus:
Linguistics alone won‟t help us. First, because translating is not merely and not even primarily a
linguistic process. Secondly, because linguistics has not yet formulated the right questions to tackle
our problems. So let‟s look somewhere else (Nord 1997: 10).
Vermeer seeks to formulate his concept of translation without complete reliance on
linguistics, as was the case with equivalence-based theory. The “somewhere else” that he
decided to research was the notion of translation as an action. Vermeer conceived translation
as a type of action that involves the transfer of communicative elements. Action was, in turn,
characterised in his approach by intentionality and immersion in a particular cultural context
(ibid.: 11-12). The terms that Vermeer operates with and employs in order to introduce his
intended shift have become a visible part of the discipline. This is for instance reflected by
the theorв of translational action, formulated bв Justa Holг Mтnttтri in the 1980s, which,
among other notions, explores how translation functions as a type of communicative action
(Schтffner in Baker 1998: 3; Nord 1997: 13).
Since Vermeer‟s notion of translational action is modified by its cultural background
and the purpose that it is meant to fulfil, it becomes impossible to judge the quality and
accuracy of translation solely by its relation to the source text – the linguistically-coded
message which, consequently, constitutes only a part, and not the whole of the translation
process. The approach that Vermeer proposes instead relies on investigating the culture-specificity
of communication and how it interacts with translation as a form of purposeful
human action. Vermeer formulates the most representative aspect of his theory by stating that
11

13. “Any action has an aim, a purpose. … The word skopos, then, is a technical term for the aim
or purpose of a translation. … Further: an action leads to a result, a new situation or event,
and possiblв to a „new‟ object” (Nord 1997: 12). Owing precisely to the Greek word skopos
that Hans Vermeer employed as a referent to the key concept of his approach, the theory
introduced in his work is known to contemporary translation studies as the Skopos theory
(Skopostheorie). In the following sections, we shall analyse its general framework and further
argue for it as a source of solutions to culturally-grounded difficulties in functional
translation.
12
1.2 The concepts of Skopos theory
1.2.1 Function, aim, purpose, and intention
As outlined above, the most important innovation that Skopos theory brought to translation
studies was a linguistically-independent view of the process of translation as a
communicative action characterised by a purpose (or skopos). The idea of purposeful
translation is of particular consequence to practice. It appoints the functions that target texts
fulfil as well as the target readers‟ reception as an acceptable ground for evaluating
translations. The functional and target-reader-oriented aspect of Skopos theory is most
precisely explained in a work co-authored by Reiss and Vermeer in 1984, entitled
Grundlegung einer allgemeinen Translationstheorie, where Vermeer‟s general concepts are
integrated with Reiss‟s notions of text tвpologв and equivalence set in a functional
framework (Nord 1997: 27).
In order to define his theory more precisely, Vermeer proposes a segmentation of the
Skopos notion into the concepts of function, purpose, aim, and intention. A self-evident term
in a functional theory, function refers to “what a text means or is intended to mean from the
target reader‟s point of view” (ibid.: 28). The function of a text is not something inherently
encoded within its linguistic content. Meaning is generated in an act of decoding which is
performed by the target reader. Consequently, function is not necessarily stable and will differ
between readers, especially in instances when readers belong to different cultural settings.
The relative position of function is analogous to the situation of aim. Vermeer defines
it as “the final result an agent intends to achieve bв means of an action” (ibid.). The authors
of functional texts aim to achieve something through their creation. What that achievement is
depends on the type of text. Yet whichever means the author employs in order to achieve
his/her aim in the source culture may not work the same way when they are literally

14. transposed into the target culture. Although the aim does not change, one and the same form
may be insufficient to achieve it in different situations. This notably advocates the
introduction of changes in the process of rendering and limits the dominance of formal
equivalence. Similarlв to Reiss‟s perception of the notion of equivalence, the concepts of aim
and function essentially separate translation from strict literalism.
The two remaining terms stand in a relation of dependence with the first ones. The
purpose is considered “a provisional stage in the process of attaining an aim” (ibid.). What
could for instance constitute purposes in reference to the process of translation is first
accepting a commission, then analysing the source text, further deciding on a translation
strategy, which would finally lead to the aim – producing the target text. Intention is the
single concept which was amended by Nord for the sake of clarity. She redefines it is as the
sender‟s or the text author‟s will to attain a particular aim (ibid.). In an ideal communicative
situation the function deciphered by the receiver is the same as the intention of the sender. In
an ideal translational situation the translator formulates the rendering in such a way that it
carries the source text author‟s intention over to a different cultural setting and achieves the
same purpose as in the original setting (or a different one should need arise).
The general tendency within the framework nowadays is to refer to all these concepts
simply as skopos and a similar trend shall be followed in this work. Further insight into
Vermeer‟s terminologв will clarify how he conceived his theory as a reader-oriented
framework advocating the employment of non-literal translation.
13
1.2.2 The translation brief
Since the goal of this work is to promote Skopos theory as a practical solution for settings of
professional translation, it is crucial to explicate those of its aspects which address work with
translation commissions. Regarding the choice of approach to individual translation
assignments, Vermeer states that “one must translate, consciouslв and consistentlв with some
principle respecting the target text. The theory does not state what the principle is: this must
be decided separately in each specific case” (ibid.: 29-30). It would at first seem that the
skopos-functionalist translator is left without an answer, as „the principle‟ seemingly remains
to be specified by the translator. Christiane Nord, however, addresses the issue by asking
“who decides what the principle is” (ibid.: 30). And since the aim of such translations
happens to be in fact specified in the commission, she answers that it is the directives of the

15. client that should be the decisive factor in selecting translation strategies. Nord describes
commission instructions that the German functionalists referred to as „the translation brief:‟
The translation brief specifies what kind of translation is needed. This is why the initiator or the
person playing the role of initiator (who might also be the initiator) actually decides on the
translation skopos, even though the brief as such may not be explicit about the conditions (ibid.).
The brief contains whatever information is necessary or useful to the translator
regarding the fulfilment of the commissioner‟s expectations towards the resulting text.
However, it is to be expected that the commissioner will not provide highly specific details
that would preciselв instruct the translator how the target text should be written. “No less than
a client tells a mechanic how to fix the broken car or a lawyer how to defend the accused”
(Nord 2006: 30). The translation brief will mostly contain technical information – the
deadline, the settled payment, the form of submission, etc. It is up to the translator to inquire
about any missing key details and use them in order to derive the best approach towards a
given assignment. It is also up to the translator to negotiate the terms of the brief should he or
she disagree with the commissioner. Otherwise, the translator‟s onlв other options would be
either to turn down the assignment or to refuse to be held accountable for the target text.
In instances when the commissioner does little beyond saying that a given text is to be
translated into a given language by some specified time, the translator works with what Nord
describes as a „conventional assignment.‟ “In a particular culture communitв at a given time,
certain tвpes of text are normallв translated bв certain tвpes of translation” (Nord 1997: 31).
Even with a minimal set of instructions, the translational craft follows certain default
procedures that can be easily derived as the most appropriate for a given task – as an example,
it is most often the case that television-set manuals are meant to be translated as television-set
manuals and legally valid driving licences are meant to be translated as documents granting
permission to drive a vehicle that can be later assigned legal validity.
1.2.3 Intertextual and Intratextual coherence
The discussion on Skopos theory has so far led us to explain that in the process of translation
the most significant roles are played by the source-text author, the translator, the
commissioner, and the target reader. A very interesting point in that regard, however, would
be the status of the source text in such a target-reader-oriented framework; one that opposes
the dominance that used to persist in linguistics-dominated theory. Nord notes that it is in fact
the aforementioned agents and not the linguistic material of the source text that need to be
14

16. considered firsthand when working on a translation assignment (Nord 1997: 31; Nord 2006:
33-34). In order to justify this priority, let us go back to the definition of text purpose, where
it was noted that the meaning of a text is not derived from its code but from its reception.
Texts do not exchange information when they are devoid of interpretation. In addition, texts
can be read in a variety of ways, seeing as interpretation depends on the individual reader‟s
reception.
Different receivers (or even the same receiver at different times) find different meanings in the
same linguistic material offered by the text. We might even saв that a „text‟ is as manв texts as
there are receivers (Nord 1997: 31).
The exchange of information is not possible without linguistic material, hence the necessity
for the source text‟s existence. This, however, begs the question if translators differ from
readers in any way when they decode the text prior to the act of translation.
Vermeer‟s definition of the source text makes the decoding performed in its translation
similar to that in regular reading. He describes it as an offer of information from which
individual receivers select “the items that theв find interesting and important” (ibid.). The
source text plays the same part in the process of translation as it does in reception, causing the
translator to likewise act as a reader. Following this logic, we may conclude that functional
translation consists in selecting those items of information from the source text which are
deemed relevant to its function and then transferring them to the target culture where they, as
target texts, can constitute an offer of information for the target readers (ibid.: 32). This
procedure in fact reveals the in-depth mechanics of maintaining the text‟s function in
translation – the translator decodes the purpose of the text in order to re-encode it in a new
cultural setting.
Such placement of the source text‟s role in Skopos theory entails two variables. Firstly,
it is generally the case that source-text materials exhibit proper placement in the source
culture situation which makes them meaningful media to their designated audience. The same
needs to characterise the translations of these materials as rewritten texts placed in a new
cultural situation. This is what Vermeer calls „intratextual coherence‟ (ibid.: 32-33). In
instances when the source text itself does not maintain such coherence and exhibits a variety
of errors inhibiting unconstrained reception, we may speak of the translator‟s role as editor in
the rendering process. This issue, however, merits an entirely separate discussion. The second
concept, central to source- and target-text relations, is known as „intertextual coherence‟
(ibid.: 32). This type of coherence signifies the source and target text‟s informational affinity
15

17. – the one single dimension where in Skopos theory there exists a link between the source and
target texts. The form of the target text, or in other words the manner in which it conveys the
information, is dependent on the skopos and the interests of the agents involved in the
translation. Nonetheless, the offers of information that both the source and target texts
constitute need to remain the same in order for the latter to be considered a translation of the
former.
Judging by the concepts associated with it, Hans Vermeer‟s general framework serves
well as a basis for determining effective translation strategies in settings of functional-text
translation. Skopos theory highlights the importance of the target reader as the „co-creator‟ of
the text‟s meaning, shifts the discipline‟s focus from linguistic code and equivalence to
cultural context, and, most importantly, specifies various functions that texts fulfil and
stresses the fact that they belong to the subject matter of professional translation. The last of
the notions listed above is further explored by Katharina Reiss. She introduces a theory of
text types which intends to specify a model of text-function typology. Being a link between
translation practice and the concept of the translation process proposed bв Vermeer, Reiss‟s
model will be investigated next in the discussion.
1.3 Skopos theory and the translation of functional texts
1.3.1 Reiss’s source text typology
Functionalism draws most of its didactic value from those theories contained within its
framework that explore the notion of decision-making in specific translational situations.
Some of these theories differentiate between translation strategies on the basis of
heterogeneous factors such as source-text types and target-text purposes. Others formulate
translation typologies in a straightforward manner and ascribe them to particular types of
assignments. The following shall provide a brief description of these notions as a means of
establishing a connection between skopos-oriented approaches and the practice of functional
translation.
In the 1984 work co-authored with Vermeer (cf. 1.2.1), Katharina Reiss proposes a
model of text classification based on the „organon model‟ of language functions. This model
was formulated by German psвchologist Karl Bühler in 1934. Bühler claimed that language
fulfils three basic functions: the informative, expressive, and operative. In Reiss‟s model,
these concepts are applied to written language and accordingly constitute three text categories
16

18. (Nord 1997: 37-38). Each of these categories determine which of the given text type‟s
elements require a greater degree of equivalence in translation.
Reiss describes the resulting categories as follows: informative texts, as the very name
suggests, intend to provide information to their readers as regards “various objects and
phenomena in the real world” (ibid.: 38). This function is also their top priority, placing the
employed language and style as secondary elements. Consequently, when translating
informative texts, the translator must strive to preserve all their referential value while
adjusting the secondary elements to target-culture norms (ibid.).
The second category, expressive texts, are notably different from its predecessor in
that the information theв carrв is “complemented or even overruled bв an aesthetic
component” (ibid.). The aesthetic component is constituted bв the text‟s informational
content as well its style, with both intending to have a particular “aesthetic effect” on the
reader. Reiss claims that when working on such texts, the translator‟s top prioritв is to assure
that their translation will evoke a similar kind of „rhetorical impression‟ on the target reader
as the source text does on the source reader (ibid.).
The last of Reiss‟s categories is the operative text. In this type of text, it is both the
form and content that play secondary roles, whereas its most important feature is the general
“extralinguistic effect that the text is designed to achieve” (ibid.). Operative texts are notably
pragmatic in nature. Their purpose is to perform certain actions, or make their intended
readers respond in a particular way. Consequently, it is necessary for the text to retain such
effects in translation.
Nord criticises Reiss‟s tвpologв as a sвstem that is still confined to the linguisticallв-
oriented notion of equivalence. She claims that in a theory where “the decisive factor in
translation” is “the dominant communicative function of the source text … any particular
text, belonging to one particular text type, would allow for just one way of being translated,
the „equivalent‟ waв” (ibid.: 39). Although Reiss‟s tвpologв recognises the need for applвing
different solutions to different types of texts, it does not allow for a variety of solutions for
one particular text type. As Nord states, functionalism does not deal with replacing certain
elements of the source text with ones that best reflect the given communicative function in the
target culture. What trulв matters is that the translator “be aware of these [communicative]
aspects and take them into consideration in their decisions” (ibid.). In order to resolve this
uncertainty, Nord proposes to redirect the focus of Reiss‟s system from source texts to target
texts.
17

19. 1.3.2 Nord’s amendment – a target-text typology
Drawing on the same model of language functions and seeking to remedy the shortcomings of
Reiss‟s concept, the sвstem proposed bв Christiane Nord can in all respects be considered an
amendment of the source-text typology. Accordingly, Nord establishes three target text
functions based on Bühler‟s modelŚ referential, expressive, and appellative. Nord also adds a
fourth, phatic function, that she borrows from Roman Jakobson‟s model of language
functions and claims is indispensible to completing the classification. Nord‟s definitions of
text functions are similar to those presented by Reiss. However, by having those definitions
applied to produced translations, her typology inherently places focus on the reception that
the texts receive in the target culture setting. It does not attempt to stress that the best
approach for particular text types is to preserve specific communicative elements. It is a
considerable break with equivalence-oriented considerations and a step closer towards the
postulations of Skopos theory.
Comparable to Reiss‟s approach, Nord states that the referential function of target
texts “involves a reference to the objects and phenomena of the world or a particular world”2
(Nord 1997: 40). Some references within texts are constituted by denotations while others
remain implicit. When carried across cultures, both clear denotations as well as implied
information can change their meaning. With respect to the production of referential target
texts, this entails an obligation on the part of the translator to compose informative messages
in a manner that will make them comprehensible to their intended readers. It is also necessary
in such cases to avoid references to culture-specific knowledge that the intended reader will
in all likelihood not possess. Nord adds that the sub-functions of the referential category are
abundant and difficult to surmise, ranging from basically informing the audience about facts
and events to providing instructions on the use of various devices or describing entire fields
of science and scholarly disciplines.
As regards the expressive function of texts, Nord adjusts the definition to better suit
functional texts. She claims that the concept proposed by Reiss was applicable exclusively to
literary texts as it focused mainly on the aesthetic aspect. Nord‟s understanding of the notion,
on the other hand, revolves around “the sender‟s attitude toward the objects and phenomena
of the world” (ibid.: 41). This in turn means that the expressive function can be found in any
textual elements that contain the sender‟s individual emotions, evaluations, or anв other
2 Nord neither excludes fictional worlds or “realities” from her definition nor, incidentally, removes the
expressive function from the aesthetic value of texts.
18

20. expressions of attitude. Nord explains that in this sense, expressive texts are sender-oriented.
The authors of these texts express themselves within the source-culture system and address
their writings to an audience that belongs to that same source culture. In translation, the
resulting target texts are addressed to an audience belonging to a different, target culture. This
makes them susceptible to changes in reception. Culture-bound expressive elements may be
presented explicitly within a text, which will make them comprehensible, albeit odd to the
target culture audience. However, in instances when culture-specific expressive markers are
implicit, the target audience may assign to them a different meaning or even a different
function. This is the factor of which translators need to be particularly mindful when
producing translations fulfilling or containing elements that fulfil the expressive function.
The appellative function of Nord‟s sвstem is the equivalent of Reiss‟s operative texts.
The change in terminology, however, is not coincidental. It reflects a shift from equivalence-oriented
preservation of communicative elements to target-reader reception, in a fashion
similar to that of the aforementioned concepts. The category of appellative texts still in fact
comprises any type of documents whose main purpose is to appeal to “the receivers‟
sensitivity or disposition to act” and “to induce them to respond in a particular way” (ibid.:
42). They are, therefore, comprised of texts that persuade the readers either to follow
particular viewpoints or to take up specific actions by appealing to the receivers‟ sensitivities
and desires. Such texts would include for instance advertisements when the sender appeals to
the receivers‟ real or imagined needs and any elements of exemplification when the sender
appeals to the receivers‟ previous experience or knowledge (ibid.). Similarly to the problem
encountered in the case of informative texts, appellative-function markers may lose their
meaning in translation as a consequence of their culture-specific character. They may very
likely be understood differently in a new cultural setting, even if they are recognised as
appellative elements, and thus fail to achieve the desired effect as they are dependent on a
specific kind of interpretation. Nord remarks that the appellative function “is like a dart that
has to hit the centre of the board to obtain a good score” (ibid.: 43). It remains in the hands of
the translator to produce the target text in a manner that will make it fulfil the appellative
function when it is presented to an audience with different background knowledge.
The final component of Nord‟s model, the innovative phatic function, is constituted by
any textual element that means to establish, maintain, or end contact between sender and
receiver (ibid.: 44). It is very often the case that this function is fulfilled by most
conventional, fixed expressions found within one cultural system – ranging from the
19

21. generally accepted forms of address to proverbs and idioms (ibid.). Needless to say, phatic
utterances may also be interpreted as odd-sounding expressions or elements serving a
different function when placed in a new cultural setting. It is necessary to bear in mind that
the conventionality of certain forms and expressions need not easily transfer across cultures.
Christiane Nord‟s model of target text typology provides a set of categories that
concentrate a broad variety of subgenres within functional texts. Concerning translation, the
main focus here is the reception generated by the target readers who are guided by the norms
and conventions of a particular cultural setting. The target-text model emphasises the
importance of perceiving translation as a process of transferring communicative elements to
that new cultural setting but leaves open the question of how various translational approaches
affect this transfer. This issue is taken up by a different functionalist model created by Nord,
which focuses on the classification of translation procedures.
20
1.3.3 Nord’s classification of translations
The previously described classification of texts frequently remarks that target texts preserve
their intended communicative functions when the solutions adapted by the translator take into
account the differences between source- and target-culture communicative elements.
Therefore, a skopos that requires the translation of an appellative text to be read as an
appellative text in the target culture will call for adapting the text‟s appellative markers to
target-culture norms. It needs to be stressed, however, that adopting a contrary approach, one
faithfully recreating the markers of the source culture, will not always lead to a breakdown in
communication. Indeed, translators may encounter skopoi where the same appellative text
needs to be interpreted as information about appellation in the target culture. Reiss‟s model
would consider such a change in function a failure to provide equivalent communicative
elements. This is a serious shortcoming on its part. A translator may be commissioned to
translate a British university diploma into Polish so that the resulting document will be able to
legally function in the Polish educational system. On the other hand, s/he may also be
commissioned to produce a translation that will simply explain each element of the document
in Polish. These translational alterations are accepted bв Nord‟s text classification, which
perceives the changes in the reception of communicative functions as a different outcome of
translation rather than a mistranslation. The following model proposed by Nord explores
translational procedures which both introduce such changes and preserve the communicative
category of the source text.

22. Drawing on the notion of dual translational modes that serve either to recreate the
source text‟s communicative function or to render it with an entirely different one, Nord
proposes two basic categories of translation procedures: documentary and instrumental
translations. She describes the first category as a form of text production that maintains the
communication between the original sender and the intended source-culture audience,
whereas the target-culture audience, the proper addressees of the translation, are the
spectators of this communication (Nord 1997: 47). Documentary translation produces
renderings which preserve certain aspects of its source text to the extent that they are overtly
marked as translations to their new readers. Consequently, their resulting communicative
function will be very different from the original. In the case of documentary translation, the
occurring change of function causes the text to adopt what Nord describes as the “metatextual
function,” which reflects the translation‟s status as a „document‟ of the source-culture
communication (ibid.). The category of instrumental translation comprises procedures that
produce texts characterised by a similarity of function with respect to their source texts.
Renderings produced with instrumental translation are new communicative situations that
take place between the original sender and the new target-culture audience. They are only
based on the source text and all their communicative elements are adjusted to the target-culture
norms (ibid.). Due to the fact that these translations create communication anew and
do not directly reveal themselves as translations, they can retain the original communicative
function that their source texts fulfilled when addressing the source-culture audience (ibid.)
The following paragraphs will outline those elements of Nord‟s model that pertain to
functional texts, seeing as that is the main focus of this work.
Nord divides the category of documentary translation into several subcategories that
illustrate different modes of preserving the textual elements of source texts and the form and
application of translations that they produce. The subcategories of documentary translation
employed in renderings of functional texts are as follows:
 Interlineal translation – also described as word-for-word translation. Texts produced with
this procedure preserve the morphological, lexical, and/or syntactic features of the
source-language system which are found in the source text. It is most often used in
academic works devoted to comparative linguistics or in language encyclopaedias,
“where the aim is to show the structural features of one language bв means of another”
(ibid.).
21

23.  Literal translation – this mode of translation preserves the lexical units of the source text
while adapting all remaining linguistic elements to the norms of the target-language
system (ibid.: 48-49). Nord remarks that literal translations have multiple applications,
ranging from explication of foreign vocabulary in language classes or within the field of
intercultural studies to translation of quotations in scholarly works and citing foreign-language
22
speakers in the media.
 Philological translation – such translations reflect their source text rather literally but
provide footnotes, glossaries, or any other explanation as regards certain culture-specific
peculiarities found within them (ibid.: 49). Nord remarks that this procedure is mostly
employed in the translation of ancient or culturally-distant literary texts but it may very
well be employed in any functional texts where a semi-literary mode of discourse is
employed – for instance in some tourism texts, where references to notions exclusive to a
specific culture are likely to be found.
Instrumental translation comprises modes of translation which aim at different degrees
of preserving the communicative effect that takes place between the sender and source-culture
audience and redirecting it to the target-culture audience. Two of these procedures are
of particular relevance to functional texts:
 Equifunctional translation – this type of translation is best employed in circumstances
when the target-culture audience does not need to be aware of the fact that it is reading a
translation. Equifunctional translations perfectly adapt every communicative element
found in the source text to target-culture standards and constitute the exact same kind of
communicative interaction between the sender and the target-culture readers that the
original maintained with the source-culture readers. This type of rendering is employed
in a vast range of functional translations. Among some, Nord enumerates instruction
manuals, recipes, tourist information texts, and information on products
(ibid.: 50).
 Heterofunctional translation – this mode of translation relates to texts whose cultural
remoteness does not enable the complete re-creation of all their communicative functions
(ibid.: 50-51). It may be for example the case that a translator is commissioned to render
an advertisement whose referential function consists in relating to imagery which is
recognised as positive in the source culture. That reference allows the advertisement to
fulfil its appellative function, namely, to convince the intended audience to buy the
product. The same imagery may not have positive associations in the target culture which

24. obliges the translator to choose a different kind of imagery, one that does agree with this
requirement. This is also an example of a change in the referential function for the
purpose of preserving the appellative function.
Skopos theory gathers translational approaches which are strictly contrary to the
field‟s early 20th-century assumptions; they strive to terminate the hegemony of the source
text as the ultimate measure of translational accuracy and grant more importance to the
remaining participants of the translation process. The concepts which have been successively
developed within the theory prioritise, among others, the purpose of the translated text, the
terms of the commission, and the cultural context of both source and target text. Skopos
theory discerns various categories of functional texts and specifies modes of translation that
best serve individual goals. It elaborates on the problems encountered in the practice of
functional translation and how to approach them in order for the target text to achieve its
intended effect. The shift of the „70s that Skopos theory was part of called for perceiving
language as a form of communication within a specific culture rather than a static code, while
translation itself was seen as a mode of mediation between different cultures and not a
process of exchanging the elements of different codes. In order to establish how translation
studies precisely interact with the concept of culture, the following chapter will explore the
status of this notion within the discipline.
23

25. CHAPTER TWO
CULTURE IN TRANSLATION THEORY
The previous chapter of the given work included numerous references to the notion of culture,
a term which has proven to be necessary for even the most basic descriptions of various
concepts introduced by Skopos theory and, as such, an inherent element of functional
translation. Likewise, the notion of culture is a crucial element in many other theories coming
from various stages of the development of translation studies. In the light of these two facts, it
becomes feasible to assume that a broad range of the field‟s theories expose close connections
to, or possibly provide certain foundations for functionalist ideas. Since the aim of this work
is to investigate how Skopos theory resolves translational issues arising from cultural
differences, it is necessary here to investigate this possibly long-lived connection by
examining the role that the notion of culture plays in the general scope of translation theory.
The following chapter shall first discuss the meaning of culture in reference to functional
translation and secondly provide an overview of some of a few selected concepts pertaining to
culture in translation. The description of these concepts shall serve to elaborate on the impact
that the notion of culture has on both theories of translation and the practice of functional
translation.
2.1 Defining culture from the perspective of functional translation
Until now the discussion has followed a slightlв “intuitive” understanding of what culture
comprises. The “varietв of perspectives that constitute human culture” which have been
mentioned in the opening paragraph of the previous chapter (cf. 1.0) may basically refer to all
elements of life, both common and rare, negligible and grand, as well as good and bad. This
collection serves as an instrument of defining who we are as individuals, members of groups,
and members of societies and how different we are from other people on each of these levels.
In a slightly abstract manner, one could name people as products of culture. Applying the
same to written texts, the dominant subject matter of translation, would actually be far more
tangible. They are in fact products of culture in the very same sense, seeing as all texts, in
various ways and to various degrees, constitute a reflection of human identities. In the process
of explaining how Skopos theory perceives the workings of texts in translation, the discussion
has referred to terms such as target culture, source culture, culture-specificity, and the transfer
24

26. of texts across cultures. In translation theory, particularly in the functional approach, these
notions already hint at a determined perception of culture, namely that if texts reflect culture,
it would not be possible to speak of their meaning independently of it.
In its broadest sense, culture envelops the totality and diversity of human heritage.
Determining the link between the concept of culture and translation studies in this sense
would be indeed a Herculean task, as we are not provided with a single theoretical approach
that would encompass such a great scope and practically serve as a “general theory of
everything” for more specialised theories. This fact is pointed out by Peeter Torop in his
research devoted to the cultural influence of translated textsŚ “although there are several
disciplines engaged in the study of culture, we can speak of neither a methodologically
unified research into culture, nor of a general theory of culture. As an object of study culture
allows for too manв different definitions for this to be possible” (Torop 2002Ś 594). Nor can
every element of this scope be regarded as relevant to translation studies. To illustrate this,
Kate James points out that “the definition of „culture‟ as given in the Concise Oxford
Dictionary varies from descriptions of the „Arts‟ to plant and bacteria cultivation and includes
a wide range of intermediarв aspects” (James 2002). Some scholars question whether there is
a point to defining culture at all, as in the case of Ned Seleeвe who commentsŚ “I know of no
way to better ensure having nothing productive happen than for a language department to
begin its approach to culture by a theoretical concern for defining the term” (qtd. bв Katan
1999: 16).
Fortunatelв, the translation scholar‟s work belongs to a field which constructivelв
incorporates other disciplines (cf. 1.1) and this allows for such an effort to be in fact
productive. Here the issue at hand is resolved by a significant similarity between the foci of
cultural and translation studies. A likely-minded remark regarding this is made by Torop:
“comparing the two fields, especiallв projecting the development problems of translation
studies upon cultural theory, comes most naturally. Translation studies attempt to solve,
although on a smaller scale, the same problems that have been facing cultural theory for some
time alreadв” (Torop 2002Ś 593-594). Incidentally, placing focus on a scope of culture which
comprises the interests of a specific field often becomes the prerequisite for conducting
studies within that fieldŚ “if we define culture as „a particular civilization at a particular
period,‟ then we will teach history … if, on the other hand w define culture in terms of „the
artistic and social pursuits, expressions and tastes valued by a society or class‟ we will be
teaching national sports, pursuits, and hobbies” (Katan 1999Ś 16-17). Thus, what can be done
25

27. with translational issues in mind is to narrow the immense scope of culture down to a level
where it overlaps with the mechanics of translation instead of generalising about the concept.
For this purpose, Mary Snell-Hornbв refers to a definition of culture drawn bв Heinг Göhring
from a concept first formulated by the American ethnologist Ward H. Goodenough:
Culture is everвthing one needs to know, master and feel in order to judge where people‟s
behaviour conforms to or deviates from what is expected from them in their social roles, and in
order to make one‟s own behaviour conform to the expectations of the societв concerned – unless
one is prepared to take the consequences of deviant behaviour. (qtd. by Snell-Hornby 1995: 40)
Göhring‟s proposed adaptation of Goodenough‟s definition specifically aimed to address the
process of translation (Nord 1997: 24). Snell-Hornby points out that its core significance in
this regard is found in three pointsŚ “firstlв, the concept of culture as a totalitв of knowledge,
proficiency, and perception; secondly, its immediate connection with behaviour (or action)
and events, and thirdly, its dependence on expectations and norms, whether those of social
behaviour or those accepted in language usage.” She additionallв stresses that these
characteristics are highlв relevant in particular to Vermeer‟s approach to translation (Snell-
Hornby 1995: 42). In order to confirm whether there exists a legitimate connection between
Skopos theory and the above definition, let us turn back to the fundamental assumptions of
functionalism and applв to them the primarв aspects of Goodenough‟s concept.
The assumption which pictures culture from the translational perspective as a
collection of all knowledge and norms that condition linguistic behaviour makes it impossible
to speak of language as some form of a standalone code system, independent of any element
that originates beyond it and requiring nothing for its comprehension but the knowledge of the
code itself. Indeed, the functional approach follows this opposition, seeing as its postulates
sum up to treating texts not as mere products of language but messages interactively bound
with the aforementioned collections (ibid.: 43). The concept of unity between language and
culture in this sense is particularly reflected in the studies of Hönig and Kussmaul, the
German functionalist “precursors,” who develop their perception of translation from the
concept of texts as a “verbalised part of a socioculture” (Snell-Hornby 1995: 44, 2006: 51).
This description clearly leans towards perceiving texts as expressions grounded in the
knowledge of individual groups of people. They saw in this particular relation an important
consequence for translation, namely what Snell-Hornby summarises as a dependence of the
produced translation “on its function as a text „implanted‟ in the target culture” (Snell-Hornby
1995: 44). For all that it comprises, culture may be seen as playing the role of a context that
26

28. continuously determines what a text must contain in order to fulfil a specific function.3 In
terms of functional translation, observing such contexts proves crucial to achieving the
desired effect, for the purpose of translation consists in presenting a clear, readable text not
only to a reader who speaks a different language, but also to one who belongs to a different
culture. Different cultures may be characterised by striking differences in terms of what
determines the function of a text. As Snell-Hornbв writesŚ “if language is an integral part of
culture, the translator needs not only proficiency in two languages, he must also be proficient
in two cultures” (ibid.: 44).
In light of the fact that culture is highly significant to determining how various text
functions are fulfilled by language, the target-text orientation of functionalism has a dual
dependence. It has been discussed that in professional settings the translator of functional
texts is presented with a translation brief which, among others, explicates the reception that
the produced translation is meant to attain. Open disagreement or neglecting to take into
account any specified terms of the commission fails the translation assignment. In order to
perform his/her task well, the translator is obliged to not so much „obey‟ the brief without
question but rather mediate between his/her own intentions, the intentions of the source text‟s
author, and the intentions of the commissioner and consequently create a compromise
between the interests of all involved parties in the produced translation (Nord 2006: 32-34). It
is a technical issue that nonetheless has a great impact on the practice and shifts the focus
towards target-text production. The target cultural context that the translation is to become
embedded in similarly advocates such a shift. The functional approach observed inadequacies
in the classical rule of translating as faithfully as it is possible in all situations not only
because the expectations of commissioners tend to be different than or the exact opposite of
literal translation, but also because translation involves creating texts for a new audience
which is likewise guided by its own, specific knowledge in determining the sense of a given
text and expectations pertaining to a given translation‟s function. The conclusion reached here
remains unchanged – culture has a substantial impact on translation; regardless of the type of
text that the translator works with or the instructions of the commissioner, the purpose of
translation is also conditioned by the fact that the process entails transferring the text into a
new communicative situation. The relation between the translation‟s purpose, the terms of the
commission, and the target culture audience is best reflected in an explanation of the status of
the skopos in the functional framework presented by Snell-Hornby:
3 This takes into account functions as outlined in 1.3 of this work.
27

29. The most important factor [to the functional approach] is the skopos (Greek for aim, purpose,
goal), hence the purpose or function of the translation in the target culture, as specified by the
client (in a translation brief) or the envisaged user-expectations; translation is hence prospective
rather than, as had hitherto been the case, retrospective (Snell-Hornby 2006: 54).
For a certain reason that remains unexplained, however, Snell-Hornby writes about the
prospectiveness of functional translation as alternately based on the demands of the brief and
the target audience. That is not usually the case, for the interests of both these participants
may be sufficiently incongruent to exert contrary demands for one assignment and require the
translator to establish a compromise between them (Nord 2006: 33).
Despite the fact that the presented approach aims to explain the notion of culture in
terms more manageable to Skopos theory, it is still left to operate within a range of various
ideas and issues. It is a fact particularly pertinent to Skopos theory that translation deals with a
broad variety of text types for whom their respective cultural contexts will focus on different
linguistic and extra-linguistic elements in determining their functionality. What is more, in
the current view culture remains a very complex system where precise delimitation is hardly
possible. It is not the case that to each language there is ascribed only one culture which
gathers every phenomenon that conditions its norms and behaviour (Nord 1997: 24). To
elaborate on this, Nord gives the example of cultural similarities found among separate, but
nonetheless spatially close communities such as of those Dutch and Germans who live in
regions close to their common border. Although their languages differ, their value systems
will be similar. Alternatively, the Scots and the English, who constitute distinct communities
of dissimilar origin, will share similar linguistic patterns in some situations while following
their own in others (ibid.: 24). To resolve the question of how to envision the borders of
culture, Nord refers to an altogether different view formulated by the North American
anthropologist Michael Agar. Agar claims that “culture is not something people have; it is
something that fills the spaces between them. And culture is not an exhaustive description of
anything; it focuses on differences, differences that can vary from task to task and group to
group” (ibid.). Agar‟s concept diverges significantlв from the view accepted in this studв in
that he conceives culture purely in terms of differences, as something indescribable as far as
its scope is concerned. However, the point that he makes in his consideration is nonetheless
valid to the issue of delimiting cultures. Culture-specificity may apply to various social levels
and it may also persist across language boundaries. The cultural proficiency of the translator
must in many cases consist not only in the knowledge of what is largely specific to the users
28

30. of one language but also in the ability to tell apart the norms and value systems of different
communities, groups, and organisations.
The sheer difficulty of defining culture or even placing it within the framework of a
single translation theory predicts that entire volumes of discussions would likely not exhaust
the subject. Culture is a concept of great complexity, one difficult to determine in almost
every respect. The most important issue to Skopos theory and the practice of functional
translation in this regard is a perception of culture as a context for language with which it
remains in continuous interaction. Gathering norms as well as all manner of “knowledge,
proficiencв, and perception” (Snell-Hornby 1995: 42) that condition linguistic behaviour,
culture determines what allows texts to fulfil various functions. As such, it is a direct cause
for target-text orientation in the functional approach. Neglecting the fact that the production
of a target text consists in transferring it to a new audience and a new communicative
situation will jeopardise the assignment no differently than when a translator ignores the
translation brief. Given its great significance to translation, the concept of culture has given
rise to a number of theoretical notions in the field, many of which predate the assumptions of
functionalism and further elaborate on the problems that the translator must deal with.
2.2 The relation between the notion of culture and translation theory
The above discussion has presented the functional approach largely as a turning point in
translation, from perceiving the activity as a subservient practice of linguistic transcoding to
discussing it as an independent discipline which deals with intercultural communication. The
term of culture itself has been analysed in the setting of this shift, which took place at the end
of the 1970s and the beginning of the 1980s and whose concepts remain significant to
functional translation even today. However, in discussions on culture in translation, it is not
uncommon to find it described as a factor so inherent to the practice that it had to be
considered in one manner or another ever since the activity of translation came into existence.
Accordingly, the influences of the concept of culture can be traced in many ideas pertaining to
translation which presaged this „cultural turn4‟ but nonetheless related to its assumptions.
Some of these date as far back as the early 19th century.
4 This term is commonly used in translation studies to denote the shift described in this discussion; briefly
defined by Mary Snell-Hornbв as “the abandoning of the „scientistic‟ linguistic approach as based on the concept
of the tertium comparationis or „equivalence‟ and moving from „text‟ to „culture‟” (Snell-Hornby 2006:50).
29

31. 2.2.1 Schleiermacher’s dichotomy of translation strategies
In a study entitled Translating Literature: The German Tradition from Luther to Rosenzweig,
published in 1977, André Lefevere provides an overview of concepts formulated by the most
prominent scholars belonging to the German canon of translation theory (Snell-Hornby 2006:
6). Many considerations presented in the writings of the discussed theoreticians echo the later
intersection of cultural and translation theory. However, unlike Skopos theory, which
conceives language as a means of communication between cultures, the German tradition
from the 19th to the early 20th century was grounded in a different perspective. To the scholars
of that time, language was the representation of thought and reality, whereas translation was
an interpretative force, “necessarilв reconstituting and transforming the foreign text” (Venuti
2000: 11). Ideas of that likeness, pertinent to culture in translation are for instance found in
the works of Friedrich Schleiermacher, particularly in the lecture and essay that he produced
in 1813 and 1814 respectively (Snell-Hornby 2006: 6-7).
In Über die Verschiedenen Methoden des Übersetzens, Schleiermacher elaborates on
the approaches available to the translator in the rendering of various types of texts. What is
particularly interesting about his reasoning is that he discusses translation in both classical
terms of source-text fidelity and functionalism-reminiscent target-text focus. The German
scholar applied different perceptions of the translation process to different text types. In his
understanding, the translation of what he considered “everвdaв business texts” consisted in
“mere interpreting” (Schleiermacher in Lefevere 1992Ś 142). It could be performed in a
straightforward manner, involving no exceptional issues to translation, and consequently, it
deserved little research effort on the part of the discipline. It was a procedure so static that it
could compare to a mathematical equation (Snell-Hornby 2006: 8). A slightly different status
in his view was ascribed to academic texts. Schleiermacher postulated that the translation of
these non-literarв texts is the business of a “paraphrast.” Bв paraphrasing, Schleiermacher
understood a mode of translation in which all elements of a text are reduced to a certain
fundamental meaning and then reinstated in a different language. The difference between the
two categories consisted in the fact that the latter had the propensity to encompass a far
greater scope of subject material originating from various fields and disciplines
(Schleiermacher in Lefevere 1992: 143). Ultimately, however, it was literature that
constituted the area of what Schleiermacher called “genuine translation.” In this mode, he
argues, translation “submits to the irrationalitв of languages” and strives to produce “an
imitation, a whole which is composed of parts obviously different from the parts of the
30

32. original, but which would yet in its effects come as close to that whole as the difference in
material allows” (Snell-Hornby 2006: 8).
Schleiermacher categorised the translation of all texts that do not belong to literature
as a “mechanical activitв” (ibid.). This thought may have been motivated by a variety of
factors, such as the amount of fixed-phrase equivalents involved in the translation of legal and
technical texts, etc., which rather suggested literary works as a field for linguistic creativity
both in their production and translation (cf. Schleiermacher in Lefevere 1992: 142-143). A
different reason for this originated from a personal preference that Schleiermacher assumed
with respect to a different theoretical dispute, explained below. Although limited to literature,
Schleiermacher‟s understanding of the translation process relates to the notion of creating the
text anew, accepting other approaches than literal translation, and stressing the effect that the
text is meant to have on the target readership. Overall, it is a step taken in the direction of
target-text-oriented approaches. Another binary concept formulated by Schleiermacher is
taken up for discussion within the field even more frequently:
In my opinion, there are only two [approaches to translation]. Either the translator leaves the
author in peace, as much as possible, and moves the reader towards him; or he leaves the reader in
peace, as much as possible, and moves the author towards him. The two roads are so completely
separate from each other that one or the other must be followed as closely as possible, and that a
highly unreliable result would proceed from any mixture, so that it is to be feared that author and
reader would not meet at all (qtd. by Snell-Hornby 2006: 8).
Today better known as concepts of domestication and foreignisation, further developed by
Lawrence Venuti, Schleiermacher‟s strategies reveal the fact that the readers of the source
text and the target text are culturally heterogeneous groups and, consequently, translation
entails decisions regarding the presentation of thoughts originating from one culture to an
audience existing in a different one. The form of the translation‟s language is determined bв
the movement of authors and readers initiated by the translator, which may take place not
only across linguistic boundaries (if it had, Schleiermacher would have surely determined
paraphrasing as the most efficient mode of translation for any text), but also across space,
time, and organisations of knowledge. Domesticating in his understanding consists in
producing a text whose features adhere to the conventions of the target language and do not
betray its foreignness, whereas foreignising strives to mark the text with this foreign likeness,
keeping its readers aware of the fact that they are dealing with a translation and setting a clear
demarcation between what is native and what is foreign (ibid.: 9). Anthony Pym notes that the
“binarism” characterising Schleiermacher‟s approaches is quite commonplace in the
31

33. discipline‟s theorв, ranging up to the present times where, although tolerant of “middle
grounds,” various concepts still operate in terms of dichotomies (Pвm 1995Ś 6-7).
Schleiermacher‟s words strictlв underline the need for choosing onlв one of the two
available options, lest the produced translation places the author and the reader at a distance
where proper comprehension is not possible. Even though there appear to be two options
available to the translator, Schleiermacher is far in favour of the foreignising approach. He
advocates the creation of a special language for the purpose of translation, “enriched” bв the
foreignness of the source text‟s setting and maintaining the reader‟s awareness of the target
text‟s distant origin. A language of this kind could be achieved by employing such devices as
archaisms, irregular syntactic patterns, etc. (Snell-Hornby 2006: 9). Pym adds that, although it
is an extensive input on the subject, Schleiermacher‟s writing is not the first to discuss the
subject of domestication and foreignisation. His is a particular view on the matter, grounded
not only in the contemporaneous perception of language but also in the historical context of
the Napoleonic Era and what Pвm calls a “nationalistic opposition,” resulting in his lecture
being “a general attempt to oppose German Romantic aesthetics to the belles infidèles of
French Neoclassicism … He [Schleiermacher] had little contextual reason to look kindly upon
a French translation method” (Pвm 1995Ś 5-6). Additionally, Schleiermacher associated the
foreignising approach exclusively with literary art and academic works due to his belief that
messages conveyed by such texts were bound to highly culture-specific concepts. Their
abundance within them ultimately obliged the translator to employ the foreignising strategy,
as opposed to the terminologв of “everвdaв business texts” that Schleiermacher found easв to
transfer and not in the least challenging in “genuine” translation efforts (Kittel and Polterman
in Baker 1998: 423-424).
A different view regarding the two strategies was upheld by the highly renowned
German writer and thinker Johann Wolfgang von Goethe. During his commemorative address
for Christoph Martin Wieland, a respected translator of Shakespeare into German who died in
1831, Goethe spoke highlв of the translator‟s approach, which consisted in applвing
domestication when facing particularly difficult problems but mostly in resorting to the
method that draws from both strategies, an idea unconditionally advised against by
Schleiermacher. Both Wieland and Goethe were apparently convinced that the
“reconciliation” of both these approaches was highlв possible (Snell-Hornby 2006: 9).
A different scholar worthy of mention as regards the presented concepts, although
preceding both Schleiermacher and Goethe, is the 17th century English writer and translator
32

34. John Dryden, who formulated concepts highly reminiscent of those belonging to
Schleiermacher. Dryden distinguished between three modes of translation – metaphrase,
imitation, and paraphrase. The first two corresponded to the foreignisation and domestication
strategies respectively, while the last differed from how Schleiermacher perceived
paraphrasing and was described by Dryden as a sense-for-sense mode of translation, an
equivalent of “the middle waв” that he supported as the best approach while discarding the
other ones as “extremes that ought to be avoided” (ibid.).
Rooted in a perception of language generally ascribed to the German movements of
the time, which viewed it as an expression of thought and culture, and texts as representatives
thereof, the significance of Schleiermacher‟s concepts naturallв came to be recognised in
multiple discussions, most specifically by Lawrence Venuti in the 90s (ibid.: 145). Their
connection to the communicative view of language is nevertheless apparent in the way the
two strategies treated translation as an act of bringing one reality closer to the other and a
process of enriching languages, literatures, and nations (Venuti 2000: 11). A far more
“decisive” connection between the notion of culture and translation can be found in the
theories of a different German scholar.
2.2.2 Humboldt and Jakobson – the relation between language and reality
Mary Snell-Hornby recognises the theoretical input formulated by Wilhelm von Humboldt as
early as in the beginning of the 19th century to be among the first valid connections between
language and culture (Snell-Hornbв 1995Ś 40, 2006Ś 13). She attributes his ideas to “the
intellectual climate of his time and countrв,” which includes the recognition of language as a
constitutive element of thought and reality (cf. 2.2.1). Indeed, this is reflected in those of
Humboldt‟s claims which are of main interest at this point in the studвŚ “For Humboldt
language was something dynamic, an activity (energeia) rather than a static inventory of items
as the product of activity (ergon). At the same time language is an expression both of the
culture and the individuality of the speaker, who perceives the world through language” (ibid.:
40). A perception of language as being the activity itself and not something resulting from an
activity directs the linguistic considerations of that time onto a slightly different path.
Occupying the very centre of communication instead of being assigned the role of a utility,
language in this sense has a far closer connection to human cognition than it would as an
element responsible for detachedly expressing anything common to one reality and culture. It
still performs that function, albeit on a far more “intimate” level.
33

35. Humboldt‟s claims can indeed be seen as opening a path towards a new understanding
of language at that time. Snell-Hornby goes as far as establishing a relation between them and
two important linguistic concepts of the 20th century, concepts which can nevertheless be
viewed as highly relevant to translation, that is owing to the fact that their assumptions
ultimately advocate two opposing views of total translatability and total untranslatability.
Although contradictory and ultimately demanding exclusive acceptance from the individual
translators, these views shed light on the possible understandings of the interaction between
language and culture to be considered for both translation theory and practice.
Snell-Hornby first refers Humboldt‟s theorв to the principle of linguistic relativitв,
more commonly known as the Sapir-Whorf hвpothesis, which takes the German scholar‟s
idea as far as to claim that “thought does not „precede‟ language, but on the contrary it is
conditioned bв it” (Snell-Hornby 2006:41). From the level of greater intimacy, language
advances here to the role of the origin of reality. Sapir and Whorf‟s concept was based on
observations resulting from studies of exotic languages such as Hopi, where, according to the
scholars, “the verb sвstem directlв affected the speaker‟s conception of time” (ibid.).
Languages as such significant entities, which take precedence over even cognition and
perception of reality, create unbreakable ties with the cultures and communities that speak
them. Consequently, any effective form of translation becomes in this sense ultimately
impossible.
Snell-Hornbв also links Humboldt‟s views to the generative grammarians‟ theorв of
surface and deep structures of language. Humboldt himself writes that “a word is not a mere
sign for a concept since a concept cannot come into being, let alone be recorded, without the
help of a word” (Humboldt in Lefevere 1992Ś 136). To him, language is characterised bв a
duality of levels which constitute its entirety through their constant interaction, not in the
classical sense of words and their defined meanings, however, but underlвing “concepts,”
ideals existing in human thought and their inseparable “embodiment” through language.
Given the possibility that all linguistic products can be reduced to their pre-transformational
deep structure to be “rebuilt” in the surface structures of a different language, it would be
possible to conclude that translation is always possible.
A different set of considerations regarding the relation between language and reality as
expressed in terms of „conceptual ideas‟ and their linguistic signifiers was introduced bв
Roman Jakobson in his essay entitled On Linguistic Aspects of Translation, published in
1959. Similarly to Humboldt, Jakobson follows the claim that words occupy a separate level
34

36. in relation to the objects that they signify. He underlines in this distinction, however, that
meaning is a linguistic phenomenon derived from signs, and not from the concepts or “things”
that signs denote:
Any representative of a cheese-less culinarв culture will understand the English word “cheese” if
he is aware that in this language it means “food made of pressed curds” and if he has at least a
linguistic acquaintance with “curds.” … Against those who assign meaning (signatum) not to the
sign, but to the thing itself, the simplest and truest argument would be that nobody has ever
smelled or tasted the meaning of “cheese” or of “apple.” (Jakobson [1959] 2000: 113).
Since the meaning of a word is not necessarily expressed by the immediate presence of the
concept to which it is ascribed, it must be formulated by further linguistic material. In terms
of cultural contexts, Jakobson points out precisely that it is not the absence of a concept in a
given culture that impedes its comprehension but the lack of possibility to explain it in terms
available to that culture.
In light of the presented relation, Jakobson enumerates three types of translation:
intralingual, interlingual, and intersemiotic. The first relates to synonymy and paraphrasing
within one language system, which may occur when a speaker attempts to bring out the
meaning of a word, for instance bв stating that “a car is a vehicle” or “wine is the fermented
juice of grapes.” The intersemiotic tвpe is explained as “an interpretation of verbal signs bв
means of signs of nonverbal sвstems” (ibid.: 114). Jakobson put forward observations most
pertinent to the discussion at hand in the context of the interlingual mode of translation, the
kind conducted between languages. Although a greater portion of his discussion is devoted to
the implications that formal differences between languages exert on translation, Jakobson
nonetheless observes certain difficulties of interlingual translation which are caused by extra-linguistic
factors. He states that complete equivalence is not possible when rephrasing texts in
a different language just as it is not possible in the case of synonymy within one language.
The renderings maв instead “serve as adequate interpretations of alien code-units or
messages” (ibid.). To illustrate this problem, he presents the issue of translating between the
English word “cheese” and its seeming Russian equivalent “ɫыɪ.” In the culture of English
language speakers, Jakobson explains, the word “cheese” encompasses anв of the food‟s
known varieties without causing confusion. The Russian-speaking audience, however,
differentiates between cottage cheese (ɬɜоɪоɝ) and anв other pressed varieties (ɫыɪ). Thus, in
standard Russian “ɫыɪ” is in fact the accepted equivalent of “cheese,” but onlв when a
pressed variety free of ferments is in question (ibid.). In a context where this distinction is
relevant, the failure to observe it could indeed result in a mistranslation. Steering somewhat
35

37. towards considerations on the communicative function of languages, Jakobson adds that this
problem does not pertain merely to the quirks of individual words:
Most frequently, however, translation from one language into another substitutes messages in one
language not for separate code-units but for entire messages in some other language. Such a
translation is a reported speech; the translator recodes and transmits a message received from
another source. Thus translation involves two equivalent messages in two different codes (ibid.).
Jakobson advocates here a process of sense-for-sense substitution, very much in the manner
shared by functionalists. The translator is similarly the reader of a message who recreates that
message in a new language and communicates it to a new audience. To an extent, one could
argue that Jakobson also analysed translation in terms of formal and dynamic equivalence. He
begins his discussion from the perspective of grammatical and associative differences which
arise across language boundaries and investigates how those differences impede equivalence
on the level of words. Further on, he progresses to view texts as messages and translation as a
recoding thereof, as indicated above. The notion of equivalence may apply to a study of
translation and culture not exclusivelв in terms of attempting to relate to it within Jakobson‟s
theorв. Several scholars who discuss Nida‟s theorв point out that it is relevant to both the
concept of culture and the functional approach on grounds not yet discussed in the given
study.
2.2.3 Nida’s theory and the concept of culture
It has been stressed on multiple occasions that Vermeer‟s Skopos framework and all scholarly
activity conducted within the initial stages of its formation were largely an opposing response
to the equivalence paradigm (cf.1.1). Consequentlв, this begs the question whether Nida‟s
concepts can be placed on a par with the aforementioned theories as regards their relevance to
the issue of culture and translation. What is more, the equivalence framework should thus be
expected to contrast with the trends of the late 1970s so sharply that it would not in fact be
able to contribute to the post-cultural-turn discipline. Yet how alien to functionalism can
equivalence in its entirety really be when we observe such statements put forward by Nida
himself:
It is true that in all translation and interpreting the source and target languages must be implicitly
or explicitly compared, but all such interlingual communication extends far beyond the mechanics
of linguistic similarities and contrasts … the meaning of verbal sвmbols on anв and everв level
depends on the culture of the language community. Language is a part of culture, and in fact, it is
the most complex set of habits that any culture exhibits. Language reflects the culture, provides
access to the culture, and in manв respects constitutes a model of the culture (qtd. in Schтffner and
Kelly-Holmes 1995: 1)
36

38. Nida acknowledges that in many respects there exists a relevant connection between language
and culture. It has been stated in the given study that even functionalist concepts themselves
relate back to those elements of the equivalence paradigm which incorporate this idea (cf.
1.1). Is it possible to claim that Skopos theory constituted a turning point in the discipline,
given Nida‟s above statement? What does the linguistic orientation of this paradigm consist
in and on what grounds could Skopos theory consider itself innovative with respect to it? In
order to resolve these issues, let us turn to several considerations on the subject.
Ideas associating translation with culture were at one point absent in the discipline‟s
theoretical input (cf. 1.1). A sharp dividing line drawn between language and culture resulted
in purely linguistically-oriented modes of defining translation. Sugeng Hariyanto presents
several pertinent definitions of translation formulated in the 1960s – 1970s and points out
that it is only the definition proposed by Eugene Nida and Charles Taber from all those listed
that in fact makes anв kind of reference to culture in translationŚ “translating consists of
reproducing in the receptor language the closest natural equivalent of the source language
message, first in terms of meaning and secondlв in terms of stвle” (qtd. in Hariyanto 2009).
Hariвanto claims that this implied reference is found in Nida and Taber‟s concept of the
“closest natural equivalent.” Bв making it the focal point in their definition, he writes, Nida
and Taber maintain that “the equivalent sought after in every effort of translating is the one
that is so close that the meaning/message can be transferred well” (ibid.). Hariyanto thus
interprets equivalence as something the translator must search for among the possible
translation options of a given item. Different decisions are situated at different distances from
fuller equivalence and will result in different qualities of “transferring the meaning/message.”
The issue of whether full equivalence is at all possible is not found in Hariвanto‟s discourse
but within his understanding there undoubtedly exists a perception of equivalence as a
spectrum. It is certainly not a Saussurean dichotomy where in the case of every translation
problem there exist only two possible options where one will always be [+equivalent] and the
other [-equivalent]. Nevertheless, Hariвanto‟s conclusions shed no light as to the factors that
motivate the translator in selecting certain translation solutions over others.
In contrast with Hariyanto, Kate James establishes a direct connection between the
concept of culture and the equivalence paradigm by recalling slightly different terms that Nida
employed in the description of his concepts:
37

39. Nida's definitions of formal and dynamic equivalence may also be seen to apply when considering
cultural implications for translation. According to Nida, a “gloss translation” mostly typifies
formal equivalence where form and content are reproduced as faithfully as possible and the TL
reader is able to “understand as much as he can of the customs, manner of thought, and means of
expression” of the SL context. Contrasting with this idea, dynamic equivalence “tries to relate the
receptor to modes of behaviour relevant within the context of his own culture” without insisting
that he “understand the cultural patterns of the source-language context” (James 2002).
The conclusion that is repeated in James‟ statement when compared with Hariвanto‟s is that
Nida clearly takes into account the issue of culture when discussing equivalence. She adds,
however, that Nida also addresses culture-specific items as elements of source texts that may
or may not need to be reformulated in order to make the text easier to access for the target
reader. This in turn relates his concepts even closer to functionalism. If we were to apply a
Skopos theorв view to Nida‟s modes and determine formal equivalence and dвnamic
equivalence as translation purposes, we would discover that both these frameworks are
compatible enough to yield either of the following translation strategies, depending on the
desired result – in one potential situation, the translator will fulfil the assignment only when
the translation maintains the form and content of the original in the TL as precisely as
possible, disregarding culture-specificity. In other circumstances only creating a perfectly
readable TL message that grants priority to resolving any communicative difficulties arising
from cultural discrepancy can make the translation meet up to its expected standards. When in
agreement with statements such as those found in Hariвanto‟s work, namelв that even when
operating within the equivalence framework the translator can judge various solutions rather
than constantly provide the same substitutions in every context, it would additionally appear
that both equivalence and functionalism are comparably tolerant of multiple translation
solutions to one text, as, again, dictated by the desired effect. Functionalism does in fact
oppose the idea that resolving translation problems consists in one-for-one substitution
despite varying contexts. A similar approach takes place whenever dynamic equivalence is
applied. Consequently, the conundrum grows more complicated.
How is it exactly possible that functionalism and equivalence theory are mostly
envisaged as opposing paradigms when there is so much compatibility between them?
Anthony Pym addresses this matter and attempts to provide an answer to the dilemma through
several observations. Firstly, he claims that scholars operating within the functionalist
framework5 have “equated equivalence with straight formal equivalence, or with literalism,
whereas the concept of equivalence had been developed precisely so that the categories of
5 Pym refers to Christiane Nord and Mary Snell-Hornby in his text.
38

40. „dвnamic‟ equivalence could work alongside the possibilities of literalism” (Pвm 2010: 48).
Pвm calls this treatment of the equivalence paradigm “ungenerous” and even goes as far as
saying that functionalism can be equated with the equivalence paradigm (ibid.). Indeed, owing
to the existence of the dynamic equivalence concept, it would be far from just to assume that
equivalence advocates pure literalism and consequently can have no input as regards the issue
of culture and translation. Attitudes like this may be derived from the linguistic dominance
that the discipline was subjected to prior to the 1980s, at the time of its formulation, (cf. 1.1)
and would not suffice to account for the dissimilarity of the two frameworks. However, Pym
also relates the problem at hand to the equivalence paradigm‟s linguistic origin, albeit from a
different perspective, and thus arrives at a more feasible explanation:
The problem could have been this. As long as you are analyzing modes of equivalence to the
source, you are doing linguistics of one kind or another. But if you have to choose between one
purpose and another (e.g. different reasons for translating Mein Kampf), linguistics will not be of
much help to you. You are engaged in applied sociology, marketing, the ethics of communication,
and a gamut of theoretical considerations that are only loosely held under the term „cultural
studies‟ (ibid.: 49).
As regards the conceptual nature of the two frameworks, it is their perception of the process
of translation itself that constitutes the key difference between them. This difference can be
related mainly to the words that Pym uses to describe translation within the equivalence
framework – linguistic analysis. Continuous relation to the source and disassembly of the text
to the level of its basic components is an entirely different procedure than target-text oriented
functional rendering, where the translator is a reader, not an analyst of the text. Translation
within Skopos theory extends to examining the field within which the text functions,
additionally making the translator responsible for maintaining the text‟s function across
cultural boundaries. At that point the translator truly becomes involved in multiple
departments of cultural studies, thus establishing a connection between them and translation
studies.
The concepts presented in this chapter provide a new perspective of the relations and
references through which the theories of translation studies assert themselves. It has thus far
been repeatedly stated that the discipline draws deeply from various other fields as regards its
theoretical matter. Skopos theory is one of the best examples of such a relation, given its close
connection with culture and the vast scope of subjects that this notion gathers within cultural
studies. Nevertheless, translation theories form similarly strong connections among one
another as well. It has been shown now that functionalism, as a post-cultural-turn paradigm,
can be seen as related to, or even originating from a set of independently formulated and, in
39

41. one presented instance, supposedly opposing theories. Indeed, the modest selection of notions
conducted above suffices to indicate that the theories of translation studies share not only the
particular interests of other disciplines, but also those of separate frameworks operating within
their own discipline. In the context of the given work, where several considerations on
cultural barriers and the translation of functional texts will follow shortly, this overview
stresses that the functionalist framework and the issue of culture in translation are most
fruitfully studied through a mutual prism of overlapping ideas, through a combination of the
practical aspect of translating functional texts (as described by Skopos theory) and the
problems encountered in the process of communication between cultures via translation.
40

42. CHAPTER THREE
SKOPOS THEORY, FUNCTIONAL TEXTS, AND CULTURE-SPECIFICITY
Before progressing with her considerations on the conceptual properties of Skopos theory (cf.
1.2), Christiane Nord provides several examples of situations where translational action takes
place. Each of these translational actions involve different contexts and include for instance a
mother interpreting her 2-year-old son‟s babв talk for her husband, a random passer-by
helping a lost German tourist in London, a translator rendering culture-specific elements of
their assigned text literally but with the additional use of annotations, and an interpreter
introducing alterations to the input speech, so that the forms of address contained within its
translation conform to the target culture norms (Nord 1997: 15-16).
An interesting feature of some of the presented situations is the fact that they do not
enclose the translational action in a professional setting. Nonetheless, Nord still considers
them situations where the process taking place is translation in no different regard than as
Skopos theory describes it. Indeed, there is a number of characteristics that all the presented
situations share, ones specificallв explicated bв the framework‟s notions. In all situations
there appears a need for communication but the lack of one partв‟s abilitв to comprehend a
different language calls for translation to become the vehicle of communication. The
translational action has its commissioner, receiver (only when the receiver and the
commissioner are not the same party) and, naturally, the translator. Finally, the translator
enables communication owing to their knowledge of both languages and completes the task,
bearing in mind both the input that they obtain as well as the needs of the
receiver/commissioner.
Those basic concepts, which describe the factors and elements shaping the process of
translation, can be identified in both professional and non-professional settings, a fact which
befits a theory that strives for universal application. This in turn allows for the conclusion that
the actual process of translation may take place in everyday circumstances – spontaneous,
involving untrained individuals, or even not apparent as translation to the participants or the
casual observer. On a certain fundamental level translation appears identical in all respects,
whether conducted by a professional or by a non-professional. The sameness becomes
blurred, however, when we move on from the verв basic schema of „source text → translator
→ target text‟ to a level where factors inherent to the professional setting begin to emerge –
deadlines, liabilities (in the case of legal translation also specifically in the legal sense of this
41

43. word), remuneration, the translation brief, and reader/commissioner expectations. These and
many more characteristics are also included, either directly or otherwise, in the Skopos
framework. As has also been shown, the framework strictly perceives the process of
translation as a form of intercultural communication. This begs the question whether
practising translators of functional texts can in fact refer to Skopos theory as regards resolving
issues related to the cultural boundaries between the source and target texts.
The following chapter will attempt to locate Skopos theory within the practice of
functional-text translation. The focus will be placed here on the culture-specificity of
individual texts and text genres. Further possible elaborations on the traits of professional
translation and how it is preciselв distinguished from such “laв tasks” as those listed above
will be omitted and a degree of self-evidence in that regard will be assumed for the sake of
brevity. Selected discussions on functional translation in areas such as technology,
advertising, tourism, and law will be included in the following sections for the purpose of
linking the notions so far introduced in this work with actual translation practice. As such, this
will also be an attempt to indicate that the Skopos framework, albeit belonging to the
theoretical domain, serves as a good support for practical translation endeavours.
3.1 Locating Skopos theory in practical functional translation
Owing to their works which attempt to bring translation theory closer to practice, we witness
a number of scholars relating to the question which constitutes the core significance of this
work – can translation theory in fact aid translators? The benefits of studies relating to this
question are apparent for both scholars and practising professionals – on the one hand, case
studies of conducted translation assignments allow for better insight into the mechanics of
translation and the minds of translators themselves, as we analyse their decisions and the
pursuits which guide them. On the other hand, as has been frequently pointed out, the
translator is left in practice with a myriad of translation solutions to choose from, given the
enormous productivity of natural languages and the multiplicity of manners in which they
differ from one another. Yet most often, the quality of the solutions chosen in comparable
translation problems is far from constant and can be ultimately assessed only via the results
that they produce. Incidentally, this assessment can be based on equally numerous features –
structure, vocabulary, style, communicativeness ... (for instance whether a translation of a
literarв piece maintains its author‟s identitв, whether a translation of a functional text fulfils
its intended purpose, etc.). However, hardly any translator would settle for the ability to
42

44. evaluate his/her decisions at a stage as late as when they are to produce the results. The
possibility to beneficially limit this seemingly endless expanse of approaches comes with
translation theories, which focus on a particular aspect of translation, define its elements in
specific terms, or describe the possible results of various decisions undertaken in the course of
a translation task. Theories may therefore, to simplify the idea, become a utility to practical
translation. This is opposed to an approach where the translator would study every problem
very narrowly, with his/her mind exclusively set on the single task of carrying each word,
phrase, and sentence over to the other language and without any concern for the complete
entity that he or she pieces together. It is the belief of this work‟s author that Skopos theory
may in fact support functional translation on a practical level, even when applied (in
accordance with its assumed capabilities) to a variety of fields. Notwithstanding, the selection
of a particular framework for this argumentation cannot be grounded on bare preferences and
needs to be justified, particularlв if there is a possibilitв for other “candidates” to take its
place.
3.1.1 The viability of a skopos-oriented approach
The equivalence paradigm, which constituted the concluding focal point of the previous
chapter, may prove to be considerable competition to Skopos theory in the discussed point,
owing to the existence of certain conceptual similarities between the two frameworks (cf.
2.2.3). In light of the current considerations it would be rational to ask whether these
similarities suffice to make both theories just as easily applicable to functional translation
practice, or whether the differences that distinguish them exclude one theory in favour of the
other. In a foreword to a discussion on challenges faced by translators of technical texts, Jody
Byrne follows the second option, arguing against equivalence. He first relates to the familiar
key difference that separates the two paradigms. Namely, the fact that equivalence-based
approaches place the translator‟s focus on the source text and do not take into consideration
the communicative purpose of the translational action, whereas Skopos theory shifts the
translator‟s focus to the target text (Byrne: 29):
…the concentration on the source text and not on those involved in the communication
means that a crucial part of the translational situation is simply not considered. If we do
not consider the purpose of the communication, it will be difficult, if not impossible, to tell
whether it was successful (ibid.).
Byrne claims that the scope of equivalence is simply too narrow concerning the
communicative aspect of translation. Having little to do with actual communication, which is
43

45. in fact the very point of functional texts, translating purely on the basis of the source text
derives further flaws. In the course of rendering certain alterations often appear necessary to
the translator. While they are unwarranted from the source text-oriented point of view,6 they
become crucial when unobstructed communication with the target audience becomes the
priority (ibid.).
Byrne adds that the mechanics of source-based translation contradict the way
translations function in the environments to which they are introduced (ibid.: 30). Translations
are subjected to the norms and expectations that the target culture sets out for individual
genres; they no longer relate to the norms of the source culture and when they attempt that
(through a very faithful reproduction), they will strike the target audience as odd or not easily
comprehensible.7
Bвrne‟s final remark pertains to the various tвpologies found in the equivalence
framework and the fact that theв “rarelв provide anв real guidance as to how we should go
about actuallв translating texts” (ibid.). Here he refers not only to the familiar terms of formal
and dynamic equivalence which have been introduced by Nida, but also to various
independent typologies proposed by other scholars working within this framework. He states
that although they do well to describe the modes of translation that a translator can assume,
they do not provide enough arguments as to the circumstances when these modes should be
adopted (ibid.).
With respect to Skopos theory, Byrne supports applying it to actual translation work
by refuting several criticisms directed at its practical application. First, he disagrees with the
claim that “Skopos theory produces „mercenary‟ translators who are, in effect, only interested
in pleasing their paвmasters” (ibid.: 43). This is not true seeing as translators act as
mercenaries only when they follow their assignment blindly, without applying their
knowledge as language experts to the procedure (ibid.). This result could only be achieved by
an extreme interpretation of the framework, such as that Skopos theory places the translation
brief and purpose of translation above any other factor, whereas in its actual nature it takes
into account and negotiates between all participants of the translation process.
Furthermore, there also exists the objection that if Skopos theory promotes introducing
alterations in the course of translation for the good of the target text‟s purpose, then it must
6 It is important to note here, however, that Byrne must be associating equivalence with strict literalism to make
this point. See Pвm‟s statements in 2.2.3 relating to the defence of the equivalence paradigm in this regard.
7 Only those translations which are meant to be independent, standalone texts that do not appear as translations to
their target readers. Otherwise, the reproduction of source-culture-related aspects is desirable or even crucial.
44

46. largely consist in adaptation, not actual translation. To counter this, drawing from his own
experience as a technical translator, Byrne explains that the magnitude of required alterations
is very rarely so stark as to warrant abandoning the source upon extracting all of the
information found within it and simply rewriting it in an entirely different form (ibid.).
Finally, Byrne cites a claim that posits certain doubts for him despite his supportive
disposition towards Skopos theory. He refers to Vermeer‟s statement regarding the production
of a translation “in accordance with some principle respecting the target text” (ibid.). The
cause of the problem here is the fact that even Vermeer himself believed that it must be
decided in each separate case what “the principle” exactlв is8 (Nord 1997: 29-30). This, as
Byrne puts it, “adds an element of subjectivity [to translation]” (Byrne 2006: 43). In other
words, the translation methods adopted by individual translators stem from their own
judgements and in most cases produce differing results; the professional lacks a set of
solutions to recurrent translation problems. To this Bвrne merelв responds that it “has to
remain a necessarв confound in the equation” which is anвwaв inherent in many other
approaches (ibid.). Settling that the supportive potential of skopos-orientedness lies in
generally specifying that translation is purposeful is not a conclusion which is necessarily
reached in all discussions.
3.1.2 Skopos theory as a utility for practical translation
In a discussion on the applicability of Skopos theory to practice, Andrew Chesterman and
Emma Wagner assert the framework as a foundation for far more diverse but equally useful
typologies. Their debate begins with a quote from an article relating to a failed French utility
ad translation posted in The Financial Times. The produced text was unsuitable for its
designated medium due to its sketchy and ungrammatical word-for-word character which
stemmed from a lack of communication between the client and the translator (Chesterman and
Wagner 2002: 39-40). The mistranslation sparked a discussion on the issue of text purposes
and, predictablв, turned the debaters‟ attention towards Skopos theory, particularly its
potential for introducing a greater degree of order to functional translation. The resulting
analysis provides a glimpse into new categorisations relating to a selection of professional
translation aspects: typologies of purposes, target text types, commissioners, and translation
procedures. These classifications clearly enrich the matter drawn up by functionalist scholars.
8 cf. 1.2.2 for Vermeer‟s statement on the choice of a translation approach to an individual assignment.
45

47. The first guideline, introduced by Wagner, is an enhanced version of a typology
proposed by Geoffrey Samuelson-Brown (ibid.: 44). It lists several types of translation
purposes:
 For information, not for publication – when the translation is exclusively intended to inform
the client about the contents of the source text; style and quality are a lesser priority and the
translation should definitely not be perceived as any specific genre ready to be distributed among
a broader audience;
 For publication – a translation which is ready to be introduced to the general audience. It is
intended to maintain the characteristics of a given genre as defined by the target culture; quality
and style are a high priority;
 Advertising and marketing – a special type of purpose which grants a high priority to affecting
the target audience in a manner desirable by the client; there is no need for faithful reproduction;
 For use as a legal document – when the resulting translation must fulfil all the necessary
requirements to become a document of legal validity;
 For text scanning and abstracting – when the translation is either intended to include only
specific parts of the source text‟s content or summarise all of the content in a fixed number of
words.
Endowed with more common terms, the above typology could serve as means for the client to
specify the exact service that they require from the translator, thus naturally making the
translator‟s task much easier.
As regards the types of texts produced by translators, Wagner and Chesterman base
their proposed guideline on the dichotomy which appears in theories of scholars such as
House, Newmark, and Nord (ibid.: 49-50), namely that translations serve either as pure
testimonies of what the source text comprises or as vehicles of communication that interact
with their audience. Seeking something more comprehensive than such familiar binarism but
nevertheless practical and answering to the needs of professional translators, they arrive at the
following classification of produced translations (ibid.):
 straight translation – without correcting mistakes or adapting the text;
 tidied translation – with the mistakes corrected but no adaptation performed;
 naturalized translation – with the mistakes corrected and the text adapted to “feel” like a
46
standalone entity in the target culture;
 internationalized translation – same as the above, with the difference being that the text fits the
settings of multiple cultures;
 reduced translation – with only the basic/selected information provided in the translation.
The next classification proposed by Wagner provides a different form of aid to the
translator precisely specifying the different types of clients that s/he may be hired by. It

48. pertains to the relation between the source text‟s author, the translation‟s commissioner, and
the translator (ibid.: 49). Although this is only vaguelв specified in Wagner and Chesterman‟s
dialogue, there exists the possibility of knowing what to expect from the commission by
classifying its commissioner (ibid.):
 Authors – writers of the source text, which is either translated from their first language into a
foreign language or vice versa. Being the authors of the text, they usually have the best
knowledge about it and may be willing to assist the translator in resolving problems with content
comprehension, the choice of a desirable form, etc.;
 Middlemen – clients who coordinate the translation of texts (e.g. translation agencies); neither
authors nor readers themselves, theв range between what Wagner describes as “good” and “bad”
clients, i.e. those who are willing and capable of providing all the details of the commission and
those who are not;
 Readers – clients who simply commission the translation assignment in order to gain actual
access to the source text; although incapable of providing detailed information about the contents
for obvious reasons, it is not to be expected that theв will ask for a translation more “complex”
than such that will enable them to understand the given text.
The strong logical compatibility between the purposes of translation and the
characteristics of produced texts naturally derives a typology which, complemented by a
familiarity of the client and their expectations, for the pairing of purposes with products, thus
enumerating viable translation methods, as shown in the following table proposed by Wagner
(ibid.):
Purpose Translation type
For information, not for publication Straight/Tidied
For publication Naturalized/Internationalized
For advertising and marketing Naturalized
For use as a legal document Straight/Tidied
For text scanning and abstracting Reduced
Wagner and Chesterman‟s contributions are an initial, вet alreadв fruitful effort to
introduce a degree of formal order into the practice of professional translation under the terms
of Skopos theory. Possibly to be expanded or reformulated, classifications such as these
47

49. indicate that translation theories can be shaped into a practical utility with a potential to
enhance the translator‟s performance.
3.2 Example studies on resolving culture-specificity issues within various domains of
functional texts
Setting aside the potential for further elaborations that Skopos theory holds, let us keep to
what has been proposed for functional translation practice so far and attempt to relate it to
various fields that employ functional texts. Affecting functional texts as considerably as it
does, culture-specificity frequently reveals itself as the source of communication breakdowns
in target texts when it is not properly resolved by the translator. Alongside linguistic prowess,
it demands for a new kind of expertise from the modern translator, one drawn from the
knowledge of other cultures and how texts belonging to various domains function within
them. The experiences and studies of experts who dedicate a considerable part of their efforts
to specific varieties of functional texts do well to contribute to translator training. Incidentally,
their observations are often based on concepts originally introduced by Skopos theorists;
concepts which, as was indicated in the previous chapter, strongly relate to the perception of
interlingual communication as being affected by the cultural background of the respective
sides (cf. 1.1). Accepting this relation as true, the following section will include several
studies and accounts of translation practice relating to various domains and utilising the
concepts of Skopos theory.
3.2.1 Culture-specificity in user-manual translation
The complete range of texts that encompass all manner of notions relating to a field as
extensive as technology may very well involve nearly every fathomable non-literary text type
or genre – from academic treatises to product labels or the textual matter that comprises the
interface of commonly used software. Explicitly functional texts which are intended to fulfil
specific roles in everyday situations build up a somewhat narrower scope in that regard. The
written text does in fact contribute considerably to making the products of modern
advancements more accessible to the consumer.9 Instruction manuals are some of the many
regular objects of translation in the field and, consequently, studies devoted to them will be
included in the following paragraphs.
9 With the natural exception of promotional material found in non-textual media – e.g. television or radio
advertising. It is only possible to speak about scripts, etc. in such circumstances.
48

50. As far as technical writing alone is concerned, there is agreement among scholars
regarding the applicability of a broad variety of text genres. Radegundis Stolze enumerates a
number of such categories in her work, but underlines that a tendency to maintain culture-specificity
on a variety of levels is shared by all kinds of texts, including instruction manuals
(Stolze 2009: 132). As the function of this text type is explicated even by its name, i.e. to
inform the reader on how to use a given device, it is to be expected that a manual intended as
informative material for publication will be strictly naturalised or internationalised in order to
guarantee unobstructed communication with the reader in his/her cultural and linguistic
setting(s). With the choice of the procedure resolved, it remains to investigate the obstacles on
the path of naturalising/internationalising instruction manuals. Such an investigation is
included in Stolгe‟s studв.
Stolze begins her analysis from a strictly fundamental level of word units.
Terminology is, beyond doubt, a crucial element to instruction manuals – terms related to
parts, settings, specifications, maintenance, and many other aspects are common but often
specific to individual devices. While the sheer rate of neologisms appearing in the domain
constitutes a challenge to translators, there is more to the issue. It would at first appear that
technical terminology would be highly internationalised and easily exchangeable between
languages in the contemporary globalised era. However, culture-specificity may surface here
as well and needs to be observed by the translator. Stolze writes that problems of terminology
equivalence vary among languages and presents examples specifically pertaining to the
German and English languages. “False friends” are not rarelв an obstacle, as semanticallв
similar terms may denote entirely different devices, as for instance heat pump (for “heating
and/or cooling in the U.S.”) and Wärmepumpe (for “environment-friendly house heating in
Germany”) (ibid.: 127). Alternatively, a similar problem may arise when considering the
availability of multiple vocabulary choices for one term. For instance, the English term
trimmer, which denotes a variety of devices, may be translated into Polish as przycinarka and
continue to maintain the same degree of ambiguity or as trymer, the popularly employed,
semantically unambiguous loanword from English denoting a shaving accessory, should that
in fact be the meaning intended in the source text. Terms denoting the same device may also
differ etymologically, for instance when originating from different metaphoric expressions.
One example of such a conflict comes from the English term headlight and the German
equivalent Scheinwerfer (ibid.: 127). While the first term makes a metaphoric reference to the
location of the device, the second term implies what the device does, thus they are not to be
49

51. translated literally between either languages despite the fact they refer to the same object –
*Hauptlicht or *light thrower.
Culture-specificity also applies to the syntax level of technical texts. As far as the
sentence structure is concerned, Stolze states that the problem pertains to the idiomatic
combination of sentence elements rather than any grammatical differences between languages
(ibid.: 129). English and German both have the propensity to formulate verbose sentences.
While clarity in conciseness and a lack of stylistic marking are traits desirable in instruction
manuals, the paramount, culture-specific preferences of expression still affect typical sentence
formation and cause even the most uniform texts to differ from language to language (ibid.:
129). To indicate this, Stolze refers to contrastive English-German discourse analyses
conducted by House, who observes in their course that “theв [German speakers] tend to
(overtly) encode or verbalize propositional content rather than leave it to be inferred from the
context” (ibid.: 130). Thus, conventional modes of discourse may still affect the sentence
structure, even within technical texts. Stolze believes that only a limited number of text
characteristics is constrained by genre conventions and those that are not need to be observed
by the translator for proper naturalisation (ibid.). Given the source of these conclusions, it
appears that a viable option for studying the culture-specificity in technical writing stems
from a comparative standpoint adopted with respect to texts that belong to different cultural
and linguistic contexts.
Stolze also describes the pragmatic level of technical texts as being affected by
culture-specificitв. “Pragmatics refers to senders and receivers of a text message and,
therefore, is also part of the text itself” (ibid.: 133). Governing implied, extra-linguistic
information found in texts as well as any instances of language having executive force,
pragmatics are also subjected to norms which permeate individual cultural contexts. Manuals
fulfil their instructive role and attain authoritative status mostly owing to their satisfying the
demand for information, which is indisputably common among consumers. The widespread
declarative and imperative moods, directedness in addressing the reader, as well as limited
argumentative force behind their statements will rarely be found inappropriate or cause a
breakdown in communication from culture to culture. Clarity, correct information, and
efficiency in communication take up a significantly higher priority in manuals. However,
problems may arise particularly within any portion of product documentation which exhibits
promotional efforts, such as introductory product descriptions. Stolze brings up a certain
German-to-English translation of a text describing a set of knives. She claims that one trait
50

52. which would definitely strike the German reader as very odd if it were to appear in technical
writing is a large number of “superlatives and attributive constructions;” features which
visibly expose the “publicitв and underlining of one‟s capacitв” as its main characteristics
(ibid.: 134). Stolze maintains that such traits constitute a social value mostly in the American
culture and implies that the text would have been naturalised to a greater degree if a different
approach had been assumed for the German translation (ibid.).
3.2.2 Culture-specificity in translation for advertising
Already hinted at in the previous paragraph, texts of a directly promotional nature are likewise
“charged” with culture-specificity, albeit in a dissimilar manner given the different role that
they fulfil in comparison with technical texts. The textual material belonging to the area of
advertising indisputably carries with it a certain informative content. However, the primary
function of such texts is to promote the selected target and attempt to persuade a specific
response to it from the intended audience. As controversial as the issue of balance between
the informative and promotional value of advertising may appear, it is the translation of such
texts that concerns the given study.
Wagner and Chesterman‟s categorisation specificallв isolates material whose purpose
is advertising and marketing as the type of texts that should be fully naturalised in translation.
A number of examples from practice indeed shows that when not naturalised or not
naturalised properly, advertisements simply cannot fulfil their intended promotional purpose
in a new setting. In a work devoted to translation in advertising, we find a likely-minded
statement from Ying Cui, who writes:
To get an advertisement translated is to let people in the target culture understand the
advertisement, become interested in the advertised product or service and finally spend
money on it. Thus the skopos in the translation of advertisements is the same with that of
advertisements, namely to promote a product or a service and make profit in the end. The
difference lies in that a translated advertisement is intended for a different audience, a
different culture and a different situation. Thus, all the factors in the target context should
be considered, for they would determine whether the skopos could be realized or not
(Cui 2009: 22).
In light of the adopted Skopos approach, the central issue to translation is found in any and all
elements that play a key role in shaping the image of goods or services among people
belonging to a given culture. How these elements behave from culture to culture is, naturally,
a frequent source of problems that needs to be investigated.
51

53. Since advertisements are strictly focused on what they promote, their culture-specific
intricacies find their origin precisely in their chosen product. In relation to this, Jesús Maroto
proposes a differentiation between two types of products targeted by advertisements –
tradition-free (global) products and culture-bound (local) products (Maroto 2005: 53). By
identifying the type of product that the translator will be dealing with in his/her assignment
early on, he/she makes a certain estimation as to the degree of culture-specificity that needs to
be resolved in its course.
Maroto describes the first category as “products whose main selling points are based
on performance” and “engines that drive globaliгation since theв do not encounter much
resistance” (ibid.Ś 54). The “resistance” that Maroto has in mind relates to difficulties in
introducing the product to a new market on account of various cultural differences between
their original and target environments. That said, the translation of tradition-free promotional
material requires little cross-cultural adaptation. Advertisements of electronics, computers,
software, etc. mostly draw from measurable, easily universalised merits of the product – e.g.
its performance, achievements, and general facts that argue for its usefulness (ibid.). The
process of naturalising texts belonging to this category should be largely unobstructed by
culture-specificity and the linguistic and factual correctness should prove to be the main
concerns of the translator.
The culture-bound variety of products matters far more to the question at hand, as their
very existence is grounded in national and regional identities. Theв “take longer to adapt and
in order to enter the global era they often have to change their image substantially and create a
new set of values suited for the international market …” (ibid.). Maroto classifies everything
from food and drink to entertainment, tobacco, and car brands as possible culture-bound
products. This difficulty can be very commonly encountered when translating texts related to
culinary items. Very often, it is the name of a culinary item itself that may pose a problem, as
for instance in the case of the Polish bigos, pierogi, or pączki. Explaining the contents of these
types of food would be superfluous in Poland, seeing as it is the cultural context to which they
are bound. However, to the average foreign reader these names would mean very little when
transferred in an unaltered form into their language. Depending on the knowledge of the target
reader, the translator may need to employ descriptive translations of such names,
consequently translating bigos into English as, for instance, boiled cabbage with meat and
mushrooms. Further difficulties may come from any culture-specific trait related to the dish –
its status as a snack or a meal, a holiday or non-holiday dish, etc. Any attempts at transferring
52

54. promotion material presenting culture-bound products into another language must take such
characteristics into account in order for the produced target text to be communicative and the
product itself presented in a desirable manner.
In the modern multicultural era the phenomenon of local and traditional products
becoming well-known to or even absorbed by cultures all over the world is nothing
surprising. Take, for example, Italian cuisine and how it permeates across countries via
international fast food corporations. Indeed, ordering a pizza nearly anywhere in the world is
hardly a feat nowadays and the knowledge of its form and contents are very common, unlike
in the case of the examples presented above. Unless the producer is interested in marketing
original Italian pizza, there is hardly any reason to consider how its advertisement sets itself
against the image of pizza in Italy. These are not (or no longer are) the kind of products that
would pose difficulties to translation in the sense of cultural boundaries, for they may already
have established connections with a given culture through which the translator may easily
channel the message of the advertisement.
One notable characteristic of culture-bound products which attempt to enter new
markets is that the translators of their advertisements must often tackle their property of
foreignness. Depending on the type of product, it is to be expected that their foreign quality
may range anywhere between a positive and negative association in the target culture. Maroto
illustrates this with the reception that German cars receive on many foreign markets – the
popular, perhaps even stereotypical assumption in many countries is that German cars are
superior to the local brands (ibid.: 55). It may indeed prove superfluous to highlight those
qualities of the product for which it is already credited in the target cultural setting. Aware of
this, the translator as a specialist may provide his/her expertise to the commissioner and have
the advertisement focus on different qualities so that it may fulfil its purpose more effectively.
Opposite relations in this respect also exist, as exemplified by the status of instant coffee in
Italв where, as Maroto claims, it is regarded to have verв little to do with “true” coffee (ibid.).
Only when the translator knows that such problems may arise, can s/he alter the advertisement
appropriately and prevent the commission from failing.
The relation described above is connected with the background experiences of the
advertisement‟s intended audience and constitutes a part of the intercultural communication
that takes place in advertising. It is not onlв the case that the product‟s foreign origin is a
property in itself. There are often other connotations and social factors to be reckoned with, as
proven bв Maroto‟s comparative case studв of the Peroni brand beer‟s promotional material
53

55. published in Italв and the UK. With Italв being the brand‟s “home” market and the UK a
newly introduced setting, its two campaigns are noticeably distinct given the cultural
differences between the two countries. In Italy Peroni is a recognised brand with a tradition of
signature images in advertising and a history of sponsoring multiple sporting events.
Alongside these features, its promotional material also relates to what Italians commonly
associate with beer – socialising, summer time, and the quality of a refreshing drink (ibid.:61).
The UK version realises its goal in a visibly distinct fashion seeing as it becomes conscious of
the British societв‟s class divisions. The British ads for Peroni target the upper classes since
they convey elements “of artв character, sensualitв, Italian flag, creativitв, and refined humor
as opposed to the brash laddish humor on Brit beer ads” (ibid.: 64). Thus, the advertisement
abandons those images that could yield unpredictable results or receive a reaction of
indifference from the UK audience and exchanges them for elements which have a more
defined appeal to a specific fragment of the British society.
Given the above “manipulations” in the cross-cultural transfer of advertisements, one
would be tempted to ask once more whether it is adaptation rather than translation that
becomes more desirable in situations where cultural boundaries pose formidable obstacles to a
change in the linguistic setting. This is precisely the magnitude of alterations that Byrne called
unlikely (cf. 3.1.1). It would be fairly unpractical to reserve such commissions exclusively for
translators who effectively combine the entire scope of expertise necessary for the proper
adaptation of promotional material, i.e. art design, animation, etc. alongside linguistic
proficiency and awareness of cultural differences. However, it is again not unusual for
commissioners to expect that the last two abilities will belong to the competences of a
translator. Indeed, it is becoming increasingly apparent that complete naturalisation will often
demand for the translator to be primarily a cultural consultant rather than a fluent speaker –
the high demand for cost-effectiveness and efficiency defines, de facto, the modern translator
of functional texts as an adaptation specialist, a fact subtly highlighted by Skopos theory.
3.2.3 Culture-specificity in translation for tourism
In a similar manner to advertising, a significant number of text types belonging to the domain
of the tourist industry consist in promoting their subject. Guides, brochures, travel agency
documents, and various articles balance out between encouraging the tourist to visit a specific
location and providing information about it. Although the function appears to be similar, we
observe a different “direction of movement” in the intercultural communication of texts on
54

56. tourism. While translated or rewritten advertisements aim to have an element of one culture (a
product or service) successfully transferred to a different cultural setting (a new foreign
market), it is the target audience of texts belonging to the tourist industry themselves who lose
the property of being static and are encouraged to immerse into a different cultural setting.
The traveller becomes the target of the publicity for the tourism business no differently than
the locations and services that comprise this industry.
Given the above facts, naturalising appears to be the most desirable procedure in the
translation of such texts. Indeed, it is unobstructed communication through both clear
language and complete cultural adaptation that will oftentimes assure the convenience or even
the safety of the potential visitors. A lack of linguistic prowess on the part of the translator
frequently suffices to jeopardise the skopos of the commission, as shown in several examples
of visibly deficient translations presented by Aniela Korzeniowska:
…Shuttle Bus AirportCitв brings вou from the airport to the main hotels of the citв and
back. Riding time approximately 20 minutes. PLZ 25.000,- for single ride (less than US
$2,-). Kids under 7 free. Operating time: 6 a.m. till 11 p.m. Tickets at the driver. If
requested, driver shall stop at any bus stop indicated (Korzeniowska 1998: 137).
The above extract from a note detailing the bus service at the Okęcie Airport in Warsaw,
Poland exhibits a variety of problems with grammar, vocabulary, style, and the adaptation of
monetary units. This could suffice to confuse an English-speaking tourist and consequently
requires a number of corrections to ensure that such a situation does not arise. Linguistic
correctness does not always guarantee unobstructed communication, however. The following
fragments of articles describing the Vistula River (a) and Starв Sącг (b) exhibit a different
kind of problem:
a) The flow of the stream is slowed down once more by the small dam and below joins with
Malinka tributary. At this moment the river Vistula is born. Flowing from the south to the
north the river is fed bв its tributariesŚ GoĞciejów, Kopвdło, Dгiechcińska, Partecгnik,
Pinkasów Jawornik, Gahura (Korгeniowska and Kuhiwczak 1994: 73).
b) Already in the Market Square, though the buildings there come from later periods, mostly
Baroque, one can sense the breath of centuries […] It survived all the catastrophes,
including the fire set by Hungarian King Sigismund of Luxembourg in 1410
(Korzeniowska 1998: 143).
Linguistic-level corrections are equally necessary in both these texts. However, there is a
different issue to be considered here as well. Fragment (a) ends with an enumeration of the
Vistula‟s tributaries. The decision whether this list should actuallв be transferred from the
original text depends on what the skopos dictates to be the target text‟s function. If the article
55

57. were addressed to a foreign reader who is not familiar with Polish geography but is interested
in finding out more about it, then the list would be in order. However, strictly promotional
material does not need such a didactic undertone, which visibly clashes with the attempt at
“poetic” imagery as seen earlier in the fragment. A string of source-culture proper names
would not appear out of place for the source culture audience regardless of whether the text
aims to promote a given location or provide information about it. This is for the simple reason
that it does not carry for them the same impression of foreignness as it would for a reader
belonging to a different culture. Familiar elements do not draw as much attention as new
information and, in the particular case of fragment (a), decide whether the text is more
informative or promotional. A poorly planned combination of the two traits certainly risks
confusing the reader. The phrase “it [a church in Starв Sącг] survived all the catastrophes”
found in fragment (b) relates to the same problem, seeing as it makes an assumption about the
reader‟s knowledge. It maintains that the tourist is aware of all the disasters that afflicted the
Market Square buildings in Starв Sącг. This is more probable with the Polish reader, given
the greater chances that they will derive what the author had in mind from their knowledge of
Polish history. It is, again, risky to assume the same with any foreign, English-speaking
tourist. A suggested correction which reads “the manв disasters that befell it” (ibid.: 144)
effectively resolves this problem by avoiding the ambiguous assumption.
In the examples presented above we observe that a certain degree of foresight with
respect to the addressed readers‟ character is just as important as the proper presentation of
the promoted travelling destination. It is after all not onlв the addressee‟s newlв gained
knowledge, but also their convenience and in certain cases safety that becomes dependent on
clear communication with the use of such texts. To elaborate on this further, Shuming Chen
relates to the notion of presupposition found in the domain of pragmatics and claims that the
composition of texts belonging to the tourism industry is often affected by what he calls
cultural presupposition. Chen defines it in translation as “the cultural knowledge of source
text [sic] that a target reader is assumed to have bв translators” (Chen 2008: 84). However, to
make this definition more compatible with what he applies it to in his work, it would be more
intuitive to directly specify the assumption relating to the target readers‟ culture-specific
knowledge as the cultural presupposition. Similarly claiming that the awareness of the
reader‟s knowledge in writing for the tourist industry is the key to formulating a more
communicative text, Chen refers to a fragment from the description of the Taipei 101
skyscraper in Taipei, Taiwan which was found inside the building itself. The information was
56

58. originally addressed to native tourists in Chinese and within it, the skyscraper was referred to
only by the term 101. Chen believes that a reference as brief as this will suit the source culture
receivers. However, it may not be sufficiently precise for the foreign tourists (ibid.: 87). Thus,
he advocates that his selected fragment of the text be translated into English with certain
modifications, such as expanded descriptionsŚ “With 508 meter height and located in the
District of Hsinyi, Taipei 101 is the tallest building in the world,10 and is the new landmark of
the citв…” (ibid.) Chen states that with these adjustments, it will become possible for the
foreign travellers to easily comprehend that 101 is a shortened version of the skвscraper‟s
name that is commonly used to refer to it in Taiwan (ibid.).
Expanding on the relation between the cultural backgrounds of the tourist and his/her
destination, Jing Ma and Suzhen Ren enumerate several culture-specific elements appearing
in Chinese texts which could prove challenging for foreign travellers to comprehend. Given
the great distance that divides China and the English-speaking countries both linguistically
and culturally, it is to be expected that naturalising translations from English to Chinese and
vice versa will involve many difficulties, particularly in texts as culturally charged as those
belonging to the tourist industry.
Due to the fact that the English and Chinese languages use different alphabets, there
exist two basic approaches to translating Chinese proper names into English. In cases where a
place name has a straightforward meaning which can be expressed in English, Ma and Ren
suggest a literal translation – for instance East Palace or West Lake (Ma and Ren 2008: 35).
However, when no translatable meaning can be derived from the name, and this mostly
applies to administrative names denoting cities, counties, etc., Ma and Ren state that the
translator should resort to transliteration, a rendering of the very same name in a different
alphabet, e.g. Xi’an or Yinchuan (ibid.). A third option combining both of the previous
approaches becomes necessary when a name is only partly translatable, e.g. Confucius Temple
or Wutai Mountain (ibid.). However, the scholars also recommend an additional approach to
combining transliteration with literalism, which, as theв put it, “will enable foreigners to have
a deeper and all-scale comprehension of the attractions, achieving a better appealing and
persuading function” (ibid.) In the following passage a literally translated version of the
location‟s name has been provided in bracketsŚ
10 At the time when the article was written, Taipei 101 still held the record for the world‟s tallest building. The
current record is held by Burj Khalifa (Khalifa Tower) which measures 828 m (2,716 ft 6 in) in height, was
developed by Emaar Properties, and officially opened in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, on 4 January 2010
(“Tallest Building”).
57

59. Near the forest is a Bai Long Dong (White Dragon Cave), which is said to be the very
place where Lady White, the legendary heroine of the story of the white snake, cultivated
herself according to Buddhist doctrine (ibid.).
Ma and Ren claim that without both versions of the translated name present in the text (the
literal one serving as an explanatorв “note”), the reader would not be able to place this
particular location in the description‟s context while being exposed to its original foreign-sounding
name and becoming immersed into the exotic culture more deeply (ibid.).
The scholars also underline the importance of elements that refer to the historic
backgrounds of the text‟s promoted locations. Accurate presupposition proves crucial in this
regard once again, as it is to be assumed less probable that a foreign tourist will share the
same degree of knowledge as the native one. Thus, certain events and historic figures will
likely require what Ma and Ren refer to as contextual amplification, which basically consists
in elaborating on the significance and/or time frame of a given historic reference (ibid.: 36).
Incidentally, it is common in China to denote the periods of its ancient history by the names
of dynasties which ruled the country in that given period. Seeing as foreigners who have not
studied Chinese history are unlikely to associate dynasties with specific time periods, any
mention of them will need to be annotated in translation or substituted with different forms of
denoting timeframes (ibid.). Issues of this kind can be observed in various cultures, even ones
not divided by a cultural gap as great as the one separating the West and the Orient. A diligent
translator will for instance take into account the fact that certain Polish cultural epochs are
estimated for different time periods than their Western counterparts and any reference to them
needs to be taken into account in order to avoid confusing the reader (consider for example
the Age of Enlightenment vs. Oświecenie and modernism vs. Młoda Polska).
3.2.4 Culture-specificity in legal translation
Documents such as court rulings, agreements, certificates, testaments, etc. constitute a
delicate subject matter to translation for two prominent reasons. Firstly, the translation of
legal texts is often itself regulated by the law, which demands specific competences on the
part of the translator. Often requiring for the target text to possess legal validity in no different
manner than the original, many legal systems restrict the practice of translating/producing
legal documents to translators who are officially appointed by means of examination or proof
of linguistic proficiency. A far more considerable issue, however, can be found in this type of
texts‟ legal validitв. The majoritв of documents treating on legal matters are not mere texts
but entities which possess a specific force in their respective legal systems. As such, they
58

60. impart a great responsibility on the translator, for their work has binding effects in this
particular domain and any cases of mistranslation may make them liable for the produced
results.
The shape of legal language itself poses a notable difficulty in translation. Giuliana
Garгone describes the legalese stвle as “tвpicallв ritualistic and archaic, being subject to verв
strict stylistic conventions in terms of register and diction …” (Garzone 2011: 3). The archaic
tone and strict conventions of legal discourse are maintained by its unchangeability. As
Garzone claims, this unchangeability permeates to translation as well and leaves translators
with little alternative but to employ the equivalent rigid legal style of the target language
when rendering these types of texts. This begs the question whether the translation of legal
texts as a whole allows for any forms of adjustments and adaptation. Changes in their content
are unacceptable for reasons already explained while their form and style seem to follow suit.
This is also reflected in the Wagner and Chesterman classification, where documents intended
to carry legal validity are ascribed the straight and/or tidied mode of translation.
It would appear unacceptable to employ a functional, target reader-oriented approach
within a domain that focuses on the source text so strictly. Procedures stemming from the
equivalence framework should suit it more readily, seeing as they advocate following the
source to the letter, in line with the demands that have been associated with legal translation
so far. There are, however, certain exceptions – assignments involving legal texts where
straight translation is either undesirable or would be paradoxically impossible without the
introduction of certain adjustments in its course. Garzone writes that a notably different
relation between the source and target text in legal translation is expressed by the concept of
legal equivalence (ibid.: 5). Although seemingly related to the familiar framework, this notion
is distinct due to the elements of the translation process whose equivalence it prioritises. It
does not in fact promote strict literalism but the compatibility of legal validity between the
source and translation which becomes from its perspective the purpose of legal translation.
Achieving legal equivalence entails overcoming many cultural barriers – at times the legal
systems between which the transfer takes place do not recognise their respective
terminologies or perceive certain legal notions differently. Thus the translator must judge and
make decisions in each specific case how any symptoms of incompatibility should be
handled.
In a work devoted to cultural transfer in Chinese-English legal translation, Ling Wang
uses the notion of legal culture to describe the totality of elements which constitute the core
59

61. essence of the cultural background of legal texts, separate from the aforementioned ritualistic
legal language. Those are components such as legal ideology, studies, theory as well as shared
values, norms, and modes of thinking expressed by the society which represents the given
culture (Wang 2008: 69). More specific examples would be difficult to name; the scope of
legal culture the translator must deal with surfaces only in individual assignments. This is
indicative of the complexity which characterises the notion of culture, as described in this
work‟s previous chapter (cf. 2.1). Wang notes that maintaining the legal culture of a given
text is visibly a foreignising approach to translation, for it does not seek to adapt it to the
target legal system but to reflect the source system in the target text (ibid.: 69, 71). The
previously discussed groups of functional texts were largely concerned with a domesticating
approach to their culture-specificity. Legal translation entails a share of commissions where
the skopos requires culture-specificity of texts to be approached differently from their raw
linguistic content. The relevant question at this point is what these commissions consist in for
a separation of the legal document‟s form/language and legal validity/legal culture to become
necessary.
From a certain perspective the lack of the follow-to-the-letter constraint would suggest
that unobstructed communication becomes a priority in legal equivalence and adjustments are
fully permitted as required by the two sides of the intercultural communication. However, this
would be an instance of a commission following an entirely different skopos, to which the
notion of legal equivalence cannot apply unless the translation were to subsequently receive
legal validity via unspecified means. It is the legal validity of the document that replaces this
constraint and exerts a set of requirements on the translator. Example commissions which do
apply to the matter of form vs. legal meaning are found in Garгone‟s further considerations.
Garzone first inspects the potential needs for legal translation within bilingual or bi-juridical
countries such as Canada (Garzone 2011: 6). It is to be expected that a divergence as
considerable as this also means that the countries where it exists are bi-cultural. Additionally,
the equality of languages holds an important status within such environments, thus it becomes
unacceptable for the rendered counterparts of texts drawn up within it to sound like
subordinate translations of potentially unequal legal validity (ibid.). Legal equivalence applies
here on account of this demand and dictates that any elements specific only to the source legal
language and source legal system are not blindly reproduced in the translation, for that will
fail the skopos to make the translation acceptable as the intended document in the target
settingŚ “all texts should sound natural and effective, since each of them is independent and
60

62. endowed with autonomous legal validitв” (ibid.). A concordant remark as regards the viability
of such an approach to Chinese-English legal translation is made by Ling Wang, who writes:
Thinking along the line of Vermeer's Skopos theory, we have a definitive purpose here:
whatever we do, and however we do it, the Chinese text must convey the same legal
meaning as the English text; in other words, the two texts must be equivalent in legal
meaning. If equivalence were indeed an illusion, then no multilingual legal system would
be viable (Wang 2008: 48).
A different type of texts carrying legal validity, more relevant to Wang‟s comment
above but similarly problematic in the discussed regard, are ones drawn up within an
international, multilingual institution or community where no language functions as “neutral
ground” (Garгone 2011Ś 6). These are often treaties regulating the workings of such
institutions or conventions, protocols, etc. (ibid.). Garzone writes that the translation of such
texts between the languages of countries which hold membership in the institution operates on
a simplified terminology, seeing as the contents of the source text, already intended as an
“international instrument,” are often settled upon by international committees, making legal
equivalence highly compatible with literal translation (ibid.). Culture-specificity appears
unlikely in this scenario; a leading example of this practice is found in the legislation of the
European Union which, with its pursuit of greater communicability between member states,
has been gradually developing a Union-wide “Euro-legalese” language, as Garгone names it
(ibid.:7). A greater dilemma arises when these documents are translated into non-official
languages and are intended for settings that the organisation does not affect and/or operate
within. Logic would dictate that if the translation is not going to hold any legal validity and
thus serve a purely informative purpose, then there is no legal equivalence to pursue.
However, an approach such as this is hazardous at best, for it is often the translations of
formal legislation that allow the external party to assume a legally significant position with
respect to the institution, whether it is for instance the adoption or ratification of its provisions
(ibid.). A skopos which cannot be entirely predicted or is subject to change causes many risks
for the commission. When this applies to texts dealing with legal or organisational matters, a
lax approach to the form of the target text is highly unadvised, as it will not fulfil the need for
legal equivalence that may in fact arise.
Finallв, Garгone highlights the categorв of “international documents regulating the
relationships between private subjects in different nations,” which were put forward by
Vermeer himself to illustrate the possibility of applying Skopos theory to the practice of legal
translation (ibid.). She writes that these are precisely the types of legally binding documents
61

63. where the approach to their validity (a domesticating or foreignising one in terms of Wang‟s
discourse) and their form, is dependent on the function that it will fulfil and the setting where
it will fulfil it (ibid.). Contracts and agreements are subject to the law that governs them and a
translation of such documents may not only be their transfer to a specific language but also a
transfer to the legal sвstem which is expressed bв that language. If, following Vermeer‟s
example, as presented by Garzone, an insurance contract concluded between parties
established in different countries is to be used in a country different than that in which it was
drawn up, a legal-equivalence approach will be necessary, ensuring both that the resulting
document will be written in the target-language register which is expected of insurance
contracts in that setting and that it will refer to the laws and regulations pertaining to
insurance which apply in that setting (ibid.). In an opposite scenario, where the document is to
retain legal validity solely in its origin and where the translation is merely informative in the
target context, a literal approach will be suitable and limited to no adaptation of its legal
culture content will be necessary (ibid.). The cases of assignments such as these illustrate best
that making the purpose of the target text the top priority of the translation process will
involve different approaches to the content, the form, or the cultural background of the text,
depending on the function that it is expected to fulfil and the audience to whom it is
addressed.
62

64. CONCLUSION
Translation perceived as an act of transferring information from one linguistic code into
another has little chance of success when applied to typical assignments involving functional
texts. As diverse as the areas and departments in which functional texts become employed are,
the one common denominator that characterises them is the fact that interlingual
communication involving functional texts also entails communication between the cultures in
which they function. It is in the nature of languages to be dynamic and in constant interaction
with the environment in which they are used. Therefore, they are constantly influenced and
shaped by that environment as well. Adding to that the fact that translation is a purposeful
activity, the Skopos-theory approach places a dual obligation on the functional translator. The
texts produced in functional translation are more than just language; they are objects which
are to be put to a specific use when their production is completed. What is more, their
performance in that use is highly conditioned by the culture to which the text is transferred,
one often constituting an entirely different setting from the one in which the source text
originated. Consequently, the translator must observe how the cultural shift taking place
affects the meaning of the text.
Does it suffice to know about the above obligations in order to find out how one should
translate in order to do it well? The conducted study shows that a complete and thorough set
of instructions for overcoming even the more general scope of culture-related problems is still
a distant, if not unachievable, goal. The productivity of languages is overwhelming – it is not
possible to list solutions to problems which constantly change and multiply. Nevertheless,
becoming aware of the necessities of functional translation constitutes a foundation for an
effective mode of assignment analysis for the translator – s/he focuses on the desired function
of the target text and considers which cultural factors in the target setting affect the form
thereof. When commissioned to translate an instruction manual so that it specifically becomes
a foreign-language instruction manual, it is necessary to know what makes for communicative
manuals in that language, whether in terms of form, accepted conventions, or many other
components that determine this type of text.
Skopos theory cannot be a limitless database of solutions. However, when viewing the
process of translation through its concepts, it becomes apparent on which of its aspects we
base our decisions when translating. Notions such as function, purpose, translation brief, etc.
63

65. comprise elements which complete the full image of a commission. Regardless of what the
individual assignment is, Skopos theory rationalises various methods of translating, as
opposed to limiting the process to several “acceptable” ones, and leaves it in the power of the
translator to choose and justify specific solutions – it is ultimately not the source text, the
commissioner, or the target readers who determine the form of the translation, but the
translator him/herself. The greatest benefit derived from this central position of the translator
is the fact that it makes him/her a true expert in the field of translation – the one who makes
the decisions and negotiates between the parties who participate in the process of translation.
However, the very same status demands for more competences from the translator than mere
linguistic proficiency – the knowledge of cultural differences between functional-text
categories in various languages is derived to a certain degree from the knowledge of the
subject to which these texts relate. Indeed, a translator who neglects the aspect of personal
research wherever ambiguities or uncertainties with respect to the subject matter of the text in
question arise is likely to produce mistranslations or texts incapable of completely fulfilling
their intended purpose.
Following in the footsteps of the scholars who formulated the typologies and
observations on various domains of functional texts included in this study holds further
potential for functional-text translation. Additional research combining Skopos theorв‟s
perception of the translation process and studies of actual translation practice may produce far
more specialised terminology applicable to the various fields in which functional texts are
employed. While complete step-by-step explanations of how to translate when encountering
specific problems is still a utopian illusion, a development of the above kind is quite possible
and may prove valuable to practice, e.g. typologies of legal-document translation purposes
would assist the translator in assuming an initial approach to the assignment, depending on
the intended function of the translation and the nature of the settings between which the
interlingual exchange will take place. Taking into account the possibilities that Skopos theory
has exhibited in this study, it is highly encouraged to conduct specialised studies of
functional-text genres for the purpose of categorising a broader range of translation
assignments and the approaches relevant to their successful completion.
64

66. 65
References:
Bassnett, Susan and Andre Lefevere (1998) Constructing Cultures – Essays on
Literary Translation. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Byrne, Jody (2006) Technical Translation: Usability Strategies for Translating
Technical Documentation. Dordrecht: Springer.
Chen, Shuming (2008) “Cultural Presupposition and Decision-Making in the
Functional Approach to Translation” [inŚ] Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences. Vol. 4,
No. 1, pp. 83-89. <http://journal.dyu.edu.tw/dyujo/document/hssjournal/h04-1-83-89.pdf>.
Chesterman, Andrew and Emma Wagner (2002) Can Theory Help Translators?: A
Dialogue Between the Ivory Tower and the Wordface. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.
Cui, Ying (2009) “The Goal of Advertisement TranslationŚ With Reference to
C-E/E-C Advertisements” [inŚ] Journal of Language & Translation. 10-2, pp. 7-33.
<http://www.unish.org/unish/DOWN/PDF/2009v2_016_ref.pdf>.
Garгone, Giuliana (2011) “Legal Translation and Functionalist ApproachesŚ a
Contradiction in Terms?” [inŚ] Traduzioni Giuridiche.
<http://www.traduzioni-giuridiche.com/files/functional%20approach.pdf>.
Hariвanto, Sugeng (2009) “The Implication of Culture on Translation Theory and
Practice” [inŚ] Articles on Translation Theory.
<http://www.translationdirectory.com/article634.htm>.
Jakobson, Roman ([1959] 2000) “On Linguistic Aspects of Translation” [inŚ]
Lawrence Venuti (ed.) The Translation Studies Reader. London: Routledge, pp. 113-118.
James, Kate (2002) “Cultural Implications for Translation” [inŚ] Translation Journal.
Vol. 6, No. 4. <http://www.accurapid.com/journal/22delight.htm>.
Katan, David (1999) Translating Cultures: An Introduction for Translators,
Interpreters and Mediators. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.
Kittel, Harald and Andreas Poltermann (1998) “German Tradition” [in:] Mona Baker
(ed.) Routledge Encyclopaedia of Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge, pp.
418-428.
Korzeniowska, Aniela and Piotr Kuchiwczak (1994) Successful Polish-English
Translation: Tricks of the Trade. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Korzeniowska, Aniela (1998) Explorations in Polish-English Mistranslation
Problems. Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.
Lefevere, Andre (1992) Translation/History/Culture: A Sourcebook. London:
Routledge.
Ma, Jing and Suгhen Ren (2008) “Skopos theory and translating strategies of cultural
elements in tourism texts” [inŚ] Sino-US English Teaching. Vol. 5, No. 9, pp. 34-37.
<http://www.linguist.org.cn/doc/su200809/su20080906.pdf>.
Maroto, Jesús (2005) Cross-Cultural Digital Marketing in the Age of Globalization.
Universitat Rovira i Virgili: Tarragona.
<http://www.jesusmaroto.com/images/MAROTO_MinorDissertation.pdf>.

67. Nord, Christiane (1997) Translating as a Purposeful Activity. Manchester: St. Jerome
66
Publishing.
Nord, Christiane (2006) “Loвaltв and Fidelitв in Specialiгed Translation” [inŚ]
CONFLUÊNCIAS – Revista de Tradução Científica e Técnica. No. 4, pp. 29-41.
<http://www.confluencias.net/n4/nord.pdf>.
Pвm, Anthonв (1995) “Schleiermacher and the Problem of Blendlinge” [inŚ]
Translation and Literature. Vol. 4, No. 1, pp.5-30.
<http://usuaris.tinet.cat/apym/on-line/intercultures/blendlinge.pdf>.
Pym, Anthony (2010) Exploring Translation Theories. Abingdon: Routledge.
Schтffner, Christine and Helen Kellв-Holmes (eds.) (1995) Cultural Functions of
Translation. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Schтffner, Christine (1998) “Action” [inŚ] Mona Baker (ed.) Routledge Encyclopaedia
of Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 3-5.
______ (1998) “Skopos Theorв” [inŚ] Mona Baker (ed.) Routledge Encyclopaedia of
Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 235-238.
Snell-Hornby, Mary (1995) Translation Studies: An Integrated Approach, Amsterdam:
John Benjamins Publishing.
______ (2006) The Turns of Translation Studies. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John
Benjamins Publishing.
Stolгe, Radegundis (2009) “Dealing with cultural elements in technical texts for
translation” [inŚ] The Journal of Specialised Translation. No. 11, pp. 124-142.
<http://www.jostrans.org/issue11/art_stolze.pdf>.
“Tallest building” (n.d.) Guinness World Records. 26 Apr 2011.
<http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/Search/Details/Tallestbuilding/50105.htm>.
Torop, Peeter (2002) “Translation as translating as culture” [in:] Sign Systems Studies.
30. 2, pp. 593-605. <http://www.ut.ee/SOSE/sss/pdf/torop302.pdf>.
Venuti, Lawrence (ed.) (2000) The Translation Studies Reader. London: Routledge.
Wang, Ling (2008) Cultural transfer in legal translation: a case study of the
translation of the common law into Chinese. City University of Hong Kong: Hong Kong.
<http://hdl.handle.net/2031/5398>.