All Title Author
Keywords Abstract


Types of Non-Equivalence in the Kikamba Bible Translation

DOI: 10.4236/oalib.1105721, PP. 1-21

Subject Areas: Education, Linguistics

Keywords: Translation, Non-Equivalence, Source Text, Target Text, The Bible and Kikamba Language

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract

This paper examines types of non-equivalences in the Kikamba Bible translation. Translation involves the rendering of a source text message into the target text so as to ensure that the surface meaning of the two is ap-proximately similar and the structures of the source language are preserved as closely as possible in the target text. However, the process is hampered by non-equivalence, which occurs when a lexical item or an expression in the source language lacks an equivalent item to translate it into the target language. A descriptive research design was used to obtain information from a sampled population. The Bible is divided into two sections; the Old and the New Testament. It is further categorized into seven groups. Purposive sampling was used to select one book from each category and one chapter from each book to form the sample for the study. Data was collected through careful study of the English Revised Standard Version Bible to identify types of non-equivalences and the Kikamba Bible to analyze how non-equivalence is handled. The study established two types of non-equivalences; non-equivalence at lexica level and above word level. The study reveals that non-equivalence is difficult to handle at lexical level mostly due to culture-specific words. Above the word level, translation is hampered by the use of figurative language in the source text. The study recommends that the translator needs a good background on the culture of the two languages and the metaphorical language use in the Bible. It is hoped that the research will be a contribution to applied linguistics in the area of translation, specifically on non-equivalence.

Cite this paper

Musyoka, E. N. and Ireri, H. K. (2019). Types of Non-Equivalence in the Kikamba Bible Translation. Open Access Library Journal, 6, e5721. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/oalib.1105721.

References

[1]  Newmark, P. (1988) A Textbook of Translation. Prentice Hall, Hertfordshire.
[2]  Kelly, H.C. (2000) The Bible in the Twenty First Century. American Bible Society, New York.
[3]  Coulson, S. (2000) Semantic Leaps: Frames Shifting and Conceptual Blending in Meaning Constructions. Cambridge University Press, New York, Cam-bridge.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511551352
[4]  Majola, A.O. (1999) God Speaks in Our Own Lan-guages—Bible Translation in East Africa. 1844-1998. Bible Societies, Nairobi.
[5]  Mugambi, J.N.K. (1995) From Liberation to Reconstruction: African Christian Theology after the Cold War. East African Educational Publishers.
[6]  Newmark, P. (1991) About Translation. Multilingual Matters, Hertfordshire.
[7]  Nida, E.A. and Taber, C.R (1982) The Theory and Practice Translation. E.J. Brill, Leiden.
[8]  Waruta, D.W. (1975) Scripture Translation in Kenya. University of Nairobi, Nairobi.
[9]  Nida, E.A. (1964) Towards a Science of Translating. Brill, Leiden.
[10]  Ciampa, R.E. (2011) In the Wisdom of the Cross: Exploring 1st Corinthians. Nothignam.
[11]  Maundu, P. (1980) Reconstruction of Kikamba Consonantal Sounds. University of Nairobi, Nairobi.
[12]  Ngotho, T.M. (1963) Kimena Kya Nzou na Mbiti (the Enmity Between the Elephant and the Goat. EALB.
[13]  Kimilu, D.N. (2013) Mukaamba Wa Wo 2nd ed. Kenya Literature Bureau, Nairobi.
[14]  Baker, M. (1992) In Other Words; A Course Book on Translation. Routledge, London.
[15]  Toury, G. (1995) Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. John Benjamin, Amsterdam. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.4
[16]  (2008) Revised Standard Version Bible. BFBS, London.
[17]  Mbivilia ivoo Miseo Kikamba kya ivinda Yii (2011) Nairobi: Bible Society of Kenya.
[18]  Brisset, A. (2000) The Search for a Native Language: Translation and Cultural Identity. The Translation Studies Reader, 343-375.
[19]  Kollar, W. (1989) Equivalence in Translation Theory in Chesterman A Reading in Translation Theory. Oyfinn Lecute Ab, Finland.
[20]  Catford, J.C. (1965) A Linguistic Theory of Translation. Oxford University Press, London.
[21]  Dingwall, R. (1998) Quality in Qualitative Research. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 3, 167-172. https://doi.org/10.1177/135581969800300308
[22]  Mwau, J. (2006) Kikamba Dictionary. Regal Printing Ltd., Nairobi.
[23]  Statistics, K.N.B.O. (2010) The 2009 Kenya Population and Housing Census (Vol. 1). Kenya National Bureau of Statistics.
[24]  Douglas, J. and Tenny, M. (1987) The New International Dictionary of the Bible Grand Rapids. Zondervan Publishing House, Zonderva.
[25]  Collision-Burch, C. (2007) Paraphrasing and Translation. Routledge, New York.
[26]  Kvetko, P. (2009) An Introduction to Translation Studies: A Practical. University SV, Trava.
[27]  Lycan, W.G. (2000) Philosophy of Language. Routledge, London.
[28]  Davidson, D. (1978) What Metaphors Mean in Inns. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
[29]  (2010) Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary of Current English. 8th Edition.
[30]  Blumenberg, H. (1960) Paradigmen zu einer Metaphorologie. Bouvier and Co., Bonn.
[31]  Pilrainen, E. (2007) Figurative Phraseology and Culture. In: Granger, S. and Meunie, F., Eds., Phraseology. An Interdisciplinary Perspective, John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.139.20pii
[32]  Bredin, H. (1998) Comparison and Similes. Lingua, 105, 67-78.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-3841(97)00030-2
[33]  Fromilague, C. (1995) Figures and Styles. Nathan, Paris.
[34]  Gutt, E.A. (2000) Translation and Relevance: Cognition and Context. Blackwell, Oxford.

Full-Text


comments powered by Disqus