The Skopos theory differs from the other theories of linguistics and translations at its core. Unlike some of them, this approach has a solid philosophical context behind it and implies that the process of translation should be held according to that principle. The source text always, no matter in what language it was originally written, has a purpose with which it was created. Fiction literature aims to entertain the readers and send a message through the story; textbooks provide precise and formal information to educate the audience and many other examples. While creating the target text, the translator should keep in mind the goal of the source text and present it according to the initial statement as closely as possible. Thus, the possibility of sticking to the original aim of the text is the value and usefulness of the Skopos theory.
The significance of the approach is also confirmed by the great diversity of languages and cultures that exist globally. One of the most widespread theories is called domestication, and it is used quite often in translations from the source to the target text. The goal of the theory is to transform foreign words and names to look the most similar to the language it is translated into (Abdelaal, 2019). It adapts to the cultural differences and makes them more understandable and clear to the people while perceiving the main sense of the source text. Still, it slightly distinguishes from the Skopos theory in the central concept of the approach. While domestication strives to adopt foreign features and peculiarities, the Skopos theory focuses on perceiving the message. Foreignization is the opposite of domestication and preserves the exterior names or phrases, emphasizing the original language’s features (Gong, 2020). Depending on the topic, the Skopos method might transform the text according to the domestication concept or keep the initial cultural singularities as long as it helps to keep the purpose of the source text.
Different levels of equivalence sometimes may be used as tools for the Skopos theory of translation, but there are significant residuals in their concepts. Formal equivalence is used to translate the text in the most similar manner starting from the word meaning to the structure of the sentence. Compared to the Skopos theory, this approach is more likely to lose the text’s goal and miss a message that the source text contains (Liangqiu, 2018). Dynamic equivalence is more similar to the Skopos theory since it delivers the original sense of remaining clarity and readability. Observing this method from the more inclusive strategy, it might be seen that it is a mix of many different approaches. Translating to maintain the purpose of the source text, whether it is educational, entertaining, or, motivational different linguistic instruments may be used depending on the objective. It can borrow and adopt tools from the different translation styles when sending the reader through the target text is necessary.
Overall, the Skopos theory is one of the most philosophical approaches to translation due to its focus on the text’s purpose and the goals it is striving to achieve initially. Different approaches such as foreignization or dynamic equivalence might be used to maintain the message and deliver it to the reader. However, the Skopos theory differs significantly from domestication and formal equivalation because of their narrow focus on the literal translation. From the broader perspective, the Skopos theory is the most appropriate translation method for keeping the original message and getting it to the public.
References
Abdelaal, N. M. (2019). Faithfulness in the Translation of the Holy Quran: Revisiting the Skopos Theory. SAGE Open. Web.
Gong, Y. (2020). Translation Strategies of The Strange Days Under Skopos Theory. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 10(9), 1153-1157.
Liangqiu, L., & Donghui, W. (2018). A Study of Subtitle Translation from the Perspective of Skopos Theory: Youth Film as a Case Study. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and Translation, 4(2), 26-30.