DIRECT VS INDIRECT TRANSLATION
The degree of latitude which translators enjoy may be seen in terms of another
distinction which the relevance model of translation has had to adopt: direct and
indirect translation. This dichotomy addresses the need ‘to distinguish between
translations where the translator is free to elaborate or summarize [i.e. indirectly]
and those where he has to somehow stick to the explicit contents of the original’
[directly] (Gutt 1991:122). Obviously, this is not an either/or choice but rather the
two ends of a continuum. Indirect translations are intended to survive on their
own, and involve whatever changes the translator deems necessary to maximize
relevance for a new audience (i.e. the predominantly ‘descriptive’ mode of the tourist
brochure type of translation in the example discussed above). Direct translations,
on the other hand, are more closely tied to the original, a case of what we have called
‘interpretive’ resemblance.Guided by a notion of faithfulness, the translator designs
a direct translation in such a way that it resembles the original ‘closely enough in
relevant respects’ (Sperber and Wilson 1986:137
).
