6. Target-text user is described by Holz-Manttari as the one who finally puts it to use, perhaps as training material, as a source of information or as a means of advertising. (ibid.)
From the above, it is clear that both the roles of initiator and translator are crucial for a translation process. Besides, the role of the intended target text receiver is also
decisive in the specification of translation Skopos. Although people or agents involved in the translation process are divided into six different types, in reality, it is important to notice that different roles may be fulfilled by one person.
c) Translation as Intercultural Action
In Skopostheorie, the concept of culture is also very important. To break with traditional linguistic translation theory, Vermeer views translation as an intercultural action. It is not the transcoding of words or sentences from one language into another, but a complex action in which someone provides information about a text under new functional, cultural and linguistic conditions in a new situation. For Vermeer, a culture is "the entire setting of norms and conventions an individual as a member of his society must know in order to be `like everybody' or to be able to be different from everybody." (Vermeer, 1987a: 28 qtd. in Nord, 2004: 33). According to Vermeer, "every cultural phenomenon is assigned a position in a complex system of values. And every individual is an element in a system of space-time coordinates. Therefore, transcultural action or communication across culture barriers has to take account of cultural differences with regard to behaviour, evaluation and communicative situation." (cf. Vermeer, 1990b: 29 qtd. in Nord, 2004: 33)
Nord points out that "translation takes place in concrete, definable situations that involve members of different cultures."困ord, 2004: 23). In this sense, culture is a complex system, which can be subdivided into "paraculture", "diaculture" and "idioculture". (ibid.: 24). However, the borderlines between cultural systems or sub-systems are difficult to define until Michael Agar, a North American anthropologist "avho thinks a culture cannot simply be equated with a language and who worked as an `intercultural practitioner' in Mexico presents a different view towards culture:
Culture is something that the ICP }intercultural practitioner) creates, a story he/she tells that highlights and explains the dif, j`'erences that cause breakdowns. 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, `'erences that can vary task to task and group to group. (Agar, 1992: 11 qtd. in Nord, 2004: 24)
In Agar's point of view, language and culture are interdependent and their combination is called "languaculture" which is treated as a single entity by him, and the culture boundary is marked by "rich points", which are differences in behaviour causing culture conflicts or communication breakdowns between two communities in
contact.ord, 2004: 25). This view is useful in guiding translation practice, because it means that .a translator has to be very aware of the "rich points" relevant to a particular translation task between groups on either side of the languaculture barrier.
3.1.3.2 Translation Brief
For functionalists, translation is usually done `by assignment'.As Nord puts it, "in the professional practice of intercultural communication, translators rarely start
working of their own accord. They are usually called upon to do so by a client." (ibid.: 20). That is to say, a client needs a text for a particular purpose and calls upon the translator for a translation, thus acting as the initiator of the translation process, who decides the communicative purpose. In an ideal case, the initiator would give as many
details as possible about the purpose, explaining the target-text addressee(s), the (prospective) time, the place of text reception, the occasion and medium through which the text will be transmitted, the function the text is intended to have as well as the motive for the production of the text. For Nord, this information would constitute an explicit translation brief (ibid.: 30). However, real practice often presents different situations where the client give the trans explicit translation brief, because sometimes he may have
y a vague or even incorrect idea of what kind of text is needed for the situation in question or usually he does not know that a good brief spell a better translation, since he is not an expert in intercultural communication. In this case, the translator, who plays crucial role in the translation process, should be responsible for "analyzing the acceptability and viability of the translation brief in legal, economic or ideological terms" as well as for "specifying the activities required for carrying out the brie'. ord, 2004: 21). Based on the source text in the source settings, an experienced translator is able to infer the translation brief himself and make some variations upon the target text in order to make it meaningful for the target culture receivers. "Apart from this, the translation brief does not tell the translator how to go about their translating job, what translation strategy to use, or what translation type to choose. These decisions depend entirely on the translator's responsibility and competence." (ibid.: 30). Since the translation brief may not be identical with the original author's intention, the translator purposefully chooses those items of information which he thinks can realize the translation brief, and leaves out or adjusts those that are not coincident with the brief. In this sense, translators in the functional translation theory have more power and freedom to decide the translating strategies according to translation purpose.
According to Nord, with regard to Skoposthevrie, instead of depending on the source culture, the viability of the brief depends on the circumstances of the target culture. Since translation has been defined as a translational action involving a source text, the source is usually a part of the brief. In terms of action theory, the agents(sender, receiver, initiator, translator) play the most important parts (ibid.: 31).
3.1.3.3 Adequacy: the Standard of Evaluation
In the process of translation, the translator is usually guided by his assumptions of the target text readers' needs, expectations and previous knowledge. These assumptions may be different from the intention of the original author; therefore, it is understandable that the translator cannot offer the same amount or kind of information as the original author. For that, Skopo >theorie has come to challenge, the traditional concept of equivalence. According to Skopostheorie, the intended purposes of the target text determine the translation strategies and the criterion for translation evaluation is "adequacy" instead of "equivalence".
Some scholars also use the same term in their translation theories. Even-Zohar, for instance, points out that an adequate translation "is a translation which realizes in the target language the textual relationships of a source text with no breach of its own [basic] linguistic system." (Even-Zohar, 1975: 43 qtd. in Nord, 2004: 35). Besides,
Toury states that "adherence to source norms determines a translation's adequacy as compared to the source text." (Toury, 2001:56). However, different from the above uses of the term, "adequacy" in Skopos theory refers to "the qualities of a target text with regaxd to the translation brief: the translation should be `adequate' to the requirements of the brief.", 2004: 35). Compared with the concept of equivalence, adequacy is a dynamic concept related to the process of translational action and referring to the "goal-oriented selection of signs that are considered appropriate for the communicative purpose defined in the translation assignment". (ibid.). Equivalence is a static, result-oriented concept describing a relationship of equal communicative value' between two texts or, words, phrases, sentences, syntactic structures and so on. (ibid.: 35-6). In Skopostheorie, "equivalence means adequacy to a Skopos that requires that the target text serve the same communicative function or functions as the source text, thus preserving `invariance of function between source and target text'. That is, the concept of equivalence is reduced to `functional equivalence' on the text level." (ibid.: 36). In this way, equivalence .is subject to adequacy and determined by Skopos. Within the framework of Skopostheorie, purpose is essential in the evaluation of function. Translation is defined to be adequate or inadequate with regard to the purpose or the communicative function it is supposed to achieve.
