Ultimately, just as etymology suggests that translationis metaphor, metaphors for translation show that it is so much more than mere etymology

1.2 Theory of translation

This theory, based on a solid foundation on understanding of how languages work, translation theory recognizes that different languages encode meaning in differing forms, yet guides translators to find appropriate ways of preserving meaning, while using the most appropriate forms of each language. Translation theory includes principles for translating figurative language, dealing with lexical mismatches, rhetorical questions, inclusion of cohesion markers, and many other topics crucial to good translation.

Basically there are two competing theories of translation. In one, the predominant purpose is to express as exactly as possible the full force and meaning of every word and turn of phrase in the original, and in the other the predominant purpose is to produce a result that does not read like a translation at all, but rather moves in its new dress with the same ease as in its native rendering. In the hands of a good translator neither of these two approaches can ever be entirely ignored.

Conventionally, it is suggested that in order to perform their job successfully, translators should meet three important requirements; they should be familiar with:

• the source language
• the target language
• the subject matter

Based on this premise, the translator discovers the meaning behind the forms in thesource language and does his best to produce the same meaning in the target language - using the forms and structures of the target language. Consequently, what is supposed to change is the form and the code and what should remain unchanged is the meaning and the message. (Larson, 1984)

One of the earliest attempts to establish a set of major rules or principles to be referred to in literary translation was made by French translator and humanist Étienne Dolet, who in 1540 formulated the following fundamental principles of translation ("La Manière de Bien Traduire d’une Langue en Aultre"), usually regarded as providing rules of thumb for the practicing translator:

The translator should understand perfectly the content and intention of the author whom he is translating. The principal way to reach it is reading all the sentences or the text completely so that you can give the idea that you want to say in the target language because the most important characteristic of this technique is translating the message as clearly and natural as possible. If the translation is for different countries besides Mexico, the translator should use the cultural words of that country. For example if he/she has to translate ”She is unloyal with her husband” in this country it can be translated as “Ella le pone los cuernos” but in Peru it can be translated as “Ella le pone los cachos”. In this case it is really important the cultural words because if the translator does not use them correctly the translation will be misunderstood.

The translator should have a perfect knowledge of the language from which he is translating and an equally excellent knowledge of the language into which he is translating. At this point the translator must have a wide knowledge in both languages for getting the equivalence in the target language, because the deficiency of the knowledge of both languages will result in a translation without logic and sense. For example if you translate the following sentence “Are you interested in sports?” as “¿Estás interesado en deportes?” the translation is wrong since the idea of this question in English is “¿Practicas algún deporte?”

The translator should avoid the tendency to translate word by word, because doing so is to destroy the meaning of the original and to ruin the beauty of the expression. This point is very important and one of which if it is translated literally it can transmit another meaning or understanding in the translation.

1.3 The problem of equivalence in translation.

The specificity of translation, which distinguishes it from all other linguistic mediation, is that it is designed for full replacement of the original and the translation speakers find it completely identical to the original text. However, it is clear that absolute identity of the original translation is unattainable and that it does not impede the implementation of interlingual communication.

Because of the lack of identity between the content of the original text and the translated text it was introduced the term "equivalence", which stands for common content, i.e. semantic proximity original and translation. As the importance of maximum convergence between these texts seems apparent equivalence is generally regarded as the main feature and the condition of translation.

So, we can make three conclusions from this:

· First, the condition of equivalence should be included in the definition of translation

· Second, the concept of "equivalence" gets an estimated character: translation considered "good" or "right" only if equivalence occurs.

· Thirdly, as the equivalence is a condition of translation, the task is to identify this condition, indicating what is the translation equivalence that must necessarily be preserved in translation.

Professional translator always achieve practical information equivalence translation of the original, but in theoretical terms this equivalence can vary greatly.

You can pre argued that any translation will never be completely identical to the original canon. Equivalence of the translation of the original is always a relative concept. And the level of relativity can be very different. The degree of approximation to the original depends on many factors: the skill of the translator, the characteristics of languages and cultures that are the objects of comparison, from the era of the creation of the original and the translation, the method of translation, the nature of translated texts and so on.

To comprehend all this, you should start with spelling the terms out.

In theory and practice of translation such concepts as equivalence, adequacy and identity are operated. In broad terms, equivalence is understood as something interchangeable, something equivalent, and adequacy - as something quite smooth, and identity - as something that has a complete coincidence resemblance to something.

Apparently, this less categorical semantic word "equivalence" made him the best in modern translation. Of course, the concept of adequacy, identity, usefulness and even similarity remain in the same semantic field as the term "equivalence" and sometimes overlap each other.

Thus, under equivalence in translation theory we should understand preserve the relative equality of content, semantic, semantic, stylistic and functional-communicative information that contained in the original and the translation. It should be emphasized that the equivalence of the original and translation - is primarily a common understanding of the information contained in the text, including one that affects not only the mind but also the feelings of the speaker, which is not only expressed explicitly in the text, but also implicitly referred to the subtext. Equivalence of translation also depends on the situation of the generation of the original text and its reproduction in the target language. This interpretation shows equivalence of completeness and multilevel concept associated with semantic, structural, functional, communicative, pragmatic, genre, and other characteristics. And in all these definitions of parameters to be stored in the translation, but the degree of their implementation will be different according to the text, conditions and way of translation.

In translation studies can be found on the thesis that the main defining principle of equivalence text is communicative and functional feature which consists of equity communicative effect levied on the speakers original and translation. With this postulate, we can partially agree, but the interpretation of communicative and functional equivalence states that creating text language of the recipient, the translator builds it so that translation of the speaker took it the same as the original speaker.

That translator does not have to submit the text message feature of his own perception, which is different from the perception of the message to the recipient, to whom it was addressed. In fact, the perception of the translator and each of the recipients of speech in any case can not be the same due to different personal, cultural and social reasons.

Translator, such as literature, sees the text not as an unknown average native speaker, but as a minister of a particular "high art" translation.

Of course, it is not at adjusts his translation of abstract perception of two things: foreign and domestic reader bibliophile. Because these speakers original and translation perception can not be cloned. It definitely differs at least in some way. And besides, the true meaning, for example, a work of art never fully exhausted and the approach to it - an endless process.

The purpose of translation is not processing the text in one's perception, but maintaining the content, features, style, stylistic, communicative and artistic values ​​of the original. If this goal is reached, then the perception of translation in the language environment will be relatively smooth transfer of the original perception in the original language environment. Exaggeration of the role of communicative and functional factor in translation leads to erosion of domestic content, informative the essence of the text, the original and the translation, to the replacement of the nature of the object reaction to him from perceiving subject. The decisive is not the text itself and its communicative function and terms of sale.