Analysis Of Gideon Toury's Three-Phase Methodology

2. Theoretical background
2.1 Gideon Toury’s three-phase methodology
Gideon Toury worked with Israeli scholar Itamar Even-Zohar, the man behind the polysystem; “a system of various systems which intersect with each other and partly overlap, using concurrently different options, yet functioning as one structured whole, whose members are interdependent” (Munday, 2016, p. 174). Toury also saw translation to have a position both in social and literary systems of the target culture, and developed the polysystem theory further, and presented his three-phase methodology for the branch of descriptive translation studies, an empirical branch of translation studies (ibid.). With this method, the description of the translation and its wider role in the sociocultural system is incorporated (ibid.). First, “situate the text within the target culture system, looking at its significance or acceptability” (Munday, 2016, p. 175). Then, “undertake a textual analysis of the ST and the TT to identify relationships between corresponding segments in the two texts” (ibid.), called “coupled pairs” by Toury. Now,

The connection between the receptor and the message aims to be as close as the connection between the original receptor and the message. In short, dynamic equivalence is about naturalness of expression, and to come as close to a recreation of the function the words might have had in the ST (Pym, 2016, p. 31). He defined dynamic equivalence as “the closest natural equivalent to the source-language message” (Munday, 2016, p. 68). With this receptor-oriented approach follows several adjustments, grammatically, lexiconically and culturally, to achieve naturalness. Nida considers four requirements to achieve equivalent effect or response; making sense, conveying the spirit and manner of the original, having a natural and easy form of expression, and producing a similar response (Munday, 2016, p.