Working with Purpose: A Functionalist Approach to Interpreting and Translation

Interpreting and translation are often described in terms of accuracy, clarity, and equivalence. These ideas matter, but they do not always explain why we make certain decisions in practice. A functionalist approach encourages interpreters and translators to think about communication in a broader way: every piece of language, signed or spoken, is produced for a reason. Our task is not only to reproduce information, but to ensure the message works for the people who will receive it.

Functionalism has shaped both translation studies and interpreting theory for several decades. Its key message is consistent across scholars such as Hans Vermeer, Eugene Nida, and interpreting writers including Alcorn and Humphrey: to do our work well, we must understand the purpose behind the communication and make choices that support that purpose.

This article explores how functionalism developed, how it links to ideas such as Skopos Theory and dynamic equivalence, and how interpreters and translators can apply it in real settings.

Where Functionalism Comes From

Earlier linguistic approaches tended to see translation as the transfer of content from one code to another. The interpreter or translator was expected to replicate forms as closely as possible, which often meant following the structure of the source language even when it created confusion in the target language.

Functionalism challenged this view. Scholars such as Vermeer argued that translation is a human activity carried out in a context, not a mechanical operation. If communication takes place, it has an aim. Translating or interpreting without considering this aim risks producing output that is technically accurate but functionally weak.

This shift in thinking encouraged practitioners to ask different questions:

• Who is this message for?

• What is the speaker or author trying to achieve?

• What prior knowledge does the audience have?

• What should my output do in this situation?

This approach is especially relevant to sign language interpreting, where grammatical differences, discourse structures, and cultural expectations can make literal interpretations ineffective or confusing.

Skopos Theory: Purpose as the Main Guide

Hans Vermeer played a central role in shaping functionalism through Skopos Theory. The term “Skopos” comes from Greek and refers to aim or purpose. Vermeer argued that every translation should be guided by the intended purpose of the communication. In other words, the purpose determines the strategy.

Vermeer explained that translators and interpreters must produce work that functions appropriately for the users in the context where it will be used. The source text is important, but it does not override the needs of the target audience or the demands of the situation. This grants interpreters and translators more discretion but also more responsibility, because the success of the communication depends on the choices they make.

Skopos Theory encourages practitioners to consider:

• the brief (formal or informal)

• the expectations of clients and users

• the wider context of the communication

• whether the message needs to be adjusted to ensure it works for its new audience

For example, interpreting a safeguarding meeting requires a very different approach from interpreting a community event or translating an academic article. The aim of the communication shapes choices about register, clarity, explicitness, and structure.

Dynamic Equivalence: Eugene Nida’s Contribution

Eugene Nida, known for his work on Bible translation, developed the idea of dynamic equivalence, which aligns closely with functionalist principles. Rather than focusing on structural matches, Nida argued that translators should seek to create a similar effect for modern readers that the original would have created for its first audience.

Nida recognised that languages do not map neatly onto each other. He argued that a translation should communicate the intended meaning in a natural form for the target audience, even if the structure changes. His work illustrated that literal translations often obscure meaning or block comprehension, particularly when cultural references or outdated expressions are involved.

Dynamic equivalence paved the way for functionalism by reinforcing the idea that the target audience’s needs are central. A translation or interpretation is successful when it enables understanding in the way the source message intended, not when it mirrors the original form.

Alcorn and Humphrey: Function in Interpreting Practice

Within sign language interpreting literature, Alcorn and Humphrey have emphasised the importance of understanding intention, context, and interactional purpose. Their work highlights that interpreting is not simply about reproducing linguistic forms. It is a complex activity involving meaning-making, decision-making, and cultural mediation.

Their contribution aligns with functionalist thinking in several ways:

• They highlight the need to analyse intention rather than rely solely on lexical equivalence.

• They acknowledge the interpreter’s role in managing communication between parties who may not share cultural frameworks.

• They discuss strategies for ensuring that the message has the correct impact on the target audience.

Together, their work and that of the earlier functionalist theorists offer interpreters a practical foundation for analysing messages and making informed choices.

Functionalism in Practice

Functionalism encourages interpreters and translators to look beyond the words themselves and focus on what the message is meant to achieve. Below are several practical applications.

1. Understanding the Brief

The starting point is understanding the purpose. For translators, this may be a written commission. For interpreters, it may be established through professional preparation, initial discussions, or experience within the setting.

Questions to clarify include:

• Who will use the message?

• What do they need to know?

• What is the expected outcome?

• What constraints or sensitivities are present?

Without this understanding, decisions about wording, register, and cultural adaptation become guesswork.

2. Working with Different Structures

English and BSL differ significantly in structure. English may compress information into long sentences with multiple clauses. BSL is spatial, visual, and often topic-focused.

A functional approach recognises that a direct structural match may not serve the purpose. For example:

English:“The committee has expressed concerns regarding your late submissions, and further delays may affect the final decision.”

A literal interpretation may overwhelm the client. A functional interpretation might restructure the message into clearer, staged information to ensure understanding.

3. Cultural Mediation

Functionalism supports necessary adjustments when cultural references would otherwise block understanding.

For instance, if a speaker refers to a well-known British TV show in a joke or analogy, the interpreter may need to choose a culturally equivalent reference or explain the concept briefly, depending on the aim of the communication. The goal is not to replace cultural content but to ensure the message has the intended effect.

4. Domesticating and Foreignising Choices

Lawrence Venuti discussed two approaches to cultural distance in translation: domesticating and foreignising. Domesticating makes the text feel natural in the target culture, while foreignising preserves some unfamiliar elements to signal cultural difference.

A functionalist approach does not mandate either strategy. Instead, the decision depends on purpose.

For example:

• A leaflet intended for local distribution about recycling may require domesticating choices so that the audience understands the instructions easily.

• A translation for a museum exhibition about Indigenous practices may require a degree of foreignising to maintain cultural authenticity.

  
  

The key question remains: which approach supports the message’s purpose?

Examples from Interpreting and Translation

Here are some examples that demonstrate functionalism in action.

Example 1: Education Setting

Teacher:“Tom is bright, but he loses track when lessons get a bit theoretical.”

A word-for-word approach might reflect the structure but lose the interpersonal tone. A functional interpretation can present the key points in a natural way for the Deaf parent, preserving the teacher’s mix of reassurance and concern.

Example 2: Housing Advice

Original message:“You may be eligible for a priority assessment, depending on your circumstances.”

In BSL, a clear, staged explanation may support better understanding of eligibility and process. Functionalism supports reordering the information so the decision pathway is clearer.

Example 3: Legal Translation

Source text:“Failure to comply may result in further action.”

A literal translation into another language might risk ambiguity or unnecessary harshness. A functional translation would reflect the seriousness but maintain the tone expected in that legal system.

Example 4: Conference Interpreting

If a speaker opens with humour to build rapport, the interpreter may not replicate the exact joke. Instead, the interpreter aims to recreate the social function of the opening, helping the audience settle into the session.

Implications for Professional Practice

A functionalist approach encourages interpreters and translators to:

• Think beyond linguistic form.

• Prioritise the intended meaning and purpose.

• Analyse the audience’s needs.

• Make justified, informed choices about structure and register.

• Collaborate with clients where required to clarify purpose.

It does not dismiss the source message. Rather, it places the source within a wider framework where communication must work for the target audience in the real world.

Conclusion

Functionalism offers a practical and thoughtful way to approach interpreting and translation. It reminds us that our job is not only to convert language but to support communication so it achieves what it is meant to achieve. From Vermeer’s Skopos Theory to Nida’s dynamic equivalence and the work of Alcorn and Humphrey, the message is consistent: purpose matters.

When interpreters and translators keep purpose at the centre of their decisions, their work becomes clearer, more coherent, and more effective for those who rely on it.

Stephen Ellis-Menton (2025)

Bibliography

Alcorn, B.J. and Humphrey, J.H. (2007) So You Want to Be an Interpreter? An Introduction to Sign Language Interpreting. 4th edn. Amarillo: H&H Publishing.

Nida, E.A. (1964) Toward a Science of Translating. Leiden: Brill.

Nida, E.A. and Taber, C.R. (1969) The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden: Brill.

Schäffner, C. (1998) ‘Skopos Theory’, in Baker, M. (ed.) Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London: Routledge, pp. 235–238.

Shuttleworth, M. and Cowie, M. (1997) Dictionary of Translation Studies. Manchester: St Jerome.

Venuti, L. (1995) The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation. London: Routledge.

Vermeer, H.J. (2000) ‘Skopos and Commission in Translational Action’, in Venuti, L. (ed.) The Translation Studies Reader. London: Routledge, pp. 221–232.