2. Conception of Nominative-semantic Equivalence

It is connected with the translation of everyday text. This conception is based on the two main principles.

1. the contexts are conveyed as completely as possible.

2. the norms of the TT are to be followed

the conception of formal correspondence was little by little replaced by nominative-semantic correspondence. It was in the 16^th century when M. Luther suggested translated the Bible by the lg the people who surrounded him spoke the message of such translation gave verse to new translation of the Bible into national lg-s. this conception is the basis for oral formal translation. Unlike the 1^st conception , this conception achieves equivalence at the level of both writing and oral translation.

The conception of aesthetic equivalence – the original text was created like aesthetic equivalence. It is characteristic of literary translation. It was used in soviet theory of translation.

3. Conception of Translation Adequacy

Was formed during the 19^th-20^th century. It was based on written translation of literary texts. The conception was founded by Федоров and Retzker. There was the linguistic theory of translation. They set a task to get rid of aesthetic principles and to outline the objective criteria. They proposed the following criteria:

1. The complete rendering of context;

2. The rendering of the context by equivalent means.

It was functional equivalence the equivalence of the functions of the lg means, which the author used in the original. The text that corresponded to the 2 criteria could be considered adequate. This conception suggested dividing all the elements of the ST into content and its means of its expression. The drawback of this conception that it doesn’t take into account the conflict of form and content. According to this conception it is possible to convey all the peculiarities of the original text on the basis of functional correspondence of the means. Still the modern literary translation practice follows this conception. It is the basis for all the other translation equivalence.

4. Conception of Dynamic Equivalence

This conception was suggested by E. Nida, American scientist in 1950s. He came into this conception by analyzing the original and translating the Bible. He suggested establishing equivalence by means of comparing the responds of the ST receptor and the TT receptor. The receptor of the TT receives the text with the help of translations.

The translations may be equivalent if the responses coincide both intertextually and emotionally. The equivalence of responses means their similarity but not identity.

5. Conception of Functional Equivalence

This conception is close to the conception of dynamic equivalence. It was proposed by the Russian scientist Sweizer. The author suggests directing to the communicative purpose on which a choice of linguistic means in the text depends. These means are realized as a set of speech act characteristics or functions, such as denotative, expressive, poetic, metalinguistic and others. These characteristics are presented in a speech utterance unequally. Shweizwer suggested singling out the dominating characteristics defining their expressive means, and creating an equivalent translation on their basis. He called these functions functional dominants.

The dynamic equivalence is an addition to the concept of nom- sem equivalence in oral official translation. This concept helps to overcome linguistic and aesthetic difference of lg while necessary in Mass media texts, formal office texts and common everyday texts. Equivalence conceptions which were formed at different times and reflected historical, different approaches of people to the text have been specified by modern linguistic notions firstly on the basis of the theory of lg communication. Now these conceptions allow elaborating the fundamentals methods of translation of any text.