LiteraturereviewonDynamicEquivalencebyEugeneA.NidaDuringtheprocessoftranslation,thecomparisonbetweendifferentlanguagesandculturesisaninevitablephenomenon.Therefore,theconceptofequivalencegetsinvolvedintranslation.Andthereisawidebutnotuniversalagreementthatthemainaimofthetranslatoristoproduceasnearlyaspossiblethesameeffectonhisreadersaswasproducedonthereadersoftheoriginal.Theapproachofpragmaticequivalenceisrepresentedbythetheoryof“DynamicEquivalence”(orFunctionalEquivalence)byEugeneA.Nida.EugeneA.Nidaisoneofthemostdistinguishedandinfluentialcontemporarytranslationtheoristsinthewest.hisextensivewritingsontranslationcoveralmostallproblemsintranslationandbringforthhisimportanttranslationprincipleofdynamicequivalence.Hisimportantpositioninthestudyoftranslationisestablishedinthe1960s.Bibletranslating:anAnalysisofPrinciplesandProcedures(1947)oneofhismajorworksthatwaspublishedin1946,wascommentedbythefamousGermantranslationtheoristWilssas“themarkofthebeginningofmoderntranslation”[1]Nida’stranslationtheoryhasbeenstudiedbymanytranslatorsandtranslationtheoristsandalotofpenetratingandvaluableargumentshavebeenpresented.Atfirst,thetheorywinshighpraisesamongtranslationscholars,butastimegoesby,itishighlyquestionedandchallenged.Somescholarsevenclaimthathistranslationtheoryhasbeenoutofdateandbecomeuseless.Translationscholarsshowverydiverseresponsetohistranslationtheory.Someabsolutelyaffirmitwhileothersnegateit.Koller,forinstance,oncestatesthatNida’s“dynamicquivalence”tendstoruleoutallothertranslationpriciples.[2]ProfessorTanZaixihasgeneralizedNida’scontributionsinabroadsenseinstating:“Nida’stheoreticalcontributiontotranslationliesinthefactthathehelpstocreateanewstyleoftreatingdifferentculturesindifferentlanguagestopromotetheexchangeandcommunicationintheworld.”[6]Frombeinghighlypraisedatthebeginningtobeingseriouslyquestionedandgreatlychallengedlater,Nida’stheoryexperiencesupsanddowns.Newmark,however,arguesthatNida’sequivalenteffectisthedesirableresult,ratherthantheaimofanytranslati