part of the content is not a mandatory sign of trans-
lation.
The third approach to the definition of transla-
tion equivalence can be called empirical; it is pre-
sented in the V.N. Komissarov’s works. Its essence is
not to try to decide what should be the commonality
of the translation and the original, but to compare
a large number of translations actually performed
with their originals and find out what their equiva-
lence is based on. Having done such an experiment,
Komissarov concluded that the degree of semantic
proximity to the original is different for different
translations, and their equivalence is based on the
preservation of different parts of the contents of the
original.
