▁approaches ▁that ▁are ▁employed ▁to ▁achieve ▁different ▁levels ▁of ▁literal ness ▁between ▁the ▁source ▁text ▁and ▁the ▁target ▁text , ▁as ▁ev iden ced ▁in ▁bib lic al ▁translation . ▁▁ ▁The ▁two ▁have ▁been ▁understood ▁basically , ▁with ▁dynamic ▁equivalence ▁as ▁sense - for - s ense ▁translation ▁( trans l ating ▁the ▁mean ings ▁of ▁phr ases ▁or ▁whole ▁sentences ) ▁with ▁read ability ▁in ▁mind , ▁and ▁with ▁formal ▁equivalence ▁as ▁word - for - word ▁translation ▁( trans l ating ▁the ▁mean ings ▁of ▁words ▁and ▁phr ases ▁in ▁a ▁more ▁literal ▁way ), ▁keeping ▁literal ▁f idel ity . ▁ ▁Appro aches ▁to ▁translation ▁ ▁F ormal ▁equivalence ▁approach ▁tends ▁to ▁emphas ize ▁f idel ity ▁to ▁the ▁lex ical ▁details ▁and ▁gram mat ical ▁structure ▁of ▁the ▁original ▁language , ▁whereas ▁dynamic ▁equivalence ▁tends ▁to ▁employ ▁a ▁more ▁natural ▁rendering ▁but ▁with ▁less ▁literal ▁accuracy . ▁ ▁According ▁to ▁Eug ene ▁N ida , ▁dynamic ▁equivalence , ▁the ▁term ▁as ▁he ▁originally ▁co ined , ▁is ▁the ▁" quality ▁of ▁a ▁translation ▁in ▁which ▁the ▁message ▁of ▁the ▁original ▁text ▁has ▁been ▁so ▁transport ed ▁into ▁the ▁re ceptor ▁language ▁that ▁the ▁response ▁of ▁the ▁re ceptor ▁is ▁essentially ▁like ▁that ▁of ▁the ▁original ▁re cept ors ." ▁The ▁desire ▁is ▁that ▁the ▁reader ▁of ▁both ▁languages ▁would ▁understand ▁the ▁mean ings ▁of ▁the ▁text ▁in ▁a ▁similar ▁fashion . ▁ ▁In ▁later ▁years , ▁N ida ▁dist anced ▁himself ▁from ▁the ▁term ▁" dynamic ▁equivalence "