Roman Jakobson (1896-1982) was one of the greatest linguists of the 20th century. He was born in Russia and was a member of the Russian Formalist school as early as 1915. Jakobson taught in Czechoslovakia between the two world wars, where, along with N. Trubetzkoy, he was one of the leaders of the influenal Prague Linguisc Circle. When Czechoslovakia was invaded by the Nazis, he was forced to flee to Scandinavia, and went from there to the United States in 1941. From 1942 to 1946 Jakobson taught at the École Libre des Hautes Études in New York City, where he collaborated with Claude Lévi-Strauss. In 1943 he became one of the founding members of the Linguisc Circle of New York and acted as its vice president unl 1949. He taught at numerous instuons from 1943 on, including Harvard University and MIT. Through his teaching in the United States, Jakobson helped to bridge the gap between European and American linguiscs. He had a profound influence on general linguiscs (especially on Noam Chomsky's and Morris Halle's work) and on Slavic studies, but also on semiocs, anthropology, psychoanalysis, ethnology, mythology, communicaon theory and literary studies. His famous model of the funcons of language is part of the intellectual heritage of semiocs. In his essay, Jakobson states that meaning of a word is a linguisc phenomenon. Using semiocs, Jakobson believes that meaning lies with the signifier and not in the signified. Thus it is the linguisc verbal sign that gives an object its meaning. Interpretaon of a verbal sign according to Roman Jakobson can happen in three ways: intralingual, interlingual and intersemioc. In the case of intralingual translaon, the changes take place within the same language. Thus a verbal sign (word) belonging to a parcular language is replaced by another sign (word) belonging to the same language. Interlingual translaon on the other hand can be seen as replacing a verbal sign with another sign but belonging to a different language. The last kind of explanaon of verbal sign that he talks about is the intersemioc translaon. Here more than focusing on the words, emphasis is on the overall message that needs to be conveyed. Thus the translator, instead of paying aenon to the verbal signs, concentrates more on the informaon that is to be delivered. Roman Jakobson uses the term ‘mutual translatability’ and states that when any two languages are being compared, the foremost thing that needs to be taken into consideraon is whether they can be translated into one another or not. Laying emphasis on the grammar of a parcular language, he feels that it should determine how one language is different from another. In the essay, Roman Jakobson also deals with the problem of ‘deficiency’ in a parcular language. Jakobson believes that all cognive experiences can be expressed in language and while translang whenever there is a lack or ‘deficiency’ of words’, ‘loan words’, ‘neologisms’ and ‘circumlocuons’ can be used to fill in this lack. Reinforcing the fact that one of the factors that translaon has to take care of is the grammacal structure of the target language, Jakobson believes that it becomes tedious to try to maintain fidelity to the source text when the target language has a rigid grammacal framework which is missing in the source language. Jakobson, in his essay also brings in the relaonship between gender and the grammar of a parcular language. Skopos theory (German: Skopostheorie) is a concept from the field of translaon studies. It provides an insight into the nature of translaon as a purposeful acvity, which is directly applicable to every translaon project. It was established by the German linguists Hans Vermeer and Katharina Reiß and comprises the idea that translang and interpreng should primarily take into account the funcon of the target text. Aim and audience[edit] Skopos theory focuses on translaon as an acvity with an aim or purpose, and on the intended addressee or audience of the translaon. To translate means to produce a target text in a target seng for a target purpose and target addressees in target circumstances. In skopos theory, the status of the source text is lower than it is in equivalence-based theories of translaon. The source is an "offer of informaon", which the translator turns into an "offer of informaon" for the target audience.[1] Paul Kussmaul writes about this theory: "the funconal approach has a great affinity with Skopos theory. The funcon of a translaon depends on the knowledge, expectaons, values and norms of the target readers, who are 1