English poet and translator John Dryden (1631–1700) had a lasting impact on translation theory and practice. In the preface to his translation of Ovid’s Epistles, Dryden highlighted a challenge all translators face: balancing accuracy with readability.
He offered one of the earliest clear frameworks for handling this tension. His three categories of translation (metaphrase, paraphrase, and imitation) still help translators decide how closely a translation should follow the source text.
This article explains each category, when it works best, and how we can use Dryden’s thinking to make intentional choices when translating.
John Dryden’s Influence on Translation
Dryden helped shape early English ideas about translation. His work on Virgil, Ovid, and Juvenal influenced debates about voice, style, and meaning. His ideas endure because they focus on the purpose of translation.
He asked two questions that remain central today:
- How close should a translation stay to the original?
- How much freedom can a translator take?
Dryden’s Three Modes of Translation
To answer these questions, Dryden proposed three modes for any translation project. Each mode reflects a different level of fidelity or closeness to the source text:
- Metaphrase — word-for-word translation
- Paraphrase — sense-for-sense translation
- Imitation — creative, adaptive translation
Let’s explore each mode in detail.
Metaphrase: When Accuracy Matters Most
Metaphrase stays very close to the original wording and structure. It prioritises precision, even if the style becomes rigid or foreign. Dryden criticizes Ben Jonson for using metaphrase, calling him a “verbal copier.”
Metaphrase is practical when literal translation is required. When metaphrase might be suitable:
- Legal contracts and compliance documents
- Technical specifications
- Religious or ceremonial texts
- Terminology-heavy materials
- Projects where clients explicitly request strict closeness to the source
Paraphrase: Sense-for-Sense Translation for Natural Flow
Paraphrase works when ideas matter more than exact wording. It aims to communicate meaning clearly while keeping the target text smooth and natural. Dryden preferred this mode because it balances fidelity and readability.
When paraphrase is obvious:
- Essays and opinion articles
- Business and marketing texts
- General non-fiction
- Educational or public-facing content
Imitation: Creative or Adaptive Translation
Imitation gives the translator freedom to reshape, reframe, or reimagine the source. It takes the framework or pattern of the source text and reproduces the intended effect, emotion, or impact. It does not care much about the choices of the original text.
Dryden did not consider imitation an efficient method, but still it remains useful in certain contexts:
- Poetry or literary translation
- Theatre, dialogue, and scripts
- Advertising and brand storytelling
- Cultural adaptation or full transcreation
How We Can Use Dryden’s Translation Framework Today
Dryden’s logic still applies to our translation workflows. While he suggested avoiding both metaphrase and imitation in favor of paraphrase, today translators often use all three modes depending on the project.
It’s important to choose a mode based on audience, purpose, and client expectations. Understanding these factors helps translators make informed decisions before starting a project.
Limitations of Dryden’s Three Modes of Translation
Dryden wrote long before modern fields like localisation, UX writing, and SEO translation appeared, so his three modes of translation do not account for many of the constraints contemporary translators face.
Today, digital content is often designed for scanning, websites and apps require multilingual SEO, software and app localisation impose strict user interface word limits, and maintaining brand voice consistency across cultures presents additional challenges.
However, though Dryden’s modes do not cover all of these scenarios, they still provide a useful foundation for making informed translation choices.
Why Dryden Still Matters
Dryden’s three modes are still valuable because they give us a simple, practical structure for deciding how to translate.
Their strength lies in simplicity. Every time we start a translation, consciously or not, we choose between these three approaches.
They remain a guide for balancing accuracy, readability, and creativity in translation even today.
