在翻译实践中有时会发现两种语言之间的转换无法表达原文的意思，更不能显示

在翻译实践中有时会发现两种语言之间的转换无法表达原文的意思，更不能显示出译入语的本身特征。解决这一问题的途径之一便是运用词性转换这一方法，这常常可使译文更符合译入语的表达习惯。谈到英语翻译技巧，必会提到词性转换，因为运用词性转换可使原本看似杂乱的文章译得更有表现力，达到意合、神合的效果，使得译文与原文更加地贴合。美国翻译家尤金·A·奈达的功能对等理论也与突破词性有关。他主张摒弃传统的词性观念，不一定按原文语法的规则翻译，而在必要时另辟蹊径。

In translation practice, it is sometimes found that the transformation between the two languages can not express the meaning of the original text, let alone show the characteristics of the target language. One of the ways to solve this problem is to use part of speech conversion, which can often make the translation more in line with the expression habits of the target language. When it comes to English translation skills, we must mention part of speech conversion, because the use of part of speech conversion can make the original seemingly messy articles more expressive, achieve the effect of parataxis and spirit, and make the translation more consistent with the original text. The functional equivalence theory of American translator Eugene A. Nida is also related to the breakthrough part of speech. He advocates abandoning the traditional concept of part of speech, not necessarily translating according to the rules of the original grammar, but finding another way when necessary.

In translation practice, it is sometimes found that the transformation between two languages can not express the meaning of the original text, let alone show the characteristics of the target language itself. One of the ways to solve this problem is to use the method of part-of-speech conversion, which often makes the translation more in line with the expression habits of the target language. When it comes to English translation skills, part-of-speech conversion must be mentioned, because the use of part-of-speech conversion can make the original seemingly messy articles more expressive, achieve the effect of parataxis and harmony, and make the translation more compatible with the original text. American translator Eugene A. Nida's functional equivalence theory is also related to breaking through part of speech. He advocated abandoning the traditional concept of part of speech, not necessarily translating according to the rules of the original grammar, but finding another way when necessary.