Seven Current Translation Theories & Methods

I was recently asked what the main translation theories are at the moment. These are the ones mainly discussed in departments of translation studies in universities around the world:

1. The Code Model. This is the first modern theory of translation, developed by Eugene Nida in the 1960s. It focuses on the meaning of the translation, and suggests translations should have 'dynamic equivalence', that is, the same meaning as the source text. It wants translations to be accurate, clear and natural, often with a focus on naturalness.
2. Skopos Theory. This was developed Hans J. Vermeer and Christine Nord has written a lot on this. This emphasises the purpose of the translation, putting the audience more in the driving seat than the Code Model. With Skopos Theory, the expected change in the audience is more important than fidelity to the source text. Translations do something, they have an affect, and not only on the translator, but on the target audience. An obvious example would be the translation of jokes that rely on a play on words. These cannot be translated, as such, but need to be replaced by similar jokes (as happened when Asterix the Gaul was translated into English from French).
3. Foreignization and Domestication (Lawrence Venuti). Venuti discusses the invisibility of the translator, and notes that it is often necessary for a translator to resist domesticating their translation, which results in foreignizing elements that preserve the flavour of the source cultural context. Domesticating translations have a tendency to a) remove the cultural flavour of the source language b) change the historic and geographic context. It would be better if hearers could understand that the original communication took place at another time and in a different place, and got on board with that cultural context.
4. Cultural Mediation (David Katan). In this theory the translator is seen as a cultural mediator between the target context and the source context. This requires negotiation, and can affect the amount of information included in the translation to help the reader, whether within the translation itself or in footnotes or other 'helps'.
5. Literary Translation. Various authors have suggested that the main feature of a good translation is good literary features. This will not be the same as the source text's features, as any language has its own literary features. Some, like Robert Alter, have tried to preserve the literary features of the source text, or at least explain them in footnotes.
6. Postcolonial studies (R. S. Sugirtharajah). When applied to translation this considers power dynamics used in translation projects. Translations in the past often subjugated the community they were translated for. Often, those who have greater power and influence were (and still are) in charge of the translation programme. Unwittingly, perhaps, their values, rather than local community values, come through in the translation. One way of avoiding poor power dynamics in Bible translation is Church-Centric Bible Translation. 
7. On top of this it's important to mention machine translation and the use of large language models (AI). There is much discussion on how well AI can do translation, and the ethics of using AI. Ultimately, AI can speed up translation, but human beings need to be involved at each stage, guiding the AI program, and checking the translation once the AI has completed it.

The last of these is not so much a theory as a method, but I have included it as there is so much ink spilt on this topic at the moment. 

Most translators use a range of theories when working, including the Code Model. It is not necessary to throw that model out completely, rather it has been modified by more recent translation theories. Interestingly, in the Bible translation world we haven't looked at recent theories of translation. This is partly because it is hard to produce manuals based on later models.