1887
Volume 3, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0924-1884
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9986
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

After some preliminary notes on the fragmented state of Translation Studies, the author directs his attention to one of the seemingly irreconcilable oppositions within the discipline, namely, between "theoretical" and "historical" approaches to translation. On the basis of insights from modern epistemology it is claimed that the two are, in fact, complementary and that one should aim for a continuous interplay between them. Normative approaches fail to achieve this and prove to have little explanatory power when confronted with the historical of translation. Four discursive strategies are discussed whereby this anomaly is often camouflaged or explained away.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/target.3.2.02del
1991-01-01
2022-08-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Delabastita, Dirk
    1990a Review of Snell-Hornby 1988 Leuvense Bijdragen79:2. 242–247.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. 1990b“There’s a Double Tongue”: An Investigation into the Translation of Shakespeare’s Wordplay. K.U. Leuven. [Doctoral Dissertation.]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Hermans, Theo
    ed. 1985The Manipulation of Literature: Studies in Literary Translation. London and Sydney: Croom Helm.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Holmes, James S.
    1988 “The Future of Translation Studies: A Handful of Theses”. Translated!: Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies. Amsterdam: Rodopi 1988 99–102. 10.1163/9789004486669
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004486669 [Google Scholar]
  5. Jakobson, Roman
    1959 “On Linguistic Aspects of Translation”. Reuben A. Brower, ed.On Translation. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press 1959 232–239. doi:  10.4159/harvard.9780674731615.c18
    https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674731615.c18 [Google Scholar]
  6. Koller, Werner.
    21983Einführung in die Übersetzungswissenschaft. Heidelberg: Quelle & Meyer. [Unitaschenbücher, 819.]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Lambert, José
    1983 “Un modèle descriptif pour l’étude de la littérature. La littérature comme polysystème”. Kortrijk: Faculteit Letteren en Wijsbegeerte van de K.U. Leuven, campus Kortrijk. [Preprint paper, 29.]
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 1976 “Echanges littéraires et traduction, ou: études théoriques vs. études descriptives” Lillebill Grähs, Gustav Korlèn and Bertil Malmberg, eds.Theory and Practice of Translation [Nobel Symposium, 39]. Bern, Frankfurt am Main, Las Vegas: Peter Lang 1976 237–250.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 1988 “Twenty Years of Research on Literary Translation at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven”. Harald Kittel, ed.Die literarische Übersetzung: Stand und Perspektiven ihrer Erforschung. Berlin: Erich Schmidt 1988 122–138.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Lambert, José Hendrik van Gorp
    1980 “Geschiedenis, theorie en systeem: valse dilemma’s in de literatuurwetenschap”. Spektator10:6. 514–519.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Landheer, Ronald
    1989 “L’ambiguïté: un défi traductologique”. Meta34:1. 33–43. doi:  10.7202/003395ar
    https://doi.org/10.7202/003395ar [Google Scholar]
  12. Levý, Jiří
    1967 “Translation as a Decision Process”. To Honor Roman Jakobson2. The Hague and Paris: Mouton 1967 1171–1182.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Newmark, Peter
    1981Approaches to Translation. Oxford, etc.: Pergamon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Quirk, Randolph and Sidney Greenbaum
    1973A University Grammar of English. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Roberts, Roda P.
    1988 “The Need for Systematization of Translation Theory”. Paul Nekeman, ed.Translation, Our Future: Proceedings of the XIth World Congress of FIT. Maastricht: Euroterm 1988 117–123.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Shen, Dan
    1989 “Literalism: NON ’Formal-equivalence’”. Babel35:4. 219–235. doi:  10.1075/babel.35.4.03she
    https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.35.4.03she [Google Scholar]
  17. Snell-Hornby, Mary
    1988Translation Studies: An Integrated Approach. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  10.1075/z.38
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.38 [Google Scholar]
  18. Söll, Ludwig
    1971 “Traduisibilité et intraduisibilité”. Meta16:1/2. 25–31. doi:  10.7202/004199ar
    https://doi.org/10.7202/004199ar [Google Scholar]
  19. Toury, Gideon
    1980In Search of a Theory of Translation. Tel Aviv: The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics, Tel Aviv University.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. 1989 Unpublished lectures delivered as holder of The CERA Chair for Translation, Communication and Cultures (Leuven), Summer 1989.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. . in press. “What are Descriptive Studies into Translation Likely to Yield apart from Isolated Descriptions?”. Kitty van Leuven-Zwart ed. Proceedings of the First James S Holmes Symposium on Translation Studies. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Vanderauwera, Ria
    1982 Review of Toury 1980. Dispositio7:19/21. 177–179.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Wilss, Wolfram
    1982The Science of Translation: Problems and Methods. Tübingen: Gunter Narr. [Tübinger Beiträge zur Linguistik, 180.]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/target.3.2.02del
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error