1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Translation in Society
  4. Volume 3, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 3, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2667-3037
  • E-ISSN: 2667-3045
EPUB
PDF

Abstract

Abstract

The paper by Erich Prunč introduces and develops the concept of , a concept that captures cultural and social aspects of translation. Expanding beyond the narrow traditional views of equivalence and text oriented approaches that were dominant in translation studies when Prunč developed the concept, Prunč presents translation as a critical practice not only in mediating between languages but also as an essential act of transcultural communication.

The concept of is theorized as a self-referential, self-regulating subsystem of culture, characterized by a set of socially established norms and behaviors shared by individuals involved in translation. Prunč emphasizes the complexity of translation cultures, which arise from the delicate compromises among all stakeholders engaged in or affected by the translation process, including translators, authors, and recipients. Translation cultures are shaped by power dynamics within the field, and factors like societal status and resource allocation contribute to the establishment of hierarchies relevant for translation practices.

By introducing this concept, Prunč moreover aims to encourage a conscientious reflection on the roles and responsibilities of translators and interpreters, their loyalties towards themselves, and advocates for more confident and self-critical agents acting towards ideals of a prototypical democratic translation culture. The paper concludes with the vision of translators and interpreters who are aware of their significant role in shaping discourses and who exercise their power with a sense of professional pride and ethical diligence.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/tris.24019.pru
2024-09-06
2025-06-14

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/tris.24019.pru
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/tris.24019.pru.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/tris.24019.pru&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Bachleitner, Norbert, and Michaela Wolf
    2004 Auf dem Weg zu einer Soziologie der literarischen Übersetzung im deutschsprachigen Raum.” InThemenheft: Soziologie der literarischen Übersetzung, edited byNorbert Bachleitner, and Michaela Wolf, 1–25. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. 10.1515/IASL.2004.2.1
     https://doi.org/10.1515/IASL.2004.2.1 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bachmann-Medick, Doris
    2004 “Übersetzung als Medium interkultureller Kommunikation.” InHandbuch der Kulturwissenschaften. Band 2, edited byFriedrich Jaeger, and Jürgen Straub, 439–56. Stuttgart: Metzler.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Bassnett, Susan, and André Lefevere
    1998 Constructing Cultures. Essays on Literary Translation. Clevendon: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781800417892
     https://doi.org/10.21832/9781800417892 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bourdieu, Pierre
    1984 Distinction. A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste [orig.La Distinction: Critique sociale du jugement]. Translated byRichard Nice. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. 1996 The Rules of Art. Genesis and Structure of the Literary Field [orig. Les Règles de l’art. Genèse et structure du champ littéraire]. Translated bySusan Emanuel. Stanford: Stanford University Press. 10.1515/9781503615861
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9781503615861 [Google Scholar]
  6. Chesterman, Andrew
    1997 “Ethics of Translation.” InTranslation as Intercultural Communication: Selected Papers from the EST Congress, Prague 1995, edited byMary Snell-Hornby, Zuzanne Jettmarova, and Klaus Kaindl, 147–157, Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.20.15che
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.20.15che [Google Scholar]
  7. Delisle, Jean, and Judith Woodsworth
    1995 Translators Through History. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.13
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.13 [Google Scholar]
  8. Ebrecht, Jörg, and Frank Hillebrandt
    eds. 2004 Bourdieus Theorie der Praxis. Erklärungskraft · Anwendung · Perspektiven. Hamburg: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. 10.1007/978‑3‑322‑80848‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-80848-6 [Google Scholar]
  9. Gouanvic, Jean-Marc
    1999 Sociologie de la traduction. La science-fiction américaine dans l’espace culturel français des années 1950. Arras Cedex: Artois Presses Université.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Hermans, Theo
    1997 “Translation as Institution.” InTranslation as Intercultural Communication: Selected Papers from the EST Congress, Prague 1995, edited byMary Snell-Hornby, Zuzanne Jettmarova, and Klaus Kaindl, 3–20, Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.20.03her
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.20.03her [Google Scholar]
  11. 1999 Translation in Systems. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Holz-Mänttäri, Justa
    1984 Translatorisches Handeln. Theorie und Methode. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Hönig, Hans
    1992 “Von der erzwungenen Selbstentfremdung des Übersetzers — Ein offener Brief an Justa Holz-Mänttäri. TextConText71, 1–14.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Inghilleri, Moira
    2003 “Habitus, Field and Discourse. Interpreting as a Socially Situated Activity.” Target15 (2): 243–268. 10.1075/target.15.2.03ing
     https://doi.org/10.1075/target.15.2.03ing [Google Scholar]
  15. ed. 2005 Bourdieu and the Sociology of Translation and Interpreting. Manchester: St. Jerome.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Kautz, Ulrich
    2000 Handbuch Didaktik des Übersetzens und Dolmetschens. Munich: Iudicium.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Levý, Jiří
    1967 “Translation as a Decision Process.” InTo Honor Roman Jakobson. Essays on the Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday, vol. II, 1171–1182. The Hague: Mouton.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Lewis, David K.
    1969 Convention: A Philosophical Study. Cambridge: Wiley-Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Nord, Christiane
    1989 “Loyalität statt Treue. Vorschläge zu einer funktionalen Übersetzungstypologie.” Lebende Sprachen14 (3): 100–105. 10.1515/les.1989.34.3.100
     https://doi.org/10.1515/les.1989.34.3.100 [Google Scholar]
  20. 2004 “Loyalität als ethisches Verhalten im Translationsprozess.” InUnd sie bewegt sich doch …. Translationswissenschaft in Ost und West Festschrift für Heidemarie Salevsky zum 60. Geburtstag, edited byIna Müller, 235–245. New York: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. ÖNORM
    ÖNORM 2000a ÖNORM D 1200. Übersetzungsleistungen. Anforderungen an die Dienstleistung und an die Bereitstellung der Dienstleistung. Vienna: Austrian Standards International.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. ÖNORM
    ÖNORM 2000b ÖNORM D 1201. Übersetzungsleistungen. Übersetzungsverträge. Vienna: Austrian Standards International.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. ÖNORM
    ÖNORM 2006 ÖNORM EN 15038. Translation services — Service requirements. Übersetzungsdienstleistungen — Dienstleistungsanforderungen. Vienna: Austrian Standards International.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Prunč, Erich
    1997 “Translationskultur.” TextConText11 (2): 99–127.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. 2001 “Translation in die Nicht-Muttersprache und Translationskultur.” TextConText15=NF5 (2): 283–299.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. 2003 “Óptimo, subóptimo, fatal: reflexiones sobre la democracia etnolingüística en la cultura europea de traducción.” InLa direccionalidad en traducción e interpretación: perspectivas teóricas, profesionales y didácticas, edited byDorothy Kelly, 67–89. Granada: Atrio.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. 2004 “Zum Objektbereich der Translationswissenschaft.” In: Und sie bewegt sich doch …. Translationswissenschaft in Ost und West Festschrift für Heidemarie Salevsky zum 60. Geburtstag, edited byIna Müller, 263–285. New York: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. 2006 “Die ÖNORM-en D 1200 und 1201 und die ÖNORM EN 15038.” Universitas41: 3–7.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Pym, Anthony
    2012 On Translator Ethics: Principles for Mediation between Cultures [orig.Pour une éthique du traducteur]. Translated byHeike Walker. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.104
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.104 [Google Scholar]
  30. Risku, Hanna
    2004 Translationsmanagement. Interkulturelle Fachkommunikation im Informationszeitalter. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Schippel, Larisa
    ed. 2006 Übersetzungsqualität: Kritik — Kriterien — Bewertungshandeln. Berlin: Frank & Timme.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Schreiber, Michael
    2006 “Loyalität und Literatur. Zur Anwendung des Loyalitätsbegriffs auf die literarische Übersetzung.” InÜbersetzen — Translating — Traduire. Towards a “Social Turn”?, edited byMichaela Wolf, 79–87. Vienna: LIT.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Schwingel, Markus
    1995 Pierre Bourdieu zur Einführung. Hamburg: Junius Verlag.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Sela-Sheffy, Rakefet
    2006 “The Pursuit of Symbolic Capital by a Semiprofessional Group: The Case of Literary Translation in Israel.” InÜbersetzen — Translating — Traduire. Towards a “Social Turn”?, edited byMichaela Wolf, 243–252. Vienna: LIT
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Simeoni, Daniel
    1998 “The Pivotal Status of the Translator’s Habitus.” Target10 (1): 1–39. 10.1075/target.10.1.02sim
     https://doi.org/10.1075/target.10.1.02sim [Google Scholar]
  36. Sturge, Kate
    2004 “The Alien Within”: Translation into German during the Nazi Regime. Munich: Iudicium.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Wolf, Michaela
    1999 “Zum ‚sozialen Sinn’ in der Translation. Translationssoziologische Implikationen von Pierre Bourdieus Kultursoziologie.” Arcadia. Zeitschrift für Allgemeine und Vergleichende Literaturwissenschaft34 (2): 262–275.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. ed. 2006 Übersetzen — Translating — Traduire. Towards a “Social Turn”?. Vienna: LIT.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Zöhrer, Jutta
    1991 Übersetzen im arabischen Raum in Vergangenheit und Gegenwart. Mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Problematik der fachsprachlichen Terminologie. Master’s diss. University of Graz.
  40. Alexander, Jeffrey C., Ronald N. Jacobs, and Philip Smith
    eds. 2012 The Oxford Handbook of Cultural Sociology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Gouanvic, Jean-Marc
    2014 “Is Habitus as Conceived by Pierre Bourdieu Soluble in Translation Studies?” InRemapping Habitus in Translation Studies, edited byGisella M. Vorderobermeier, 29–42, Amsterdam: Rodopi. 10.1163/9789401210867_004
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789401210867_004 [Google Scholar]
  42. Hebenstreit, Gernot
    2020 “Functional Translation Theories and Ethics.” InThe Routledge Handbook of Translation and Ethics, edited byKaisa Koskinen, and Nike K. Pokorn, 58–71. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781003127970‑6
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003127970-6 [Google Scholar]
  43. Nord, Christiane
    1997 Translating as a Purposeful Activity. Functionalist Approaches Explained. Manchester: St. Jerome.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Schäffner, Christina
    2021 “Theory of Translatorial Action.” InHandbook of Translation Studies vol 2, edited byYves Gambier, and Luc van Doorslaer, 157–162. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hts.2.the1
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hts.2.the1 [Google Scholar]
  45. Wolf, Michaela, and Alexandra Fukari
    eds. 2007 Constructing a Sociology of Translation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.74
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.74 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/tris.24019.pru
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): democratic translation; Erich Prunč; skopos; Sociology of translation; translation culture; Translationskultur

Most Cited

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