Translation Studies fifty years on

References

1. Abdullatief, Muhammad J. H.
   2018 “Cultural Satirical Features in Translation: The Pessoptimist as a case study.” InKey Cultural Texts in Translation, ed. byKirsten Malmkjær, Adriana Serban, and Fransiska Louwagie, 275–297. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.140.16abd
   https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.140.16abd [Google Scholar]
2. Baker, Mona
   1993 “Corpus Linguistics and Translation Studies: Implications and Applications.” InText and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair, ed. byMona Baker, Gill Francis, and Elena Tognini-Bonelli, 233–250. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/z.64.15bak
   https://doi.org/10.1075/z.64.15bak [Google Scholar]
3. Baker, Mona
   1996 “Corpus-based Translation Studies: The Challenges that lie Ahead”. InTerminology, LSP and Translation. Studies in Language Engineering in Honour of Juan C. Sager, ed. byHarold Sommers, 175–186. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.18.17bak
   https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.18.17bak [Google Scholar]
4. Bernardini, Silvia, and Dorothy Kenny
   2020 “Corpora”. InRoutledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, ed. byMona Baker, 110–115. London: Routledge.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Blum-Kulka, Shoshanna
   1986 “Shifts of Cohesion and Coherence in Translation.” InInterlingual and Intercultural Communication: Discourse and Cognition in Translation and Second Language Acquisition Studies, ed. byJuliana House, and Shoshanna Blum-Kulka, 17–35. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Boase-Beier, Jean
   2004 “Translation and Style.” Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics13(1): 9–11. 10.1177/0963947004039483
   https://doi.org/10.1177/0963947004039483 [Google Scholar]
7. Boase-Beier, Jean
   2006 Stylistic Approaches to Translation. Manchester: St. Jerome.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Boase-Beier, Jean
   2020 Translation and Style. London: Routledge.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Boase-Beier, Jean, and Marian de Vooght
   eds. 2019 Poetry of the Holocaust: An Anthology. Todmorden: Arc Publications.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Boase-Beier, Jean, and Michael Holman
    eds. 1998 The Practices of Literary Translation: Constraints and Creativity. Manchester: St. Jerome.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Boase-Beier, Jean, Peter Davies, Andrea Hammel, and Marion Winters
    eds. 2017 Translating Holocaust Lives. London: Bloomsbury.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Boria, Monica, Ángeles Carreres, María Norriega-Sánchez, and Marcus Tomalin
    eds. 2020 Translation and Multimodality: Beyond Words. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Bundgaard, Kristine, and Tina Paulsen Christensen
    2019 “Is the Concordance Feature the New Black? A Workplace Study of Translators’ Interaction with Translation Resources while Post-editing TM and MT Matches.” The Journal of Specialised Translation31: 14–37.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Carl, Michael, Silke Gutermuth, and Silvia Hansen-Schirra
    2015 “Post-editing Machine Translation: Efficiency, Strategies, and Revision Processes in Professional Translation Settings.” InPost-editing Machine Translation: A Usability Test for Professional Translation Settings, ed. byAline Ferreira, and John W. Schwieter, 145–174. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.115.07car
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.115.07car [Google Scholar]
15. Charlston, David
    2014 “Translatorial Hexis: The Politics of Pinkard’s Translation of Hegel’s Phenomenology.” Radical Philosophy186(Jul/Aug): 11–22.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Charlston, David
    2018 “Hegel’s Phenomenology: A Comparative Analysis of Translatorial Hexis.” InKey Cultural Texts in Translation, ed. byKirsten Malmkjær, Adriana Serban, and Fransiska Louwagie, 221–233. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.140.13cha
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.140.13cha [Google Scholar]
17. Choi, Jinsil
    2022 Government Translation in South Korea: A Corpus Based Study. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780429433504
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429433504 [Google Scholar]
18. Dagut, Menachem B.
    1976 “Can Metaphor Be Translated?.” Babel22 (1): 21–33. 10.1075/babel.22.1.05dag
    https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.22.1.05dag [Google Scholar]
19. Dickins, James
    2005 “Two Models for Metaphor Translation.” Target17 (2): 227–273. 10.1075/target.17.2.03dic
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.17.2.03dic [Google Scholar]
20. Ericsson, K. Anders, and Herbert A. Simon
    1980 “Verbal Reports as Data.” Psychological Review87: 215–251. 10.1037/0033‑295X.87.3.215
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.87.3.215 [Google Scholar]
21. Ericsson, K. Anders, and Herbert A. Simon
    1984 Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data. Cambridge, MA.: The MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
22. González Núñez, Gabriel
    2022 “Translation Studies and Public Policy.” InThe Cambridge Handbook of Translation, ed. byKirsten Malmkjær, 181–197. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108616119.010
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108616119.010 [Google Scholar]
23. Grice, Paul
    1957 “Meaning.” The Philosophical Review66: 377–88. 10.2307/2182440
    https://doi.org/10.2307/2182440 [Google Scholar]
24. Gutt, Ernst-August
    1990 “A Theoretical Account of Translation – without a Translation Theory.” Target2(2): 135–164. 10.1075/target.2.2.02gut
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.2.2.02gut [Google Scholar]
25. Gutt, Ernst-August
    1991 Translation and Relevance: Cognition and Context, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Hagström, Warren O.
    1965 The Scientific Community. New York: Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Hempel, Carl G.
    1967 Fundamentals of Concept Formation in Empirical Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Hermans, Theo
    1996 “The Translator’s Voice in Translated Narrative.” Target8(1): 23–84. 10.1075/target.8.1.03her
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.8.1.03her [Google Scholar]
29. Holmes, James S.
    1972/1988 “The Name and Nature of Translation Studies.” Expanded version of a paper presented at the Third International Congress of Applied Linguistics, Copenhagen, 1972. InTranslated! Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies with an Introduction by Raymond van den Broeck. Amsterdam: Rodopi 1988, pp.67–80.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Holmes, James
    1988 Translated! Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies with an Introduction by Raymond van den Broeck. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 10.1163/9789004486669
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004486669 [Google Scholar]
31. Hubscher-Davidson, Séverine, and Michael Borodo
    eds. 2012 Global Trends in Translator and Interpreter Training: Mediation and Culture. London: Bloomsbury.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Jakobsen, Arnt Lykke
    1998 “Logging Time Delay in Translation.” InLSP Texts and the Process of Translation, ed. byGyde Hansen, 73–101. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Working Papers in Translation.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Jakobsen, Arnt Lykke
    1999 “Logging Target Text Production with Translog.” InProbing the Process in Translation: Methods and Results, ed. byGyde Hansen, 9–20. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Jakobsen, Arnt Lykke
    2006 “Research Methods in Translation – Translog.” InComputer Keystroke Logging and Writing: Methods and Applications, ed. byKirk P. H. Sullivan, and Eva Lindgren, 95–105. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Jakobsen, Arnt Lykke
    2017 “Translation Process Research.” InThe Handbook of Translation and Cognition, ed. byJohn W. Schwieter, and Aline Ferreira, 21–49. Malden: John Wiley and Sons. 10.1002/9781119241485.ch2
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119241485.ch2 [Google Scholar]
36. Jakobsen, Arnt Lykke, and Lasse Schou
    1999 “Translog Documentation.” InProbing the Process in Translation: Methods and Results, ed. byGyde Hansen, 151–186. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson
    1980 Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Lowrie, Walter
    translator 1946 Kierkegard’s The Concept of Dread. Oxford: Geoffrey Cumberledge.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Malmkjær, Kirsten
    2003 “What Happened to God and the Angels? An Exercise in Translational Stylistics.” Target15(1): 39–62. 10.1075/target.15.1.03mal
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.15.1.03mal [Google Scholar]
40. Malmkjær, Kirsten
    2004 “Translational Stylistics.” Language and Literature13(1): 13–24. 10.1177/0963947004039484
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0963947004039484 [Google Scholar]
41. Malmkjær, Kirsten
    2018 “Angst and Repetition in Danish Literature and its Translation: From Kierkegaard to Kristensen and Høeg.” InPalgrave Handbook of Literary Translationed. byJean Boase-Beier, 251–268. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑75753‑7_13
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75753-7_13 [Google Scholar]
42. Meylaerts, Reine
    2017 “Studying Language and Translation Policies in Belgium: What Can we Learn from a Complexity Theory Approach?.” Parallèles29(1): 45–59.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Mossop, Brian
    2007 “Empirical Studies of Revision: What we Know and Need to Know.” JoSTrans: The Journal of Specialised Translation8: 5–20.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Munday, Jeremy S.
    2007 Style and Ideology in Translation: Latin American writing in English. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
45. Newmark, Peter
    1990 A Textbook of Translation. New York: Prentice Hall.
    [Google Scholar]
46. Nida, Eugene
    1964 Toward a Science of Translating: With Special Reference to Principles and Procedures Involved in Bible Translating. Leiden: E.J. Brill. 10.1163/9789004495746
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004495746 [Google Scholar]
47. Nietzke, Jean, Silvia Hansen-Schirra and Carmen Canfora
    (2019) “Risk management and post-editing competence.” JoSTrans: The Journal of Specialised Translation31, 239–259.
    [Google Scholar]
48. O’Hagan, Minako, and David Ashworth
    2002 Translation-mediated Communication in a Digital World: Facing the Challenges of Globalization and Localization. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781853595820
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853595820 [Google Scholar]
49. Olohan, Maeve
    2017 “Technology, Translation and Society: A Constructivist, Critical Theory Approach.” Target29(2): 264–283. 10.1075/target.29.2.04olo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.29.2.04olo [Google Scholar]
50. Pym, Anthony
    1994 “Twelfth-century Toledo and Strategies of the Literalist Trojan Horse.” Target6(1): 43–66. 10.1075/target.6.1.04pym
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.6.1.04pym [Google Scholar]
51. Pym, Anthony
    2011 “What Technology Does to Translating.” Translation & Interpreting3(1): 1–9.
    [Google Scholar]
52. Reiss, Katharina
    1971 Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Übersetzungskritik. Munich: Max Hueber.
    [Google Scholar]
53. Sakamoto, Akiko
    2022 “Translation and Technology.” InThe Cambridge Handbook of Translation, ed. byKirsten Malmkjær, 55–74. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108616119.004
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108616119.004 [Google Scholar]
54. Schaeffer, Moritz, and Michael Carl
    2017 “Language Processing and Translation.” InEmpirical Modelling of Translation and Interpreting, ed. bySilvia Hansen Schirra, Oliver Czulo, and Sascha Hofmann, 117–154. Berlin: Language Sciences Press. 10.4324/9781315692845‑19
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315692845-19 [Google Scholar]
55. Schäffner, Christina
    2004 “Metaphor and translation: Some Implications of a Cognitive Approach.” Journal of Pragmatics36(7): 1253–1269. 10.1016/j.pragma.2003.10.012
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2003.10.012 [Google Scholar]
56. Schäffner, Christina
    2012 “Finding Space under the Umbrella: The Euro Crisis, Metaphors, and Translation.” JoSTrans: The Journal of Specialised Translation17b: 250–270.
    [Google Scholar]
57. Schäffner, Christina, and Mark Shuttleworth
    2013 “Metaphor in Translation: Possibilities for Process Research.” Target25(1): 93–106. 10.1075/target.25.1.08shu
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.25.1.08shu [Google Scholar]
58. Shuttleworth, Mark
    2011 “Translational Behaviour at the Frontiers of Scientific Knowledge: A Multilingual Investigation into Popular Science Metaphor in Translation.” The Translator17(2): 301–323. 10.1080/13556509.2011.10799491
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2011.10799491 [Google Scholar]
59. Schleiermacher, Friedrich
    1813 “Ueber die verschiedenen Methoden des Uebersezens” Lecture delivered to the Royal Academy of Sciences, Berlin, June 24 1813.
    [Google Scholar]
60. Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson
    1986 Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
61. Taibi, Mustapha, and Uldis Ozolins
    2016 Community Translation. London: Bloomsbury.
    [Google Scholar]
62. Toury, Gideon
    1980 “Translated Literature: System, Norm, Performance: Toward a TT-oriented Approach to Literary Translation.” InSearch of a Theory of Translation, 51–62. Tel Aviv, Tel Aviv University: The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics. Reprinted in: Poetics Today (1981), 2(4): 9–27.
    [Google Scholar]
63. Toury, Gideon
    1995 Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.4
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.4 [Google Scholar]
64. Van den Broeck, Raymond
    1988 “Introduction.” InHolmes, James S.Translated! Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies with an Introduction by Raymond van den Broeck, 1–5. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
    [Google Scholar]
65. Venuti, Lawrence
    1995 The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
66. Venuti, Lawrence
    ed. 2017 Teaching Translation: Programs, Courses, Pedagogies. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
67. Vermeer, Hans Josef
    1978 “Ein Rahmen für eine allgemeine Translationstheorie.” Lebende Sprachen23(3): 99–102. 10.1515/les.1978.23.3.99
    https://doi.org/10.1515/les.1978.23.3.99 [Google Scholar]
68. Vienne, Jean
    1994 “Toward a Pedagogy of ‘Translation in Situation’.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology2(1): 51–59. 10.1080/0907676X.1994.9961222
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.1994.9961222 [Google Scholar]
69. Vinay, Jean-Paul, and Jean Darbelnet
    1958/2000 Comparative Stylistics of French and English: A Methodology for Translation. Translated and edited byJuan C. Sager and M.-J. Hamel. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.11
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.11 [Google Scholar]
70. Wilson, Deirdre, and Dan Sperber
    1990 “Outline of Relevance Theory.” Hermes: Journal of Linguistics5: 40–56.
    [Google Scholar]
71. Øverås, Linn
    1998 “In Search of the Third Code: An Investigation of Norms in Literary Translation.” Meta43(4): 571–588. 10.7202/003775ar
    https://doi.org/10.7202/003775ar [Google Scholar]