Introducing Translation Studies, Theories and Applications 2016 PDF

Introducing Translation Studies Introducing Translation Studies remains the definitive guide to the theories and concepts that make up the field of translation studies. Providing an accessible and up-to-date overview, it has long been the essential textbook on courses worldwide. This fourth edition has been fully revised and continues to provide a balanced and detailed guide to the theoretical landscape. Each theory is applied to a wide range of languages, including Bengali, Chinese, English, French, German, Italian, Punjabi, Portuguese and Spanish. A broad spectrum of texts is analysed, including the Bible, Buddhist sutras, Beowulf, the fiction of García Márquez and Proust, European Union and UNESCO documents, a range of contemporary films, a travel brochure, a children’s cookery book and the translations of Harry Potter. Each chapter comprises an introduction outlining the translation theory or theories, illustrative texts with translations, case studies, a chapter summary and discussion points and exercises. New features in this fourth edition include: Q new material to keep up with developments in research and practice, including the sociology of translation, multilingual cities, translation in the digital age and specialized, audiovisual and machine translation Q revised discussion points and updated figures and tables Q new, in-chapter activities with links to online materials and articles to encourage independent research Q an extensive updated companion website with video introductions and journal articles to accompany each chapter, online exercises, an interactive timeline, weblinks, and PowerPoint slides for teacher support This is a practical, user-friendly textbook ideal for students and researchers on courses in Translation and Translation Studies. Jeremy Munday is Professor of Translation Studies at the University of Leeds, UK, and is a quali- fied and experienced translator. He is author of Style and Ideology in Translation (Routledge 2008) and Evaluation in Translation (Routledge 2012), editor of The Routledge Companion to Translation Studies (2009) and co-author, with Basil Hatim, of Translation: An Advanced Resource Book (Routledge 2004). Praise for this edition ‘Jeremy Munday’s Introducing Translation Studies has long been admired for its combination of theoretical rigour and down-to-earth explanation, and this new edition will further confirm its place as the go-to introduction for students and teachers alike. Its further incorporation of ideas from the Chinese context is particularly welcome.’ Robert Neather, Hong Kong Baptist University, China ‘An even better fourth edition of a widely popular and commonly used book in Translation Studies (TS). Munday’s volume is a sound and accessible introduction to TS, combining scholarly rigor with reader-friendly style and an excellent didactic orientation, which will continue to make this book highly attractive to students, teachers and newcomers.’ Sonia Colina, University of Arizona, USA Praise for the third edition ‘This book provides a comprehensive and precise coverage of the major theories of translation … The discussion and research points at the end of each topic will be welcomed by students, teachers and researchers alike … written in exceptionally clear and user-friendly style … Readers who may have no previous knowledge of translation studies will also find the book interesting and illuminating.’ Susan Xu Yun, SIM University, Singapore ‘Whether you are a researcher, teacher, practitioner or learner of translation, you should read this book to get a comprehensive view of translation theories of the world, at present and in the past. This book is extremely useful as the starting point for understanding translation theories. It is deep enough for you to get adequate details and broad enough to let you know which directions to follow in your further research.’ Chris Shei, Swansea University, UK ‘Jeremy Munday covers it all in this up-to-date book. It covers most, if not all, aspects of translation, whether they are theoretical or practical. This book is also an essential resource of knowledge for professional, academic, and practicing translators. Many approaches to translation are clearly and thoroughly explained.’ Said M. Shiyab, UAE University, UAE ‘It would be difficult to find a better introduction to the complex field of translation studies … A real must for everybody interested in this discipline.’ María Sánchez, University of Salford, UK ‘This updated edition of Introducing Translation Studies provides a clear, thorough, and balanced introduction to major past and current trends in translation studies. It will be of great assistance to translation instructors and students seeking an updated overview of the field.’ Françoise Massardier-Kenney, Kent State University, USA Introducing Translation Studies Theories and applications Fourth Edition JEREMY MUNDAY Fourth edition published 2016 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2016 Jeremy Munday The right of Jeremy Munday to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. First edition published by Routledge 2001 Second edition published by Routledge 2008 Third edition published by Routledge 2012 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Names: Munday, Jeremy, author. Title: Introducing translation studies : theories and applications / by Jeremy Munday. Description: Fifth Edition. | Milton Park ; New York : Routledge, 2016. | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2015039263 | ISBN 9781138912540 (pbk.) | ISBN 9781138912557 (pbk.) | ISBN 9781315691862 (ebk.) Subjects: LCSH: Translating and interpreting. Classification: LCC P306.M865 2016 | DDC 418/.02—dc23 LC record available at http://lccn.loc.gov/2015039263 ISBN: 978-1-138-91254-0 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-138-91255-7 (pbk) ISBN: 978-1-315-69186-2 (ebk) Typeset in Berthold Akzidenz Grotesk by RefineCatch Limited, Bungay, Suffolk Additional materials are available on the companion website at www.routledge.com/cw/munday Para Cristina, que me ha hecho feliz This page intentionally left blank Contents A visual tour of Introducing Translation Studies x List of figures and tables xiii Acknowledgements xv List of abbreviations xvii Introduction 1 Chapter 1 Main issues of translation studies 7 1.1 The concept of translation 8 1.2 What is translation studies? 10 1.3 An early history of the discipline 13 1.4 The Holmes/Toury ‘map’ 16 1.5 Developments since Holmes 21 1.6 The van Doorslaer ‘map’ 22 1.7 Discipline, interdiscipline or multidiscipline? 24 Chapter 2 Translation theory before the twentieth century 29 2.0 Introduction 30 2.1 ‘Word-for-word’ or ‘sense-for-sense’? 30 2.2 Early Chinese and Arabic discourse on translation 33 2.3 Humanism and the Protestant Reformation 38 2.4 Fidelity, spirit and truth 40 2.5 Early attempts at systematic translation theory: Dryden, Dolet, Tytler and Yán Fù 42 2.6 Schleiermacher and the valorization of the foreign 47 2.7 Towards contemporary translation theory 49 Chapter 3 Equivalence and equivalent effect 58 3.0 Introduction 59 3.1 Roman Jakobson: the nature of linguistic meaning and equivalence 59 3.2 Nida and ‘the science of translating’ 62 3.3 Newmark: semantic and communicative translation 71 3.4 Koller: equivalence relations 74 3.5 Later developments in equivalence 77 viii CONTENTS Chapter 4 Studying translation product and process 86 4.0 Introduction 87 4.1 Vinay and Darbelnet’s model 88 4.2 Catford and translation ‘shifts’ 95 4.3 Option, markedness and stylistic shifts in translation 98 4.4 The cognitive process of translation 100 4.5 Ways of investigating cognitive processing 103 Chapter 5 Functional theories of translation 113 5.0 Introduction 114 5.1 Text type 114 5.2 Translatorial action 124 5.3 Skopos theory 126 5.4 Translation-oriented text analysis 131 Chapter 6 Discourse and Register analysis approaches 141 6.0 Introduction 142 6.1 The Hallidayan model of language and discourse 142 6.2 House’s model of translation quality assessment 145 6.3 Baker’s text and pragmatic level analysis: a coursebook for translators 149 6.4 Hatim and Mason: the levels of context and discourse 156 6.5 Criticisms of discourse and Register analysis approaches to translation 159 Chapter 7 Systems theories 169 7.0 Introduction 170 7.1 Polysystem theory 170 7.2 Toury and descriptive translation studies 174 7.3 Chesterman’s translation norms 186 7.4 Other models of descriptive translation studies: Lambert and van Gorp and the Manipulation School 189 Chapter 8 Cultural and ideological turns 197 8.0 Introduction 198 8.1 Translation as rewriting 199 8.2 Translation and gender 205 8.3 Postcolonial translation theory 208 8.4 The ideologies of the theorists 213 8.5 Translation, ideology and power in other contexts 214 Chapter 9 The role of the translator: visibility, ethics and sociology 222 9.0 Introduction 223 9.1 The cultural and political agenda of translation 223 9.2 The position and positionality of the translator 233 CONTENTS ix 9.3 The sociology and historiography of translation 236 9.4 The power network of the translation industry 239 9.5 The reception and reviewing of translations 241 Chapter 10 Philosophical approaches to translation 249 10.0 Introduction 250 10.1 Steiner’s hermeneutic motion 250 10.2 Ezra Pound and the energy of language 258 10.3 The task of the translator: Walter Benjamin 260 10.4 Deconstruction 262 Chapter 11 New directions from the new media 274 11.0 Introduction 275 11.1 Audiovisual translation 275 11.2 Localization, globalization and collaborative translation 287 11.3 Corpus-based translation studies 291 Chapter 12 Research and commentary projects 302 12.0 Introduction 303 12.1 Consilience in translation studies 303 12.2 Translation commentaries 306 12.3 Research projects in translation studies 314 Notes 319 Bibliography 328 Index 361 A visual tour of Introducing Translation Studies Pedagogical features Introducing Translation Studies offers a variety of ways to help lecturers introduce this vibrant discipline, and to help students understand the key concepts and issues. Keyconcepts Key conce KEY CONCEPTS Each chapter opens with a Q Definitions of translating and interpreting. series of straightforward definitions of the key Q Definitio concepts that the chapter will cover. Q The practice of translating is long established, b Q ofThe prac studies is new. translation Key texts KEY TEXTS Essential articles and books in the Key texts Baker, Mona and Gabriela Saldanha (eds) (2009) The R topic area. Baker, Mon of Translation Studies, Part II: History and Traditions, 2n New York: Routledge. of Transla CASE STUDIES Case studies in each chapter to Case study Case study give focus and insight into the theories discussed. The following case study considers two series of transla view offollowing The Nida’s formal and dynamic equivalence. The three from English translations from the Hebrew of the openi i f Nid ’ book of the Old Testament of the Christian Bible.10 1.1 Exploration: The term ‘translation’ EXPLORATION Within each chapter there are Exploration links to extra journal material on the ITS companion Which word(s) are used for ‘translation’ in the languag website to encourage further exploration of ideas. ch word(s) Explore ar What do these terms suggest abou their origins. zation of translation? lore their origin DISCUSSION AND RESEARCH POINTS At the Discussion and research points Discussion end of each chapter are a number of questions 1 Look again at the analysis in the case study. Are the that can be set as assignments, or discussed in 1 disagreeaga Look with the analysis? What does this tell us a class. They can also serve as a platform for kind of model? The analysis focuses on the seven pr related research project ideas. Further reading FURTHER READING Additional sources for Further re students to explore particular issues raised in the See Hatim (2009) for a useful overview of discourse an chapter. its relation See Hatim to functional (2 theories, and also Baker et al. recent studies. See Halliday and Hasan (1976) for it l ti t Companion website www.routledge.com/cw/munday Introducing Translation Studies also includes a comprehensive companion website of online resources for both students and lecturers. These include: Student resources Q Video presentation by the author on each chapter, discussing the key issues for students to consider Q Interactive timeline to explain how translation theories have evolved since the first theorists Q Multiple-choice questions to test understanding of definitions and concepts Q Additional discussion questions and further reading Lecturer resources Q PowerPoint presentations for each chapter, which can be downloaded and annotated, providing lecturers with a ready-made foundation for lecture preparation Q Free access to journal articles with accompanying teaching notes This page intentionally left blank Figures and tables Figures 1.1 Holmes’s ‘map’ of translation studies 17 1.2 The applied branch of translation studies 20 1.3 Translation strategies 23 1.4 Translation procedures 24 3.1 Nida’s three-stage system of translation 63 5.1 Reiss’s text types and text varieties 116 5.2 Text type and relevant criteria for translation 122 6.1 The Hallidayan model of language 143 6.2 Revised scheme for analysing and comparing original and translated texts 146 7.1 Conditions when translation is in primary position in polysystem 173 7.2 Toury’s initial norm and the continuum of adequate and acceptable translation 178 7.3 Initial, preliminary and operational norms 179 8.1 Control factors inside and outside the literary system 201 9.1 Domestication and foreignization: ethical and discursive levels 228 10.1 Steiner’s hermeneutic motion 252 11.1 Concordance sample of loom large 297 11.2 Concordance sample of se cierne(n) 298 Tables 3.1 Example of componential analysis 66 3.2 Comparison of Newmark’s semantic and communicative translation 72 3.3 Characteristics of research foci for different equivalence types 76 4.1 Segmentation of text into units of translation 106 5.1 Functional characteristics of text types and links to translation methods 115 6.1 Register variables and their typical realizations 145 6.2 Forms of cohesion 152 7.1 Comparison of Toury’s and Chesterman’s norms 188 11.1 Multimodal transcription model 282 12.1 Example translation specification sheet 307 12.2 Comparison of terminology for orientation of strategies 311 12.3 Types of research questions 315 12.4 Types of hypotheses 315 This page intentionally left blank Acknowledgements I would like to thank the following copyright holders for giving permission to reproduce the following: Figure 1.1, reproduced from G. Toury, Descriptive Translation Studies – And Beyond, revised edition copyright 2012, Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. Figures 1.3 and 1.4 reproduced from L. van Doorslaer ‘Risking conceptual maps’, in Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer (eds) The Metalanguage of Translation, special issue of Target 19.2: 217–33, reis- sued in Benjamins Current Topics 20 in 2009. Figure 5.2, reproduced from M. Snell-Hornby, Translation Studies: An Integrated Approach, copyright 1998, Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. All the above reproduced with kind permission by John Benjamins Publishing Company, www.benjamins.com. Figure 3.1, reproduced from E. Nida and C. R. Taber, The Theory and Practice of Translation, copyright 1969, Leiden: E. J. Brill. Figure 6.2, reproduced from J. House, Translation Quality Assessment: Past and Present, copyright 2015, Routledge. Table 5.1, translated and adapted from K. Reiss, Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Übersetzungskritik; the original is copyright of K. Reiss. While every effort has been made to trace copyright holders and obtain permission, this may not have been possible in all cases. Any omissions brought to the publisher’s atten- tion will be remedied at the earliest opportunity. The case study in Chapter 8 is a revised and abridged version of an article of mine: ‘The Caribbean conquers the world? An analysis of the reception of García Márquez in translation’, published in Bulletin of Hispanic Studies, 75.1(1998): 137–44. Introducing Translation Studies has evolved over time, but I acknowledge my sincere debt to Lawrence Venuti (Temple University, USA) for his encourage- ment with the initial project and for his detailed comments and suggestions on drafts of the first edition. My thanks also go to Rana Nayar (Reader, Department of English at Panjab University, Chandigarh, India) for his assistance with the case study in Chapter 9. I also thank colleagues at the Universities of Leeds, Surrey and Bradford for their support during the writing of the various editions of this book, and to my students xvi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS at all those institutions and universities where I have been lucky enough to be invited to speak, who have responded to versions of this material. My thanks also to all who have contacted me with comments on the earlier editions with sugges- tions for revision, to those journal reviewers who have made constructive sugges- tions and most particularly to the reviewers of the proposal and drafts for this fourth edition. There are many other translation studies colleagues who have offered suggestions and help in many ways. I thank them all. I would also like to express my extreme gratitude to Louisa Semlyen, Laura Sandford and everyone at Routledge, who have been so very supportive and patient throughout the writing and editing process. Also to Anna Callander for her careful attention to detail. And thanks to Jacob Blakesley and Falih Al-Emara for help with the index. Any remaining errors or deficiencies are of course mine alone. Finally, but most of all, my thanks to Cristina, whose love and help mean so much to me, and to Nuria and Marina, who continue to add so much more to my life. Jeremy Munday London, August 2015 Abbreviations #$& Before Common Era $& Common Era DTS descriptive translation studies SL source language ST source text TL target language TT target text This page intentionally left blank Introduction Translation studies is the now established academic discipline related to the study of the theory, practice and phenomena of translation. This book brings together and clearly summarizes the major strands of translation studies, in order to help readers acquire an understanding of the discipline and the necessary background and tools to begin to carry out their own research. It also presents and discusses theoretical frameworks into which professional translators and trainee translators can place their own practical experience. The first three editions of Introducing Translation Studies (2001, 2008 and 2012) presented a practical introduction to an already diverse field. This fourth edition, while maintaining the structure and much of the material, is fully revised and updated. New content has been included throughout, ‘exploration boxes’ have been inserted within the text to link to full-text articles available on the Introducing Translation Studies companion website (http://www.routledge.com/ cw/munday) and other material has been located online. The website also contains new video summaries of each chapter and revised PowerPoint presentations that may be customized by the tutor. However, the general structure of the book remains the same. It sets out to give a critical but balanced survey of many of the most important trends and contributions to translation studies in a single volume, written in an accessible style. The different contemporary models are applied to illustrative texts in brief case studies so that the reader can see them in operation. The new research contained in these case studies, together with the ‘discussion and research points’ sections, is designed to encourage further exploration and understanding of translation issues. The book is designed to serve as a coursebook for undergraduates and postgraduates in translation, translation studies and translation theory, and as a solid theoretical introduction for students, researchers, instructors and professional translators. The aim is to enable the readers to develop their under- standing of the issues and associated technical language (metalanguage), and 2 INTRODUCTION to begin to apply the models themselves. The reader is also encouraged to carry out a closer examination of specific issues and to pursue further reading in those areas that are of greatest interest. In this way, the book may provide a stimulating introduction to a range of theoretical approaches to translation that are relevant both for those engaged in the academic study of translation and for the profes- sional linguist. Each of the chapters surveys a major area of the discipline. Each is designed to be self-standing, so that readers with a specific focus can quickly find the descriptions that are of most interest to them. However, conceptual links between chapters are cross-referenced and the book has been structured so that it can function as a coursebook. The twelve chapters might be covered in one or two weeks, depending on the length of the course, to fit into a semesterized system. The discussion and research points additionally provide substantial initial mate- rial for students to begin to develop their own research. The progression of ideas is also from the introductory (presenting main issues of translation studies in Chapter 1) to the more complex, as the students become more accustomed to the terminology and concepts. In general, the progression is chronological, from pre-twentieth-century theory in Chapter 2 to linguistic-oriented theories (Chapters 3 to 6) and to more recent developments from cultural studies such as postcolonialism (Chapter 8), and from sociology (Chapter 9) and new technologies (Chapter 11). But it is also conceptual, since some of the earlier theories and concepts, such as equivalence and universals of translation, are constantly being revisited (e.g. in Chapter 10). Clarity has been a major consideration, so each chapter follows a similar format of: Q an introductory table clearly presenting key terms and ideas; Q the main text, describing in detail the models and issues under discussion; Q ‘exploration boxes’ with links to relevant full-text articles online and with self- study or classroom activities; Q an illustrative case study, which applies and evaluates the main model of the chapter; Q suggestions for further reading; Q a brief evaluative summary of the chapter; Q a series of discussion and research points to stimulate further thought and research; Q links to the ITS website (www.routledge.com/cw/munday) where each chapter is accompanied by a video summary, multiple-choice recall test, INTRODUCTION 3 customizable PowerPoint slides, extra research articles, further reading hints and research project questions. Extra case studies in other languages appear. In common with other anthologies and introductory books, this volume is neces- sarily selective. The theorists and models covered have been chosen because of their strong influence on translation studies and because they are particularly representative of the approaches in each chapter. Much other worthy material has had to be excluded due to space constraints and the focus of the book, which is to give a clear introduction to a number of theoretical approaches. Over recent years, the field has continued to expand dramatically with a considerable increase in the number of publications and the borrowing of concepts from new fields such as cognitive studies, sociology, literary theory and corpus linguistics. It is not practicable, and indeed would be impossible, to attempt to be fully comprehensive. I am also aware that the organization of the book inevitably gives preference to those theorists who have advanced major new ideas and gives less than sufficient due to the many scholars who work in the field producing detailed case studies or less high-profile work. For these reasons, detailed suggestions are given for Further reading. These are designed to encourage students to go to the primary texts, to follow up ideas that have been raised in each chapter and to investigate the research that is being carried out in their own countries and languages. In this way, the book should ideally be used in conjunction with the readers mentioned in section 1.2 and be supported by an institution’s library resources. An attempt has also been made to refer to many works that are readily available, either in recent editions or reprinted in one of the anthologies. The emphasis is on encouraging reflection, investigation and awareness of the new discipline, and on applying the theory to both practice and research. A major issue has been the choice of languages for the texts used in the illustrative case studies. There are examples or texts from Chinese, English, French, German, Italian, Portuguese and Spanish. Some additional examples are given from Arabic, Bengali, Dutch, Punjabi and Russian. Yet the case studies are written in such a way as to focus on the theoretical issues and should not exclude those unfamiliar with the specific language pairs. A range of text types is offered. The earlier editions included the Bible, Beowulf, the fiction of García Márquez and Proust, European Union and UNESCO documents, a travel brochure, a chil- dren’s cookery book, the translations of Harry Potter and subtitled films from Bengali, French and German. This fourth edition expands to discuss website 4 INTRODUCTION localization, other types of technical translation, videogame transcreation and crowdsourced translations, amongst others. A guide to chapters The book is organized as follows. Chapter 1 discusses what we mean by ‘translation’ and what the scope is of the discipline of translation studies. It discusses the three types of transla- tion defined by Jakobson: intralingual, interlingual and intersemiotic. It then presents the well-known Holmes/Toury conceptual map of the discipline, and critiques it with new conceptualizations and knowledge structures used in the construction of the online publications database, the Benjamins Translation Studies Bibliography. Chapter 2 describes some of the major issues that are discussed in writings about translation up to the twentieth century. This huge range of over 2,000 years, beginning with Cicero in the first century #$&, focuses on the ‘literal vs. free’ translation debate, an imprecise and circular debate from which theorists have emerged only in the last sixty years. The chapter describes some of the classic writings on translation over the years, making a selection of the most well- known and readily available sources. It aims to initiate discussion on some of the key issues. Chapter 3 deals with the concepts of meaning, equivalence and ‘equivalent effect’. Translation theory in the 1960s under Eugene Nida shifted the emphasis to the receiver of the message. This chapter encompasses Nida’s model of translation transfer, influenced by Chomsky’s generative grammar, and his concepts of formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence. Newmark’s similarly influential categories of semantic translation and communicative translation are also discussed, as is Koller’s analysis of equivalence. Chapter 4 overviews attempts that have been made to describe the product and process of translation. These include classifications of the linguistic changes or ‘shifts’ which occur in translation. The main model described here is Vinay and Darbelnet’s classic taxonomy, but reference is also made to other tradi- tions, such as Loh’s English-Chinese model, and to Catford’s linguistic model. The latter part of the chapter introduces some of the work that has been conducted from a cognitive perspective, which seeks to explain message processing and how translation as communication is achieved. This section INTRODUCTION 5 covers the interpretive model of the Paris School, Gutt’s work on relevance theory and recent advances in empirical studies. Chapter 5 covers Reiss and Vermeer’s text-type and skopos theory of the 1970s and 1980s and Nord’s text-linguistic approach. In this chapter, translation is analysed according to text type and function in the TL culture, and prevailing concepts of text analysis – such as word order, information structure and thematic progression – are employed. Hybrid and multimodal text genres are also discussed. Linked closely to the previous chapter, Chapter 6 moves on to consider House’s recently modified Register analysis model and the development of discourse-oriented approaches in the 1990s by Baker, and Hatim and Mason, who make use of Hallidayan linguistics to examine translation as communication within a sociocultural context. Chapter 7 investigates systems theories and the field of target-oriented ‘descriptive’ translation studies, following Even-Zohar, Toury and the work of the Manipulation School. Chapter 8 examines the cultural and ideological approaches in translation studies. These start with Lefevere’s work of the 1980s and early 1990s – which itself arose out of a comparative literature and Manipulation School background – and move on to more recent developments in gender studies and translation (in Canada), to postcolonial translation theories (in India) and other ideological impli- cations of translation. The chapter then focuses on a case study of translation from Asia. Chapter 9 looks at the role of the translator and the ethics of translation prac- tice. It begins by following Berman and Venuti in examining the foreign element in translation and the ‘invisibility’ of the translator. The idea explored is that the prac- tice of translation, especially in the English-speaking world, is considered to be a derivative and second-rate activity, and that the prevailing method of translation is ‘naturalizing’. The role of ‘agents’ such as literary translators and publishers is also described and linked to recent work on the sociology and historiography of translation, incorporating theories from Bourdieu, Latour and Luhmann. Chapter 10 investigates a range of philosophical issues around language and translation, ranging from Steiner’s ‘hermeneutic motion’, Pound’s use of archaisms, Walter Benjamin’s ‘pure’ language, and Derrida and the deconstruc- tion movement. These question some of the basic tenets of translation theory. Chapter 11 looks at the challenges presented by the unprecedented growth in new technologies. It discusses audiovisual translation, the most prominent of the new research areas, but also localization processes in translation practice and corpus-based translation studies. These technological advances have forced 6 INTRODUCTION a dramatic revision of some long-held beliefs and the reassessment of central issues such as equivalence and translation universals. Chapter 12 brings together some of the distinct strands of the discipline in Chesterman’s call for ‘consilience’. It then discusses how research advances may be achieved, with the reaching out to other disciplines, and proposes specific advice for those working on reflexive translation commentaries and MA or PhD research projects. CHAPTER 1 Main issues of translation studies Key concepts Q Definitions of translating and interpreting. Q The practice of translating is long established, but the discipline of translation studies is relatively new. Q In academic circles, translation was previously relegated to just a language-learning activity. Q A split has persisted between translation practice and theory. Q The study of (usually literary) translation began through comparative literature, translation ‘workshops’ and contrastive analysis. Q James S. Holmes’s ‘The name and nature of translation studies’ is considered to be the ‘founding statement’ of a new discipline. Q Translation studies has expanded hugely, and is now often considered an interdiscipline. Key texts Holmes, James S. (1988b/2004) ‘The name and nature of translation studies’, in Lawrence Venuti (ed.) (2004), The Translation Studies Reader, 2nd edition, London and New York: Routledge, pp. 180–92. Jakobson, Roman (1959/2012) ‘On linguistic aspects of translation’, in Lawrence Venuti (ed.) (2012), The Translation Studies Reader, 3rd edition, London and New York: Routledge, pp. 126–31. Snell-Hornby, Mary (2006) The Turns of Translation Studies, Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, Chapter 1. van Doorslaer, Luc (2007) ‘Risking conceptual maps’, in Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer (eds) The Metalanguage of Translation, special issue of Target 19.2: 217–33. 8 INTRODUCING TRANSLATION STUDIES 1.1 The concept of translation Watch the introductory video on the companion website. The main aim of this book is to introduce the reader to major concepts and models of translation studies. Because the research being undertaken in this field is now so extensive, the material selected is necessarily only representative and illustrative of the major trends. For reasons of space and consistency of approach, the focus is on written translation rather than oral translation (the latter is commonly known as interpreting or interpretation), although the overlaps make a clear distinction impossible (cf. Gile 2004). More subtly, interpreting is defined, by Otto Kade, as ‘a form of Translation (in the wider sense) in which (a) the source language text is presented only once and thus cannot be reviewed or replayed, and (b) the target language text is produced under time pressure, with little chance for correction and revision’ (Pöchhacker 2009: 133, following Kade 1968).1 The English term translation, first attested in around 1340,2 derives either from Old French translation or more directly from the Latin translatio (‘trans- porting’), itself coming from the participle of the verb transferre (‘to carry over’). In the field of languages, translation today has several meanings: (1) the general subject field or phenomenon (‘I studied translation at university’) (2) the product – that is, the text that has been translated (‘they published the Arabic translation of the report’) (3) the process of producing the translation, otherwise known as translating (‘translation service’). The process of translation between two different written languages involves the changing of an original written text (the source text or ST) in the original verbal language (the source language or SL) into a written text (the target text or TT) in a different verbal language (the target language or TL): Source text (ST) Target text (TT) in source language (SL) in target language (TL) Thus, when translating a product manual from Chinese into English, the ST is Chinese and the TT is English. However, internationalization and communication practices have meant that this traditional conceptualization of translation needs MAIN ISSUES 9 to be broadened to include those contexts in which there is no clearly defined source text. This may be because there are multilingual versions of the same text, each of which is deemed to be equally valid (e.g. the Acquis body of European Union law), or because of an ‘unstable’ source text that is subject to constant updating or adaptation, each iteration of which requires a modification of existing target texts rather than a completely new translation (e.g. a multilingual website). The traditional ST-TT configuration is the most prototypical of ‘interlingual trans- lation’, one of the three categories of translation described by the Russo-American structuralist Roman Jakobson (1896–1982) in his seminal paper ‘On linguistic aspects of translation’. Jakobson’s categories are as follows: (1) intralingual translation, or ‘rewording’ – ‘an interpretation of verbal signs by means of other signs of the same language’ (2) interlingual translation, or ‘translation proper’ – ‘an interpretation of verbal signs by means of some other language’ (3) intersemiotic translation, or ‘transmutation’ – ‘an interpretation of verbal signs by means of signs of non-verbal sign systems’. (Jakobson 1959/2012: 127) These definitions draw on semiotics, the general science of communication through signs and sign systems, of which language is but one (Cobley 2001, Malmkjær 2011). The use of the term semiotics is significant here because trans- lation is not always limited to verbal languages. Intersemiotic translation, for example, occurs when a written text is translated into a different mode, such as music, film or painting. Examples would be Jeff Wayne’s famous 1978 musical version of H. G. Wells’s science-fiction novel The War of the Worlds (1898), which was then adapted for the stage in 2006, or Gurinder Chadha’s 2004 Bollywood Bride and Prejudice adaptation of Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice. Intralingual translation would occur when we produce a summary or otherwise rewrite a text in the same language, say a children’s version of an encyclopedia. It also occurs when we rephrase an expression in the same language. In the following example, revenue nearly tripled is a kind of intralingual translation of the first part of the sentence, a fact that is highlighted by the trigger expression in other words. In the decade before 1989 revenue averaged around [NZ]$1 billion a year while in the decade after it averaged nearly [NZ]$3 billion a year – in other words, revenue nearly tripled.3 10 INTRODUCING TRANSLATION STUDIES It is interlingual translation, between two different verbal sign systems, that has been the traditional focus of translation studies. However, as we shall see as the book progresses, notably in Chapters 8 to 10, the very notion of ‘translation proper’ and of the stability of source and target has been challenged. The question of what we mean by ‘translation’, and how it differs from ‘adaptation’, ‘version’, ‘transcreation’ (the creative adaptation of video games and advertising in parti- cular, see section 11.1.8), ‘localization’ (the linguistic and cultural adaptation of a text for a new locale, see section 11.2) and so on, is a very real one. Sandra Halverson (1999) claims that translation can be better considered as a prototype classification, that is, that there are basic core features that we associate with a prototypical translation, and other translational forms which lie on the periphery. Much of translation theory has until recently also been written from a western perspective and initially derived from the study of Classical Greek and Latin and from Biblical practice (see Chapter 2). By contrast, Maria Tymoczko (2005, 2006, 2007: 68–77) discusses the very different words and metaphors for ‘translation’ in other cultures, indicative of a conceptual orientation where the goal of close lexical fidelity to an original may not therefore be shared, certainly in the practice of translation of sacred and literary texts. For instance, in India there is the Bengali rupantar (= ‘change of form’) and the Hindi anuvad (= ‘speaking after’, ‘following’), in the Arab world tarjama (= ‘biography’) and in China fan yi (= ‘turning over’). Each of these construes the process of translation differently and anticipates that the target text will show a substantial change of form compared to the source.4 Tymoczko (2007: 107–39) also frames the ‘cross-cultural’ concept of translation as an interface of representation, transmission and transculturation. 1.1 Exploration: The term ‘translation’ Which word(s) are used for ‘translation’ in the languages you work with? Explore their origins. What do these terms suggest about the conceptuali- zation of translation? 1.2 What is translation studies? Throughout history, written and spoken translations have played a crucial role in interhuman communication, not least in providing access to important texts for MAIN ISSUES 11 scholarship and religious purposes. As world trade has grown, so has the impor- tance of translation. By 2015, the global market for outsourced translation, inter- preting and related technologies was estimated to exceed US$38 billion, while international organizations such as the European Union translate between 24 languages and spend some €456 million per year on translation and interpreting services.5 Yet the study of translation as an academic subject only really began in the second half of the twentieth century. In the English-speaking world, this discipline is now generally known as ‘translation studies’, thanks to the Dutch-based US scholar James S. Holmes (1924–1986). In his key defining paper delivered in 1972, but not widely available until 1988, Holmes describes the then nascent discipline as being concerned with ‘the complex of problems clustered round the phenomenon of translating and translations’ (Holmes 1988b/2004: 181). By 1995, the time of the second, revised, edition of her Translation Studies: An Integrated Approach, Mary Snell-Hornby was able to talk in the preface of ‘the breathtaking development of translation studies as an independent discipline’ and the ‘prolific international discus- sion’ on the subject (Snell-Hornby 1995, preface). Little more than a decade later, the editors of the second edition of the Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation comment on ‘new concerns in the discipline, its growing multidisciplinarity, and its commitment to break away from its exclusively Eurocentric origins, while holding on to the achievements of the past decades’ (Baker and Saldanha 2009: xxii). There are four very visible ways in which translation studies has become more prominent. Unsurprisingly, these reflect a basic tension between the prac- tical side of professional translating and the often more abstract research activity of the field. First, just as the demand for translation has soared, so has there been a vast expansion in specialized translating and interpreting programmes at both undergraduate and postgraduate level. These programmes, which attract thousands of students, are mainly oriented towards training future professional commercial translators and interpreters and serve as highly valued entry-level qualifications for the professions. The types of translation covered at each institu- tion vary. These may include MAs in applied translation studies, scientific and technical translation, conference and bilateral interpreting, audiovisual transla- tion, specialized Sign Language and audio description. A smaller number of programmes focus on the practice of literary translation. In Europe, literary trans- lation is also supported by the RECIT network of centres where literary transla- tion is studied, practised and promoted.6 The first of these was set up in Straelen, West Germany, in 1978. Second, the past decades have also seen a proliferation of conferences, books and journals on translation in many languages. Longer-standing 12 INTRODUCING TRANSLATION STUDIES international translation studies journals such as Babel (the Netherlands) and Meta (Canada), first published in 1955, were joined by TTR (Traduction, terminologie, rédaction, Canada) in 1988, Target (the Netherlands) in 1989, Perspectives (Denmark) in 1993 and The Translator (UK) in 1995. Online accessibility is increasing the profile of certain publications including open access journals such as The Journal of Specialised Translation and New Voices (see www.routledge.com/cw/munday). In addition, there is a whole host of other journals devoted to single languages, modern languages, applied linguis- tics, comparative literature and others where articles on translation are often published. 1.2 Exploration: Translation studies journals The companion website for Introducing Translation Studies includes a list of major translation studies journals. The front and backlists of publishers such as Bloomsbury, John Benjamins, Multilingual Matters, Peter Lang, Palgrave, Rodopi and Routledge (including St Jerome publishing) have significant series in translation studies. There are also various professional publications dedicated to the practice and study of transla- tion. In the UK these include The Linguist of the Chartered Institute of Linguists, The ITI Bulletin of the Institute of Translating and Interpreting and In Other Words, the literary-oriented publication of the Translators Association. Third, as the number of publications has increased so has the demand for general and analytical instruments such as anthologies, databases, encyclo- pedias, handbooks and introductory texts. Their number is ever-growing. Among these are Translation Studies (Bassnett 1980/1991/2002/2013), Contemporary Translation Theories (Gentzler 1993/2001), The Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies (Baker and Malmkjær 1998; Baker and Saldanha 2009), Dictionary of Translation Studies (Shuttleworth and Cowie 1997), Introducing Translation Studies (Munday 2001/2008/2012), The Routledge Companion to Translation Studies (Munday 2009), Critical Concepts: Translation Studies (Baker 2009), Critical Readings in Translation Studies (Baker 2010), Exploring Translation Theories (Pym 2010/2014), the Handbook of Translation Studies (Gambier and van Doorslaer 2010 onwards), The Oxford Handbook of Translation Studies (Malmkjær and Windle 2011), Theories of Translation (Williams 2013), The Routledge Handbook of Translation Studies (Millán and Bartrina 2013) and MAIN ISSUES 13 A Companion to Translation Studies (Bermann and Porter 2014). The best- known searchable online bibliographies are Translation Studies Bibliography (John Benjamins/Routledge) and the free-access BITRA (University of Alicante).7 Fourth, international organizations have also prospered. The Fédération Internationale des Traducteurs (International Federation of Translators, FIT) was established in 1953 by the Société française des traducteurs and its president Pierre-François Caillé (1907–79). It brought together national associations of translators. In more recent years, translation studies scholars have banded together nationally and internationally in bodies such as the Canadian Association for Translation Studies/Association canadienne de traductologie (CATS, founded in Ottawa in 1987), the European Society for Translation Studies (EST, Vienna, 1992), the European Association for Studies in Screen Translation (ESIST, Cardiff, 1995), the American Translation and Interpreting Studies Association (ATISA, Kent, OH, 2002), the International Association for Translation and Intercultural Studies (IATIS, Seoul, 2004) and the Asia-Pacific Forum on Translation and Intercultural Studies (Hangzhou-Tsinghua, 2011). International conferences on a wide variety of themes are held in an increasing number of countries. From being a relatively quiet backwater in the early 1980s, translation studies has now become one of the most active and dynamic new areas of multidisciplinary research. 1.3 An early history of the discipline Writings on the subject of translating go far back in recorded history. The prac- tice of translation was crucial for the early dissemination of key cultural and religious texts and concepts. In the west, the different ways of translating were discussed by, among others, Cicero and Horace (first century #$&) and St Jerome (fourth century $&). As we shall see in Chapter 2, their writings were to exert an important influence up until the twentieth century. In St Jerome’s case, his approach to translating the Greek Septuagint Bible into Latin would affect later translations of the Scriptures. Indeed, in western Europe the translation of the Bible was to be the battleground of conflicting ideologies for well over a thou- sand years and especially during the Reformation in the sixteenth century. In China, it was the translation of the Buddhist sutras that inaugurated a long discus- sion on translation practice from the first century $&. While the practice of translation is long established, the study of the field developed into an academic discipline only in the latter part of the twentieth century. Before that, translation had often been relegated to an element of 14 INTRODUCING TRANSLATION STUDIES language learning. In fact, from the late eighteenth century to the 1960s and beyond, language learning in secondary schools in many countries had come to be dominated by what was known as grammar-translation (Cook 2010: 9–15). Applied to Classical Latin and Greek and then to modern foreign languages, this centred on the rote study of the grammatical rules and structures of the foreign language. These rules were both practised and tested by the trans- lation of a series of usually unconnected and artificially constructed sentences exemplifying the structure(s) being studied. This is an approach that persists even today in certain contexts. Typical of this is the following rather bizarre and decontextualized collection of sentences to translate into Spanish, for the prac- tice of Spanish tense use. They appear in K. Mason’s Advanced Spanish Course, still to be found on some secondary school courses in the UK until the 1990s: (1) The castle stood out against the cloudless sky. (2) The peasants enjoyed their weekly visits to the market. (3) She usually dusted the bedrooms after breakfast. (4) Mrs Evans taught French at the local grammar school. (Mason 1969/1974: 92) The gearing of translation to language teaching and learning may partly explain why academia considered it to be of secondary status. Translation exercises were regarded as a means of learning a new language or of reading a foreign language text until one had the linguistic ability to read the original. Study of a work in trans- lation was generally frowned upon once the student had acquired the necessary skills to read the original. Grammar-translation therefore fell into increasing disre- pute, particularly in many English-language countries, with the rise of alternative forms of language teaching such as the direct method and the communicative approach from the 1960s and 1970s (Cook 2010: 6–9, 22–26). The communi- cative approach stressed students’ natural capacity to learn language and attempts to replicate ‘authentic’ language-learning conditions in the classroom. It often privi- leged spoken over written forms, at least initially, and generally avoided use of the students’ mother tongue. This led to the abandoning of translation in language learning. As far as teaching was concerned, translation then tended to become restricted to higher-level and university language courses and professional trans- lator training. It is only relatively recently that there has been a move to restore translation to language teaching (see Cook 2010: 125–53, for examples). In 1960s USA, starting in Iowa and Princeton, literary translation was promoted by the translation workshop concept. This was based on the reading and MAIN ISSUES 15 practical criticism workshops of Cambridge critic I. A. Richards (1893–1979) from the 1920s and on later creative writing workshops. The translation work- shops were intended as a platform for the introduction of new translations into the target culture and for the discussion of the finer principles of the translation process and of understanding a text.8 Running parallel to this approach was that of comparative literature, where literature is studied and compared transna- tionally and transculturally, necessitating the reading of some works in translation. Another area in which translation became the subject of research was contrastive linguistics. This is the study of two languages in contrast in an attempt to identify general and specific differences between them. It developed into a systematic area of research in the USA from the 1930s onwards and came to the fore in the 1960s and 1970s. Translations and translated examples provided much of the data in these studies (e.g. Di Pietro 1971, James 1980 and later Connor 1996). The contrastive approach heavily influenced important linguistic research into translation, such as Vinay and Darbelnet (1958) and Catford (1965), even if it did not incorporate sociocultural and pragmatic factors nor sufficiently the role of translation as a communicative act. The continued application of linguistics-based models has demonstrated their obvious and inherent link with translation. Among the specific models used are those related to generative grammar, functional linguistics and pragmatics (see Chapters 3 to 6). The more systematic, linguistic-oriented, approach to the study of translation began to emerge in the 1950s and 1960s. There are a number of now classic examples: Q Andrei Fedorov’s Osnovy obshchey teorii perevoda [Foundations of a General Theory of Translation] (1953/1968), described by Mossop (2013) and shown by Pym (2016) to have heavily influenced Vinay and Darbelnet and Loh (below); Q Jean-Paul Vinay and Jean Darbelnet produced their Stylistique comparée du français et de l’anglais (1958), a contrastive study of French and English which introduced key terminology for describing translation. It was not trans- lated into English until 1995; Q Alfred Malblanc (1944/1963) did the same for translation between French and German and Loh Dian-yang for Chinese and English (Zhang and Pan Li 2009; Pym 2016); Q Georges Mounin’s Les problèmes théoriques de la traduction (1963) exam- ined linguistic issues of translation; 16 INTRODUCING TRANSLATION STUDIES Q Eugene Nida (1964a) incorporated elements of Chomsky’s then fashionable generative grammar as a theoretical underpinning of his books, which were initially designed to be practical manuals for Bible translators. This more systematic approach began to mark out the territory of the ‘scientific’ investigation of translation. The word science was used by Nida in the title of his 1964 book (Toward a Science of Translating, 1964a). The German equivalent, Übersetzungswissenschaft, was taken up by Wolfram Wilss in his teaching and research at the Universität des Saarlandes at Saarbrücken, by Werner Koller in Heidelberg and by the Leipzig School, where scholars such as Otto Kade and Albrecht Neubert became active (see Snell-Hornby 2006). At that time, even the name of the emerging discipline remained to be determined, with other candi- dates staking their claim, such as translatology and its counterparts Translatologie in German, traductologie in French and traductología in Spanish (e.g. Vázquez- Ayora 1977 and the substantial contribution of Hurtado Albir 2001). 1.4 The Holmes/Toury ‘map’ A seminal paper in the development of the field as a distinct discipline was James S. Holmes’s ‘The name and nature of translation studies’ (Holmes 1988b/2004). In his Contemporary Translation Theories, Gentzler (2001: 93) describes Holmes’s paper as ‘generally accepted as the founding statement for the field.’ Snell-Hornby (2006: 3) agrees. Interestingly, in view of our discussion above of how the field evolved from other disciplines, the published version was an expanded form of a paper Holmes originally gave in 1972 in the translation section of the Third International Congress of Applied Linguistics in Copenhagen (Holmes 1972). Holmes drew attention to the limitations imposed at the time because translation research, lacking a home of its own, was dispersed across older disciplines (languages, linguistics, etc.). He also stressed the need to forge ‘other communication channels, cutting across the traditional disciplines to reach all scholars working in the field, from whatever background’ (1988b/2004: 181). Crucially, Holmes put forward an overall framework, describing what transla- tion studies covers. This framework was subsequently presented by the leading Israeli translation scholar Gideon Toury as in Figure 1.1. In Holmes’s explanations of this framework (Holmes 1988b/2004: 184–90), the objectives of the ‘pure’ areas of research are: (1) the description of the MAIN ISSUES 17 Figure 1.1 Holmes’s ‘map’ of translation studies (from Toury 1995: 10) phenomena of translation; and (2) the establishment of general principles to explain and predict such phenomena (translation theory). The ‘theoretical’ branch is divided into general and partial theories. By ‘general’, Holmes is refer- ring to those writings that seek to describe or account for every type of transla- tion and to make generalizations that will be relevant for translation as a whole (one example would be Toury’s ‘laws’ of translation; see Chapter 7). ‘Partial’ theoretical studies are restricted according to the parameters discussed below (medium, text-type, etc.). The descriptive branch of ‘pure’ research in Holmes’s map is known as descriptive translation studies (DTS, see Chapter 7). It may examine: (1) the product; (2) the function; and (3) the process. (1) Product-oriented DTS examines existing translations. This may involve the description or analysis of a single ST–TT pair or a comparative analysis of several TTs of the same ST (into one or more TLs). These smaller-scale studies can build up into a larger body of translation analysis looking at a specific period, language or text/discourse type. Examples would be translation in the twenty-first century, in the English< >Chinese language pair, or of scientific reports. Larger-scale studies can be either diachronic (following development over time) or synchronic (at a single point or period in time). Holmes (ibid.: 185) foresees that ‘one of the eventual goals of 18 INTRODUCING TRANSLATION STUDIES product-oriented DTS might possibly be a general history of translations – however ambitious such a goal might sound at this time’. (2) By function-oriented DTS, Holmes (ibid.) means the description of the ‘function [of translations] in the recipient sociocultural situation: it is a study of contexts rather than texts’. Issues that may be researched include which texts were translated when and where, and the influences that were exerted. For example, the study of the translation and reception of Shakespeare into European languages, or the subtitling of contemporary cartoon films into Arabic. Holmes terms this area ‘socio-translation studies’. Nowadays it would probably be called the sociology and historiography of translation. It was less researched at the time of Holmes’s paper but is more popular in current work on translation studies (see Chapters 8 and 9). (3) Process-oriented DTS in Holmes’s framework is concerned with the psychology of translation, i.e. it is concerned with trying to find out what happens in the mind of a translator. Work from a cognitive perspective includes think-aloud protocols (where recordings are made of translators’ verbalization of the translation process as they translate). More recent research using new technologies such as eye-tracking shows how this area is now being more systematically analysed (see section 4.4). The results of DTS research can be fed into the theoretical branch to evolve either a general theory of translation or, more likely, partial theories of translation ‘restricted’ according to the subdivisions in Figure 1.1. Q Medium-restricted theories subdivide according to translation by machine and humans, with further subdivisions according to whether the machine/ computer is working alone (automatic machine translation) or as an aid to the human translator (computer-assisted translation), to whether the human translation is written or spoken and to whether spoken translation (inter- preting) is consecutive or simultaneous. Q Area-restricted theories are restricted to specific languages or groups of languages and/or cultures. Holmes notes that language-restricted theories (e.g. for the Japanese< >English pair) are closely related to work in contras- tive linguistics and stylistics. Q Rank-restricted theories are linguistic theories that have been restricted to a level of (normally) the word or sentence. At the time Holmes was writing, there was already a trend towards text linguistics, i.e. analysis at the level of the text, which has since become far more popular (see Chapters 5 and 6 of this book). MAIN ISSUES 19 Q Text-type restricted theories look at discourse types and genres; e.g. literary, business and technical translation. Text-type approaches came to prominence with the work of Reiss and Vermeer, among others, in the 1970s (see Chapter 5). Q The term time-restricted is self-explanatory, referring to theories and trans- lations limited according to specific time frames and periods. The history of translation falls into this category. Q Problem-restricted theories may refer to certain problems such as equivalence (a key issue that came to the fore in the 1960s and 1970s) or to a wider question of whether so-called ‘universals’ of translation exist. Despite this categorization, Holmes himself is at pains to point out that several different restrictions may apply at any one time. Thus, the study of the prefaces to the new English translations of novels by Marcel Proust, analysed in Chapter 2, would be area restricted (translation from Parisian French into English), text-type restricted (prefaces to a novel) and time restricted (1981 to 2003). The ‘applied’ branch of Holmes’s framework concerns applications to the practice of translation: Q translator training: teaching methods, testing techniques, curriculum design; Q translation aids: such as dictionaries and grammars; Q translation criticism: the evaluation of translations, including the marking of student translations and the reviews of published translations. Another area Holmes mentions is translation policy, where he sees the transla- tion scholar advising on the place of translation in society. This should include what place, if any, it should occupy in the language teaching and learning curriculum. There are drawbacks to the structure. The divisions in the ‘map’ as a whole are in many ways artificial, and Holmes himself points out that the theoretical, descrip- tive and applied areas do influence one another. The main merit of the divisions is, as Toury states (1991: 180; 2012: 93), that they allow a clarification and a division of labour between the various areas of translation studies which, in the past, have often been confused. The divisions are still flexible enough to incorporate develop- ments such as the technological advances of recent years (see Chapter 11). Even a cursory glance at Figure 1.1 shows the applied side to be under- developed. However, it is not difficult to expand it, as in Figure 1.2: 20 INTRODUCING TRANSLATION STUDIES Figure 1.2 The applied branch of translation studies While the general categories have been retained, we have filled in the detail, particularly for translation aids with the explosion in the use of computer-assisted translation tools (CAT tools) and in automatic online translation. Although it may have dated, the crucial role played by Holmes’s paper is in the delineation of the potential of translation studies. The map is still often employed as a point of departure, even if subsequent theoretical discussions have attempted to rewrite parts of it (e.g. Pym 1998, Hatim and Munday 2004, Snell-Hornby 2006, van Doorslaer 2007, see below). Also, present-day research has transformed the 1972 perspective. The fact that Holmes devoted two-thirds of his attention to the ‘pure’ aspects of theory and description surely indicates his research interests rather than a lack of possibilities for the applied side. ‘Translation policy’ is nowadays far more likely to be related to the ideology, including language policy and hegemony, that determines translation than was the case in Holmes’s description. The different restrictions, which Toury identifies as relating to the descriptive as well as the purely theoretical branch in the discontinuous vertical lines in Figure 1.1, might well include a discourse-type as well as a text-type restriction. Inclusion of interpreting as a sub-category of human translation would also be disputed by many scholars. In view of the very different requirements and activities associated with interpreting, and despite inevitable points of overlap, it would probably be best to consider interpreting as a parallel field or ‘sub-discipline’, under the title of ‘interpreting studies’ (see Pöchhacker 2004, 2009). Audiovisual translation (see Díaz Cintas and Remael 2007) and sign language interpreting might claim similar status. Additionally, as Pym points out (1998: 4), Holmes’s map omits any mention of the individuality of the style, decision-making and working practices of human translators MAIN ISSUES 21 involved in the translation process. Yet it was precisely the split between theory and practice that Holmes, himself both a literary translator and a researcher, sought to overcome. 1.3 Exploration: Location in the Holmes/Toury map Look at a recent issue of widely available online journals such as Meta and JosTrans (and, where possible, Target, The Translator and other journals). Try and locate each article within the Holmes/Toury ‘map’ (Figures 1.1 and 1.2). How easy is it to do so? Where would you locate your own work or studies in this schema? 1.5 Developments since Holmes The surge in translation studies since Holmes has seen different areas of the map come to the fore. Contrastive linguistics generally fell by the wayside, but has resurfaced thanks to the advances in machine translation and corpus-based studies (see Chapter 11). The linguistics-oriented ‘science’ of translation has continued strongly in Germany, but the concept of equivalence associated with it has been questioned and reconceived (see Chapter 3). Germany has seen the rise of theories centred around text types and text purpose (the skopos theory of Reiss and Vermeer, see Chapter 5). The Hallidayan influence of discourse anal- ysis and systemic functional grammar, which views language as a communicative act in a sociocultural context, came to prominence in the early 1990s, especially in Australia and the UK. It was applied to translation in a series of works by scholars such as Bell (1991), Baker (1992/2011), Hatim and Mason (1990, 1997), Calzada Pérez (2007), Munday (2008, 2012) (see Chapter 6). The late 1970s and the 1980s also saw the rise of a descriptive approach that had its origins in compar- ative literature and Russian Formalism (see Chapter 7). A pioneering centre was Tel Aviv, where Itamar Even-Zohar and Gideon Toury pursued the idea of the literary polysystem in which, among other things, different literatures and genres, including translated and non-translated works, compete for dominance. The polysystemists worked with a Belgium-based group including José Lambert and the late André Lefevere (who subsequently moved to the University of Austin, Texas), and with the UK-based scholars Susan Bassnett and Theo Hermans. A key volume was the collection of essays edited by Hermans, The Manipulation of Literature: Studies in Literary Translation (Hermans 1985a), which gave rise to the name of the 22 INTRODUCING TRANSLATION STUDIES ‘Manipulation School’. Bassnett and Lefevere’s volume Translation, History and Culture (1990) then introduced the term ‘cultural turn’. This dynamic, culturally oriented approach held sway for much of the following decade (Chapter 8). The 1990s saw the incorporation of new approaches and concepts: Canadian-based translation and gender research led by Sherry Simon, the Brazilian Cannibalist School promoted by Else Vieira, and postcolonial trans- lation theory with the prominent figures of the Bengali scholars Tejaswini Niranjana and Gayatri Spivak (Chapter 8). In the USA, the cultural studies-oriented analysis of Lawrence Venuti called for greater visibility and recognition of the translator (Chapter 9). Developments continued at an ever-increasing pace in the new millennium, with special interest devoted to, for example, translation, globalization and resistance (Cronin 2003, Baker 2006, Boéri and Maier 2010, Marais 2014), the sociology and historiography of translation (e.g. Inghilleri 2005a, Wolf and Fukari 2007, Rundle 2014, Vorderobermeier 2014) and process-oriented research (e.g. O’Brien 2011). Research activity, as well as the practice of transla- tion, has also been revolutionized by new technologies. These new areas include machine and automatic translation, audiovisual and multimodal translation, locali- zation and corpus-based translation studies (see Chapter 11). Furthermore, the international reach of the discipline has expanded enormously with research and training in Asia (e.g. Chan 2004, Cheung 2006, 2009, Sato-Rossberg and Wakabayashi 2012) and the Arab world (Selim 2009) in particular. 1.6 The van Doorslaer ‘map’ In order to deal with such a breadth of work, a new conceptual tool was devel- oped for the Benjamins Translation Studies Bibliography, as explained by van Doorslaer (2007). In the new maps, a distinction is drawn between ‘translation’ and ‘translation studies’, reflecting the different centres of interest of research.9 ‘Translation’ looks at the act of translating and, in the new map (van Doorslaer 2007: 223), is subdivided into: Q lingual mode (interlingual, intralingual); Q media (printed, audiovisual, electronic); Q mode (covert/overt translation, direct/indirect translation, mother tongue/ other tongue translation, pseudo-translation, retranslation, self-translation, sight translation, etc.); Q field (political, journalistic, technical, literary, religious, scientific, commercial). MAIN ISSUES 23 Translation studies (ibid.: 228–31) is subdivided into: Q approaches (e.g. cultural approach, linguistic approach); Q theories (e.g. general translation theory, polysystem theory); Q research methods (e.g. descriptive, empirical); Q applied translation studies (criticism, didactics, institutional environment). Alongside these is a ‘basic transfer map’ (ibid.: 226) of terminology to describe the linguistic manoeuvres that, despite the cultural turn, remain central to the concrete translating process. This consists of strategies, procedures/ techniques, ‘errors’, rules/norms/conventions/laws/universals and translation tools. Figures 1.3 and 1.4 display the taxonomy of ‘strategies’ and ‘procedures’. Figure 1.3 Translation strategies (following van Doorslaer 2007: 226) 24 INTRODUCING TRANSLATION STUDIES Figure 1.4 Translation procedures (following van Doorslaer 2007: 227) The distinction is an important one, even if it is sometimes blurred in the literature: a strategy is the overall orientation of a translated text (e.g. literal translation, see Chapter 2) while a procedure is a specific technique used at a given point in a text (e.g. borrowing, calque, see Chapter 4). Linguistic transfer of course still occurs within a sociocultural and historical context and institutional environment that place their own constraints on the process. 1.7 Discipline, interdiscipline or multidiscipline? A notable characteristic of recent research has been its interdisciplinarity. In the first edition of this book we ended with a discussion of translation studies as MAIN ISSUES 25 a discipline, interdiscipline or sub-discipline, and saw the future in interdiscipli- narity. We discussed the nature of interdisciplines, referring to Willard McCarty’s paper ‘Humanities computing as interdiscipline’ (1999),10 which gives the following description of the role of an interdiscipline in academic society: A true interdiscipline is... not easily understood, funded or managed in a world already divided along disciplinary lines, despite the standard pieties... Rather it is an entity that exists in the interstices of the existing fields, dealing with some, many or all of them. It is the Phoenician trader among the settled nations. Its existence is enigmatic in such a world; the enigma challenges us to rethink how we organise and institutionalise knowledge. (McCarty 1999) An interdiscipline therefore challenges the current conventional way of thinking by promoting and responding to new links between different types of knowledge and technologies. Viewing the hierarchy of disciplines as a systemic order, McCarty sees the ‘conventional’ disciplines having either a ‘primary’ or a ‘secondary’ relationship to a new interdiscipline. For us, translation studies would itself be the Phoenician trader among longer-established disciplines. It has the potential for a primary relationship with disciplines such as: Q linguistics (especially semantics, pragmatics, applied and contrastive linguis- tics, cognitive linguistics); Q modern languages and language studies; Q comparative literature; Q cultural studies (including gender studies and postcolonial studies); Q philosophy (of language and meaning, including hermeneutics and deconstruction and ethics); and, in recent years, with sociology, history and creative writing. Some current projects are also multidisciplinary, involving the participation of researchers from various disciplines, including translation studies. It is important to point out that the relationship of translation studies to other disciplines is not fixed. This explains the changes over the years, from a strong link to contrastive linguistics in the 1960s to the present focus on more cultural studies perspectives and even the recent shift towards areas such as computing and multi-media. Other, secondary, relationships come to the fore when dealing with the area of applied translation studies, such as translator training. For instance, specialized translation courses should have an element of 26 INTRODUCING TRANSLATION STUDIES instruction in the disciplines in which the trainees are planning to translate – such as law, politics, medicine, finance, science – as well as an ever-increasing input from information technology to cover computer-assisted translation. While the discussion has continued on interdisciplinarity (e.g. Ferreira Duarte et al. 2006) and multidisciplinarity (House 2014), some, like Daniel Gile, have seen it as a threat: [P]artnerships established with other disciplines are almost always unbal- anced: the status, power, financial means and actual research competence generally lie mostly with the partner discipline. Moreover, interdisciplinarity adds to the spread of paradigms and may, therefore, weaken further the status of [translation research] and [interpreting research] as autonomous disciplines. (Gile 2004: 29) It is also true that translation studies has in some places been colonized by language departments driven by the perceived attractiveness of academic teaching programmes centred on the practice of translation but harbouring their own academic prejudices. Ironically, this has also worsened the artificial gap between practice and theory. For example, research assessments in the UK (formal external audits and evaluations of individuals’ and departments’ research output) have valued academic articles higher than translations, even translations of whole books. This ignores the fact that the practice of translation is an invalu- able, not to say essential, experience for the translation theorist and trainer. Yet the most fascinating developments have been the continued emergence of new perspectives, each seeking to establish a new ‘paradigm’ in translation studies. This provoked debate, highlighted by Chesterman and Arrojo (2000) and pursued in subsequent issues of Target, as to what ‘shared ground’ there actually was in this potentially fragmenting subject area. The volume New Tendencies in Translation Studies (Aijmer and Alvstad 2005), deriving from a workshop at Göteborg University, Sweden in 2003, set out a concerted attempt to bring together and evaluate research methodologies. As the editors, with some understatement, pointed out in the introduction (ibid.: 1), there has been ‘a move- ment away from a prescriptive approach to translation to studying what transla- tion actually looks like. Within this framework the choice of theory and methodology becomes important.’ Such choice is crucial and it depends on the goals of the research and the researchers. As we shall see as this book progresses, method- ology has evolved and become more sophisticated (see Saldanha and O’Brien 2013). At the same time, there is considerable divergence on methodology, as MAIN ISSUES 27 translation studies has moved from the study of words to text to sociocultural context to the working practices of the translators themselves. An illustration of the diversity of current research can be gauged by the 19 panels at the 5th IATIS conference held in Belo Horizonte, Brazil, in July 2015. 1.4 Exploration: Translator studies Read the online article by Chesterman (2010) for a discussion of some developments in Holmes’ map. See also the bibliometric study by Zanettin et al. (2015), available through the ITS website, for a discussion of sub- fields in translation studies. Even the object of study, therefore, has shifted over time, from translation as primarily connected to language teaching and learning to the study of the circum- stances in which translation and translators operate. Summary Translation studies is an academic research area that has expanded massively over the years. Translation was formerly studied as a language-learning method- ology or as part of comparative literature, translation ‘workshops’ and contrastive linguistics courses. The discipline as we now know it owes much to the work of James S. Holmes, who proposed both a name and a structure for the field, but the context has now advanced. The interrelated branches of theoretical, descrip- tive and applied translation studies initially structured research. Over time the interdisciplinarity and specialization of the subject have become more evident and theories and models have continued to be imported from other disciplines but also forged from within translation studies itself. Discussion and research points 1 Investigate the use of other translation-related terms, such as ‘adapta- tion’, ‘version’ and ‘transcreation’. In what contexts are they used? How easy is it to define these terms? In the light of your findings, try to write a definition of ‘translation’. 28 INTRODUCING TRANSLATION STUDIES 2 Investigate how research-based translation studies fits into the university system in your country. How many universities offer ‘translation studies’ (or similar) MA or doctoral programmes? In which university depart- ments/faculties are they housed? What are the ‘primary’ and ‘secondary’ relationships to other disciplines? What do you conclude is the status of translation studies in your country? 3 As you read each of the following chapters, try and locate each topic or concept within the Holmes/Toury ‘map’ (Figures 1.1 and 1.2). Carry out the same exercise with the van Doorslaer schema and compare the results. The ITS website at www.routledge.com/cw/munday contains: Q a video summary of the chapter; Q a recap multiple-choice test; Q customizable PowerPoint slides; Q further reading links and extra journal articles; Q more research project questions. CHAPTER 2 Translation theory before the twentieth century Key concepts Q The ‘word-for-word’ (‘literal’) vs. ‘sense-for-sense’ (‘free’) debate. Q The importance of the translation of sacred texts. Q The vitalization of the vernacular: Luther and the German Bible. Q The influence of Dryden and the triad of metaphrase, paraphrase, imitation. Q Attempts at a more systematic prescriptive approach from Dolet and Tytler. Q Schleiermacher: a separate language of translation and respect for the foreign. Q The vagueness of the early terms used to describe translation. Key texts Baker, Mona and Gabriela Saldanha (eds) (2009) The Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, 2nd edition, Abingdon and New York: Routledge, Part II: History and Traditions. Bassnett, Susan (1980, revised edition 2013) Translation Studies, London and New York: Routledge, Chapter 2. Cheung, Martha (ed.) (2006) An Anthology of Chinese Discourse on Translation: From Earliest Times to the Buddhist Project, Manchester: St Jerome. Gutas, Dimitri (1998) Greek Thought, Arabic Culture: The Graeco-Arabic Translation Movement in Baghdad and Early ‫ޏ‬Abbāsid Society (2nd–4th/8th– 10th Centuries), London and New York: Routledge. 30 INTRODUCING TRANSLATION STUDIES Robinson, Douglas (1997b) Western Translation Theory from Herodotus to Nietzsche, Manchester: St Jerome. For fuller extracts from Cicero, St Jerome, Dolet, Bruni, Luther, Dryden and Tytler, among many others. Schleiermacher, Friedrich (1813/2012) ‘On the different methods of trans- lating’, in Lawrence Venuti (ed.) (2012) The Translation Studies Reader, 3rd edition, London and New York: Routledge, pp. 43–63. 2.0 Introduction Watch the introductory video on the companion website. The aim of this chapter is not to attempt a comprehensive history of translation or translators through the ages; this would be beyond the scope of any book. Instead, the main focus is the central recurring theme of ‘word-for-word’ and ‘sense-for- sense’ translation, a debate that dominated much of translation theory in what Newmark (1981: 4) called the ‘pre-linguistics period of translation’. It is a theme which Susan Bassnett sees as ‘emerging again and again with different degrees of emphasis in accordance with differing concepts of language and communication’ (2013: 53). In this chapter, we focus on a select few of the readily available writings based on the criterion of the influence they have exerted on the history of translation theory and research. The list of further reading will note some of the others that have a justifiable claim for inclusion or that provide a more detailed account. Historically, there has also been a very strong tendency to concentrate on western European writing on translation, starting with the Roman tradition, although over the past decades there has been an ever-growing list of publications in English addressing the wider geographic framework and for a wider audience. 2.1 Exploration: Timeline The theory timeline on the ITS companion website locates the theorists who are discussed in this chapter. 2.1 ‘Word-for-word’ or ‘sense-for-sense’? Up until the second half of the twentieth century, western translation theory seemed locked in what George Steiner (1998: 319) calls a ‘sterile’ debate over the ‘triadic model’ of ‘literalism’, ‘paraphrase’ and ‘free imitation’. The distinction between PRE-TWENTIETH-CENTURY TRANSLATION THEORY 31 ‘word-for-word’ (i.e. ‘literal’) and ‘sense-for-sense’ (i.e. ‘free’) translation goes back to Cicero (106–43 #$&) and St Jerome (347–420 $&). In the west, where the status of the Classical authors of ancient Greece and Rome remained pre-eminent, it formed the basis of key writings on translation for nearly two thousand years. The Roman rhetorician and politician Marcus Tullius Cicero outlined his approach to translation in De optimo genere oratorum (46 #$&/1960 $&), intro- ducing his own translation from the Greek of speeches of the fourth-century #$& Attic orators Aeschines and Demosthenes: And I did not translate them as an interpreter, but as an orator, keeping the same ideas and forms, or as one might say, the ‘figures’ of thought, but in language which conforms to our usage. And in so doing, I did not hold it necessary to render word for word, but I preserved the general style and force of the language.1 (Cicero 46 #$&/1960 $&: 364) The ‘interpreter’ of the first line is often read by translation studies as being the literal (‘word-for-word’) translator, while the ‘orator’ tried to produce a speech that moved the listeners. However, McElduff (2009: 136) points out that in ancient Rome it was the low social status of the ‘interpreter’ – a mediator of various kinds – that was disparaged because of a lack of education. This then led to ‘limited and pedantic understanding’ and to an inelegant, ‘word for word’, Latin style. The disparagement of word-for-word translation came from others as well, such as the poet Horace, who, in a short but famous passage from his Ars Poetica (c.20 #$&),2 underlines the goal of producing an aesthetically pleasing and creative poetic text in the TL. This attitude had great influence on the succeeding centuries. Thus, St Jerome, the most famous of all western translators, cites the authority of Cicero’s approach to justify his own Latin revision and translation of the Christian Bible, later to become known as the Latin Vulgate. At a time when different and competing versions of the Bible were being produced, this was commissioned by Pope Damasus in 382 $& and aimed at establishing an official and standardized Latin translation for use in churches. Jerome revised and corrected earlier Latin translations of the Greek New Testament, the account of Jesus’s life. For the Old Testament, he decided to return to the original Hebrew. This was a decision that was controversial to those who maintained the divine inspiration of the Greek Septuagint, the commonly accepted translation of the older texts, in use among Christians (Rebenich 2002: 53–4). The Septuagint was a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, undertaken over a long period beginning in the third century #$& in what has been described as ‘the first major translation in western culture’ (Rajak 32 INTRODUCING TRANSLATION STUDIES 2009: 1). By comparing the Greek Septuagint translation with the Hebrew original, Jerome noted points where the two versions differed. His overall translation strategy is formulated in De optimo genere interpretandi, a letter addressed to his friend, the senator Pammachius, in 395 $&.3 In it, Jerome responds specifically to public criticisms of his originally private translation of a letter from Pope Epiphenius to John, the Bishop of Jerusalem. In perhaps the most famous statement ever made on the translation process, St Jerome defends himself against accusations of ‘incorrect’ translation and describes his strategy in the following terms: Now I not only admit but freely announce that in translating from the Greek – except of course in the case of the Holy Scripture, where even the syntax contains a mystery – I render not word-for-word, but sense-for-sense.4 (St Jerome 395 $&/1997: 25) Although some scholars (e.g. Vermeer 1994: 7) argue that these terms have been misinterpreted,5 Jerome’s statement is now usually taken to refer to what came to be

Introducing Translation Studies, Theories and Applications 2016 PDF

Document Details

Tags

Related

Summary

Full Transcript

Upgrade to continue