Cover not available
Part of
Interdisciplinarity in Translation and Interpreting Process Research
Edited by Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow, Susanne Göpferich and Sharon O'Brien
[Benjamins Current Topics 72] 2015
► pp. 95–108

Metaphor in translation

Possibilities for process research

 | Aston University, UK
ORCID logo | University College London, UK
This chapter explores potential benefits of closer interaction between metaphor studies and translation process research. It presents some developments within translation studies that make use of conceptual metaphor theory and illustrates some process research methods for investigating metaphors. The chapter considers a number of methodological recommendations and argues that the need to take full account of insights from metaphor studies and associated disciplines is of greatest importance. Another significant potential innovation is the use of a multilingual approach in respect of both product- and process-oriented studies in order to increase both the amount and the generality of data available for analysis. Thirdly, it is important to extend the current source-text (ST) oriented approach. The chapter concludes by suggesting some options for triangulating data gathered through a combination of methods.
Keywords: eye tracking, keystroke logging, metaphor, metaphor studies, multilingual approach, TAPs, translation process research, triangulation
Published online: 11 June 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.72.08shu
References (22)
References
Al-Harrasi, Abdulla. 2001. Metaphor in (Arabic-into-English) Translation with Specific Reference to Metaphorical Concepts and Expressions in Political Discourse. Unpublished PhD thesis, Aston University.Google Scholar
Alves, Fabio, Adriana Pagano, Stella Neumann, Erich Steiner, and Silvia Hansen-Schirra. 2010. “Translation Units and Grammatical Shifts. Towards an Integration of Product and Process-Based Translation Research.” In Translation and Cognition, ed. by Gregory M. Shreve, and Erik Anglone, 109–141. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cameron, Lynne. 1999. “Identifying and Describing Metaphor in Spoken Discourse.” In Researching and Applying Metaphor, ed. by Lynne Cameron, and Graham Low, 105–132. New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deignan, Alice, Danuta Gabrys, and Agniezska Solska. 1997. “Teaching English Metaphors Using Cross-Linguistic Awareness-Raising Activities.” English Language Teaching Journal 51: 352–360. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Evans, Vyvyan, and Melanie Green. 2006. Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Göpferich, Susanne. 2008. Translationsprozessforschung. Stand, Methoden, Perspektiven. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Jakobsen, Arnt Lykke, Kristian T.H. Jensen, and Inger M. Mees. 2007. “Comparing Modalities: Idioms as a Case in Point.” In Interpreting Studies and Beyond. A Tribute to Miriam Shlesinger, ed. by Franz Pöchhacker, Arnt Lykke Jakobsen, and Inger M. Mees, 217–249. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
Kövecses, Zoltan. 2005. Metaphor in Culture: Universality and Variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kussmaul, Paul. 2000. Kreatives Übersetzen. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
. 2003. “Der Professionalität auf der Spur.” In Traducta Navis. Festschrift zum 60. Geburtstag von Christiane Nord, ed. by Britta Nord, and Peter A. Schmitt, 131–149. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1993. “The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor.” In Metaphor and Thought, 2nd ed., ed. by Andrew Ortony, 202–251. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martikainen, Kati. 1999. What Happens to Metaphorical Expressions Relating to ‘Comprehension’ in the Processes and Products of Translation? A Think-Aloud Protocol Study. A Pro Gradu thesis, Savonlinna School of Translation Studies. University of Savonlinna.Google Scholar
Mauranen, Anna, and Pekka Kujamäki (eds). 2004. Translation Universals. Do They Exist? Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Olohan, Maeve. 2004. Introducing Corpora in Translation Studies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Schäffner, Christina. 2004. “Metaphor and Translation: Some Implications of a Cognitive Approach.” Journal of Pragmatics 36: 1253–1269. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shuttleworth, Mark. 2011. “Translational Behaviour at the Frontiers of Scientific Knowledge: A Multilingual Investigation into Popular Science Metaphor in Translation.” Translator 17 (2): 301–323. [Special Issue: Science in Translation.] DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sjørup, Annette C. 2008. “Metaphor Comprehension in Translation: Methodological Issues in a Pilot Study.” In Looking at Eyes. Eye-Tracking Studies of Reading and Translation Processing [Copenhagen Studies in Language, 36], ed. by Susanne Göpferich, Arnt Lykke Jakobsen, and Inger M. Mees, 53–77. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
. 2011. “Cognitive Effort in Metaphor Translation: An Eye-Tracking Study.” In Cognitive Explorations of Translation, ed. by Sharon O’Brien, 197–214. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja. 2001. “Metaphors in Translation Processes and Products.” Quaderns. Revista de traducció 6: 11–15.Google Scholar
. 2002. “Metaphoric Expressions in Translation Processes.” Across Languages and Cultures 3 (1): 101–116. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Dijk, Teun A. 1995. “Interdisciplinarity.” Discourse and Society 6 (4): 459–460. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

[no author supplied]
2020. Introduction of Synesthetic Metaphors in English-Ukrainian Translations of Fiction. The Journal of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University Series: Foreign Philology. Methods of Foreign Language Teaching :91 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.