Cover not available
Article published In:
FORUM
Vol. 15:1 (2017) ► pp.67–84

The idea of faithfulness and reformulation of the Gricean maxims for the needs of translation

 | Tabaran Institute of Higher Education, Mashhad Iran
 | Jahrom University, Jahrom, Iran
Translation scholars have been applying the Gricean maxims as analytical tools to handle pragmatic issues in translation. Not always this genuine application is successful regarding that the maxims are culture-bound in nature and may not have the same utility in a different culture and/or in translation. Rarely any attempts have been done to adjust these maxims to the needs of translation. The present article, while does not intend to criticize the basic applicability of the maxims in translation, aims at reformulating them, within a framework of faithfulness, to be more flexible and responsive to the needs of translation. To illustrate this and evaluate the maxims, examples are analyzed and re-analyzed.
Keywords: Gricean maxims, relevance, pragmatic translation, faithfulness
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The Gricean maxims in translation
    • 2.1The Gricean maxims
    • 2.2(Non)-applicability of the Gricean maxims in translation
    • 2.3A post-Gricean replacement
  • 3.Theoretical framework
    • 3.1Gutts’ application of the idea of faithfulness (from relevance theory) in translation
    • 3.2Clark’s cooperative Common Ground Theory
    • 3.3The rationale
  • 4.Reformulating the maxims
  • 5.Testing the reformulated maxims
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References


This article is currently available as a sample article.

Published online: 4 September 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/forum.15.1.04san
References (36)
References
Aghbar, Ali. 1995. “Grice’s maxims as applied to the translation of fiction.” In Studies in the Humanities, 22 (1–2), 76–85.Google Scholar
Alves, Fabio and Goncales, Jose Luis V. R. 2003. “A Relevance theory approach to the investigation of inferential processes in translation.” In Triangulating Translation, ed. by Fabio Alves, 3–24. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alves, Fabio. 2007. “Cognitive effort and contextual effect in translation: A Relevance-theoretic Approach.” In Journal of Translation Studies, 10 (1), 57–76.Google Scholar
Baker, Mona. 1998. Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London/New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1992. In Other Words: A Coursebook on Translation. London/New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beckett, Samuel. 1956. Dar entezar-e Godo [orig. Waiting for Godot]. Translated by Mustafa Abedini Fard. New York: Chelsea House.Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana. 1981. “The study of translation in view of new developments in discourse analysis: Indirect speech acts.” In Poetics Today, 2 (4), 89–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana, House, Julian, and Kasper, Gabriele. 1989. Cross-cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies. Ablex: Norwood, NJ.Google Scholar
Chapman, Siobhan. 2011. Pragmatics. New York: Palgrave McMillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert. 1996. Uses of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dynel, Marta. 2009. “Where cooperation meets politeness: Revisiting politeness models in view of the Gricean framework.” In Brno Studies in English, 35 (1), 23–43.Google Scholar
Fawcett, Peter. 1997. Translation and Language: Linguistic Theories Explained. Manchester: St Jerome.Google Scholar
Grice, Herbert P. 1989. Studies in the Way of Words. USA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Gutt, Ernest A. 1998. “Pragmatic aspects of translation: Some relevance-theory observations.” In The Pragmatics of Translation, ed. by Leo Hickey, 41–53. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
1992. Relevance Theory: A Guide to Successful Communication in Translation. Dallas/New York: Summer Institute of Linguistics and United Bible Societies.Google Scholar
1991. Translation and Relevance: Cognition and Context. London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hadi, Atefeh. 2013. “A Critical Appraisal of Grice’s Cooperative Principle.” In Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 3 (1), 69–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hassani Laharomi, Zahra. 2013. “Conversational implicatures in English plays and their Persian translations: A norm-governed study.” In International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 2 (5), 51–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hatim, Basil and Mason, Ian. 1997. The Translator as Communicator. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 1990. Discourse and the Translator. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Hatim, Basil. 2006. “Relevance as effort and reward: A translation & interpreting perspective.” In FORUM, 4 (2), 25–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1997. Communication Across Cultures: Translation Theory and Contrastive Text Linguistics. Exeter: University of Exeter Press.Google Scholar
Hatim, Basil and Munday, Jeremy. 2004. Translation: An Advanced Resource Book. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Margala, Miriam. 2009. “Grice in translation: The case of Hrabal.” In Journal of Language & Translation, 10 (2), 87–128.Google Scholar
Machali, Rokiah. 2012. “Gricean maxims as an analytical tool in translation studies: Questions of adequacy.” In TEFLIN Journal, 23 (1), 88–104.Google Scholar
. 1999. “Shift in Discourse Perspective and the Question of Translation Equivalence.” In JOTT (Journal of Textlinguistics and Translation), l (12), 30–46.Google Scholar
Neubert, Albercht and Shreve, Gregory M. 1992. Translation as Text. Kent, Ohio: Kent State University Press.Google Scholar
Robinson, Douglas. 2003. Performative Linguistics: Speaking and Translating as Doing Things with Words. USA/Canada: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sanatifar, Mohammad S. 2016. “Explication of Implicatures in the Persian Translation of Barack Obama’s Selected Speeches.” In New Voices in Translation Studies,141, Special Conference Issue: PhD thesis abstract.Google Scholar
Santibañez, Cristián. 2012. “The principle of relevance in the light of cooperation and trust: Discussing Sperber and Wilson’s theory.” In Pragmatics & Cognition, 20 (3), 483–504. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sperber, Deirdre and Wilson, Dan. 1995. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Trosborg, Anna. ed. 2010. Pragmatics across Languages and Cultures. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Venuti, Laurence. 1998. The Scandals of Translation. Towards an Ethics of Difference. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verschueren, Jef and Östman, Jan-Ola. 2009. Key Notions for Pragmatics. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wierzbicka, Anna. 1991. Cross-cultural Pragmatics: The Semantics of Human Interaction. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre and Sperber, Dan. 1988. “Representation and relevance.” In Mental Representations: The Interface between Language and Reality, ed. by Ruth M. Kempson, 133–153. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Hassanein, Hamada
2021. Translating Qur’anic ‘X-phemisms’ Muslims live by. Translation and Interpreting Studies 16:1 ► pp. 124 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 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.