Article published In:
The Metalanguage of Translation
Edited by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer
[Target 19:2] 2007
► pp. 313325
References (28)
References
Carroll, Lewis. 1872/1994. Through the looking glass. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Clyne, Michael. 1991. “Zu kulturellen Unterschieden in der Produktion und Wahrnehmung englischer und deutscher wissenschaftlicher Texte”. Info DaF 18:4. 376–383.Google Scholar
Coseriu, Eugenio. 1970. “System, Norm und Rede”. Eugenio Coseriu, ed. Sprachen, Strukturen und Funktionen. Tübingen: Gunter Narr, 1970. 193–212.Google Scholar
Finkenstaedt, Thomas and Konrad Schröder. 1992. Sprachen im Europa von morgen. Berlin/ München: Langenscheidt.Google Scholar
Halverson, Sandra. 1997. “The concept of equivalence in Translation Studies: Much ado about something”. Target 9:2. 207–233.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holmes, James S. 1987 [11972]. “The name and nature of Translation Studies”. Indian journal of applied linguistics 13:2. 9–24.Google Scholar
Holz-Mänttäri, Justa. 1984. Translatorisches Handeln: Theorie und Methode. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.Google Scholar
Kade, Otto. 1968. Zufall und Gesetzmäßigkeit in der Übersetzung. Leipzig: Enzyklopädie Verlag.Google Scholar
. 1973. “Zum Verhältnis von ‘idealem Translator’ als wissenschaftlicher Hilfskonstruktion und optimalem Sprachmittler als Ausbildungsziel”. Neue Beiträge zu Grundfragen der Übersetzungswissenschaft. Supplement to Fremdsprachen 5:6. 179–190.Google Scholar
Koller, Werner. 1995. “The concept of equivalence and the object of Translation Studies”. Target 7:2. 191–222.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krein-Kühle, Monika. 2000. Review of Mary Snell-Hornby et al.. Handbuch Translation. Target 12:2. 363–366. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lefevere, André and Susan Bassnett. 1990. “Introduction: Proust’s grandmother and the thousand and one nights: The ‘cultural turn’ in Translation Studies”. Susan Bassnett and André Lefevere, eds. Translation, history and culture. London: Pinter, 1990. 1–13.Google Scholar
Newmark, Peter. 1991. “The curse of dogma in Translation Studies”. Lebende Sprachen 36:3.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nord, Christiane. 1991. “Scopos, loyalty, and translational conventions”. Target 3:1. 91–109.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pöckl, Wolfgang, ed. 2004. Übersetzungswissenschaft Dolmetschwissenschaft: Wege in eine neue Disziplin. Wien: Praesens.Google Scholar
Reiß, Katharina and Hans J. Vermeer. 1984. Grundlegung einer allgemeinen Translationstheorie. Tübingen: Niemeyer.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Searle, John R. 1969. Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Snell-Hornby, Mary. 1986. “Übersetzen, Sprache, Kultur”. Mary Snell-Hornby, ed. Übersetzungswissenschaft—Eine Neuorientierung: Zur Integrierung von Theorie und Praxis. Tübingen: Francke, 1986. 9–29.Google Scholar
. 1988. Translation Studies: An integrated approach. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. The turns of Translation Studies: New paradigms or shifting viewpoints? Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. [Benjamins Translation Library, 66.]   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Snell-Hornby, Mary, Hans G. Hönig, Paul Kussmaul and Peter A, Schmitt, eds. 1998. Handbuch Translation. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
Sturge, Kathryn E. 1999. ‘The alien within’: Translation into German during the Nazi regime. London. [unpublished Ph.D. thesis.]Google Scholar
Toury, Gideon. 1978. “The nature and role of norms in literary translation”. James S. Holmes, José Lambert and Raymond van den Broeck, eds. Literature and translation. Leuven: acco, 1978. 83–100.Google Scholar
. 1980. In search of a theory of translation. Tel Aviv: Porter Institute.Google Scholar
. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies and beyond. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. [Benjamins Translation Library, 4.]   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Venuti, Lawrence. 1995. The translator’s invisibility: A history of translation. London-New York: Routledge.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vermeer, Hans J. 1989. Kulturspezifik des translatorischen Handelns. Heidelberg: mimeo.Google Scholar
1995. A skopos theory of translation: (Some arguments for and against.) Heidelberg: mimeo.Google Scholar
Cited by (7)

Cited by seven other publications

Kazakova, Tamara Anatol'evna & Andrei Valentinovich Achkasov
2018. TOOLS OF LINGUISTIC EXPERTISE OF TRANSLATION. Philology. Theory & Practice :7  pp. 325 ff. DOI logo
Castellini, Alessandro
2017. Introduction. In Translating Maternal Violence,  pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Rosa, Alexandra Assis, Hanna Pięta & Rita Bueno Maia
2017. Theoretical, methodological and terminological issues regarding indirect translation: An overview. Translation Studies 10:2  pp. 113 ff. DOI logo
Hébert, Lyse
2016. Regard transculturel sur l’asservissement des traducteurs : optiques cubaines et canadiennes1. TTR 26:2  pp. 83 ff. DOI logo
Loizou, Antonis, Renzo Angles & Paul Thomas Groth
2015. On the Formulation of Performant SPARQL Queries. SSRN Electronic Journal DOI logo
Eccles, N. S. & S. Viviers
2011. The Origins and Meanings of Names Describing Investment Practices that Integrate a Consideration of ESG Issues in the Academic Literature. Journal of Business Ethics 104:3  pp. 389 ff. DOI logo
Snell-Hornby, Mary
2009. What's in a turn? On fits, starts and writhings in recent translation studies. Translation Studies 2:1  pp. 41 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 7 november 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.