Cover not available
Article published In:
Target
Vol. 3:2 (1991) ► pp.137–152

A False Opposition in Translation Studies

Theoretical versus/and Historical Approaches

| FUNDP, Namur
After some preliminary notes on the fragmented state of Translation Studies, the author directs his attention to one of the seemingly irreconcilable oppositions within the discipline, namely, between "theoretical" and "historical" approaches to translation. On the basis of insights from modern epistemology it is claimed that the two are, in fact, complementary and that one should aim for a continuous interplay between them. Normative approaches fail to achieve this and prove to have little explanatory power when confronted with the historical reality of translation. Four discursive strategies are discussed whereby this anomaly is often camouflaged or explained away.
Article outline
  • 1.The Study of Translation
  • 2.Theory versus/and History
  • 3.Restricted Models of Translation
  • 4.Restricted Models of Wordplay Translation, and the Art of Evasion
  • 5.A Final Remark
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 1 January 1991
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/target.3.2.02del
References (23)
References
Delabastita, Dirk. 1990a. Review of Snell-Hornby 1988. Leuvense Bijdragen 79:2. 242–247.Google Scholar
. 1990b. “There’s a Double Tongue”: An Investigation into the Translation of Shakespeare’s Wordplay. K.U. Leuven. [Doctoral Dissertation.]Google Scholar
Hermans, Theo, ed. 1985. The Manipulation of Literature: Studies in Literary Translation. London and Sydney: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Holmes, James S. 1988. “The Future of Translation Studies: A Handful of Theses”. Translated!: Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1988. 99–102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jakobson, Roman. 1959. “On Linguistic Aspects of Translation”. Reuben A. Brower, ed. On Translation. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1959. 232–239.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koller, Werner. 2 1983. Einführung in die Übersetzungswissenschaft. Heidelberg: Quelle & Meyer. [Unitaschenbücher, 819.]Google Scholar
Lambert, José. 1983. “Un modèle descriptif pour l’étude de la littérature. La littérature comme polysystème”. Kortrijk: Faculteit Letteren en Wijsbegeerte van de K.U. Leuven, campus Kortrijk. [Preprint paper, 29.]Google Scholar
. 1976. “Echanges littéraires et traduction, ou: études théoriques vs. études descriptives” Lillebill Grähs, Gustav Korlèn and Bertil Malmberg, eds. Theory and Practice of Translation [Nobel Symposium, 39]. Bern, Frankfurt am Main, Las Vegas: Peter Lang, 1976. 237–250.Google Scholar
. 1988. “Twenty Years of Research on Literary Translation at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven”. Harald Kittel, ed. Die literarische Übersetzung: Stand und Perspektiven ihrer Erforschung. Berlin: Erich Schmidt, 1988. 122–138.Google Scholar
Lambert, José Hendrik van Gorp. 1980. “Geschiedenis, theorie en systeem: valse dilemma’s in de literatuurwetenschap”. Spektator 10:6. 514–519.Google Scholar
Landheer, Ronald. 1989. “L’ambiguïté: un défi traductologique”. Meta 34:1. 33–43.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levý, Jiří. 1967. “Translation as a Decision Process”. To Honor Roman Jakobson 21. The Hague and Paris: Mouton, 1967. 1171–1182.Google Scholar
Newmark, Peter. 1981. Approaches to Translation. Oxford, etc.: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph and Sidney Greenbaum. 1973. A University Grammar of English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Roberts, Roda P. 1988. “The Need for Systematization of Translation Theory”. Paul Nekeman, ed. Translation, Our Future: Proceedings of the XIth World Congress of FIT. Maastricht: Euroterm, 1988. 117–123.Google Scholar
Shen, Dan. 1989. “Literalism: NON ’Formal-equivalence’”. Babel 35:4. 219–235.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Snell-Hornby, Mary. 1988. Translation Studies: An Integrated Approach. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Söll, Ludwig. 1971. “Traduisibilité et intraduisibilité”. Meta 16:1/2. 25–31.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Toury, Gideon. 1980. In Search of a Theory of Translation. Tel Aviv: The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics, Tel Aviv University.Google Scholar
. 1989. Unpublished lectures delivered as holder of The CERA Chair for Translation, Communication and Cultures (Leuven), Summer 1989.Google Scholar
. in press. “What are Descriptive Studies into Translation Likely to Yield apart from Isolated Descriptions?”. Kitty van Leuven-Zwart, ed. Proceedings of the First James S Holmes Symposium on Translation Studies. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Vanderauwera, Ria. 1982. Review of Toury 1980 . Dispositio 7:19/21. 177–179.Google Scholar
Wilss, Wolfram. 1982. The Science of Translation: Problems and Methods. Tübingen: Gunter Narr. [Tübinger Beiträge zur Linguistik, 180.]Google Scholar
Cited by (14)

Cited by 14 other publications

Davier, Lucile
2022. Translational phenomena in the news. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 34:3 ► pp. 395 ff. DOI logo
Boyden, Michael
2014. Counting blessings (and sheep). Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 26:2 ► pp. 169 ff. DOI logo
Leydenbach, Claire
2014. Repères bibliographiques. In Traduire-écrire, DOI logo
D’hulst, Lieven
2013. Assumed translation. In Handbook of Translation Studies [Handbook of Translation Studies, 4], ► pp. 7 ff. DOI logo
D’hulst, Lieven
2015. Quels défis pour l’histoire de la traduction et de la traductologie ?. Meta 60:2 ► pp. 281 ff. DOI logo
Lafarga, Francisco
2006. Sobre la historia de la traducción en España: contextos, métodos, realizaciones*. Meta 50:4 ► pp. 1133 ff. DOI logo
Crisafulli, Edoardo
2001. The adequate translation as a methodological tool. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 13:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Schjoldager, Anne
1995. Interpreting Research and the ‘Manipulation School’ of Translation Studies1. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 7:1 ► pp. 29 ff. DOI logo
van Doorslaer, Luc
1995. Quantitative and Qualitative Aspects of Corpus Selection in Translation Studies. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 7:2 ► pp. 245 ff. DOI logo
Delabastita, Dirk
1994. Focus on the Pun. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 6:2 ► pp. 223 ff. DOI logo
Delabastita, Dirk
2012. Response. Translation Studies 5:2 ► pp. 246 ff. DOI logo
Chesterman, Andrew
1993. From ‘Is’ to ‘Ought’. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 5:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Koster, Cees
1993. Stegeman, Jelle. 1991. Übersetzung und Leser: Untersuchungen zur Übersetzungsäquivalenz dargestellt an der Rezeption von Multatulis 'Max Havelaar' und seinen deutschen Ubersetzungen.. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 5:1 ► pp. 115 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2017. Reflections on Translation Theory [Benjamins Translation Library, 132], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 10 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.