Translation Universals.pdf - ymerleksi - home

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Probabilistic explanations in translation studies 21 are on an equal footing vis-à-vis translation. Of course, this is true in as far as cases of both can indeed be found in individual translations, maybe even every single one of them. However, it is at least counter-intuitive when it comes to the general notion of ‘translation’, even ‘[proto]typical’ translation, precisely because it lacks any indication of probability: Would one of the terms be more common, and its occurrence more predictable than its opposite? Obviously, the less vague a statement of this kind, the easier it is to disprove it; and not only speculatively (as we have been doing so far), but on empirical grounds as well; that is, in the face of factual evidence. ToquoteReichenbach again, “there is no need for a concept of probability which is not reducible to frequency notion”. To be sure, one counter-evidence is enough to shake the universality of any such statement, and exceptions are not really difficult to find. In fact, the possibility of fabricating instances of counter-evidence at will may in itself undermine such statements’ claim to universality, as any ‘fabricated’ (or ‘simulated’) translation is a kind of translation and nothing but translation, 8 and there is always a possibility that somebody has taken, or will be taking the same route when doing ‘genuine’, i.e. socially and culturally relevant translation. 4. Would the presence of “shifts” constitute a universal? Being ‘general’ is not an either/or matter, then. Rather, there seems to be a graded scale of generality. Let us climb another rung up that ladder and see what will happen. You will have noticed that there is one key-feature that all statements of the format “translation involves X” have in common; namely, their predicates representing so-called shifts, such as explicitation, implicitation, simplification, complexification, etc., etc. are all kinds of translational shifts. 9 The obvious question to ask now, in the context of our attempt to locate the point where mere ‘regularities’ become proper ‘universals’, is: what would the status be of the common denominator itself, or the underlying proposition translation involves shifts. My claim would be that we have entered the realm of analytic statements, maybe even that of flat tautologies, which may imply that we have now climbed a little too high. Thus, unlike the lower-level, derivative realizations such as explicitation, implicitation, or simplification, there can be no question about the truth of translation involves shifts. However, this truth is by definition, so to
22 Gideon Toury speak, as shifts are not just one of many possible features, but rather a defining feature of translation, thus forming an integral part of the very notion: claiming that a translation will necessarily reveal shifts is virtually like saying: “well, translation is translation!” As a distinctive feature of translation, translation involves shifts is therefore not unlike propositions such as translation involves memory (which, I suspect, no one will offer as a candidate for universal-ship due to its self-evidence and non-specificity), or translation involves norms, oreven is a norm-governed activity (which some may wish to present as one). In each case, however, the predicate (that is, the specific realization of the general notion of ‘shift’) draws from a different source, namely, the cross-linguistic, the cognitive and the socio-cultural, respectively. It is not that there is anything inherently wrong with tautologies. Actually, many of them may be quite instructive, even helpful, in teaching contexts, for example. My point is only that their use adds nothing to our understanding of what translation involves. It would therefore be rather trivial – precisely what we wanted our universals not to be. As it turns out, then, the question facing us is not really whether translation universals exist (as the sub-title of our Workshop had it), but rather whether recourse to the notion is in a position to offer us any new insights. Thatisto say, whether the foreseen gains (which nobody would deny) will outweigh the cumbersomeness which the introduction of a whole new categorical level into our crowded field necessarily involves. I, for one, expect to see some gains first and foremost in terms of the ability of translation theory to account for every individual phenomenon occurring in the field (i.e. both to describe and explain it), if not to predict it as well, as becomes the nature of <strong>Translation</strong> Studies as an empirical discipline: will that ability be enhanced by saying that translation involves shifts of one kind or another, on one level or another? Isn’t it something we have known all along? And does this known fact really represent a direct reflection of translation being translation, or are there any other mirrors we have overlooked? Bottom line: notwithstanding the fact that such statements are certainly better candidates for universal-ship than anything we have had so far, I would go on looking for the point of transition from regularities in general to true universals; namely, somewhere in-between the idiosyncratic and normgoverned, on the one hand, and the self-evident, on the other.
Page 2 and 3: Translation Universals
Page 4 and 5: Translation Universals Do they exis
Page 6 and 7: Table of contents Introduction 1 I.
Page 8 and 9: Introduction The search for univers
Page 10 and 11: Introduction 3 the main methodologi
Page 12 and 13: Introduction 5 tious corpus would w
Page 14 and 15: Introduction 7 of several frequent
Page 16 and 17: Introduction 9 For many, the term u
Page 18: Introduction 11 Toury, Gideon (1991
Page 22 and 23: Probabilistic explanations in trans
Page 40 and 41: Beyond the particular* Andrew Chest
Page 42 and 43: Beyond the particular 35 6. A trans
Page 44 and 45: Beyond the particular 37 characteri
Page 46 and 47: Beyond the particular 39 Contributi
Page 48 and 49: Beyond the particular 41 A crucial
Page 50 and 51: Beyond the particular 43 representa
Page 52 and 53: Beyond the particular 45 or unclear
Page 54 and 55: Beyond the particular 47 What we ne
Page 56: Beyond the particular 49 Schulte, R
Page 59 and 60: 52 Silvia Bernardini and Federico Z
Page 72 and 73: Corpora, universals and interferenc
Page 78 and 79:
Corpora, universals and interferenc
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Untypical frequencies in translated
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106:
Page 109 and 110:
102 Jarmo Harri Jantunen Mauranen (
Page 111 and 112:
104 Jarmo Harri Jantunen 2.2 Lexica
Page 113 and 114:
106 Jarmo Harri Jantunen eighth day
Page 115 and 116:
108 Jarmo Harri Jantunen second pha
Page 117 and 118:
110 Jarmo Harri Jantunen Figure 2.
Page 119 and 120:
112 Jarmo Harri Jantunen synonymous
Page 121 and 122:
114 Jarmo Harri Jantunen items comp
Page 123 and 124:
116 Jarmo Harri Jantunen Table 4. T
Page 125 and 126:
118 Jarmo Harri Jantunen translatio
Page 127 and 128:
120 Jarmo Harri Jantunen Table 7. T
Page 129 and 130:
122 Jarmo Harri Jantunen However, t
Page 131 and 132:
124 Jarmo Harri Jantunen 13. The bo
Page 133 and 134:
126 Jarmo Harri Jantunen Mauranen,
Page 136 and 137:
Translation-specific lexicogrammar?
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148:
Page 151 and 152:
144 Vilma Pápai It is in the last
Page 153 and 154:
146 Vilma Pápai Table 1. Summary o
Page 155 and 156:
148 Vilma Pápai (Sinclair 1991:13-
Page 157 and 158:
150 Vilma Pápai Table 2. Summary o
Page 159 and 160:
152 Vilma Pápai 4.1.2 Shifts on th
Page 161 and 162:
154 Vilma Pápai part of speech and
Page 163 and 164:
156 Vilma Pápai his former prison
Page 165 and 166:
158 Vilma Pápai Table 4. Frequency
Page 167 and 168:
160 Vilma Pápai In addition, consi
Page 169 and 170:
162 Vilma Pápai PA Porter, A. 1997
Page 171 and 172:
164 Vilma Pápai Ishikawa, Luli (19
Page 173 and 174:
166 Tiina Puurtinen (1996) and Bake
Page 175 and 176:
168 Tiina Puurtinen (1) Hän katsoi
Page 177 and 178:
170 Tiina Puurtinen conditional: jo
Page 179 and 180:
172 Tiina Puurtinen Table 2. Occurr
Page 181 and 182:
174 Tiina Puurtinen (5) Lisko voisi
Page 183 and 184:
176 Tiina Puurtinen Mauranen, Anna
Page 185 and 186:
178 Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit equivale
Page 187 and 188:
180 Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit Table 1.
Page 189 and 190:
182 Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit do not t
Page 191 and 192:
184 Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit Östman,
Page 194 and 195:
What happens to “unique items”
Page 196 and 197:
“Unique items” in learners’ t
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
The fate of “The Families of Mede
Page 214 and 215:
Thefateof“TheFamiliesofMedellín
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Author index A Adab 1 Aijmer 131 Al
Page 224:
Author index 217 Schäffner 1, 38,
Page 227 and 228:
220 Subject index G generalization
Page 229 and 230:
In the BENJAMINS TRANSLATION LIBRAR
Page 231:
47. SAWYER, David B.: Fundamental A
show all

Translation Universals.pdf - ymerleksi - home

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?