Translation Universals.pdf - ymerleksi - home

84 Sari Eskola
our knowledge of concrete distinctive features of translations is still vague, and
the question remains what really makes them the way they are. Before detailed
statements can be made on the subject, we definitely need more profound and
systematic comparative research on translated and non-translated texts based
on large electronic text collections and corpus methodology.
Not long ago Baker (1993, 1995, 1996) launched the idea of using the
methods of corpus linguistics in order to uncover the distinguishing features
of translated language. Now a growing number of researchers work in the
new field of corpus-based translation studies (CTS), trying to capture the
real nature of translated texts and bring something concrete to the rather
obscure discussion conducted (critically or otherwise) in the literature on
translation and also among the general public. This kind of descriptive study is
greatly facilitated by the availability of corpus linguistic tools. Different corpora
allow one to analyse language in a real context on both a quantitative and a
qualitative basis, and the application of corpus linguistics can reveal something
about translations that we have not been able to see using small corpora and
manual methods.
2. From norms to laws
Much effort has been devoted to the vexed question of norms (e.g. Toury 1978,
1980, 1985; Schäffner 1999; Chesterman 1997), and not least in CTS. The
concept itself has been adopted from social sciences to translation studies and
there is still no agreement in the literature as to what exactly constitutes norms
of translation. One of the main problems seems to be that norms are often
equated with observed regularity, which is why too many things are considered
norms and the concept itself has suffered and lost its explanatory power. In
my view, norms are not themselves observable but can be identified on the
basis of regularities in recurrent situations. The very essence of norms is that
they are binding constraints, social expectations that tell us how to behave and
against the backdrop of which our behaviour can be evaluated. Norms result
in regularities of behaviour, but linguistic features themselves are not norms.
Even if norms can be identified on the basis of regularities, regularity itself is
not necessarily a proof of the existence of a norm, because it may also have
other causes. Identifying what features actually are norm-dependent requires
that we find links between knowledge of values and priorities on the one hand
and features that are observable in translations on the other (see Pym 1998).