Reflections on Translation Theory: Selected papers 1993 - 2014

408 Pages·2017·2.192 MB·English

by  Andrew Chesterman

B EN J A M I N S

■

T
Relections
R
on Translation
A
Theory
N
Selected papers 1993 – 2014
S
L
Andrew Chesterman
A
T
I
O
L I B R A R Y
N

■
Reflections on Translation Theory
Benjamins Translation Library (BTL)
issn 0929-7316
The Benjamins Translation Library (BTL) aims to stimulate research and training in
Translation & Interpreting Studies – taken very broadly to encompass the many different
forms and manifestations of translational phenomena, among them cultural translation,
localization, adaptation, literary translation, specialized translation, audiovisual
translation, audio-description, transcreation, transediting, conference interpreting,
and interpreting in community settings in the spoken and signed modalities.
For an overview of all books published in this series, please see
www.benjamins.com/catalog/btl
General Editor Associate Editor Honorary Editor
Yves Gambier Franz Pöchhacker Gideon Toury†
University of Turku & University of Vienna Tel Aviv University
Immanuel Kant Baltic
Federal University (IKBFU),
Kaliningrad, Russia
Advisory Board
Rosemary Arrojo Zuzana Jettmarová Sherry Simon
Binghamton University Charles University of Prague Concordia University
Michael Cronin Alet Kruger Şehnaz Tahir Gürçaglar
Dublin City University UNISA, South Africa Bogaziçi University
Dirk Delabastita John Milton Maria Tymoczko
University of Namur University of São Paulo University of Massachusetts
Daniel Gile Anthony Pym Amherst
Université Paris 3 - Sorbonne University of Melbourne and Lawrence Venuti
Nouvelle Universitat Rovira i Virgili Temple University
Amparo Hurtado Albir Rosa Rabadán Michaela Wolf
Universitat Autònoma de University of León University of Graz
Barcelona
Volume 132
Reflections on Translation Theory. Selected papers 1993–2014
by Andrew Chesterman
Reflections on Translation Theory
Selected papers 1993–2014
Andrew Chesterman
University of Helsinki
John Benjamins Publishing Company
Amsterdam / Philadelphia
TM The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of
8
the American National Standard for Information Sciences – Permanence
of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ansi z39.48-1984.
doi 10.1075/btl.132
Cataloging-in-Publication Data available from Library of Congress:
lccn 2017001379 (print) / 2017016300 (e-book)
isbn 978 90 272 5878 6 (Hb)
isbn 978 90 272 5879 3 (Pb)
isbn 978 90 272 6576 0 (e-book)
© 2017 – John Benjamins B.V.
No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any
other means, without written permission from the publisher.
John Benjamins Publishing Company · https://benjamins.com
Table of contents
Preface ix
Section I. Some general issues 1
paper 1
On the idea of a theory (2007) 3
paper 2
Shared ground in Translation Studies (2000) 17
With Rosemary Arrojo
paper 3
What constitutes “progress” in Translation Studies? (2000) 25
paper 4
Towards consilience? (2005) 35
Section II. Descriptive and prescriptive 43
paper 5
The empirical status of prescriptivism (1999) 45
paper 6
Skopos theory: A retrospective assessment (2010) 55
paper 7
Catford revisited (2012) 71
paper 8
The descriptive paradox, or how theory can affect practice (2013) 81
Section III. Causality and explanation 95
paper 9
Causes, translations, effects (1998) 97
paper 10
A causal model for Translation Studies (2000) 123
paper 11
Semiotic modalities in translation causality (2002) 137
vi Reflections on Translation Theory
paper 12
On explanation (2008) 147
Section IV. Norms 165
paper 13
From ‘is’ to ‘ought’: Laws, norms and strategies in Translation Studies (1993) 167
paper 14
A note on norms and evidence (2006) 185
Section V. Similarities and differences 193
paper 15
On similarity (1996) 195
paper 16
Problems with strategies (2005) 201
paper 17
The unbearable lightness of English words (2007) 213
Section VI. Hypotheses 223
paper 18
The status of interpretive hypotheses (2008) 225
paper 19
Reflections on the literal translation hypothesis (2011) 237
Section VII. “Universals” 251
Paper 20
Beyond the particular (2004) 253
Paper 21
What is a unique item? (2007) 269
Paper 22
Kundera’s sentence (2004) 281
Paper 23
Universalism in Translation Studies (2014) 295
Section VIII. The sociological turn 305
Paper 24
Questions in the sociology of translation (2006) 307
Table of contents vii
Paper 25
The name and nature of Translator Studies (2009) 323
Paper 26
Models of what processes? (2013) 331
Section IX. Translation ethics 345
Paper 27
Proposal for a Hieronymic Oath (2001) 347
Paper 28
An ethical decision (2009) 363
References 369
Name index 391
Subject index 395

Preface
These selected papers all have to do with conceptual analysis; alongside textual
analysis, this is one of the oldest methods used in Translation Studies (hereafter:
TS). In most cases, the articles do not represent empirical research and are not
data-driven. When there are examples these are usually only illustrative, to in-
dicate how I interpret a concept, or to show that something is at least possible, or
to elucidate a point. No empirical research is possible without some conceptual
analysis, of course, since (for instance) hypothesis formation and data analysis
involve categorization and categories represent concepts. I therefore hope that
the conceptual work and arguments represented here can contribute to empirical
research, as well as to greater understanding of the phenomenon of translation.
One of the repeated themes is my concern about the increasing fragmentation
of TS. Several papers explore the possibility of establishing some shared conceptual
and/or methodological ground between different branches of the field. Aspects of
this theme include the relation between prescriptive and descriptive approaches
and between theory and practice, different kinds of hypothesis and explanation,
bridge concepts such as causality, and the notion of consilience. The papers are
grouped into thematic sections, and each section has a short introduction, putting
the papers into context. The selection reflects my thinking over the past couple of
decades or so, on a variety of topics in translation theory and translation research
methodology. The methodological topics derive mainly from my work in super-
vising MA and PhD theses, and participating in international graduate schools
and seminars.
A general rhetorical caveat should be made here. Like other scholars, I am not
always careful enough to distinguish clearly, by textual means, between factual
claims and conceptual or interpretive ones. That is, a clause like “there are two
kinds of norms” is of course not an empirical claim, although it may syntactically
look like one, but an interpretive one. It should be glossed: ‘I argue/suggest that it
is useful to conceptualize norms as falling into two categories’. The nature of such
conceptual claims is discussed in some detail in Paper 18.
The papers are mostly reproduced unchanged, with the original source indi-
cated in a footnote, together with copyright permission acknowledgement where
necessary. Abstracts and keywords have been added for papers which originally