New Research in Translation and
Interpreting Studies
20 October, 2006
Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Tarragona (Spain)
Ljuba Tarvi (Tallinn University)
Classification of Translation Models:
A Map or a Matrix?
Problems to discuss
• Is it possible to structure the field of
translation studies?
Problems to discuss
• Is it possible to structure the field of
translation studies?
• What might be a ‘unit’ of structuring the
field?
Problems to discuss
• Is it possible to structure the field of
translation studies?
• What might be a ‘unit’ of structuring the
field?
• What might be the ‘center of gravity’ when
delineating the field?
Problems to discuss
• Is it possible to structure the field of
translation studies?
• What might be a ‘unit’ of structuring the
field?
• What might be the ‘center of gravity’ when
delineating the field?
• In what way could theory help practice?
Karl Popper’s three worlds
World 1 (W1) - the world of physical objects
Karl Popper’s three worlds
World 1 (W1) - the world of physical objects
World 2 (W2) - the world of mental
objects/events
Karl Popper’s three worlds
World 1 (W1) - the world of physical objects
World 2 (W2) - the world of mental
objects/events
World 3 (W3) - the world of products of the
human mind, including
linguistic products
Popper’s worlds: interactions
W2 - W1
__________________
W3 (W1)
Popper’s worlds
W2 (mental objects and events)
__________________________
W3 (products of human mind)
Popper’s worlds: interaction
W2 (mental objects and events)
__________________________
???
_________________________
W3 (products of human mind)
James Holmes (1988:72)
There would seem to be three major
kinds of research in DTS, which may
be distinguished by their focus as
product oriented,
function-oriented, and
process-oriented.
Holmes’ three major kinds of
research
process-oriented
function-oriented
product-oriented
translation psychology
W2
translation sociology
function
comparative translation
description
W3
Holmes’ kinds of research &
Popper’s worlds
HOLMES:
process-oriented
translation psychology
POPPER:
W2
function-oriented
translation sociology
function?
product-oriented
comparative description
W3
Function
• Literary function is a variable notion of how
texts (W3) are connected to the language
(W3), its users (W2), and culture
(functional space of W2-W3 interaction).
Function
• Literary function is a variable notion of how
texts (W3) are connected to the language
(W3), its users (W2), and culture
(functional space of W2-W3 interaction).
• Function is a dynamic concept considering
human agents (and texts produced by
them) within cultural (society, ideology,
politics, economy, etc.) context.
Interface 1
W2 (mental objects and events)
_______________________
JH: function/sociology
_______________________
W3 (products of human mind)
Interface 2
W2 (mental objects and events)
______________________
JH: function/sociology
GT: parts/whole: functional relationship
______________________
W3 (products of human mind)
Interface 3
W2 (mental objects and events)
______________________
JH: function/sociology
GT: parts/whole: functional relationship
SWH: linguistic determinism/relativity
______________________
W3 (products of human mind)
Interface 4
W2 (mental objects and events)
___________________________
JH: function/sociology
GT: parts/whole: functional relationship
SWH: linguistic determinism/relativity
RF: functional value-driven interaction
___________________________
W3 (products of human mind)
A ‘function space’
“A variable quantity regarded in its relation
to one or more other variables in terms of
which it may be expressed, or on the value
of which its own value depends” (TOED, p.
263)
Scheme 1
W2 (mental objects and events)
___________________________
Function space
___________________________
W3 (products of human mind)
Scheme 2
W2 (I individual)
W2 (I functional)
___________________________
Function space
___________________________
W3 (products of human mind)
W3: properties
(1) W3 is autonomous
(2) W3 is timeless
(3) W3 has a history
(4) W3 is internally logical
‘institution’ (e.g., TOT, p. 225)
• establishment, institute, academy,
foundation, university, college, school
• custom, tradition, habit, practice, routine,
rule, order (of the day), code (of practice),
doctrine, dogma
‘institution’ (e.g., TOT, p. 225)
• establishment, institute, academy,
foundation, university, college, school
INSTITUTION
• custom, tradition, habit, practice, routine,
rule, order (of the day), code (of practice),
doctrine, dogma
NORM
Scheme 3
W2 (I individual)
W2 (I functional)
___________________________
Function space
___________________________
W3 (norms)
W3 (institutions)
W3 (texts)
Scheme 4
W2 (I individual)
W2 (I functional)
__________________________
FUNCTION SPACE
___________________________
↑ W3 (norms) ↑
↑ W3 (institutions) ↑
W3 (texts)
Scheme 5
W2 (I individual)
↓ W2 (I functional) ↓
__________________________
FUNCTION SPACE
___________________________
↑ W3 (norms) ↑
↑ W3 (institutions) ↑
W3 (texts)
Scheme 6
W2 (I individual)
__________________________
W2 (I functional)
W3 (norms)
W3 (institutions)
___________________________
W3 (texts)
Ideology - culture
Ideology is the set of ideas, values and
beliefs that govern a community by virtue
of being regarded as a norm.
(Calzada-Pérez 1997:35)
Culture is an integrated system of learned
behavior patterns that are characteristic of
the members of any given society.
(Khol 1984:17)
Norms – ideology - culture
NORMS
ideology
culture
NORMS
(1) official standards or levels that organizations are
expected to reach
(2) ways of behaving that are considered normal
in a particular society
Synonyms:
criterion
average
benchmark
pattern
yardstick
rule
Scheme 7
W2 (I individual)
__________________________
W2 (I functional)
W3 (norms)
W3 (institutions)
___________________________
W3 (texts)
Matrix of Translation Studies:
Spaces
Source nation
A
W2 (individual)
Intercultural Space
I/T
Target nation
R
W2 (individual)
Source culture
W2 (functional)
Function Space
Target culture
W2 (functional)
W3 (source norms)
SN
Function Space
International norms
W3 (target norms)
TN
W3 (institutions)
Function Space
W3 (institutions)
International relations
International institutions
W3 (source language) Interlinguistic Space
ST
W3 (target language)
TT
Matrix of Translation Studies:
Actors
A
I/T
R
SN
TN
ST
TT
A paradigm: major features
• it is used by a group of researchers (social
facet),
• who share the same conceptual values
(theoretical facet) and
• the same rules and standards for scientific
practice (empirical facet), and
• is open-ended (temporal facet).
James Holmes
Translated!
Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1988
James Holmes 1988
A
I/T
PROCESS
R
PROCESS
SN
TN
FUNCTION
FUNCTION
ST
TT
PRODUCT
PRODUCT
Theo Hermans
Translation in Systems. Descriptive and
System-oriented Approaches Explained.
Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing, 1999.
Theo Hermans 1999
A
I/T
SN
CULTURE-BOUND
R
READER-ORIENTED
TN
CULTURE-BOUND
ST
TT
TEXT-ORIENTED
TEXT-ORIENTED
Albrecht Neubert
“Theory and practice of translation studies
revisited. 25 years of translator training in
Europe.”
In A. Beeby, D. Ensinger & M. Preasas, (Eds.),
Investigating Translation. Selected Papers from
the 4th International Congress on Translation,
Barcelona, 1998 (pp. 13-26).
Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins
Publishing Company, 2000.
Albrecht Neubert 2000
A
I/T
R
SN
TN
interdisciplinary
ST
contrastive-linguistics
interdisciplinary
text-linguistic
TT
Andrew Chesterman
“A causal model for translation studies.”
In M. Olohan (Ed.),
Intercultural Faultness. Research Models
in Translation Studies I. Textual and
Cognitive Aspects (pp. 15-27).
Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing, 2000.
Andrew Chesterman 2000
A
I/T
PROCESS
R
PROCESS
SN
TN
CAUSAL
CAUSAL
ST
TT
PRODUCT
PRODUCT
Juliane House
“How do we know when a translation is
good?”
In (eds: Steiner & Yallop) Exploring
Translation and Multilingual Language
Production: Beyond Content (pp. 127160).
Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 2001.
Juliana House 2001
A
I/T
R
RESPONSE-BASED
NEO-HERMENEUTIC
SN
LITERATURE-ORIENTED
FUNCTIONALISTIC
POST-MODERNIST
ST
TN
TT
LINGUISTIC-ORIENTED LINGUISTIC-ORIENTED
Tarvi 2006
A
SN
ST
I/T
introspective
accountability
R
readability
applied: education
applied: criticism
applied: tools
research
benchmark
policy
communication
discourse
functionalist
polysystem
cultural
linguistics
text-linguistic
acceptability
TN
TT
Problems discussed
• Is it possible to structure the field of
translation studies?
• What might be a ‘unit’ of structuring the
field?
• What might be the ‘center of gravity’ when
delineating the field?
• In what way could theory help practice?
Problems to be discussed
• In what other ways is it possible to
structure the field of translation studies?
• What other units of structuring the field
can be suggested?
• What other ‘centers of gravity’ can be
employed to structure the field?
• Do we need theoretical constructs to help
practice?
A Map or a Matrix?
ljuba.tarvi@elisanet.fi