Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 47 views

    History of Translation Studies

    Uploaded by

    Rica Capa
    This document outlines the development of translation theory from the early 19th century to the late 20th century through three key sentences: Friedrich Schleiermacher first distinguished between foreignization and domestication in translation in the early 19th century. The Prague School in the 1920s/1960s pioneered a linguistic approach and focused on intralingual, interlingual, and intersemiotic translation. The second half of the 20th century saw the development of new theories like Skopos theory that focused on the function of translation and Manipulation theory that viewed translation as manipulation rather than equivalence.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    History of Translation Studies

    Uploaded by

    Rica Capa
    47 views14 pages
    This document outlines the development of translation theory from the early 19th century to the late 20th century through three key sentences: Friedrich Schleiermacher first distinguished between foreignization and domestication in translation in the early 19th century. The Prague School in the 1920s/1960s pioneered a linguistic approach and focused on intralingual, interlingual, and intersemiotic translation. The second half of the 20th century saw the development of new theories like Skopos theory that focused on the function of translation and Manipulation theory that viewed translation as manipulation rather than equivalence.

    Original Title

    History-of-Translation-Studies

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document outlines the development of translation theory from the early 19th century to the late 20th century through three key sentences: Friedrich Schleiermacher first distinguished between foreignization and domestication in translation in the early 19th century. The Prague School in the 1920s/1960s pioneered a linguistic approach and focused on intralingual, interlingual, and intersemiotic translation. The second half of the 20th century saw the development of new theories like Skopos theory that focused on the function of translation and Manipulation theory that viewed translation as manipulation rather than equivalence.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    47 views14 pages

    History of Translation Studies

    Uploaded by

    Rica Capa
    This document outlines the development of translation theory from the early 19th century to the late 20th century through three key sentences: Friedrich Schleiermacher first distinguished between foreignization and domestication in translation in the early 19th century. The Prague School in the 1920s/1960s pioneered a linguistic approach and focused on intralingual, interlingual, and intersemiotic translation. The second half of the 20th century saw the development of new theories like Skopos theory that focused on the function of translation and Manipulation theory that viewed translation as manipulation rather than equivalence.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 14

    August Wilhem Schegel

    Mechanical and Organic Form


    of Translation
    Friedrich Schleiemacher
    Domestication and
    Foreignization Roman Jakobson
    The Prague School
    Walter Benjamin
    Dichotomy of Word and Sense Vinay and Darbelnet
    Determined the Notion of
    Equivalent
    Jiři Levý
    O. Kade, K. Reiss, W. Koller
    The Prague School, Pioneer Leipzig School
    of TS. Eugene Nida
    Language as Part of Culture
    Catford
    Theory based on systematic grammar

    Henry Wadsworth Longfellow


    Translation as an Instrument
    Hans Vermeer
    The Skopos Theory: A
    Lefevere, Bassnet and Toury functional Approach
    Manipulation School
    The idea proposed by August Wilhem Schegel in 1809, which outlines
    the mechanical and organic form of translation enters into conflict.

    Schlegel, one of the masters of the German tradition of translation


    theory according to Lefereve (1977), claimed that all acts of communication
    are acts of translation because decoding and interpreting are always
    necessary (Bassnet McGuire, 1980).

    This dichotomy between translation as a category of thought (the


    translator is seen as a creative genius in his own right) and translation as
    a mechanical function was developed along the 19th century.
    Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768-1834) proposed the creation of a
    separate sub-language for use in translated literature only. He focuses on
    the distinction between translating literature and translating scientific
    language. For him, both types of translations were “mechanical”, but he was
    the first theorist to distinguish between foreignization and domestication
    (Snell-Hornby, 2006).

    The nineteenth-century reader expects to read a translation full of


    linguistic peculiarities which are difficult to read, that is why
    Schleiermacher rather preferred the translations that were faithful to the
    original text (Bassnet-McGuire,
    1980).
    I In the mid-1920s the Prague School was developed. It focused on
    contemporary language. It was founded by Roman Jakobson, who determined
    three ways of “interpreting a verbal sign (interlingual translation,
    intralingual translation and intersemiotic translation)”.

    • Intralingual- Rewording, paraphrasing, or summarizing a text into

    another text within a language

    • Interlingual- Rewriting a text into another text in a different language

    • Intersemiotic- The changing of a written text into a different system of

    sign
    I Walter Benjamin contributed to the problem of Dichotomy of Word and
    Sense which started with Cicero. Benjamin declared that “the interlinear
    version of the Bible is the ideal of all translation” (Snell-Hornby, 1995).

    Benjamin is out to define: “Just as translation is a form of its


    own, so, too, may the task of the translator be regarded as distinct and
    clearly differentiated from the task of the poet” (“The Task” 258).

    More or less all previous theorization of this task has been directed
    towards establishing how the translator best communicates the original’s
    meaning in the receiving language, be it word-for-word or sense-for-sense;
    this is, in Benjamin’s eyes, a futile procedure whose best possible outcome
    is the “inaccurate transmission of an inessential content” (“The Task” 253).
    Vinay and Darbelnet looked at the process of translation. What they
    did was they look at the differences between two languages in order to
    inform their understanding of both of them. Vinay and Darbelnet posited
    that there were seven main processes, or procedures, at work during any
    given translation. One of which is the equivalence which Eugene A. Nida
    made a response to for his two types of equivalence.
    Vinay and Darbelnet explain equivalence as something almost
    inherently cultural, using the example of someone expressing pain. In
    English the term "ouch!" is used, while in French, a literal rendering of
    the sound would be of no use to the reader. Instead, the equivalent of
    "ouch!" in French is "aïe!". Both words would immediately indicate to
    readers that there is some level of pain involved.
    Equivalence also relates to idiomatic expressions, whereby all the
    lexical and grammatical elements are there but translating literally would
    leave a reader confused.
    ř
    During the 1960s, the Prague School tradition was developed again by
    Jiři Levý, who was one of the pioneers of the modern Translation Studies.
    “He divided the translation process into three phases: understanding,
    interpreting and transfer” (Snell-Hornby, 2006).

    • Understanding- translators decode the message contained in the text of the

    •
    original author
    Interpreting- translators reformulate or encode the text into their own

    •
    language
    Transfer- The message contained in the translated text is then decoded by
    the reader of the translation
    They tried to make the study of translation a scientific method. One
    of the two main schools of translation theory in Europe was the Leipzig
    School. It was linguistically oriented and was defined as a sub discipline
    of Applied Linguistics.
    Eugene A. Nida was the major representative of this branch; he was
    the one who defined language as part of the culture and the one who
    developed an approach in relation with anthropology and culture. He also
    made a distinction between two types of equivalence (formal and dynamic) in
    response to the proposal of Jean-Paul Vinay and Jean Darbelnet of
    translating parallel texts in concrete communicative situations.
    Catford developed a translation theory based on the systemic grammar
    concept. His theory was mainly about applying the linguistic approach to
    translation process.
    J. C. Catford published a book ‘A linguistic Theory of Translation’
    in 1965. It deals with the analysis and description of translation process.
    He follows Firthian and Hallidayan linguistic model of translation. For
    him, the theory of translation is a branch of comparative Linguistics since
    it deals with certain type of relation between languages. It is essentially
    a theory of Applied Linguistics.
    Henry Wadsworth Longfellow stated in 1964 that: “The business of the
    translator is to report what the author says, not to explain what he means.

    He was as important as a translator; his translation of Dante became


    a required possession for those who wanted to be a part of high culture. He
    encouraged and supported other translators, as well.

    Longfellow intended the anthology "to bring together, into a compact


    and convenient form, as large an amount as possible of those English
    translations which are scattered through many volumes, and are not
    accessible to the general reader.”
    In 1976, Hans J. Vermeer initiated a new theory, the Skopos Theory.
    It focused on the function of the texts, both the original and the target
    one. The translation is considered to be dependent on the function of the
    original or on the function of the translated text to adapt to the needs of
    the target culture (Snell-Hornby, 2006).

    Vermeer wrote a book with K. Reiss, in which they develop the Skopos
    theory. In this approach, five different types of translating are described:
    the interlinear translation, the grammar translation, the documentary
    translation, the communicative translation and the adapting translation.
    André Lefevere, Susan Bassnet and Gideon Toury were the main
    representatives of Manipulation School which considers Translation Studies
    as a branch of Comparative Literature.

    It focuses on the idea that translation is not based on equivalences


    but in changes seen as manipulations.

    The approach of the “Manipulation School” is based on the concept of


    the literary polysystem. Such a polysystem is not only characterized by
    constant shifts and changes, but also by internal oppositions, including
    those between “primary” and “secondary” models and types (Snell-Hornby,
    2006: 23, 24).

    You might also like