


































Studia grazie alle numerose risorse presenti su Docsity
Guadagna punti aiutando altri studenti oppure acquistali con un piano Premium
Prepara i tuoi esami
Studia grazie alle numerose risorse presenti su Docsity
Prepara i tuoi esami con i documenti condivisi da studenti come te su Docsity
Trova i documenti specifici per gli esami della tua università
Preparati con lezioni e prove svolte basate sui programmi universitari!
Rispondi a reali domande d’esame e scopri la tua preparazione
Riassumi i tuoi documenti, fagli domande, convertili in quiz e mappe concettuali
Studia con prove svolte, tesine e consigli utili
Togliti ogni dubbio leggendo le risposte alle domande fatte da altri studenti come te
Esplora i documenti più scaricati per gli argomenti di studio più popolari
Ottieni i punti per scaricare
Guadagna punti aiutando altri studenti oppure acquistali con un piano Premium
Riassunto completo manuale Introducing translation studies: Theories and Applications By Jeremy Munday per esame Lingua e Traduzione Inglese 3 (CdL L12) e Lingua e Traduzione Inglese 2 CdL L11).
Tipologia: Appunti
1 / 42
Questa pagina non è visibile nell’anteprima
Non perderti parti importanti!



































The term translation had been first attested in 1340 and derived from the Latin translation (‘transporting’). Nowadays, the term has assumed several meanings:
transforming a written text from one language to another which generally requires a significant degree of resemblance or correspondence to the source text. Based on this new definition, a fourth component is added to the three core elements of translation: a significant degree of resemblance or correspondence between the ST and the TT, so that the TT can be considered a translation, even though it's extremely difficult to define it. A perfect equivalence between two texts is rarely reached; languages differ significantly and linguistic structures, at the different linguistic levels (semantic, syntactic, pragmatic) considerably vary cross- linguistically, which makes perfect equivalence an idealistic notion. Due to its complexity, equivalence involves different layers of meaning , as different types of equivalence can characterize the relationship between a ST and a TT e.g., meaning (semantic equivalence), effect (pragmatic equivalence), or function (functional equivalence). A translation may aim for equivalence at one particular level while sacrificing equivalence at other levels. About the notion of equivalence:
Translatability then is a potential that characterizes the original text, and the translation develops that potential by interpreting it into language adding or enhancing something in the context. About the etymology of the term ‘translation’:
of unconnected and artificially constructed sentences as examples of the rules using also mechanical learning, by memorization, of grammatical rules and structures of foreign languages. The translation was so considered a ‘secondary’ status of translation, as a simple exercise in language teaching and learning. In the 1960s and 1970s, it was developed a (new) ‘communicative’ approach to language teaching and learning. It promotes ‘authentic’ language-learning conditions in the classroom, some ‘real’ communicative situations, and encourages the use of the foreign language (vs student’s native language). This approach changed the role of translation in educational contexts ; it’s no longer used as an activity in language learning at school, but it’s still used in higher-level and university language courses in comparative literature due to activity based on the reading and the comparison of literary works in translation. In those same years, translation also became the research subject of Contrastive Linguistics (CL). CL is the study of two languages in contrast to identifying general and specific differences between them. In contrastive research, translation involves the use of parallel texts to compare phenomena in two languages. CL also influenced the more linguistic perspectives on translation and contributed to the development of linguistic-based models in TS; it led to a more systematic and linguistic-oriented study of translation and a key terminology for contrastive description across language pairs (e.g., Stylystique compare du français et de d’anglais, 1958, Vinay and darbelnet). The formal recognition of translation as a scientific field also dates back to the 1960s, becoming more prominent in four ways:
The Applied branch instead, concerns applications to the practice of translation and it’s divided into:
c. Mode. d. Field.
The ‘literal’ vs ‘free’ debate The literal and free debate on the studying of translation has involved translators and scholars for over 2,000 years, starting with roman authors in the I century BC (e.g., in the West, the distinction between ‘word-for-word or literal' and ‘sense-for-sense' or `free' translation goes back to Cicero and St Jerome). The debate has strongly influenced the theories about translation emerging in the second half of the 20th century and given the importance of Classica's authors of ancient Greece and Rome, it formed the basis of key writings on translation for nearly two thousand years. The Roman rhetorician and politician Cicero (106-43 BC) outlined his approach to the translation of Greek orators' speeches in De Optimo Genere oratorum (46 BC), affirming so his approach in favor of nonliteral translation. A similar critical position towards word-for-word translation was associated with Roman poet Horace ; in a short passage from his Ars Poetica (20 BC): he underlines the goal of producing an aesthetically pleasing and creative poetic text in the TL. The attitude of these two Roman authors had a great influence on the following centuries. St. Jerome (347-420 AD), the most famous of all Western translators, cites the authority of Cicero's approach to justifying his Latin revision and translation of the Christian Bible (later known as the Latin Vulgate) in the 4th century. He revised and corrected earlier Latin translations of the Greek New Testament but, for the Old Testament, he decided to return to the original Hebrew (not Greek). His decision was rather controversial at that time, even because the Greek translation of the Old Testament from original Hebrew, the "Septuagint”, was already in use among Christians and was widely regarded as the Bible's first major translation in Western culture. Influenced by Roman authors Jerome described his translation approach in De Optimo Genere interpretandi (395) responding to public criticism of incorrect' translation. Jerome’s statement is regarded as the first and clearest expression of the literal and free poles in Western translation theory. Thus, like Cicero and Horace, Jerome rejected and criticized the word-for-word approach, and his statement is regarded as the first claim-making distinction between different text types (e.g., a letter vs the Bible: sense-for-sense approach vs a literal method that paid closer attention to the words, syntax, and ideas of the original). Regarding Chinese Translation of Buddhist Sutras from Sanskrit, it can be divided into three phases:
In 17th^ century in England, apart from the Bible, translation into English was almost exclusively confined to verse renderings of Greek and Latin classics but, as to conceptualization and meaning assigned to translating was valued as an exercise in creativity and novelty so some translations started to be extremely free. A supporter of this approach was the English poet and essayist Abraham Cowley (1618-1667). In his preface to Pindaric Odes (1640), he attacks poetry that is “converted faithfully and word for word into French or Italian prose” implying though a loss of beauty in translation. To avoid this lack of beauty, he proposed the term ‘imitation’ to support a very free method of translating based on the imitation and the reproduction of the ‘spirit’ of the ST. A different but very influential impact on translation theory and practice was provided by the English poet and translator John Dryden (1631-1700). In the preface to his translation of Ovid’s Epistles (1680), he developed a translation into three categories:
1. Metaphrase: “word by word and line by line” translation (corresponds to literal translation). Extremely **criticized by the author.
more ST-author-oriented, for Tytler a good translation had to be TL-reader-oriented, as he suggested in his three general laws:
Jakobson's work focused on the analysis of meaning and equivalence by focusing on differences in the structure and vocabulary or terminology of languages, not on the abstract (in)ability of one language to render a message into another verbal language. Any language can express the semantic meaning of a word or structure without a necessary one-to-one correspondence between words or structures. Translatability thus becomes a question of the degree of:
**1. Semantic similarity.
Thanks to a new ‘scientific’ approach to the analysis of the meaning(s) of words in translation, influenced by semantics, he deviated from the old idea of meaning to adopt a functionalist perspective. This led to a new functional definition of meaning:
"Approaches to Translation" (1981) and "A Textbook of Translation" (1988), which presented two new concepts and terms:
c. Whole - part. d. Part - another part. e. Negation of opposite. f. Active – passive. g. Rethinking of intervals and limits in space and time. h. Change of symbol.
TL as the given. It links categories in two linguistic systems, it is a linguistic system-based concept and links a particular SL-TL pair.