March 2008
(The
short notes and comments associated with the items presented here are personal
attempts to contribute useful information. In some cases, I have reproduced
partly an abstract or presentation provided by the author or publisher. In others,
the comments were made by me after reading the items. I acknowledge the
subjective nature of my comments, take responsibility for errors and will
gladly insert corrections at the request of authors. D. Gile)
MONOGRAPHS
- Griesel, Yvonne.
2000. Translation im Theater. Die
mündliche und schriftliche Übertragung französischprachiger Inszenierungen ins
Deutsche. Frankfurts am Main, Berlin, Bern, Bruxelles, New York, Wien:
Peter Lang.
- Griesel, Yvonne.
2007. Die Inszenierung als Translat.
Möglichkeiten und Grenzen des Theaterübertitelung.
* Two interesting books which discuss specific features of theatre
translation.
ARTICLES
Target
19:2(2007) Special issue on the metalanguage of
translation, edited by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer
Gambier, Yves & Luc van Doorslaer.
2007. How about meta? An introduction. Target
19:2. 189-195.
* This
introduction starts with a quote, the last sentences of Holmes’s ‘The name and nature
of Translation Studies’: “Translation Studies has reached a stage where it is
time to examine the subject itself. Let the meta-discussion
begin”, which are taken as an invitation to discuss not Translation, but
Translation Studies. Such an invitation is certainly a good starting
point for a discussion of the metalanguage of translation, but it would been
nice if the editors had at least mentioned the intensive work that is being
devoted by various scholars (and by EST!) to meta-discussion of Translation
Studies in terms of research paradigms. It is also somewhat strange that in
their introduction, the editors talk about the need to challenge the Eurocentric
bias of TS “by exploring the diversity of non-Western discourses on and
practices of translation” as if such exploration had not started a long time
ago (a special issue of Meta on Translation in Japan was edited in 1988 and
Lefevere discussed Chinese traditions in the 1990s, to give just these two
examples) and as if there was not an increasing number of publications in TS
from non-European countries, in particular China, India, Japan and Korea. By
using such language, the editors actually exclude non-European TS from TS.
Perhaps they could have invited Western scholars to explore more
extensively non-Western discourses on and practices of translation? These are
minor complaints, though, and the special issue is an interesting one.
Hebenstreit, Gernot. 2007. Defining patterns
in Translation Studies. Revisiting two
classics of German Translationwissenschaft. Target
19:2.197-215.
* An
analysis of definitions in two seminal publications in the history of German
TS, the classic Zufall und Gesetzmässigkeit in der Übersetzung by Otto Kade
(1968), which, in the author’s views, marks the starting point of German TS,
and Grundlegung einer allgemeinen Translationstheorie by Hans Vermeer and
Katharina Reiss (1984), which marks the functionalist turn.
Van Doorslaer, Luc. 2007.
Risking conceptual maps. Mapping as a keywords-related tool
underlying the online Translation Studies Bibliography. Target
19:2. 217-233.
* The
author explains the use of Holmes’s map and related concepts in the
construction of the TSB.
Van Vaerenbergh,
Leona. 2007. Polysemy and synonymy. Their management in
Translation Studies dictionaries and in translator training. A case study. Target 19:2. 235-254.
* A
discussion with a case study focusing on the polysemic term coherence
and on four synonymous pairs of concepts and terms: documentary/instrumental
translation, overt/covert translation, interlingual interpretive
/interlingual descriptive communication, direct/indirect
translation.
Marco, Josep. 2007.
The terminology of translation. Epistemology, conceptual and intercultural
problems and their social
consequences. Target 19:2. 255-269.
* A
discussion of the lack of terminological standards in TS and its reasons
(basically the same as in many other fields).
Pym, Anthony. 2007.
Natural and directional equivalence in theories of translation. Target
19:2. 271-294.
* An
interesting discussion around the concept of equivalence in TS and some
misunderstandings associated with the term in the TS community.
Laiho, Leena.
* A
discussion of the translatability of a literary work of art.
Snell-Hornby, Mary. 2007.
“What’s in a name?” On metalinguistic confusion in
Translation Studies. Target 19:2. 313-325.
* An
interesting critical discussion of terminology in TS and of various options open to scholars who need/want to introduce a new technical
term. The author also explains why she considers that the use of English as a
lingua franca may actually increase metalinguistic problems instead of reducing
them.
Pokorn, Nike.
* The author focuses critically on the use of the concepts native
speaker and mother tongue and discusses them against the background
of the directionality issue.
Mazur, Iwona. 2007.
The metalanguage of localization. Theory and practice.
Target 19:2. 337-357.
* An
introduction to the metalanguage of localization and proposals in view of
improving its consistency.
Tang, Jun. 2007. The metalanguage of translation. A Chinese
perspective. Target 19:2. 359-374.
* After
a brief historical overview of the development of writing about translation in
Gambier,
Yves. 2007. Translation terminology and its offshoots. Target
19:2. 375-382.
* A
report on the process by which translations of Delisle, Lee-Jahnke and
Cormier’s 1999 Translation Terminology into different languages were
prepared by 5 different editors.