Translation

A brief history of the discipline:

Translation had been an element of

language learning in modern language
courses.

From the late eighteenth century to the

1960s, language learning in secondary
schools in many countires had come to be
dominated by what was known as the
grammar-translation method. (Latin and
Greek)

Translation exercises help students to

learn a new language or reading a foreing
language text.
Funny but saddening
Malaysian version
Indonesian translation
Written translation focuses on words
and sentences.
Oral translation focuses on interpreting or
interpretation.
The definition of translation
Different writers define ’Translation’ in
different ways:
1.the replacement of textual material iby equivalent
textual material in Catford,1969:20).
2.Translation is the reproduction in the receptor’s
language (TL) the closest natural equivalent of the
source language message, yle. (Nida, 1969:12).
3. Translation is made possible by an equivalence of
thought that lies behind its different verbal expressions
(Savory, 1969:13).
4.Translation is a process of finding a TL equivalent for
an SL utterance. (Pinchuck, 1977:38).
5.Translation is the rendering (translation) of SL text
into TL so as to ensure that (1) the surface meaning of
the two will be approximately similar and (2) the
structures of the SL will be preserved as closely as
possible but not so closely that the TL structures will be
seriously distorted (Mc Guire, 1980:7)
The definition

Process of translation is
some steps that should be
done by the translator before
beginning his work on
translation field (Soemarno,
1997:13).
 What is Translation? (1)
a) a process by which a spoken or written utterance
takes place in one language which is intended or
presumed to convey the same meaning as a
previously existing utterance in another language
(Rabin 1958)
b) the transfer of thoughts and ideas from one
language (source) to another (target), whether the
languages are in written or oral form . . . or whether
one or both languages are based on signs (Brislin
1976ª)
 What is Translation (2)
c) a situation-related and function-oriented complex
series of acts for the production of a target text,
intended for addressees in another culture/language,
on the basis of a given source text (Salevsky 1993)
d) Any utterance which is presented or regarded as a
‘translation’ within a culture, on no matter what
grounds (Toury 1995).

(quoted in Pöchhacker, Franz. Introducing Interpreting Studies, 2004: 11-12)

 The 13 statements Newmark (1-7)
• A translation must reproduce the words of the SLT.
• A translation must reproduce the ideas (meaning) of the
SLT.
• A translation should read like an original work.
• A translation should read like a translation.
• A translation should reflect the style of the original.
• A translation should possess the style of the translator.
• A translation should retain the historical stylistic dimension
of the SLT.
 Statements 8-13
• A translation should read as a contemporary piece of
literature.
• A translation may add to or omit from the original.
• A translation may never add to or omit from the original.
• A translation should let the readers of the SLT and the target
language text (TLT) have essentially the same response.
• A translation should convey what the SLT author intends to
convey.
• A translation should satisfy the need of the client.
 A few general distinctions
• Translating v. interpreting
• Source language/text – SL / ST
• Target language/text - TL / TT
• Intralingual v. interlingual v. intersemiotic
translation
• Translation as language learning
 According to Jacobson, translation can
be categorized as follows:

1. Intralingual translation, or “rewording”:

an interpretation of verbal signs by means

of other signs of the same language.

When does it occur ???

When we rephrase an expression or text in

the same language to explain or clarify sth
we have said or written.
2. Interlingual translation, or “translation proper”:

an interpretation of verbal signs by means of

some other language.

It is a traditional translation.
3. Intersemiotic translation, or “transmutation”:

an interpretation of verbal signs by means of

signs of non-verbal sign systems.

When does it occur ???

into music, film or painting.
Translation: key concepts

TRANSLATION

WRITTEN ORAL

Interpreting /
Interpretation
TRANSLATION

Process (translating)

Product (translation)

General subject field

TRANSLATION

The process of transferringa written text

from SL to TL, conducted by a translator,
or translators, in a specific socio-cultural context

The written product, or TT, which results from

that process and which functions
in the socio-cultural context of the TL
.

Cognitive, linguistic, visual, cultural and ideological

phenomena which are an integral part of Translation
as process and product.
 “Translation Studies”
– self-perception
• Many people today think that Translation
Studies is mainly:
– Literary theory
– Cultural studies
• And, possibly:
– Communication studies
– Stylistics & Genre analysis
Dear Sir,

You will not be paid Job Search Allowance

because your wife’s income is higher than the
amount allowed under the income test.

Yours Faithfully,

John Smith
District Manager
Tuan yang terhormat,

Tuan tidak akan dibayar Tunjangan Pencarian Kerja

karena pendapatan isteri Tuan lebih tinggi
dibandingkan jumlah yang dibolehkan menurut Uji
Pendapatan.

Dengan sesungguhnya,

John Smith
Manajer Distrik
Dengan hormat,

Bapak tidak dapat memperoleh Tunjangan Mencari

Kerja karena pendapatan isteri Bapak lebih tinggi
dari jumlah yang diperbolehkan menurut Peraturan
mengenai Pendapatan.

Hormat saya,

John Smith
Manajer Distrik
Roman Jakobson, “On Linguistic Aspects of
Translation”, 1959

TRANSLATION
INTERLINGUAL
INTRALINGUAL
INTERSEMIOTIC
 Translation can be categorized as
follows:

1. Intralingual translation, or “rewording”:

an interpretation of verbal signs by means

of other signs of the same language.

When does it occur ???

When we rephrase an expression or text in

the same language to explain or clarify sth
we have said or written.
2. Interlingual translation, or “translation proper”:

an interpretation of verbal signs by means of

some other language.

It is a traditional translation.
3. Intersemiotic translation, or “transmutation”:

an interpretation of verbal signs by means of

signs of non-verbal sign systems.

When does it occur ???

into music, film or painting.
Examples (2): Intersemiotic
 Roman Jakobson and his essay “On Linguistic Aspects of Translation”

Three ways of interpreting a verbal sign:

it may be translated into other signs of the same
language (intralingual translation), into another
language (interlingual translation),
or into another, nonverbal system of symbols
(intersemiotic translation).
 Theodore Savory’s “The Art of Translation”.

Th. Savory differentiates between four types of translation:

1) perfect translation – translation of purely informative phrases;
2) adequate translation – translation of fiction, where it is the content that
is relevant, not the manner of expression;
3) translation of classical works of literature, where the form is as
important as the content;
4) translation of scientific and technical materials called for by practical
needs.
 John Catford’s “A Linguistic Theory of Translation”.

Catford proposed very broad types of translation in terms of three

criteria:
1. The extent of translation (full translation vs partial translation);
2. The grammatical rank at which the translation equivalence is
established (rank-bound translation vs. unbounded translation);
3. The levels of language involved in translation (total translation
vs. restricted translation).
 Eugene Nida’s theory of “dynamic” or “functional equivalence”.

SOURCE LANGUAGE RECEPTOR LANGUAGE

TEXT TRANSLATION

ANALYSIS RESTRUCTURING

TRANSFER

Nida’s model of the translation process

 Lawrence Venuti and “translator’s invisibility”.

Hence, my project is the elaboration of the theoretical, critical, and

textual means by which translation can be studied and practised as a
focus of difference, instead of the homogeneity that widely
characterizes it today. Once the violence of translation is recognized,
the choices facing the writers and readers of translated texts become
clear—however difficult they are to make.
 Peter Newmark’s contribution to theory of translation.

Newmark works with three propositions:

* the more important the language of a text, the more closely
it should be translated;
* the less important the language of a text the less closely it
needs to be translated;
* the better written a text, the more closely it should be
translated, whatever its degree of importance
 TT – perspective from
Linguistics
• Linguists perceive it as related to:
– Contrastive linguistics
– Pragmatics
– Discourse Analysis
– Stylistics
• Once dismissed as useless to TT– all of
these areas have been re-animated by
corpora linguistics
 TT – perspective from
Information Technoclogy
• IT specialists are increasingly fascinated by
human language and:
– Machine assisted translation
– Machine Translation
– Knowledge Engineering
– Information Retrieval
– Artificial Intelligence
TT - the professional perspective
• Translator training
• Interpreter training
• Translation aids
• Translation criticism
• Translation quality
• Translation policy
• Professional translation standards
 Translation theories
• Most TT is:
– Product-orientated – focuses the translation
– Function-orientated – examines the context and
purpose of the translation
– Process-orientated – analyses the psychology of
translation and process
• But usually has elements of all three
 Partial theories of translation
• Medium restricted – man or machine?
• Area restricted – specific languages/cultures
• Rank-restricted – word/sentence/text
• Text-type restricted –different genres
• Time-restricted – historical view
• Problem-restricted – specific problems, e.g
equivalence
1.Medium-restricted theories subdivide according to
translation by machine and humans.
2.Area-restricted theories are restricted to specific
languages or groups of languages and cultures.
3.Rank- restricted theories are linguistic theories that
have been restricted to a specific level of the word or
sentence.
4.Text- type restricted theories look at specific
discourse types. e.g. Literary, business, and technical
translation.
5.Time- restricted theories are self-explanatory. These
theories and translations are limited according to specific
time periods.
6.Problem- restricted theories can refer to specific
problems.
 Problems
• Position of Translation Studies in academia
• Split between theory and practice
• Translation teachers' fear of theory
• Researchers still encouraged to focus on
literature
• Therefore teacher/researcher faced with
dilemma
 Early distinctions
• People have been arguing for centuries about
– literal v. free v. faithful translation
– word-for-word v. sense-for-sense
• For example:
• Cicero, St Jerome, St Augustine, Martin Luther,
Étienne Dolet, Alexander Tytler, Johann
Wolfgang von Goethe, Friedrich Schleiermacher,
Wilhelm von Humboldt, Arthur Schopenhauer
• See Robinson (1997/2002)
 Bible translation
• Bassnett (1991: 45-50) - "The history of Bible
translation is accordingly a history of western
culture in microcosm".
– St. Jerome's translation into Latin in 384 A.D.
– John Wycliffe (1330-84)and the 'Lollards'
– William Tyndale (1494-1536) – burnt at stake
– Martin Luther – New Testament 1522, Old Testament
1534
• Try Biblegateway:
http://www.biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible
 The Qur’an
• See University of Southern California:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/
• Warning: "Note that any translation of the Qur'an
immediately ceases to be the literal word of Allah,
and hence cannot be equated with the Qur'an in its
original Arabic form. In fact, each of the
translations on this site is actually an
interpretation which has been translated."
 Science in Translation
a historical view
• Scott L. Montgomery. 2000. Science in
Translation. Movements of Knowledge through
Cultures and Time. University of Chicago Press.
• Describes how scientific texts have been
translated, ‘adapted’, ‘revised’ and added to
down the centuries e.g.
– Western Astronomy
– Greek and Arabic Science
– Japanese Science
 Further reading
• HERMANS, Theo & Ubaldo Stecconi.
2002. 'Translators as Hostages to
History'.
• From the European Commission’s 'Theory
meets Practice' Seminars – at:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/translation/theory
/lectures/2001_01_18_history.pdf
 ‘Linguistic’
theories of translation
• Language Universals v. Linguistic Relativism
• Science of translation
• Equivalence
• Semantic and communicative translation
• Korrespondenz and Äquivalenz
• Translation ‘shifts’
• Discourse and register analysis
 Language Universals v.
Linguistic Relativism
• Language Universals – presuppose that
languages and/or our capacity for language
are universal and/or innate
– long history leading to Chomsky and beyond
• Language Relativism – different languages
show us different ways of viewing the
world
– Sapir-Whorf theory and most translation theory
 Science of translation
• Nida (1964)
– Linguistic meaning
– Referential or denotative meaning
– Emotive or connotative meaning
– Hierarchical structuring
– Componential analysis
– Semantic structure analysis
– Formal and dynamic equivalence
– Applications to Bible translation
 Chomsky and TT
From Nida & Taber (1969:33)
SL: Man is a thinking animal

The structural analysis of SL

Man=noun, Is=aux,A=article
Thinking=pre.participle,
Animal=Noun

lexically/literally : thinking animal=hewan yang

berpikir.

Transferring from SL to TL:

Manusia adalah hewan yang berpikir.

Restructuring TL:
Manusia adalah makhluk yang berpikir.
 Equivalence
• Roman Jacobson (1959/2000) > “Equivalence in
difference is the cardinal problem of language and
the pivotal concern of linguistics’

• Discusses equivalence at level of obligatory

grammar and lexicon, for example:
– gender
– aspect
– semantic fields
 Equivalence at word level
Baker (1992) – Chapter 2
• Morphology – lexical and syntactic
• Lexical Meaning
• Propositional v. Expressive meaning
• Presupposed meaning
• Evoked meaning
– dialect – geographical, temporal, social
– Register – field/tenor/mode of discourse

• Semantic fields and lexical sets

 Equivalence above word level
Baker (1992) – Chapter 3

• Collocation
– Collocational range and markedness
– Collocation and register
– Collocational meaning
• Idioms and Fixed Expressions
 Grammatical equivalence
Baker (1992) – Chapter 4
• Grammatical vs. Lexical categories
• The Diversity of Grammatical Categories:
– Number
– Gender
– Person
– Tense and Aspect
– Voice
– Word Order
 Newmark (1981)
• Semantic / communicative translation at level of:
– Transmitter/addressee focus
– Culture
– Time and origin
– Relation to ST
– Use of form of SL
– Form of TL
– Appropriateness
– Criterion for evaluation
 Koller (1976/89)
Korrespondenz and Äquivalenz
• Denotative equivalence
• Connotative equivalence
• Text-normative equivalence
• Pragmatic equivalence
• Formal equivalence
Vinay & Darbelnet (1977/2000)
Translation ‘shifts’
– Direct translation:
• Borrowing
• Calque
• Literal translation
– Oblique translation
• Transposition
• Modulation
• Equivalence
• Adaptation
– Function at the level of the lexicon, syntax and message
 Translation ‘shifts’
Catford (1965/2000)
1. level shifts
2. category shifts:
• structural
• class
• unit or rank
• intra-system

Van Leuven-Zwart (1989/90)

– 8 categories and 37 sub-categories!
 Linguistic theories and
translation
• Most of these theories are considered
‘linguistic’ and are useful for teaching
translation
• Most translation occurs at the linguistic
level at some stage of the process
• However, too much stress on linguistic
levels can have negative effect at the text
level
 Halliday
Functional-Systemic linguistics
 Textual equivalence
Baker (1992) Chapter 5
• Thematic and Information Structures
– Theme and Rheme
– Sentence analysis – S Od Oi Cs Co Cp Adj
Conj Disj
• Information Structure: Given and New
• Word Order and Communicative Function
 Textual equivalence
Baker (1992) Chapter 6
• Cohesion
– Reference
– Substitution and Ellipsis
– Conjunction
– Lexical Cohesion
Translation Quality Assessment
House (1997)
Focus on the function of the text
• Baker (1992) Chapter 7 - Pragmatic
equivalence
• Reiss (1970s) – Functional approach
• Holz-Mäntarri (1984) – Translational action
• Vermeer (1970s) and Reiss & Vermeer
(1984) – ‘Skopos’ theory
• Nord (1988/91) – Text Analysis in
Translation
 Pragmatic equivalence
Baker (1992) Chapter 7
• Coherence
• Presupposition
• Implicature
– Grice's maxims of
• Quantity
• Quality
• Relevance
• Manner
– Politeness
 Reiss (1970s)
Functional approach
• Classification of texts as:
– 'informative‘
– 'expressive‘
– 'operative‘
– 'audiomedial'
Reiss (1971)
Text types
Reiss > Chesterman (1989)
Text types and varieties
 Holz-Mäntarri (1984)
Translational action
• A communicative process involving:
– The initiator
– The commissioner
– The ST producer
– The TT producer
– The TT user
– The TT receiver
 Reiss & Vermeer (1984) –
‘Skopos’ theory
• Focuses purpose or skopos of translation
• Rules
1. A TT is determined by its skopos
2. A TT is message in a target culture/TL
concerning a message in a source culture/SL
3. A TT is not clearly reversible
4. A TT must be internally coherent
5. A TT must be coherent with the ST
 Nord (1988/91)
Text Analysis
Functional approach
1. The importance of the translation
commission
2. The role of ST analysis
3. The functional hierarchy of translation
problems
 Polysystem Theory
Focus - social and cultural norms
• Even-Zohar (1978/2000)
• Toury (1995)
• Chesterman (1997)
• Lambert, Van Gorp, Hermans and the
Manipulation school (1985 & 1999)
 Even-Zohar (1978/2000)
• Even-Zohar considers translated literature to
include:
– children's literature
– thrillers
– other popular works of fiction,
– (auto-)biography
• CONSIDER: informative writing of all kinds –
e.g. travel, art and sport, journalism, university
textbooks.
 Toury (1995) Descriptive
Translation Studies
• Important point in Translation Studies
• It encouraged the description of all kinds of
translation and provided a wide basis on which to
conduct research.
• The tertium comparationis = attempt to postulate
'neutral translation' v. culturally and socially
'loaded' real translations
• BUT proved unsatisfactory and abandoned
 Toury’s norms
• initial norm
– ST norms = adequate translation
– TT norms = acceptable translation
• preliminary norms
– translation policy – selection of texts
– directness of translation – is ST an original?
• operational norms
– matricial norms or completeness of the TT
– textual-linguistic norms.
 Toury’s ‘laws’
• The law of growing standardization -
suggests that the TT standards override
those of the original text. This will happen
when the TL culture is more powerful.
• The law of interference - suggests that the
ST interferes in the TT by default. This will
happen when the SL culture is more
powerful.
 Chesterman’s norms (1997)
• Expectancy norms – expectations of readers
– Allow evaluative judgements
– Validated by a norm-authority
• Professional norms
– Accountability norm – ethical norm
– Communication norm – social norm
– ‘Relation’ norm – linguistic norm (between SL
and TL)
 Polysystem theory and the
NON Literary text
• Even-Zohar, Toury, Chesteman, and others
see ST and TT as part of a much wider
social and cultural context
• Although they may consider literary text
primary, their theories and suggestions are
applicable to all texts
 Cultural Studies
• Bassnett & Lefevere (1991) dismissed
‘linguistic theories’ as having ‘moved from
word to text as a unit, but not beyond’ and
talked of ‘painstaking comparisons between
orginals and translations’ which do not
consider the text in its cultural environment.
(Munday, 2001: 127)
 Lefevere (1992)
Power and patronage
• Professionals within the literary system
• Patronage outside the literary system
– The ideological component
– The economic component
– The status component
• The dominant poetics
– Literary devices
– The concept of the role of literature
 Examples
• Edward Fitzgerald's 'improvement' of work
by Omar Khayyam
• An 18th century translator's ‘improvement’
of Camões' Os Lusiadas
• Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland -
'softened' for children
• Censorship of ‘bad’ language
• Can you think of examples?
 Simon (1996)
Translation and Gender
• ‘Masculine language of translation theorists
• Overt attempts to promote a feminist stance
through translation practice
• Contribution women have made by translating
works of literature over the centuries
• Relationship of women and culture as seen through
translation
– the translator is 'self-effacing'
– creates a 'new' work with a feminine point of view
• Link between feminist and postcolonial studies
 Postcolonial Translation Theory
• Spivak (1993/2000) and Niranjana (1992)
• Cultural implications - translating between:
– Colonized and colonizing
– Politically powerful and weaker languages and
cultures
• Power relations
• Translational and transnational factors
 Example
• Spivak (2000) translates out of Bengali into
English
• Try to imagine how an educated bi-lingual
(English/Bengali) woman with international
feminist connections might try to translate poetry
by Mahasweta Devi – a poet in an Indian village.
• http://www.emory.edu/ENGLISH/Bahri/Contents.
html#Authors
 Other Situations
• Brazilian cannibalism (1960-1999)
– Colonized devours colonizer and is enriched
• Cronin (1996)
– The Irish language and English imperialism
over the centuries
 Cultural Studies ETC
• My suggestion - surf the Internet with:
– cultural studies
– communication studies
– comparative literature
– literary studies
– translation studies
 Cultural Studies and
the NON Literary text
• Cultural Studies theorists:
– Rarely refer to NON Literary text
– Then tend to claim any ‘interesting’ text as
‘literary’!
• YET Cultural Studies should – by its very
nature – go beyond literature – or at least
Literature.
 Reaction against
TL orientated texts

• What can be done to avoid too much

standardization?
• How can one avoid social or cultural bias?
• How can one truly represent the original?
 Antoine Berman (1984)
‘the Experience of the Foreign’
• Berman’s ‘negative analytic’ of translation
focuses the following:
– Rationalization
– Clarification
– Expansion
– Ennoblement
– Qualitative impoverishment
– Quantitative impoverishment
 Antoine Berman (1984)
‘the Experience of the Foreign’
– The destruction of rhythms
– The destruction of underlying networks of
signification
– The destruction of linguistic patternings
– The destruction of vernacular networks or their
exoticization
– The destruction of expressions and idioms
– The effacement of the superimposition of
languages
 Venuti (1995)
The Translator’s Invisibility
• Criticizes those, like Toury, who aim to produce
value-free norms and laws of translation.
• Interpretes Lefevere's notions of patronage and its
influence in the context of Anglo-American
publishing
• Uses 'Invisibility' to describe the translator's
situation and activity in contemporary Anglo-
American culture
 QUESTIONS
• Can the Translator be ‘Invisible’?
• Should the Translator be ‘Invisible’?
• If, so – when? Give examples
• Can the Translator be ‘invisible’ and
creative?
• If, so – when? Give examples
 Pride, Prejudice ......
and Power
• Consider:
• How literary translators’ describe their
work – Pride
• How reviewers and the public receive
translations - Prejudice
• The publishing industry and the effect of
globalization – Power
 Philosophy and translation
• Philosophers often find translation
fascinating - a few examples:
• Walter Benjamin (1923/2000)
• Ezra Pound (1929/2000)
• Steiner (1975/92/98)
• Derrida & Deconstruction (1960 >)
 Walter Benjamin (1923/2000)
• Benjamin's metaphor - liberation of the original
text through translation.
• Believed in interlinear translation > reveals the
original in all its complexity
• TL is 'powerfully affected by the foreign tongue‘
• An extreme example of foreignization
• Believed this would allow 'pure language' to
emerge from the harmonization of the two
languages.
 Ezra Pound (1929/2000) – and
his followers
• Ezra Pound influenced much literary translation
• Idea that one does not need to know the SL well –
it is enough to feel the ‘spirit’
• Belief in archaizing and foreignizing to effect
• Led to ‘literary translation workshops’ -
inspiration
• Leads to very good translation – OR pretentious
and impenetrable texts!
 Steiner (1975/92/98)
Beyond Babel
• Hermeneutic motion
1. Initiative trust
2. Aggression
3. Incorporation
4. Compensation
• Imbalance between ST and TT
• Resistant difference of the text
• Elective affinity of the translator
 Derrida & Deconstruction
(1960 >)
• Objective of Derrida - and Deconstruction - to
demonstrate the instability of language in general and
the relationship between signified and signifier in
particular.
• 'Deconstruction' can and has been used to
'deconstruct' much more than 'traditional literature‘ .
E.g.
– Political discourse
– Philosophy
– Psychology & Sociology
– Science
 Philosophy
and the NON Literary text
• At first sight, these theories would seem to
be furthest from the NON Literary text
• BUT – consider implications for:
– Knowledge engineering
– Ontologies
– Semantic frameworks
– Descriptive terminology
 Interdisciplinary
Translation Studies
• In practice - Literary translation is confined
to Modern Languages departments
• NON Literary translation is essentially
interdisciplinary in:
– Use of language
– Use of text
– Use of technology
• Snell Hornby (1995) - Text types
 Technology and Translation
• Desktop Publishing
• Translation memories
• Terminology databases
• Translator’s Workbench
• Machine translation
• Information resources
 Other aspects
• Bert Esselink –Localizaton
• Yves Gambier –MultMedia Translation,
Conference Interpreting, Translation in Context
• Daniel Gouadec –Terminology and Translator
Training
• Don Kiraly- A Social Constructivist Approach to
Translator Education – Empowerment from
Theory to Practice.
 Bibliography
• BAKER, M. (ed) 1977. The Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. Part II: History and
Traditions. London and New York: Routledge.
• BAKER, M. (ed) 1977. The Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation.
• BASSNETT, Susan. 1991. Translation Studies. Revised Edition. London and New York: Routledge.
• TR. BASSNETT, S & A. Lefevere (eds.) 1990. Translation, History and Culture, London and New York:
Pinter.
• TR. BASSNETT, S & H. Trivedi (eds.) 1999. Post-Colonial Translation: Theory and Practics, London and
New York: Longman.
• BENJAMIN; W. 1923/2000 The task of the Translator, translated bz H. Zohn (1969) in L. Venuti(ed.)
2000, pp. 15-25.
• BERMAN, A. 1985/2000. Translation and the Trials of the foreign, in L. Venuti(ed.) 2000, pp. 284-97.
• CAMPOS, H. de. 1992. Metalinguagem e outras metas: Ensaios de teoria e crítica literária, S. Paulo:
Perspectiva.
• CATFORD, J.C. (1965) A Linguistic Theory of Translation, London: Academic Press.
• CHESTERMAN, Andrew. 1997. Memes of Translation. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Pub.
Co.

•
CHESTERMAN, A. 1989. Readings in Translation Theory. Helsinki: Finn Lectura.
• CRONIN, M. 1996. Translating Ireland: Translation, Languages and Culture, Cork: Cork University
Press.
• DERRIDA, J. 1985. 'Des tours de Babel', in J.F. Graham (ed.) pp. 209-48.
• ESSELINK, B. 2000. A Practical Guide to Localization. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins

Pub. Co.
• EVEN-ZOHAR, I. 1978/2000. 'The position of translated literature within the literary polysystem',
in in L. Venuti(ed.) 2000, pp. 192-7.
• FAWCETT, P 1995. Translation and Language: Linguistics Approaches Explained, Manchester: St.
Jerome.
• GENTZLER, Edwin. 2001. Contemporary Translation Theories. 2nd Edition. Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters Ltd.
• GRAHAM, J.F.(ed) 1985. Difference in Translation, Ithaca, NY: Cornell UniversityPress.
• HALLIDAY, M.A.K. 1978. Language as Social Semiotic, London and New York: Arnold.
• HATIM, Basil. 1997. Communication across Cultures - Translation Theory and Contrastive Text
Linguistics. Exeter: University of Exeter Press.
• HATIM, Basil & MASON, Ian. (1990) Discourse and the Translator. Harlow: Longman.
• HERMANS, T. (ed.) 1985. The Manipulation of Literature: Studies in Literary Translation,
Beckenham: Croom Helm.
• HERMANS, T. 1999. Translation in Systems, Manchester: St.Jerome.
• HOLMES, James S. (1988) Translated! Amsterdam : Editions Rodopi.
• HOLZ-MÄNTARRI; J. 1984. 'Translatorisches Handeln - theoretsche fundierte Berufsprofile' in M.
Snell-Hornby (ed.) Übersertzungwissenschaft: Eine neuorienterung, Tübingen: Franke, pp 348-74.
• HOUSE, J. 1997. Translation Quality: A Model Revisited, Tubingen: Gunter Narr.
• JAKOBSON; R. 1959/2000. 'On linguistic aspects of translation', in L. Venuti(ed.) 2000, pp.113-18.
• KIRALY, Don. 2000. A Social Constructivist Approach to Translator Education – Empowerment
from Theory to Practice. Manchester/ Northampton: St. Jerome Publishing.
• KOLLER, W. 1979. 'equivalence in translation theory', in A. Chesterman (ed.) pp. 99-104.
• LAMBERT, J-R. & H. van GORP 19865. 'On describing translation`', in T. Hermans (ed.) 1985, pp
42-53.
• LEFEVERE, André. (1992) Translation / History / Culture - a sourcebook. London and New York.
Routledge.
• LEFEVERE, André. (1992) Translation, Rewriting & the Manipulation of Literary Fame. London
and New York. Routledge.
• Leuven- Zwart, Kitty & Ton Naajikens 1991 (eds.) Translation Studies: the State of the Art.
Amsterdam/Atlanta: Rodopi.
• MUNDAY, Jeremy. 2001. Introducing Translation Studies – Theories and Applications. London
and New York: Routledge.
• NEWMARK, Peter. (1988) A Textbook of Translation. New York. Prentice-Hall.
• NIDA, E. 1964. Towards a Science of Translating, Leiden: E.J. Brill.
• NIDA, Eugene A. & TABER, Charles R. (1969) The Theory and Practice of Translation, Leiden:
E.J.Brill.
• NIRANJANA; T. 1992. Siting Translation: History, Post-Structuralism, and the Colonial Context,
Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
• NORD, Christiane. 1997, Translating as a Purposeful Activity. Manchester: St. Jerome Pub.Co.
• PYM, A. 1998. Method in Translation History, Manchester: St. Jerome Pub.Co.
• REISS, Katharina. 2000. Translation Criticism – The Potentials & Limitations. Manchester: St.
Jerome Pub.Co.
• REISS, K. 1977/89 'Text types and translation assessment' in A. Chesterman (ed) pp 160-71.
• REISS, K. & H.J. Vermeer 1984 Grundleging einer allgemeinen Translationstheorie, Tübingen:
Niemeyer.
• ROBINSON, Douglas. 1997. Becoming a Translator: An Accelerated Course. London and New York:
Routledge.
• ROBINSON, Douglas. 1997/2002. Western Translation Theory - from Herodotus to Nietzsche.
Manchester/Northampton: St. Jerome Publishing.
• SCHULTE, Rainer & BIGUENET, John. (Eds.) (1992) Theories of Translation - An Anthology of
Essays from Dryden to Derrida. Chicago and Longon : Univ. of Chicago Press.
• SNELL-HORNBY, Mary. (1988) Translation Studies - An Integrated Approach. Amsterdam/
Philadelphia. John Benjamins.
• SIMON, S. 1996 Gender in Translation: Cultural Identity and the Politics of Transmission, Londond and
New York: Routledge.
• SPIVAK, G. 1993/2000 'The Politics of translation', in L. Venuti(ed.) 2000, pp. 397-416.
• STEINER, George. 1992 After Babel. (New Edition). Oxford University Press.
• TOURY, Gideon. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies - and Beyond. Amsterdam : John Benjamin Pub.
Co.
• VENUTI, Lawrence. (1995) The Translator's Invisibility. London and New York : Routledge.
• VENUTI, L. 1998. The Scandals of Translation, Towards an Ethics of Difference, London & New York:

Routledge.
• VENUTI, Lawrence. (Ed.) 2000. The Translation Studies Reader. London and New York: Routledge.
• VINAY J.P. & DARBELNET, J (1958) Stylistique Comparée do Français et de L'Ánglais, Paris: Didier.

A classic text which compares English and French language structures.

 Useful sites:
• International Federation of Translators (FIT):
http://www.fit-ift.org/
• European Society for Translation Studies (EST):
http://www.est-translationstudies.org/ (very good
resources section) (watch video of A.Pym)
• American Translation Association (ATA)
http://www.atanet.org/
• Institute for Translators and Interpreters (ITI)
http://www.iti.org.uk/indexMain.html
 Useful sites (contd):

 Rodopi (publishing comp)

http://www.rodopi.nl/
 Routledge publishing company
http://www.routledge.com
 Multilingual matters
http://www.multilingual-matters.com/
 The Translator Interpreter Hall of Fame
http://www.tihof.org/tihof.htm

And many more, which you should add to your list

as you find them while navigating on the net
 Links
• Anthony Pym’s homepage http://www.fut.es/~apym/
• The virtual symposium "INNOVATION IN
TRANSLATOR AND INTERPRETER TRAINING
(ITIT) " at - http://www.fut.es/~apym/tti.htm.
• Post-Colonial Studies at Emory Web site
http://www.emory.edu/ENGLISH/Bahri/Contents.html#Au
thors
• Biblegateway:
• http://www.biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible
• University of Southern California:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/