Translation Theory Spring Semester

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
Translation Theory - Spring Semester
Modern Languages and Translation (Cardiff University)
StuDocu is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university

Downloaded by Gladdys Joi Gamat (shanequitong@gmail.com)
lOMoARcPSD|9261378
Lecture Seminar
Autumn Semester
Week 1 Introduction (Carlos) 
History 1 (Dr Silvia Clamor –
Visiting Lecturer)
Week 2 (Carlos) History 2
Week 3 (Carlos) History 3
Week 4 (Christie) The Linguistic Turn 1 History  
(Hannah)
Week 5 (Christie) The Linguistic Turn 2
Week 6 Reading Week (no class)
Week 7 (Christie) The Linguistic Turn 3 The Linguistic Turn
(Hannah)
Week 8 (Kate) The Functionalists 1
Week 10 (Christie) Essay Writing Class The Functionalists
(Hannah)
Spring Semester
Week 2 (Christie) The Cultural Turn 1
Week 3 (Christie) The Cultural Turn 2
Week 4 (Dr Beate The Cultural Turn 3 The Cultural Turn
(Hannah)
Herling- Visiting
Lecturer)
Week 5 Reading Week (no class)
Week 6 (Christie) The Cultural Turn 4 Guest
teacher
Week 7 (tbc) Translation and Society 1
Week 9 (tbc) Translation and Society 3 Translation and Society
(Hannah)
Week 11 (Christie) Revision and Exam Exam Techniques
Techniques (DG) (Hannah)

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
THE FUNCTIONALISM I Introduction :
In the history of translation studies, the quality of a translation rested on it “equivalence”

or “faithfulness” to the source text as the most important criteria to judge whether the
translation is successful or not. However, the late 1970s and early 1980s saw a move
away from the Linguistic Turn and gave way to the emerging a functionalist and
communicative approach to the analysis of translation.
What is the Functionalism ?
Functionalist translators introduce a new way of looking at translation, which is no longer

limited by conventional source-text oriented views. They act against the linguistic turn by
not looking at micro structures within the text but by looking at the whole text and discuss
the importance of translating the function or the purpose of the text. According to them,
each text has a purpose and aim to have a certain impact on its reader, thus, translating
that purpose is as important as to translating the language.
However functionalists are not an homogeneous group, linked by central ideas they have
different interpretations of them.
The functionalists we are going to study:
• Reiss who underlined the importance of focusing on the type of the text.
• Vermeer that asked us to consider the purpose/function of the text.
• House that asked us to consider its register.
• And Gutt that asks us to think about the relationship between translator and the
recipient of the translation – the reader or the listener for whom it is produced.
Conclusion first sentence : Functionalists don’t want to give the reader abstract philosophy
but they present practical advices to translators on how to produce a successful
translation and make them think beyond the language.

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
THE FUNCTIONALISM I KATHARINA REISS
Born in 1923. German Linguist and Translation Scholar.
Key works:
- Reiss, K. (1971 I 2000) Translation Criticism: Potential and Limitations, translated by
E. Rhodes, Manchester: St Jerome and American Bible Society.
- Reiss, K (1981 I 2004) ‘Type, kind and individuality of text: decision making in
translation’, translated by S. Kitron in L. Venuti (ed.), The Translation Studies Reader,
London: Routledge.
• Reiss who underlined the importance of focusing on the type of the text.
Core believes:
According to Katharina Reiss’s work in the 1970s communication is not achieve at the
level of the word or sentence but at the level of text and this is where equivalence must
be look for.
Her functional approach aims initially at systematising the assessment of translations

and identifies three text types:
1. Informative: a text of ‘plain communication of facts’: information, knowledge, opinions…
… example: information booklet.
2. Expressive: a text of creative composition, literally or artistic, seeking to move the reader
…………… ?example: novels, poetry.
3. Operative: a text with the aim to persuade the reader or ‘receiver’ of it, in order to act in
………………a certain way.
example: political manifesto, advertisements.
Therefore, Katerina Reiss believes that one the type of text has been identify, it tigger the
strategy and style the translator will use.
1 - The TT of an informative text should transmit the full referential or conceptual
==content of the ST. The translation should be in ‘plain prose’, without redundancy and
==with the use of explicitation when required.
2 - The TT of an expressive text should transmit the aesthetic and artistic form of the ST.
…..The translation should use the ‘identifying’ method, with the translator adopting the
…..point of view of the ST author.

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
3 - The TT of an operative text should produce the desired response in the TT

___receiver. The translation should employ the ‘adaptive’ method - creating an
___equivalent effect.
Reiss’s work is important because it moves translation theory beyond a consideration of
lower linguistic levels, the mere words on the page, beyond even the effect they create,
towards a consideration of the communicative purpose of translation.
However, over the years there have been a number of criticisms:
- Firstly, why there should only be three types of language function. And the diagram of
Chesterman representing a triangle with at each of its extremity one of the three text
types of Reiss and between these poles hybrid type show it well. For example, a
biography is between the informative and expressive types, since it provides information
about the subject while also partly performing the expressive function of a piece of
literature.
- Secondly whether the text types are fix ? If a speech is given for the 2017’s election in
France, back then its function was operative with the aim to persuade people to vote for
someone. However, if the French read the text today, it is an informative text, they can’t
vote anymore. Texts function can change over time but can also change over nations. An
catalan political speech given in Catalonia is operative but if the speech is given in
Britain the type is informative. Then text types are useful but have limitations.
- There are also criticisms on how the proposed translation methods by Reiss are applied
in the case of a specific text. For instance business and financial texts in English contain
a lot of metaphors. Some of these have a fixed translation but the more complex do not.
The translation of these texts into English requires more than just attention to the
informative value of the ST, since such a method could create an English TT lacking in
the expressive function of language. Thus, the ‘plain-prose’ method for the informative
text can be questioned.

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
To conclude:
Katerina Reiss says text types are like a Venn diagram, they overlap and the translator
have to pick the predominant text type of the source text and keep the others in mind.
Reiss says that translation is adequate if it meet the needs of a target audience, thus by
following her theory we will produce a successful translation.
However, the translation method employed depends on far more than just text type. The
translator’s own role and purpose, as well as sociocultural pressures, that also affect the
kind of translation strategy that is adopted.

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
THE FUNCTIONALISM I HANS VERMEER
Hans Vermeer and Katharina Reiss worked together and had the same functionalism
believes.
Core beliefs:
In the late 1970s and early 1980s, the german scholar brought forward a translation
theory called "Skopos theory » (meaning ‘aim’ or ‘purpose’) in a book co-authored with
Katharina Reiss.
Vermeer believes that translation is not only about the language you are translating.
- His Skopos theory focuses on the purpose of the translation, which determines the
translation methods and strategies to adopt in order to produce a functionally adequate
result. This result is the target text, which Vermeer calls the translatum.
- Therefore, in skopos theory, knowing why a source text is to be translated and what the
function of the target text will be, are crucial for the translator because it will shape its
translation.
Moreover, Vermeer elaborated a list of rules ranked by importance to help us to produce

a successful translation.
- A translation is determined by its skopos/purpose.
- A target text does not initiate an offer of information in a clearly reversible way -
which means that a translated text does not have to be symmetrical to its source
text.
- A target text must be internally coherent.
- A target text must be coherent with the source text.
Thus, according to Vermeer, a translation successful if the target text fulfils the skopos
outlined by the commission and is functionally and communicatively adequate.
Vermeer recognises that the function of the target text will not necessarily be the same
as the one of the source text. And then allow for the possibility of plurality in translation.
- The text must cater to the receiving audience, be coherent for it, in its own context.
- Therefore, the context has to be implicitly recognised. The same text can be translated
in different ways according to the purpose of the TT and the commission which is given
to the translator.
- Translation is therefore not absolute and will be different according to the culture and
the aura it is intended for.

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
The Reception of Vermeer’s theory is mixed:
Vermeer’s theories bring an important practical element to what is often a highly

personal and innately financial/commercial undertaking. His work is valuable for its focus
on the process and action of translating.
However, critics suggested that Vermeer’s theories are valid only for non-literary texts.
Literary texts are either deemed to have no specific purpose or to be far more complex in
stylistic terms.
Terminologies used by Vermeer were also criticised = « skopos », « translatum », were

judged too complex as the role of a functionalism is to be clear, clean and practical.
His theories can be dangerous for the ST text - he gives to the translator a lot of
freedom to do almost what they wants so where are the limits ?
By focusing on the purpose of the translation and how it will be gather by the target
audience, people accused him of ‘de-throning’ the original text. However, accusing him
of ‘de-throning’ the ST is over stating the case, he does not get ride of the original text
he balances it with the needs of the audience.
Conclusion:
Vermeer’s theorie was controversial but influential. Translation theories over the
ages have privileged the source text and required the translator to make it as visible and as
present as possible in a variety of ways.
However, according to Vermeer the faithfulness of the source text does not work because
there are many ingredients to take into account in order to produce a good translation.
The more important for a translation is to be internally coherent than it is for a translation
to be coherent with its original.

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
THE FUNCTIONALISM I JULIANE HOUSE:
Juliane House considers that approaches oriented towards the target audience are
‘fundamentally misguided’ because they move to fare form the source text. Nevertheless,
she is a functionalist and believes that attention needs to be pay to the text and the
audience, but she looks back on some ideas of the linguistic turn.
Core beliefs:
According to her, translations have to be done with a comparative ST and TT analysis

which assess the quality of the translation and highlight mismatches or errors. She
suggests a systematic comparison of textual ‘profile’ of the ST and the TT as well as a
particular a focus on the analysis of the register.
By register, she means « incorporating » a variety of elements such as:

Field: the subject matter, social action and language of the text.
Tenor: the time, space and society from which the author writes/speaks as well as his or
………her personal point of view.
Mode: the medium of the text (is it spoken or written etc) and the nature of the
…:::::::relationship between the addresser and the addressee (is the piece a monologue,
…:::::::…:::::::…:::::::…:::::::…:::::::…:::::::…:::::::…:::::::…:::::::…:::a dialogue etc?)
House establishes a precise model for translation, advocating the following stages:
1 – produce a profile of the ST register
2 – produce a description of the ST genre.
3 – produce a statement of function – what is the information being conveyed, how and
____why?
4 – produce all of the above for the TT.
5 – compare the two and create a list of ‘mismatches or errors’ – assess the nature of
____ these errors.
6 – produce a statement of the quality of the translation
7 – categorise the translation – it is either an overt or covert translation.
For House there are therefore 2 ways to translate either by producing:

Overt translation : a translation which admits that it is a translation.
Covert translation: a translation which appears to be an original text - does not present
itself has a translation.

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
The Functionalist trend to produce covert translation because they want to meet our
needs.
The impact of House’s approach/criticisms:
By giving a list, she is very practical. And allow the translator to assist his own
translation.
Critics question though whether a text’s function can be assessed just by analysing its
register according to House’s model.
Critics also question the possibility of identifying ‘mismatches’ as errors in places. While
differences between texts may be errors, they may also be caused by necessary
translation strategies such as explication or compensation.
Moreover, House focuses on translation frameworks which are English-Language

orientated. Her work works well in a British context not all of her theories travel well
because not all languages fit this model either within Europe or beyond.
Languages and culture are not symmetrical thus there will always a gap between a
translation and its source text.
Conclusion:
House is a Functionalist but look back on some ideas of the linguistic turn by
doesn’t over-privilege the translation and works between the needs of the audience and
the content of the source. In her point of view when a translation is produced, the
language is translated as well as the culture, they aren’t independent. Therefore the ST has
to be kept in mind and the TT has to meet the needs of the target audience.

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
THE FUNCTIONALISM I ERNST-AUGUST GUTT
INTRODUCTION : Gutt is the most extreme functionalist. According to him, when we translate
we need to focus on the target audience. Therefore, the translator has to know for whom
he is translating the text for in order to produce a successful translation because
translations are only successful if the readers can understand it.
Gutt believes that there is no universal translation and that translations are relative to
the audience and change depending on who the target audience is.
The theory of Gutt is call the « relevance theory ». It is the idea that translation must be
relevant to its target audience and must be accommodated to its culture.
Gutts explains that after the translator has evaluated the audience for which he is
translating he can decide how to translate and how much the translated text should
resemble the source text.
Moreover, the translator needs to give to the reader communicative clues in order for
the target audience to understand and engage easily with the translation.
Thus, a translation will only be successful if the translator meets the expectations and
requirements of the audience for which he is translating.
For example: the New Testament’s translation into Guarani had to be re-written because
the Guarani felt that the idiomatic translation was too different, in form, to the
Portuguese version which was seen as high-prestige.
However, Gutt argues that we need to distinguish between translations where the
translator is free to elaborate or summarise and those where he has to stick to the
explicit contents of the original.
There is therefore two types of translation according to Gutt:

INDIRECT TRANSLATIONS: are translations that involve whatever changes the translator
deems necessary in order to maximise their relevance to the target audience.
DIRECT TRANSLATIONS: on the other hand, are translation closely tied to the original.
They are guided by a notion of faithfulness, the translator designs a direct translation in
such a way that it resembles the original.

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
Strengths and weaknesses of Gutt’s theory:
If on one side Gutt theory is easy to understand but he doesn’t really give the translator
a way to asses the success of a translation. He always translates by focusing on the
needs of his target audience but how does the translator know what the target audience
want ?
Moreover the importance given to the audience is one of his ideas that were
controversial. There has to be a place for the source text and the amount of power he
gives to the translator is debated because the translator has clearly the ability to rewrite
the text. He/she can move as far away as he/she wants from the source text and
therefore move a lot from the original text by becoming the « co-author of the text. This
bends the boundaries between source text and translator which means instead of the
translator conveying someone text he is actually creating his own text.
He takes away the idea that there is an absolute perfect translation for which the
translator should strive and underline the idea that translation is subjective and wiles
produced. Thus, there is many types of translation as there is different types of target
audience, that allows a translation plurality - idea shared with Vermeer.
Conclusion :
Gutt rejects translation models such as House’s register analysis, that are based on a
consideration of how source text and translated text relate to each other, because they
exclude the target audience. He believes that a translation must be concerned only by
the target audience by communicate with it so it can understand and engage with the text.
Gutt offers an easily understandable theory but with some lacks. He don’t give a way to
asses the success of a translation and blow the boundaries between source text and
translator, instead of the translator conveying someone text he is actually creating his own
text by having the freedom to choose what and how to translate the source text.

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
THE CULTURAL TURN I INTRODUCTION:
Name of the theorist/theory is part of the cultural turn which is a movement in

Translation Studies that gained recognition in the early nineties and is primarily
associated with the work of Susan Bassnett, André Lefevere and, later, Lawrence Venuti.
The central contention of the cultural approach in Translation Studies is that the
linguistic approach and the notion of equivalence are not sufficient to comprehend the
complexities of the translation process. Theorists of the cultural turn go beyond
languages and focus on the interaction between translation and culture, on the way in
which culture has an impact on the translation.
According to Cristina Marinetti, ‘For Bassnett and Lefevere, translation is primarily

contextual. It is a fact of history and a product of the target culture, and as such it
cannot be explained through the mapping of linguistic correspondence between
languages, or judged with respect to universal standards of quality and accuracy.
Such method of study expanded the scope of translation studies enormously and
opened a new field of study, this it enhanced a further and more comprehensive
development of translation studies.
Core notions at the heart of the cultural turn:
Translation cannot be approached as a solely linguistic exercise because:

No two languages are ever sufficient similar to be considered as representing the same
social reality. The worlds in which different societies live are distinct worlds, not merely
the same world with different labels attached (Edward Sapir).
- On se tutoie, d’accord?
- Let’s use “thou” to each other, shall we?
Language is ever-changing and culturally different within one country:

- Father was exceedingly fatigued subsequent to his extensive peregrination
- Dad was very tired after his lengthy journey
- The old man was bloody knackered after his long trip.
- Standard / Hibernian English
- A: How long are yous here?

- B: Oh, we’re staying till next week. 
(silence of about two seconds)
- C: We’ve been here since Tuesday.
- A Ah we,,, yous are here a while then.

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
No language can exist unless it is steeped in the context of culture; and no culture can
exist which does not have at its center, the structure of natural language (Jurí Lotman)
THE CULTURAL TURN I SUSAN BASSNETT:
● S. Bassnett, A.Lefevere, Constructing Cultures. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters

1998.
● Translators have always provided a vital link enabling cultures to interact.

● The next stage is not just to study translations but to study cultural interaction.
Language is the heart within the body of culture [...] In the same way that the surgeon,
operating on the heart, cannot neglect the body that surrounds it, so the translator treats
the text in isolation from the culture at his peril (Susan Bassnett)
The translator is both influenced by his/her culture and creates it.
ANDRE LEFEVERE
• S. Bassnett, A.Lefevere, Constructing Cultures. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters

1998.
• A.Lefevere,Translation, Rewriting & the Manipulation of Literary Fame, New York
and London: Routledge 1992.
In his later work on translation and culture André Lefevere in many way represents a
bridging point to the « cultural turn ». For Lefevere (and Bassnett), translation is primarily
contextual. It is a fact of history and a product of the target culture, therefore it cannot be
explained through the mapping of linguistic correspondence between languages, or judged
with respect to universal standards of quality and accuracy.
Core beliefs/key questions:
Why are certain texts rewritten/translated and not others?
How are the techniques of translating used in the service of a given agenda?
Rewriters and translators are the people who really construct cultures on the basic level in
our day and age. It is as simple, and as momumental as that. And because it is so simple
and yet so monumental, it is also transparent: it tends to be overlooked.
Translation is not a neutral and harmless tool

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
Translation is never produced in a vacuum

Translation is never received in a vacuum.
• S. Bassnett, A.Lefevere, Constructing Cultures. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters 1998.

• A.Lefevere,Translation, Rewriting & the Manipulation of Literary Fame, New York and
London: Routledge 1992.
‘It is my intention that the process resulting in the acceptance or rejection, canonization or
non canonization of literary works is dominated not by vague, but by very concrete factors
that are relatively easy to discern as soon as one decides to look for them [...] and begins
to address issues such as power, ideology, institution, and manipulation (2).’
Translation as rewriting:
‘Rewriters have always been with us, from the Greek slave who put together anthologies of
the Greek classics to teach the children of his Roman masters to [...] the twentieth century
translator trying to “bring the original across” cultures’ (2).
Rewriting is responsible for the reception and survival of texts among the general public.
Rewriting manipulates and it is effective.
• Edward Fitzgerald, the Victorian translator (‘rewriter’) of the Persian poet Omar
Khayyam.
• Fitzgerald thinks Persians inferior to their Victorian counterpart, he can take
liberties and ‘rewrite’ to bring them closer to the ‘acceptable’ standards.
• Unimaginable with Homer, Virgil etc.
• ‘It is an amusement for me to take what Liberties I like with these Persians, who (as
I think) are not Poets enough to frighten one from such excursions, and who really
do want a little Art to shape them’.
Lefevere identifies three types of influence on the translation process

1. Professionals within the literary system
2. Patronage outside the literary system
3. The dominant poetics
Patrons
Influential individuals (Elizabeth I in Shakespeare’s England, Hitler in 1930’s Germany, the
Medici Family in Florence in the Italian Renaissance, Mussolini in 1930’s Italy, etc.)
Publishers, the media, political parties, etc.
Institutions (national academies, academic journals, schools and universities, etc.)
Dominant Poetics
Literary devices (genres, styles, themes and motifs, etc.)

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
The concept of the role of literature in the social system
‘Institutions enforce [...] the dominant poetics of a period by using it as the yardstick
against which current production is measured. Accordingly, certain works of literature will
be elevated to the level of ‘classics’ within a relatively short time after publications, while
others are rejected, some to reach the exalted position of a classic later, when the
dominant poetics has changed’ (129)
Translation makes a series of different Anne Franks. A young Dutch Jewish girl victim of the
Holocaust (1929-45)
The diary appeared in German translation in 1950. The translation altered the image of
Germany and its people and omitted or toned down derogatory remarks about them.
• D -‘er bestaat geen groter vijandschap op de wereld dan Duitsers en Joden [there is
no greater enmity than between Germans and Jews]
• G - Eine grőssere Feindschaft als zwischen diesen Deutschen und den Juden gibt es
nicht auf der Welt. [ there is no greater enmity in the world than between these
Germans and the Jews] . Transl. Annelise Schűtz
‘A book you want to sell in Germany... Should not contain any insults directed at
Germans’ (A. Schűtz)

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
THE CULTURAL TURN I LAWRENCE VENUTI:
• American translator working in universities.

• He is a man.
Introduction:
Venuti insists that the scope of translation studies needs to be broadened to take
account of the value-driven nature of the sociocultural framework.
OR
The Translator’s invisibility draws on Venuti’s own work experience as a translator
of experimental it alien poetry and fiction. Invisibility is a term he uses ‘to describe the
translator ’s situation and activity in contemporary British and American cultures.
In this essay we will review:

• The position and involvement of the translator and others criteria involved in the
translation process.
• Focuses on the influential work of Lawrence Venuti, notably the ‘invisibility’ of

translation and the ‘domesticating’ and ‘foreignizing’ translation strategies which he
believes are available to the translator.
——————————————————————————————————————
Key theories:
For Venuti translation is not just a linguistic act, it is always tangled up, whether it wants
to be or not, with national, cultural and personal ideologies thus, the ways that we
translate is shape by the nation, the culture and the language within which we translate.
Consequently there is different national and cultural trend in translation around the
world.
He cited ’Norms may be in the first instance linguistic or literary, but they will also
include a diverse range of domestic values, beliefs and social representations which
carry ideological force in serving the interests of specific groups. And they are always
housed in the social institutions where translations are produced and enlisted in
cultural and political agendas’ (Venuti, 1998: 29)

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
Translators are part of those very systems of patronage described by Lefevere. They
contribute with their own practice to consolidating the norms of translation behaviour
that they themselves follow.
The Translator’s Choice:
Venuti suggests that translators have a choice, they can decide whether to follow
established norms of behaviour (and help consolidate them) or reject them and translate
in ways that challenge those very norms. Therefore Venuti wanted to make translators
visible but also aware of the power of their choices.
Venuti and the invisibility of the translator:

Venuti sees this invisibility as typically being produced:
By the way translators themselves tend to translate ‘fluently’ into English, to produce an
idiomatic and ‘readable’ TT, thus creating an ‘illusion of transparency’ 
— By the way the translated texts are typically read in the target culture:  
A translated text, whether prose or poetry, fiction or non-fiction, is judged

acceptable by most publishers, reviewers and readers when it reads fluently, when
the absence of any linguistic or stylistic peculiarities makes it seem transparent,
giving the appearance that it reflects the foreign writer’s personality or intention or
the essential meaning of the foreign text – the appearance, in other words, that the
translation is not in fact a translation, but the ‘original’.  
(Venuti 1995: 1)  
And Venuti sees the most important factor for this as being ‘the prevailing conception of
authorship’.
Domestication vs foreignization:
The American translator discusses invisibility by presenting two types of translating

strategy that were borrowed ideas from Schleiermacher: domestication and
foreignization. These strategies concern both the choice of text to translate and the
translation method.
✓Domestication : designates the type of translation in which domestic equivalences in

the target culture are found to produce a transparent and fluent style to minimise the
strangeness of the foreign text for target language readers.
— Venuti describes the Anglo-American translation market as characterized by a

domestication of foreign texts. Because publishers and readers consider acceptable only
translations that ‘read like original texts’ and ‘conceal their foreigness’ behind a veneer
of naturalness.
— He argues that such domesticating approach has ideological foundations

(appropriation of foreign culture for American consumption) and that it has been

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
detrimental to the recognition of translation in society and to the status of translators.

In other words, he says that by domesticating the translator deny its existence and make
itself invisible by producing a translation that feel like a source text.
✓ In the other hand foreignization: is a target text which deliberately breaks target
conventions by retaining something of the foreignness of the original, it allows the
foreign culture to be foreign in the translation. ………………….
…………………. …………………. …………………. ………………….
— Schleiermacher and Venuti preferred foreignization to domestication.
And to counteract the domestication trend Venuti suggests that translators should resist
the appropriation of foreign culture by rejecting domestication and naturalness as a
canon for translation. Translators should foreignize, make strange, let the foreignness of
the original text shine through the translation. Because foreignizing makes readers
aware that what they are reading is not an original, but a mediated and manipulated
text. Moreover in order to reinforce translator’s visibly Venuti suggests that the
translator can provide his work with footnotes and do interviews.
——> Venuti wants to to move the reader toward the writer (foreignization) and not take
………the writer to the reader (domestication).
Another translator agains the domestication trend is William Morris a translator of the 19
century. He translated Icelandic sagas but didn’t speak Icelandic. He asked an Icelandic
friend for a brief translation the he will over write it because he believed that content
doesn’t mater but the field do and that all he had to do was to make the text feel old and
archaic.
Conclusion:
Cultural turn think back and look at the translator, think about its culture and how it
shaped it and will shape its translation. Venuti believe that it is dangerous for the
translator to be invisible because even if a translation translate the source text it also
translate the translator’s culture.
Even if Venuti advocates foreignizing translation, he is also aware of some of its
contradictions and how it can be a subjective and relative term that still involves some
domestication as it translates a source text for a target culture and depends on dominant
target culture values to become visible when it departs from them. What does not change,
however, is that domestication and foreignization deal with ‘the question of how much a
translation assimilates a foreign text to the translating language and culture, and how
much it rather signals the differences of that text’. This is a question which had already
attracted the attention of the noted French theorist, the late Antoine Berman.

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
THE CULTURAL TURN I SHERRY SIMON
• Canadian scholar Sherry Simon

• Gender in Translation: Cultural Identity and the Politics of Transmission.
Introduction:
Feminisms are one of those framework theories that have contributed powerfully to
all areas of society, including Translation Studies. The most evident outcome of this
interplay is the emergence, in 1980, of a Feminist Translation school in Canada, which
placed gender in the spotlight.
Sherry Simon is a Canadian scholar that approaches translation from a gender-studies
angle. She sees a language of sexism in translation studies, with its images of dominance,
fidelity, faithfulness and betrayal.
——————————————————————————————————————
Simon ideas piggy-back into those of Venuti.
Venuti says that the translator is invisible in society. Therefore Simon said that if according
to Venuti a the translator is invisible therefore, a female translator in doubly invisible
because of her gender. She uses Vent ideas and put them in a feminist way.
——————————————————————————————————————
Key ideas:
Among all the translators of the cultural turn Simon agrees that culture shape
translation BUT she ALSO believes that translators use translation to shape culture.
—> Simon asks us to think about what we mean when we say that culture matters. She
asks us to think about what culture is?
According to her we have to go back and find what do we mean by culture. And as
reported by the Canadian translator culture is never neutral or unproblematic, it is never
simply ‘the environment of the target text’.
Therefore, she questions the uniformity and monolithically of the culture. She considers
that culture is plural and multiple in the same way that identity is plural and multiple and
it interfaces with issues of gender, race, ethnicity, sexuality.
And that talking about culture as unproblematic always exclude different voices,
minorities. Thus, she asks translators to unpick and analyse culture.

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
—> Simon says that we need to think about the relationship between translation and
women:
She believes that you can’t talk about translation and culture without talking about
gender. Her biggest point is the invisibility of the translator borrowed from the Venuti.
However, she takes Venuti vision and interpret it in a feminist way by believing that if
translators are invisible therefore women translators are doubly invisible because of
there gender.
Simon states that ‘feminist scholars draw a parallel between the role of translation (and
translators) and the role of women’. In the same way that women have historically been
weaker figures, subordinated to men, so translations are subordinated to originals (and
translators to authors).
Typical is the seventeenth-century image of les belles infidèles, translations into French
that were artistically beautiful but unfaithful (Mounin 1955), or George Steiner’s male-
oriented image of translation as penetration in After Babel (see Chapter 10). The
feminist theorists see a parallel between the status of translation, which is often
considered to be derivative and inferior to original writing, and that of women, so often
repressed in society and literature. This is the core of feminist translation theory, which
seeks to ‘identify and critique the tangle of concepts which relegates both women and
translation to the bottom of the social and literary ladder’
Simon highlights the sexist language of translation studies with its images of dominance,
fidelity, betrayal and penetration.
And suggests that female translators should reject these models and emphasize their
female identity and feminist ideology in translation and make translation political. In
order to change society and improve women position or minority position within the
society which as a very controversial idea.
—> Simon proposes her own solutions to what she sees as the innately gendered or
political nature of translation culture:
• Using the pronoun she when referring to God in translations of the Bible.
• Using the bold ‘e’ in the word one to emphasize the feminine.
• Capitalization of M in HuMan Rights to show the implicit sexism.
• Using the neologism auther (as opposed to author) to highlight the feminine.

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
Simon argues that grammatical gender is in fact ideological:
‘While grammarians have insisted on gender-marking in language as purely

conventional, feminist theoreticians follow Jakobson in re-investing gender
markers with meaning. The meaning which they wish to manifest is both poetic
and, especially, ideological. They wish to show in what ways gender differences
serve as the unquestioned foundations of our cultural life.’ (Simon, 1996:19)
Strength and weakness:
Conclusion:
To conclude, the interest of cultural studies in translation inevitably took translation

studies away from purely linguistic analysis and brought it into contact with other
disciplines. And one of them is is the treatment of linguistic markers of gender discussed
by Simon. Who focused on feminist translation issues such as gender in the representation
of translation, the visible translator and the “translation-effect”. The solutions she
proposed were controversial and had a slight impact on the cultural turn. However, she is
going back and try to pock our idea of what culture is. Break up our vision of culture and
asset it a little bit in order to produce a translation without excluding groups and engage
with the target in a political way.

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
INTRODUCTION I EVEN-ZOHAR :
One of the most influential theories on translation in the 20th century was Even Zohar's
Polysystem theory.
The position of translations:
Society and culture can be seen as a polysystem, a group of systems, and translation can be
seen as one way in which a polysystem gets inputs from external systems.
Therefore, the Israeli scholar believes that TRANSLATION OPERATES AS A SYSTEM:

(1) in the way the TL selects works for translation. 
(2) in the way translation norms, behaviour and policies are influenced by other co-systems.
And considers TRANSLATIONS TO BE PART OF THE POLYSYSTEM OF LITERATURE. And that their POSITION IN
IT WOULD VARY, depending on the NATURE OF THE SYSTEM it belongs to.
TRANSLATIONS MAY OCCUPY A PRIMARY OR A SECONDARY POSITION IN THE POLYSYSTEM:

If a translation assumes a primary position, ‘it participates actively in shaping the centre of the
polysystem’.
On the other hand, if it assumes a secondary position then it represents a peripheral system
within the polysystem and has no major influence over the central system.
Even-Zohar points out that THE AMOUNT OF TRANSLATION DEPENDS ON THE POLYSYSTEM’S ‘STRENGTH’
AND STATUS:
The ‘stronger’ the polysystem is, the more self-sufficient it is. And thus, translates fewer foreign
texts.
Conversely, the ‘weaker’ the polysystem is, the more it relies on translations.
Moreover, Zohar believes that THE NORMS FOR TRANSLATING TEXTS DEPEND ALSO ON THE POLYSYSTEM’S
‘STRENGTH’ AND STATUS:
If the translation occupies a peripheral position, translations are a source of innovation for the
polysystem and are done in a source-oriented way so foreign norms are imported.
If the translation occupies a central position and is ‘strong’ in terms of domestic cultural
production, it doesn’t need translated foreign products as sources of innovation. Therefore,
translators will tend to use existing target-culture models for the target text. The attempt will be
to fit into an already existing pattern.
For example, commercial American manga translations tend to use target-oriented norms by;
flipping/adapting the reading direction, translation of sound effects… And thus tend to produce a
type of manga that are similar to superhero comics.
HOWEVER, THERE IS AN INTERESTING TWIST, fan translations of Japanese manga into English started
to flourish as the fans were not pleased with the translations and wanted to see more of the

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
Japanese culture in mangas. They started doing their own translations, often choosing source-
oriented norms. For example, they would leave the right-to-left reading direction, borrow
Japanese honorific, keep culturally specific Japanese terms, etc. They would also offer extensive
and often quite informal footnotes.
Advantages and Disadvantages of the Theory:
(+)
- Even-Zohar’s is a pioneer in conceiving translations as a system, he describes and explain his
theory, rather than prescribing.
- The Israeli scholar sees translations in a broader cultural context and shows that translation can
be influential in the target culture.
- And acknowledge that translation exchanges do not happen on a level playing field
(-)
However, over the years there have been a number of criticisms:
- His theory may be ill-equipped to reflect the complexities of today’s world (nation/ language/
publishing system/online communities/ professional vs non-professional translation/ etc.).
- Moreover, not enough attention is given to power relationships between societies and cultures:
abstract terms such as ‘strong’ and ‘weak polysystems’ may obscure historical and political
injustice.
- If one language is lower down the social hierarchy, does that mean that the language is inferior?
For instance, Hindi does not have the power and prestige of English in India. Most of the
translation works in India are from Hindi into English. If we go with Even-Zohar's theory, this
would mean that Hindi is an inferior language and culture.
Conclusion:
Even-Zohar believed that the selection of texts for translation are determined by the conditions
existing in the target language polysystem. This in turn would determine the translation’s position
in the polysystem and the way the texts will be translated.
However, fan translation nicely complicates Even-Zohar’s ideas, showing that different translation
trends may co-exist. It also demonstrates that ‘polysystems’ are not uniform but internally
complex.

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
Translation and society - Lecture 4
INTRODUCTION I POSTCOLONIALISM:
Postcolonial approaches can be used to look at translation between societies, much like
Even-Zohar’s polysystem theory. However, while polysystem theory discussed ‘strong’ or ‘weak’
systems in abstract terms, postcolonial analyses look at actual historical and political reasons for
inequalities between societies. More specifically, they denounce colonial subjugation and
exploitation as a major factor leading to a cultural, as well as political and economic weakness of
one society vis à vis another.
‘The East’ was represented in the West as other and inferior and that helped to justify
colonialism
European colonizers often justified their government by representing (portraying) native peoples
as incapable of self-government: as irrational, barbaric, dishonest, lazy, childish, promiscuous,
exotic etc.
This stereotyping view of the East, or Orient, by the West was named ‘Orientalism’ and was
criticized as distorted and discriminative by Edward Said in the late 1970s.
Translation was instrumental to constructing such negative representations
Language and translation have also been used by the ex-colonized to challenge colonial
domination and to speak for themselves.
Brazil can be seen as a former colony of Portugal and as a ‘New World’ country, which has been
historically seen as inferior to the ‘Old World’, or Europe, and has been strongly influenced by
European culture. In the 20th c., Brazilian intellectuals, writers and translators decided it was time
to stop feeling inferior to European culture and to champion Brazilian culture in order to aid the
process of mental and cultural decolonization.
They decided that one way to promote their culture at the expense of the European tradition was
through translations of European classics.: it was suggested that Brazilian Portuguese translations
from Western literature should be very free and appropriating, even though traditionally they may
have been quite close due to the prestige of European letters. This new trend of violating or
‘devouring’ the European originals was named ‘cannibalistic’ translation.

lOMoARcPSD|9261378

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
Strengths and weaknesses of Functionalist Theory.
Functionalist translators introduce a new way of looking at translation, which is no

longer limited by conventional source-text oriented views. They act against the linguistic
turn by not looking at micro structures within the text but by looking at the whole text and
discuss the importance of translating the function or the purpose of the text. According to
them, each text has a purpose and aim to have a certain impact on its reader, thus,
translating that purpose is as important as to translating the language.
Apart from functionalist theorists having different ideas, functionalist theories have
strengths and weaknesses.
We will compare the strengths and weaknesses of functionalist theories by making

reference to:
• Katarina Reiss who underlined the importance of focusing on the type of the text.
• HansVermeer that asked us to consider the purpose/function of the text.
• And Gutt who asks us to think about the relationship between translator and the
recipient of the translation.
A strengths of functionalist theories is that, functionalist don’t want to give the reader
abstract philosophy, they present practical advices to translators on how to produce a
successful translation. For instance the theories for Katarina Reiss and Vermeer are easy
to understand and allowed the translator to produce de successful translation by for
instance providing a list a rules ranked by order of importance for Vermeer.
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
However, the theory of Gutt is easy to understand, however, he doesn’t really give the
translator a way to asses the success of a translation. He always translates by focusing
on the needs of his target audience but how does the translator know what the target
audience want ?
A weaknesses of functionalist theory is that theorists such as Gutt and Vermeer gives to
the translator a lot of freedom. The translator has clearly the ability to rewrite the text.
He can move as far away as he wants from the source text and some how become the «
co-author » of the text. For instance in Vermeer’s list of rule ranked by importance, the
coherence of the text with its source text is last.
Another weaknesses of functionalist theory is that sometimes the theories can be very
restrictive and precise. For instance Reiss believe that there is only 3 type of language
functions. And the diagram of Chesterman representing a triangle with at each of its

lOMoARcPSD|9261378
extremity one of the three text types of Reiss and between these poles hybrid type show
well her error. For example, a biography is between the informative and expressive types,
since it provides information about the subject while also partly performing the
expressive function of a piece of literature.
She also believe that text types are fix. However, texts function can change over time but
can also change over nations.
Moreover, functionalists theorists advocate the importance of the purpose in translation.

Always translation according to the aim of the text can be difficult. For instance, literary
texts are either deemed to have no specific purpose or to be far more complex in stylistic
terms.
Terminologies used in functionalists theories are also a weaknesses. For example the
word « skopos », « translatum » in Vermeer’s theory were judged too complex as the role
of a functionalism is to be clear, clean and practical.
Finally, by focusing on the purpose of the translation and how it will be gather by the
target audience, people were accused of ‘de-throning’ the original text.

Translation Theory Spring Semester

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Translation Theory Spring Semester

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Translation Theory Spring Semester

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

lOMoARcPSD|9261378

Translation Theory - Spring Semester

Modern Languages and Translation (Cardiff University)

StuDocu is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university

Downloaded by Gladdys Joi Gamat (shanequitong@gmail.com)

THE FUNCTIONALISM I Introduction :

In the history of translation studies, the quality of a translation rested on it “equivalence”

What is the Functionalism ?

Functionalist translators introduce a new way of looking at translation, which is no longer

The functionalists we are going to study:

• Vermeer that asked us to consider the purpose/function of the text.

• House that asked us to consider its register.

Downloaded by Gladdys Joi Gamat (shanequitong@gmail.com)

THE FUNCTIONALISM I KATHARINA REISS

Born in 1923. German Linguist and Translation Scholar.

Her functional approach aims initially at systematising the assessment of translations

Downloaded by Gladdys Joi Gamat (shanequitong@gmail.com)

3 - The TT of an operative text should produce the desired response in the TT

However, over the years there have been a number of criticisms:

Downloaded by Gladdys Joi Gamat (shanequitong@gmail.com)

Downloaded by Gladdys Joi Gamat (shanequitong@gmail.com)

THE FUNCTIONALISM I HANS VERMEER

Moreover, Vermeer elaborated a list of rules ranked by importance to help us to produce

Downloaded by Gladdys Joi Gamat (shanequitong@gmail.com)

The Reception of Vermeer’s theory is mixed:

Vermeer’s theories bring an important practical element to what is often a highly

Terminologies used by Vermeer were also criticised = « skopos », « translatum », were

Downloaded by Gladdys Joi Gamat (shanequitong@gmail.com)

THE FUNCTIONALISM I JULIANE HOUSE:

According to her, translations have to be done with a comparative ST and TT analysis

By register, she means « incorporating » a variety of elements such as:

For House there are therefore 2 ways to translate either by producing:

Downloaded by Gladdys Joi Gamat (shanequitong@gmail.com)

The impact of House’s approach/criticisms:

Moreover, House focuses on translation frameworks which are English-Language

Downloaded by Gladdys Joi Gamat (shanequitong@gmail.com)

THE FUNCTIONALISM I ERNST-AUGUST GUTT

There is therefore two types of translation according to Gutt:

Downloaded by Gladdys Joi Gamat (shanequitong@gmail.com)

Strengths and weaknesses of Gutt’s theory:

Downloaded by Gladdys Joi Gamat (shanequitong@gmail.com)

THE CULTURAL TURN I INTRODUCTION:

Name of the theorist/theory is part of the cultural turn which is a movement in

According to Cristina Marinetti, ‘For Bassnett and Lefevere, translation is primarily

Core notions at the heart of the cultural turn:

Translation cannot be approached as a solely linguistic exercise because:

Language is ever-changing and culturally diﬀerent within one country:

- A: How long are yous here?

Downloaded by Gladdys Joi Gamat (shanequitong@gmail.com)

● S. Bassnett, A.Lefevere, Constructing Cultures. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters

● Translators have always provided a vital link enabling cultures to interact.

The translator is both inﬂuenced by his/her culture and creates it.

• S. Bassnett, A.Lefevere, Constructing Cultures. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters

Core beliefs/key questions:

Why are certain texts rewritten/translated and not others?

Translation is not a neutral and harmless tool

Downloaded by Gladdys Joi Gamat (shanequitong@gmail.com)

Translation is never produced in a vacuum

• S. Bassnett, A.Lefevere, Constructing Cultures. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters 1998.