Memes of Translation

The spread of ideas in translation theory

Revised edition

| University of Helsinki
HardboundAvailable
ISBN 9789027258687 | EUR 95.00 | USD 143.00
 
PaperbackAvailable
ISBN 9789027258694 | EUR 33.00 | USD 49.95
 
e-Book
ISBN 9789027267382 | EUR 95.00/33.00*
| USD 143.00/49.95*
 
This revised edition of Memes of Translation includes updates that relate the book's themes to more recent research in Translation Studies. The book contributes to the debate about whether it is worth seeking a coherent theory of translation, by proposing an approach based on norms, strategies and values, which are all seen as kinds of memes, i.e. ideas that spread. The meme metaphor allows us to see translation in the context of cultural evolution, and also highlights similarities with the philosopher Karl Popper's analysis of another kind of evolution: that of scientific knowledge. A translation is, after all, itself a theory – a theory about the source text. And as Popper stressed, theories of all kinds are like nets we make in order to catch something of reality: never perfectly, but always in the hope of better understanding.

This title replaces Memes of Translation: The spread of ideas in translation theory (1997)

[Benjamins Translation Library, 123]  2016.  xii, 225 pp.
Publishing status: Available
Table of Contents
Preface
ix–xii
Chapter 1. Survival machines for memes
1–15
Chapter 2. The evolution of translation memes
17–48
Chapter 3. From memes to norms
49–84
Chapter 4. Translation strategies
85–114
Chapter 5. Translation as theory
115–143
Chapter 6. The development of translational competence
145–166
Chapter 7. On translation ethics
167–193
Epilogue
195–196
Appendix
197–199
References
201–217
Author index
219–221
Subject index
223–225
“This is an intelligent, practical, full-blown theory of translation, hiding under a modest title. It amply demonstrates the way clever concepts can bring clarity and balance to key issues in contemporary Translation Studies, without reduction or partisanship. The many updates cover an impressively broad range of recent studies, placing them in context, pointing to several paths forward, and providing flashes of illumination.”
“Andrew Chesterman is one of the few people capable of providing a detailed bird's eye perspective on Translation Studies. In this new edition of the 'Memes' volume, he has flown over the disciplinary landscape nearly twenty years after his first view, resulting in a commentary that includes updated references to more recent work and his own reflection on the criticism received the first time around. The new edition demonstrates the staying power of some of the most central ideas in the field, as well as the interesting ways in which they continue to evolve.”
“The updates allow the book to retain its historical outlook while remaining at the forefront of the discipline.”
“In a comprehensive, coherent and comprehensible manner, this volume pulls together apparently disparate threads of thought. Its constructive view of our field is well ordered but remains rather generic, as overviews tend to be by their very nature. However, this price is worth paying for Chesterman’s attempt to link translation theory and professional translators, which has resulted in a volume that is at once an invaluable teaching and learning resource and a (meta)theoretical reflection.”
Cited by

Cited by other publications

No author info given
2020.  In Translation and Affect [Benjamins Translation Library, 152], Crossref logo
Abdulla Al-Haroon, Ameena Haroun & Rashid Yahiaoui
2017. The Role of Culture in Dubbing TV Advertisements into Arabic: The Case of Chocolate Commercials. SSRN Electronic Journal Crossref logo
Afrouz, Mahmoud & Mohammad Shahi
2020. Translation after Wittgenstein. Perspectives 28:1  pp. 159 ff. Crossref logo
Ameri, Saeed, Masood Khoshsaligheh & Ali Khazaee Farid
2018. The reception of Persian dubbing: a survey on preferences and perception of quality standards in Iran. Perspectives 26:3  pp. 435 ff. Crossref logo
Cowan, Sally Elizabeth
2019. Cultural localisation as a strategy to preserve the persuasive function in the translation of tourism websites from French into English. The Journal of Internationalization and Localization 6:2  pp. 131 ff. Crossref logo
Engelbrecht, Natasha
2020.  In The Transformative Power of Language,  pp. 351 ff. Crossref logo
Ferreira, Aline, Alexandra Gottardo & John W. Schwieter
2018. Decision-making processes in direct and inverse translation through retrospective protocols. Translation, Cognition & Behavior 1:1  pp. 98 ff. Crossref logo
Furukawa, Hiroko
2018.  In The Palgrave Handbook of Literary Translation,  pp. 107 ff. Crossref logo
Hu, Bei
2020. How are translation norms negotiated?. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 32:1  pp. 83 ff. Crossref logo
Jansen, Hanne
2019. I’m a translator and I’m proud: how literary translators view authors and authorship. Perspectives 27:5  pp. 675 ff. Crossref logo
Russell H. Kaschula & H. Ekkehard Wolff
2020.  In The Transformative Power of Language, Crossref logo
Labrador, Belén
2018. Crossed transposition in a corpus-based study of motion in English and Spanish. Languages in Contrast 18:2  pp. 207 ff. Crossref logo
Lee, Tong King & Steven Wing-Kit Chan
2018.  In The Palgrave Handbook of Literary Translation,  pp. 187 ff. Crossref logo
Norri, Juhani
2017. Translation from Latin and French as a Source of New Medical Terms in Late Medieval England. Romance Philology 71:2  pp. 563 ff. Crossref logo
Pelled, Ayellet, Tanya Zilberstein, Alona Tsirulnikov, Eran Pick, Yael Patkin & Nurit Tal-Or
2017. Textual Primacy Online: Impression Formation Based on Textual and Visual Cues in Facebook Profiles. American Behavioral Scientist 61:7  pp. 672 ff. Crossref logo
Piekkari, Rebecca, Susanne Tietze & Kaisa Koskinen
2020. Metaphorical and Interlingual Translation in Moving Organizational Practices Across Languages. Organization Studies 41:9  pp. 1311 ff. Crossref logo
Ratkus, Artūras
2020. The (Non‐)Existence of the Middle Voice in Gothic: In Search of a Mirage. Transactions of the Philological Society 118:2  pp. 263 ff. Crossref logo
Scarpa, Federica
2020.  In Research and Professional Practice in Specialised Translation,  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Scarpa, Federica
2020.  In Research and Professional Practice in Specialised Translation,  pp. 111 ff. Crossref logo
Scarpa, Federica
2020.  In Research and Professional Practice in Specialised Translation,  pp. 187 ff. Crossref logo
Scarpa, Federica
2020.  In Research and Professional Practice in Specialised Translation,  pp. 291 ff. Crossref logo
Tyulenev, Sergey
2018.  In Translation in the Public Sphere,  pp. 75 ff. Crossref logo
Valdeón, Roberto A.
2017. From translatology to studies in translation theory and practice. Perspectives 25:2  pp. 181 ff. Crossref logo
Valdeón, Roberto A.
2019. Translation studies and the ethics of publishing. Perspectives 27:5  pp. 761 ff. Crossref logo
Ye, Xinyue, Lanxue Dang, Jay Lee, Ming-Hsiang Tsou & Zhuo Chen
2018.  In Human Dynamics Research in Smart and Connected Communities [Human Dynamics in Smart Cities, ],  pp. 203 ff. Crossref logo
Zehnalová, Jitka & Helena Kubátová
2019. From a target population to representative samples of translations and translators. The Translator 25:2  pp. 87 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 september 2020. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

References

References

Abdallah, Kristiina
2012Translators in Production Networks. Reflections on agency, quality and ethics. Joensuu: Publications of the University of Eastern Finland. Available at: http://​urn​.fi​/URN:ISBN:978​-952​-61​-0609​-0. (Accessed17.5.2015.)
Angelelli, Claudia V.
2004Revisiting the Interpreter’s Role. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Antonini, Rachele
(ed.) In press. Non-professional Interpreting and Translation: State of the Art and Future of an Emerging Field of Research. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. Crossref
Archer, Carol M.
1986 “Culture bump and beyond”. In J.M. Valdes (ed.) 1986, Culture Bound. Bridging the cultural gap in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 170–178.Google Scholar
Arnold, Malcolm
1924Essays Literary and Critical. London and Toronto: Dent. (Extract from “On translating Homer” in Lefevere(ed.) 1992, 68–69.)Google Scholar
Arrojo, Rosemary
1996 “Postmodernism and the teaching of translation”. In Dollerup and Appel (eds) 1996, 97–103. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Aunger, Robert
(ed.) 2000Darwinizing Culture. The status of memetics as a science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Baker, Mona
1992In Other Words. A coursebook on translation. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1993 “Corpus linguistics and translation studies – Implications and applications”. In M. Baker, et al. (eds), Text and Technology. In Honour of John Sinclair. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins, 233–250. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006Translation and Conflict: A Narrative Account. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bakhtin, Mikhail M.
1981The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays. (Ed.M. Holquist, trans.. C. Emerson and M. Holquist.) Austin: Texas University Press.Google Scholar
Ballard, Michel
1992De Cicéron à Benjamin: Traducteurs, traductions, réflexions. Lille: Presses Universitaires de Lille. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baraldi, Claudio, and Laura Gavioli
(eds) 2012Coordinating Participation in Dialogue Interpreting. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Barkhudarov, Leonid
1993 “The problem of the unit of translation”. In Zlateva (ed.) 1993, 39–46.Google Scholar
Bartsch, Renate
1987Norms of Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Bassnett, Susan
1991Translation Studies. (Revised edition.) London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bassnett, Susan, and André Lefevere
(eds) 1990Translation, History and Culture. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
Beaugrande, Robert de, and Wolfgang Dressler
1981Introduction to Text Linguistics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Becher, Viktor
2010 “Abandoning the notion of ‘translation-inherent’ explicitation: against a dogma of Translation Studies”. Across Languages and Cultures 11(1): 1–28. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bell, Roger T.
1991Translation and Translating: Theory and Practice. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Benjamin, Andrew
1989Translation and the Nature of Philisophy: A new theory of words. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Benjamin, Walter
[1923] 1963 “Die Aufgabe des Übersetzers”. In Störig (ed.) 1963, 182–195.Google Scholar
Berman, Antoine
1984L’Épreuve de l’Étranger: Culture et traduction dans l’Allemagne romantique. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Blackmore, Susan
1999The Meme Machine. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bloom, Harold
[1975] 1980A Map of Misreading. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana
1986 “Shifts of cohesion and coherence in translation”. In House and Blum-Kulka (eds) 1986, 17–35.Google Scholar
Bly, Robert
1984 “The eight stages of translation”. In W. Frawley (ed.) 1984, Translation: Literary, Linguistic and Philosophical Perspectives. New Jersey: Associated University Press, 67–89.Google Scholar
Bowker, Lynne, and Jennifer Pearson
2002Working with Specialized Language: A Practical Guide to Using Corpora. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brainerd, Barron
1972 “An exploratory study of pronouns and articles as indices of genre in English”. Language and Style 5(4): 239–259.Google Scholar
Breedveld, Hella
2002 “Writing and revising processes in professional translation”. Across Languages and Cultures 3(1): 91–100. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Broeck, Raymond van den
1981 “The limits of translatability, exemplified by metaphor translation”. Poetics Today 2(4): 73–87. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brownlie, Siobhan
2003 “Investigating explanations of translational phenomena: a case for multiple causality”. Target 15(1): 111–152. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brunette, Louse
2000 “Towards a terminology for Quality Translation Assessment: a comparison of TQA practices”. The Translator 6(2) [Special issue on evaluation and translation]: 169–182. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brunette, Louise, Chantal Gagnon, and Jonathan Hine
(eds) 2005 “The GREVIS project: Revise or court calamity”. Across Languages and Cultures 6(1): 29–45. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Calzada Pérez, Maria
(ed.) 2003Apropos of Ideology: Translation Studies on Ideology – Ideologies in Translation Studies. Manchester: St Jerome Publishing.Google Scholar
Carl, Michael, Srinivas Bangalore, and Moritz Schaeffer
(eds) 2016New Directions in Empirical Translation Process Research. Cham: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Castellano, Lanna
1988 “Get rich – but slow”. In C. Picken (ed.) 1988, ITI Conference 2: Translators and interpreters mean business. London: Aslib.Google Scholar
Catford, John C.
1965A Linguistic Theory of Translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cattrysse, Patrick
2014Descriptive Adaptation Studies. Epistemological and methodological issues. Antwerp: Garant.Google Scholar
Cavalli-Sforza, Luca
2005Évolution biologique, évolution culturelle. Paris: Éditions Odile Jacob.Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace L.
1982 “Integration and involvement in speaking, writing and oral literature”. In D. Tannen (ed.) 1982, Spoken and Written Language: Exploring orality and literacy. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 35–53.Google Scholar
Changeux, Jean-Pierre
(éd.)2003Gènes et cultures. Paris: Éditions Odile Jacob.Google Scholar
Chesterman, Andrew
(ed.) 1989Readings in Translation Theory. Helsinki: Finn Lectura.Google Scholar
1993 “From ‘is’ to ‘ought’: translation laws, norms and strategies”. Target 5(1): 1–20. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1994a “Karl Popper in the translation class”. In Dollerup and Lindegaard (eds) 1994, 89–95.Google Scholar
1994b “Quantitative aspects of translation quality”. Lebende Sprachen 39(4): 153–156. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1995 “The successful translator: the evolution of homo transferens ”. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 2: 253–270. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1996a “Teaching translation theory: the significance of memes”. In Dollerup and Appel (eds) 1996, 63–71. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1996b “On similarity”. Target 8(1): 159–164. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1997 “Ethics of translation”. In M. Snell-Hornby (ed.), Translation as Intercultural Communication. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins, 147–157. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1998Contrastive Functional Analysis. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2001 “Proposal for a Hieronymic Oath”. The Translator 7(2): 139–154. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2005a “The memetics of knowledge”. In H.V. Dam, J. Engberg and H. Gerzymisch-Arbogast (eds) 2005, Knowledge Systems and Translation. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 17–30. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2005b “Problems with strategies”. In K. Károly and Á. Fóris (eds) 2005, New Trends in Translation Studies. In Honour of Kinga Klaudy. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 17–28.Google Scholar
2006 “Interpreting the meaning of translation”. In M. Suominen, et al. (eds) 2005, A Man of Measure. Festschrift in Honour of Fred Karlsson on his 60th Birthday. Turku: Linguistic Association of Finland, 3–11.Google Scholar
2007 “On the idea of a theory”. Across Languages and Cultures 8(1): 1–16. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008 “On explanation”. In A. Pym, M. Shlesinger and D. Simeoni (eds) 2008, Beyond Descriptive Translation Studies. Investigations in homage to Gideon Toury. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins, 363–379. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009 “The Name and Nature of Translator Studies”. Hermes 42: 13–22.Google Scholar
2014 “Universalism in translation studies”. Translation Studies 7(1): 82–90. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chesterman, Andrew, and Rosemary Arrojo
2000 “Shared ground in Translation Studies”. Target 12(1): 151–160. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chesterman, Andrew, and Emma Wagner
2002Can Theory Help Translators? A dialogue between the ivory tower and the wordface. Manchester: St Jerome Publishing.Google Scholar
Cheyfitz, Eric
1991The Poetics of Imperialism. Translation and colonization from The Tempest to Tarzan. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Connor, Ulla
1996Contrastive Rhetoric. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Connor, Ulla, and Robert B. Kaplan
(eds) 1987Writing Across Languages: Analysis of L2 texts. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Copeland, Rita
1991Rhetoric, Hermeneutics, and Translation in the Middle Ages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Coseriu, Eugenio
1970 “System, Norm und Rede”. In E. Coseriu (ed.), Sprache, Strukturen und Funktionen. Tübingen: Narr, 193–212.Google Scholar
Cowley, Abraham
[1656] 1975Extract from “Preface to the Pindarique Odes”. In T.R. Steiner1975, English Translation Theory 1650–1800. Assen and Amsterdam: van Gorcum, 66–67.Google Scholar
Craig, George
1993 “Fine-tuning Proust”. Times Literary Supplement, 22 October 1993, 24.Google Scholar
Crystal, David, and Donald Davy
1969Investigating English Style. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Cutts, Martin
2013Oxford Guide to Plain English. (Fourth edition.) Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
d’Alembert, Jean le R.
1784Morceaux choisis de Tacite. Paris: Desaint. (Translated extracts in Lefevere (ed.) 1992, 105–116.)Google Scholar
D’hulst, Lieven
1992 “Sur le rôle des métaphores en traductologie contemporaine”. Target 4(1): 33–51. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dacier, Anne
1711L’lliade d’Homère. Paris: Rigaud. (Translated extract in Lefevere (ed.) 1992, 10–13.)Google Scholar
Danan, Martine
1991 “Dubbing as an expression of nationalism”. Meta 36(4): 606–614. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dancette, Jeanne
1994 “Comprehension in the translation process: an analysis of think-aloud protocols”. In Dollerup and Lindegaard (eds) 1994, 113–120.Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald
1986 “A nice derangement of epitaphs”. In E. LePore (ed.), Truth and Interpretation: Perspectives on the Philosophy of Donald Davidson. Oxford: Blackwell, 433–446.Google Scholar
Dawkins, Richard
1976The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (New edition 1989.)Google Scholar
de la Motte, Antoine H.
1714L’lliade, poème. Avec un discours sur Homère. Amsterdam: Depuis. (Translated extract from the preface in Lefevere (ed.) 1992, 28–30.)Google Scholar
Delisle, Jean
1988Translation: An Interpretative Approach. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.Google Scholar
Delius, Juan D.
1989 “Of memes and brain bugs, a natural history of culture”. In W.A. Koch (ed.) 1989, The Nature of Culture. Bochum: Brockmeyer, 26–79.Google Scholar
Dennett, Daniel C.
1991Consciousness Explained. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
2004Freedom Evolves. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques
1985 “Des Tours de Babel”. In J.F. Graham (ed.) 1985, Difference in Translation. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 209–248.Google Scholar
Dijk, Teun van
1988News as Discourse. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Dolet, Etienne
1540De la Manière de Bien Traduire d’une Langue en Autre. Lyon: Presses E. Dolet. (Translated extracts in Lefevere (ed.) 1992, 27–28.)Google Scholar
Dollerup, Cay, and Vibeke Appel
(eds) 1996Teaching Translation and Interpreting 3. New horizons. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dollerup, Cay, and Annette Lindegaard
(eds) 1994Teaching Translating and Interpreting 2. Insights, aims, visions. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dreyfus, Hubert L., and Stuart E. Dreyfus
1986Mind Over Machine. Oxford: Blackwell / New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Dryden, John
[1680] 1975From “Preface” to Ovid’s Epistles. In T.R. Steiner1975, English Translation Theory 1650–1800. Assen and Amsterdam: Van Gorcum, 68–74. (Also in Schulte and Biguenet (eds) 1992, 17–31. Parts also in Chesterman (ed.) 1989, 7–12; and in Lefevere (ed.) 1992, 102–105.)Google Scholar
Ebeling, Gerhard
1971Einführung in Theologische Sprachlehre. Tübingen: Mohr.Google Scholar
Edelman, Gerald
1992Brilliant Air, Bright Fire. On the matter of the mind. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Ellegård, Alvar
1978The Syntactic Structure of English Texts. (Gothenburg Studies in English 43.) Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg.Google Scholar
Englund Dimitrova, Birgitta
2005Expertise and Explicitation in the Translation Process. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Enkvist, Nils Erik
1991 “Discourse type, text type, and cross-cultural rhetoric”. In Tirkkonen-Condit (ed.) 1991, 5–16.Google Scholar
Erasmus, Desiderius
[1506] 1992Extracts from “Letter to William Warham”. In Lefevere (ed.) 1992, 60.Google Scholar
Even-Zohar, Itamar
1990 Polysystem Studies . Poetics Today 11(1).Google Scholar
Faerch, Claus, and Gabriele Kasper
(eds) 1983Strategies in Interlanguage Communication. London: Longman.Google Scholar
1987Introspection in Second Language Research. Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters Ltd.Google Scholar
Fairclough, Norman
(ed.) 1992Critical Language Awareness. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Fawcett, Peter
1995 “Translation and power play”. The Translator 1(2): 177–192. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ferreira, Aline, and John W. Schwieter
(eds) 2015Psycholinguistic and Cognitive Inquiries into Translation and Interpreting. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Florin, Sider
1993 “Realia in translation”. In Zlateva (ed.) 1993, 122–128.Google Scholar
Flotow, Luise von
1991 “Feminist translation: contexts, practices and theories”. TTR 4(2): 69–84. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Footit, Hilary, and Michael Kelly
(eds) 2012Languages at War. Policies and practices of language contacts in conflict. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel
1971L’Ordre du discours. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Francis, W. Nelson, and Henry Kučera
1982Frequency Analysis of English Usage. Lexicon and grammar. Boston: Houghton Miffin Company.Google Scholar
Fraser, Janet
1993 “Public accounts: using verbal protocols to investigate community translation”. Applied Linguistics 14(4): 325–343. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Friedrich, Hugo
1965 “Zur Frage der Übersetzungskunst”. Heidelberg: Carl Winter. (English translation in Schulte and Biguenet (eds) 1992, 11–16.)Google Scholar
Fuller, Steve
[2003] 2006Kuhn vs. Popper. The Struggle for the Soul of Science. Cambridge: Icon Books.Google Scholar
Gadamer, Hans-Georg
1960Wahrheit und Methode. Tübingen: Mohr.Google Scholar
Gambier, Yves
2008 “Stratégies et tactiques en traduction et interprétation”. In G. Hansen, A. Chesterman, and H. Gerzymisch-Arbogast (eds) 2008, Efforts and Models in Interpreting and Translation Research. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins, 63–82. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012 “The position of audiovisual translation studies”. In Millán and Bartrina (eds) 2012, 45–59. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gambier, Yves, and Luc van Doorslaer
(eds) 2014Handbook of Translation Studies. (Four volumes.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gentzler, Edwin
1993Contemporary Translation Theories. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gerloff, Pamela
1986 “Second language learners’ reports on the interpretive process: talk-aloud protocols of translation”. In House and Blum-Kulka (eds) 1986, 243–262.Google Scholar
Gile, Daniel
1992 “Les fautes de traduction: une analyse pédagogique”. Meta 37(2): 251–262. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1994 “The process-oriented approach in translation training”. In Dollerup and Lindegaard (eds) 1994, 107–112.Google Scholar
1995Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goethe, Johan W. von
[1819] 1963 “Noten und Abhandlungen zu bessern Verständnis des west-östlichen Divans”. In Störig (ed.) 1963, 35–37.Google Scholar
Göpferich, Susanna
2009 “Towards a model of translation competence and its acquisition: the longitudinal study ‘TransComp’”. In S. Göpferich, A.L. Jakobsen and I.M. Mees (eds) 2009, Behind the Mind. Methods, Models and Results in Translation Process Research. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur Press, 11–37. Available at: http://​gams​.uni​-graz​.at​/fedora​/get​/o:tc​-095​-187​/bdef:PDF​/get. (Accessed18.5.2015.)
2013 “Translation competence. Explaining development and stagnation from a dynamic systems perspective”. Target 25(1): 61–76. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gorlée, Dinda
1994Semiotics and the Problem of Translation, with special reference to the semiotics of Charles S. Peirce. Amsterdam and Atlanta, GA.: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Grice, Paul
1975 “Logic and conversation”. In P. Cole and J.L. Morgan (eds) 1975, Syntax and Semantics, 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press, 41–58.Google Scholar
Grimes, Joseph E.
1963 “Measuring ‘naturalness’ in translation”. The Bible Translator 14(2): 49–62.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gutt, Ernst-August
1990 “A theoretical account of translation – without a translation theory”. Target 2(2): 135–164. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1991Translation and Relevance. Cognition and context. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hailman, Jack P.
1982 “Evolution and behavior: an iconoclastic view”. In H.C. Plotkin (ed.) 1982, Learning, Development and Culture. Chichester: Wiley, 205–254.Google Scholar
Haiman, John
(ed.) 1985Iconicity in Syntax. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Halverson, Sandra
1999 “Conceptual work and the ‘translation’ concept”. Target 11(1): 1–31. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Harris, Brian
1977 “The importance of natural translation”. Working Papers on Bilingualism 12: 96–114.Google Scholar
1990 “Norms in interpretation”. Target 2(1): 115–119. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hartama-Heinonen, Ritva
2008Abductive translation studies: the art of marshalling signs. Imatra: International Semiotics Institute.Google Scholar
Hartmann, Reinhard R.K.
1980Contrastive Textology. Comparative discourse analysis in applied linguistics. (Studies in Descriptive Linguistics 5.) Heidelberg: Groos.Google Scholar
1981 “Contrastive textology and translation”. In W. Kühlwein, G. Thome, and W. Wilss (eds) 1981, Kontrastive Linguistik und Übersetzungswissenschaft. München: Fink, 200–208.Google Scholar
Harvey, Keith
1995 “A descriptive framework for compensation”. The Translator 1(1): 65–86. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hatim, Basil, and Ian Mason
1990Discourse and the Translator. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Heidegger, Martin
[1957] 1963Der Satz vom Grund. Pfullingen: Günther Neske. Excerpt in Störig 1963, 369–383.Google Scholar
Hermans, Theo
(ed.) 1985The Manipulation of Literature. Studies in literary translation. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
1991 “Translation norms and correct translations”. In Leuven-Zwart and Naaijkens (eds) 1991, 155–169.Google Scholar
1996 “The translator’s voice in translated narrative”. Target 8(1): 23–48. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Herodotus
1920Histories Volume 1. Translated byA.D. Godley. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
Hervey, Sándor, and Ian Higgins
1992Thinking Translation. A course in translation method: French-English. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hewson, Lance, and Jacky Martin
1991Redefining Translation. The variational approach. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Heylen, Romy
1993Translation, Poetics and the Stage. Six French Hamlets. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hinds, John
1987 “Reader versus writer responsibility. A new typology”. In Connor and Kaplan (eds) 1987, 141–152.Google Scholar
Hochel, Braňo
1991 “The cross-temporal and cross-spatial factors and the translation of literary language”. In Leuven-Zwart and Naaijkens (eds) 1991, 41–48.Google Scholar
Holmes, James S.
1978 “Translation theory, translation theories, translation studies, and the translator”. In P.A. Horguelin (ed.) 1978, La Traduction, une Profession / Translating, a Profession. Montréal: Conseil des traducteurs et interprètes du Canada, 55–61. (Also in Holmes 1988, 93–98.)Google Scholar
1988Translated! Papers on literary translation and translation studies. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Holmes, James S., José Lambert, and Raymond van den Broeck
(eds) 1978Literature and Translation: New perspectives in literary studies with a basic bibliography of books on translation studies. Leuven: Acco.Google Scholar
Holz-Mänttäri, Justa
1984Translatorisches Handeln. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.Google Scholar
Hönig, Hans G., and Paul Kußmaul
1982Strategie der Übersetzung. Ein Lehr- und Arbeitsbuch. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Horguelin, Paul A., and Louise Brunette
1998Pratique de la révision. Brossard, Québec: Linguatech.Google Scholar
House, Juliane
1977 “A model for assessing translation quality”. Meta 22(2): 103–109. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1981A Model for Translation Quality Assessment. (2nd edition.) Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
1988 “Talking to onself or thinking with others? On using different thinking aloud methods in translation”. Fremdsprachen lehren und lernen 17: 84–98.Google Scholar
House, Juliane, and Shoshana Blum-Kulka
(eds) 1986Interlingual and Intercultural Communication: Discourse and cognition in translation and second language acquisition studies. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Hu, Gengshen
2003 “Translation as adaptation and selection”. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 11(4): 283–291. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Huetius, Petrus D.
1683De Interpretatione Libri Duo. The Hague: Apud Arnoldum Leers. (Translated extracts in Lefevere (ed.) 1992, 86–102.)Google Scholar
Hull, D.L.
1982 “The naked meme”. In Plotkin, H.C. (ed.) 1982, Learning, Development and Culture. Chichester: Wiley, 273–327.Google Scholar
Huss, Roger
1993 “Flaubert in English”. Times Literary Supplement, 22 October 1993, 24.Google Scholar
Inghilleri, Moira
2012Interpreting Justice. Ethics, politics and language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Inoue, Kyoko
1991MacArthur’s Japanese Constitution. A linguistic and cultural study of its making. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Itkonen, Esa
1983Causality in Linguistic Theory. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Jääskeläinen, Riitta
1989 “The role of reference material in professional vs non-professional translation: a think-aloud protocol study”. In S. Tirkkonen-Condit and S. Condit (eds) 1989, Empirical Studies in Translation and Linguistics. Joensuu: University of Joensuu, Faculty of Arts, 175–200.Google Scholar
1993 “Investigating translation strategies”. In S. Tirkkonen-Condit and J. Laffling (eds) 1993, Recent Trends in Empirical Translation Research. Joensuu: University of Joensuu, Faculty of Arts, 99–119.Google Scholar
Jakobsen, Arnt Lykke
1994a “Translation – a productive skill”. In H. Bergenholtz, et al. (eds) 1994, OFT Symposium. Translating LSP texts. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School, 41–70.Google Scholar
1994b “Starting from the (other) end: integrating translation and text production”. In Dollerup and Lindegaard (eds) 1994, 143–150.Google Scholar
2011 “Tracking translators’ keystrokes and eye movements with Translog”. In C. Alvstad, A. Hild, and E. Tiselius (eds) 2011, Methods and Strategies of Process Research. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins, 37–55. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jakobson, Roman
1959 “On linguistic aspects of translation”. In R.A. Brower (ed.), On Translation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,232–239. (Also in Chesterman (ed.) 1989, 53–60.) CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Janks, Hilary, and Roz Ivanič
1992 “CLA [Critical language awareness] and emancipatory discourse”. In Fairclough (ed.) 1992, 305–331.Google Scholar
Jodl, Friedrich
1918Allgemeine Ethik. Stuttgart and Berlin: J. G. Cotta’sche Buchhandlung Nachfolger.Google Scholar
Johansson, Stig
1978aSome Aspects of the Vocabulary of Learned and Scientific English. (Gothenburg Studies in English 42.) Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg.Google Scholar
1978bStudies of Error Gravity. (Gothenburg Studies in English 44.) Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg.Google Scholar
Johansson, Stig, and Knut Hoflund
1989Frequency Analysis of English Vocabulary and Grammar. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Jones, Francis R.
1989 “On aboriginal sufferance: a process model of poetic translating”. Target 1(2): 183–199. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jumpelt, Rudolf W.
1961Die Übersetzung Naturwissenschaftlicher und Technischer Literatur. Berlin: Langenscheidt.Google Scholar
Karlsson, Fred
1983Finnish Grammar. (Translated byAndrew Chesterman.) Helsinki: Werner Söderström.Google Scholar
Katz, Jerrold
1978 “Effability and translation”. In F. Guenthner and M. Guenthner-Reutter (eds) 1978, Meaning and Translation. London: Duckworth, 191–234.Google Scholar
Keenan, Edward
1978 “Some logical problems in translation”. In F. Guenthner and M. Guenthner-Reutter (eds) 1978, Meaning and Translation. London: Duckworth, 157–189.Google Scholar
Kelly, Louis G.
1979The True Interpreter. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kemmis, Stephen, and Robin McTaggart
1988The Action Research Planner. Deakin: Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
Kiraly, Donald C.
1995Pathways to Translation. Pegagogy and process. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.Google Scholar
Klaudy, Kinga
1996 “Back-translation as a tool for detecting explicitation strategies in translation”. In K. Klaudy, J. Lambert, and A. Sohár (eds) 1996, Translation Studies in Hungary. Budapest: Scholastica, 99–114.Google Scholar
Kolb, David A.
1984Experiential Learning. Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Koller, Werner
1972Grundprobleme der Übersetzungstheorie. Bern: Francke.Google Scholar
1979Einführung in die Übersetzungswissenschaft. Heidelberg: Quelle und Meyer. (4th revised edition 1992.)Google Scholar
Komissarov, Vilen
1993 “Norms in translation”. In Zlateva (ed.) 1993, 63–75.Google Scholar
Königs, Frank G.
1990 “ ‘Die Seefahrt an der Nagel hängen’? Metaphern beim Übersetzen und in der Übersetzungswissenschaft”. Target 2(1): 97–113. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Korpel, Luc
1993 “Rhetoric and Dutch translation theory (1750–1820)”. Target 5(1): 55–69. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Koskinen, Kaisa
1994aThe Invisible Hand: The literary translator’s role. Unpublished Licentiate thesis, University of Tampere, Finland.Google Scholar
1994b “(Mis)translating the untranslatable – the impact of deconstruction and post-structuralism on translation theory”. Meta 39(3): 446–452. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2000Beyond Ambivalence. Postmodernity and the ethics of translation. Tampere: University of Tampere.Google Scholar
Kovala, Urpo
1996 “Translations, paratextual mediation and ideological closure”. Target 8(1): 119–147. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Krings, Hans P.
1986Was in den Köpfen von Übersetzern vorgeht: eine empirische Untersuchung zur Struktur des Übersetzungsprozesses an fortgeschrittenen Französischlernern. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
2001Repairing texts. Empirical investigations of machine translation post-editing processes. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.Google Scholar
Kučera, Henry, and W. Nelson Francis
1967Computational Analysis of Present-day American English. Providence, Rhode Island: Brown University Press.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas
1970The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Second edition.)Google Scholar
Kundera, Milan
1993Les Testaments Trahis: Essai. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Künzli, Alexander
2007 “Translation revision – A study of the performance of ten professional translators revising a legal text”. In Y. Gambier, M. Shlesinger, and R. Stolze (eds) 2007, Doubts and directions in Translation Studies.Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins, 115–126. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kußmaul, Paul
1991 “Creativity in the translation process”. In Leuven-Zwart and Naaijkens (eds) 1991, 91–101.Google Scholar
1995Training the Translator. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ladmiral, Jean-René
1994Traduire: Théorèmes pour la traduction. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Lanstyák, István, and Pál Heltai
2012 “Universals in language contact and translation”. Across Languages and Cultures 13(1): 99–121. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey N.
1983Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Lefevere, André
(ed.) 1992Translation / History / Culture. A sourcebook. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
1992Translation, Rewriting and the Manipulation of Literary Fame. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Leppihalme, Ritva
1997Culture Bumps. An Empirical Approach to the Translation of Allusions. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
2011 “Realia”. In Y. Gambier and L. van Doorslaer (eds) 2011, Handbook of Translation Studies. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins, 126–130. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Leuven-Zwart, Kitty M. van
1989/1990“Translation and original. Similarities and dissimilarities”, I and II. Target 1(2): 151–181 and 2(1): 69–95. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Leuven-Zwart, Kitty M. van, and Ton Naaijkens
(eds) 1991Translation Studies: The state of the art. Proceedings of the First James S. Holmes Symposium on Translation Studies. Amsterdam and Atlanta: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Levý, Jiří
1967 “Translation as a decision process”. In To Honor Roman Jakobson, vol. II. The Hague: Mouton, 1171–1182. (Also in Chesterman (ed.) 1989, 37–52.)Google Scholar
1969Die Literarische Übersetzung. Frankfurt: Athenäum.Google Scholar
Lewis, David K.
1969Convention: A philosophical study. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, Philip E.
1985 “The measure of translation effects”. In J. Graham (ed.) 1985, Difference in Translation. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 31–62.Google Scholar
Liddell, Henry G., and Robert Scott
1940A Greek-English Lexicon. (9th edition.) Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Linnarud, Moira
1988Lexis in Composition: A performance analysis of Swedish learners’ written English. Lund: Gleerup.Google Scholar
Lörscher, Wolfgang
1989 “Models of the translation process: claim and reality”. Target 1(1): 43–68. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1991Translation Performance, Translation Process and Translation Strategies: A psycholinguistic investigation. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Lotbinière-Harwood, Susanne de
1991Re-belle et Infidèle. La traduction comme pratique de réécriture au feminin / The Body Bilingual. Translation as a rewriting in the feminine. Montréal/Toronto: Les éditions du remue-ménage / Women’s Press.Google Scholar
Malmkjær, Kirsten
1993 “Underpinning translation theory”. Target 5(2): 133–148. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2004 “Censorship or Error: Mary Howitt and a Problem in Descriptive TS”. In D. Gile, G. Hansen, and K. Malmkjær (eds) 2004, Claims, Changes and Challenges in Translation Studies: Selected Contributions from the EST Congress, Copenhagen 2001. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins, 141–155. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Malone, Joseph L.
1988The Science of Linguistics in the Art of Translation. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Mauranen, Anna
1993Cultural Differences in Academic Rhetoric: A textlinguistic study. Frankfurt am Main: Lang.Google Scholar
Mauranen, Anna, and Pekka Kujamäki
(eds) 2004Translation Universals. Do they exist? Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
May, Rachel
1994The Translator in the Text. On reading Russian literature in English. Evanston, Ill.: Norhwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Millán, Carmen, and Francesca Bartrina
(eds) 2012The Routledge Handbook of Translation Studies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Molina, Lucia, and Amparo Hurtado Albir
2002 “Translation techniques revisited: A dynamic and functionalist approach.” Meta 47(4): 498–512. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Morgenstern, Christian
1969Galgenlieder. Memmingen: Maximilian Dietrich Verlag.Google Scholar
Mossop, Brian
1983 “The translator as rapporteur: a concept for training and self-improvement”. Meta 28(3): 244–278. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007aRevising and editing for translators. (Second edition.) Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.Google Scholar
2007b “Empirical studies of revision: what we know and need to know”. The Journal of Specialised Translation [on-line series], 8. Available at http://​www​.jostrans​.org​/issue08​/art​_mossop​.php. (Accessed15.5.2015.)
Mounin, Georges
1963Les Problèmes théoriques de la traduction. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Munday, Jeremy
2012Introducing Translation Studies. Theories and applications. (Third edition.) London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nabokov, Vladimir
[1955] 1992 “Problems of translation: Onegin in English”. In Schulte and Biguenet (eds) 1992, 127–143.Google Scholar
Neubert, Albrecht
1981 “Translation, interpreting and text linguistics”. In B. Sigurd and J. Svartvik (eds) 1981, AILA 82 Proceedings: Lectures, 130–145. (Studia Linguistica 35.) (Also in Chesterman (ed.) 1989, 141–156.)Google Scholar
Neubert, Albrecht, and Gregory M. Shreve
1992Translation as Text. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.Google Scholar
Newmark, Peter
1981Approaches to Translation. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
1988A Textbook of Translation. Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall International.Google Scholar
2004 “Non-literary in the light of literary translation.” The Journal of Specialised Translation 1: 8–13.Google Scholar
Nida, Eugene A.
1964Toward a Science of Translating. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
1969 “Science of translation”. Language 45(3): 483–498. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nida, Eugene A., and Charles R. Taber
1969The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Niiniluoto, Ilkka
1978 “Notes on Popper as follower of Whewell and Peirce”. Ajatus 37: 272–327.Google Scholar
Niranjana, Tejaswini
1992Siting Translation Theory. History, post-structuralism and the colonial context. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Nord, Christiane
1991Text Analysis in Translation. Amsterdam and Atlanta: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Nouss, Alexis
1994 “Translation and the two models of interpretation”. In Dollerup and Lindegaard (eds) 1994, 157–163.Google Scholar
Nylander-Tuominen, Sirkka-Liisa
1992 “La Kanteletar and I will sing what I know: semiotic features in two translations of Kanteletar”. In E. Tarasti (ed.) 1992, Center and Periphery in Representations and Institutions. Imatra: International Semiotics Institute, 333–345.Google Scholar
Nystrand, Martin
1992 “Social interactionism versus social constructionism: Bakhtin, Rommetveit and the semiotics of written text”. In A.H. Wold (ed.) 1992, The Dialogical Alternative. Towards a theory of language and mind. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press, 157–173.Google Scholar
O’Brien, Sharon, and Michel Simard
(eds) 2014Machine Translation, 28. (Special Issue on Post-Editing.) CrossrefGoogle Scholar
O’Malley, J. Michael, and Anne Uhl Chamot
1990Learning Strategies in Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Oittinen, Riitta
1993I am Me – I am Other: On the dialogics of translating for children. (Acta Universitatis Tamperensis, ser. A vol. 386.) Tampere: University of Tampere.Google Scholar
1995Kääntäjän Karnevaali. Tampere: Tampere University Press.Google Scholar
Ortega y Gasset, José
1937 “La miseria y el esplendor de la traducción”. La Nación (Buenos Aires), May-June. (Reprinted in J. Ortega y Gasset, Obras Completas: Tomo V (1933–1941). Madrid: Revista de Occidente, 429–448. Translated extract in Schulte and Biguenet (eds) 1992, 93–112.)Google Scholar
PACTE
2005 “Investigating translation competence: conceptual and methodological issues”. Meta 50(2): 609–619. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Paepcke, Fritz
1986 “Textverstehen – Textübersetzen – Übersetzungskritik”. In M. Snell-Hornby (ed.)1986, Übersetzungswissenschaft: eine Neuorientierung. Zur Integrierung von Theorie und Praxis. Tübingen: Francke, 106–132.Google Scholar
Paz, Octavio
1971Traducción: Literatura y Literalidad. Barcelona: Tusquets. (Translated extract inSchulte and Biguenet (eds) 1992, 152–162.)Google Scholar
Pesonen, Pekka
1993 “Venäläiskertojat löysivät uuden sävellajin”. Helsingin Sanomat, 30 October 1993, C2.Google Scholar
Picken, Catriona
(ed.) 1994Quality – Assurance, Management and Control. (Proceedings, ITI Conference 7.) London: Institute of Translation and Interpreting.Google Scholar
Plotkin, Henry C.
1993 “Hunting memes”. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16(4): 768–9. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pöchhacker, Franz
2004Introducing Interpreting Studies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Pokorn, Nike K.
2005Challenging the Traditional Axioms. Translation into a non-mother tongue. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Popper, Karl R.
[1945] 1962The Open Society and its Enemies. (4th edition.) London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
[1956] 1982The Open Universe. Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
1959The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
1972Objective Knowledge. An evolutionary approach. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
1992Unended Quest. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Purves, Alan C.
(ed.) 1988Writing Across Languages and Cultures. Issues in contrastive rhetoric. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Puurtinen, Tiina H.
1995Linguistic Acceptability in Translated Children’s Literature. (University of Joensuu Publications in the Humanities 15.) Joensuu: University of Joensuu.Google Scholar
Pym, Anthony
1992aTranslation and Text Transfer. Frankfurt am Main: Lang.Google Scholar
1992b “The relation between translation and material text transfer”. Target 4(2): 171–189. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1994 “Twelfth-century Toledo and strategies of the literalist Trojan horse”. Target 6(1): 43–66. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1995 “European Translation Studies, une science qui dérange, and Why Equivalence Needn’t Be a Dirty Word”. TTR 8(1): 153–176. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1996 “Venuti’s visibility”. Target 8(1): 165–177. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1997Pour une Éthique du Traducteur. Arras: Artois Presses Université; Ottawa: Presses de l’Université d’Ottawa.Google Scholar
1998Method in Translation History. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.Google Scholar
2007 “Natural and directional equivalence in theories of translation”. Target 19(2): 271–294. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010Exploring Translation Theories. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
2011 “Translation theory as historical problem-solving”. Intercultural Communication Review 9:49–61. Available viahttp://​usuaris​.tinet​.cat​/apym​/publications​/publications​.html. (Accessed6.5.2015.)
2012On Translator Ethics. Principles for mediation between cultures. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2016Translation Solutions for Many Languages – Histories of a Flawed Dream. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar
Pym, Anthony, Miriam Shlesinger, and Zuzana Jettmarová
(eds) 2006Sociocultural Aspects of Translating and Interpreting. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pym, Anthony, Miriam Shlesinger, and Daniel Simeoni
(eds) 2008Beyond Descriptive Translation Studies. Investigations in homage to Gideon Toury. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Quine, Willard van O.
1960Word and Object. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey N. Leech, and Jan Svartvik
1985A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Randell, Elina
1986 “William Faulknerin teosten suomennoksista”. In U. Kovala (ed.), Maailmankirjallisuuden ja sen Klassikoiden Suomentamisesta, Osa III. (Monisteita 32.) Jyväskylä: Jyvaskylän yliopiston kirjallisuuden laitos, 17–30.Google Scholar
Rawson, Claude
1993Review of Fima by Amos Oz. Times Literary Supplement, 8 October 1993, 28.Google Scholar
Reiß, Katharina, and Hans J. Vermeer
1984Grundlegung einer Allgemeinen Translationstheorie. Tübingen: Niemeyer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rener, Frederick M.
1989Interpretatio: Language and Translation from Cicero to Tytler. Amsterdam and Atlanta: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Retsker, Jakob
1993 “The theory and practice of translation”. In Zlateva (ed.) 1993, 18–31.Google Scholar
Richards, Ivor A.
1936The Philosophy of Rhetoric. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Riley, Philip
1979 “Towards a contrastive pragmalinguistics”. Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics 10: 90–115.Google Scholar
Ringbom, Håkan
(ed.) 1993Near-native Proficiency in English. (English Department Publications 2.) Åbo: Åbo Akademi University.Google Scholar
Risku, Hanna
1998Translatorische Kompetenz. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
Risku, Hanna, and Florian Windhager
2013 “Extended translation. A sociocognitive research agenda”. Target 25(1): 33–45. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rissanen, Matti
1971Problems in the Translation of Shakespeare’s Imagery into Finnish. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar
Robert, Isabelle, and Luuk Van Waes
2014 “Selecting a translation revision procedure: do common sense and statistics agree?Perspectives: Studies on Translatology 22(3): 304–320. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, Douglas
1987 “Koskenko yli saareen? Pentti Saarikoski kääntäjänä ja käännösteoreetikkona”. In A. Ollikainen and M. Pulakka (eds) 1987, Kääntäjät Kulttuurivaikuttajina. (Monisteita 35.) Jyväskylä: Jyväskylän yliopiston kirjallisuuden laitos, 143–165.Google Scholar
1991The Translator’s Turn. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Robyns, Clem
1994 “Translation and discursive identity”. Poetics Today 15(3): 405–428. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rooten, Luis van
1967Mots d’heures: gousses, rames. London: Angus and Robertson.Google Scholar
Roscommon, Earl of
[1685] 1975 “An essay on translated verse”. In T.R. Steiner1975, English Translation Theory 1650–1800. Assen and Amsterdam: Van Gorcum, 75–85. (Also in Lefevere (ed.) 1992, 43–45.)Google Scholar
Rose, Hilary, and Steven Rose
2001Alas, Poor Darwin. London: Vintage.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Tina
1993 “Playwright on the stage of history”. Guardian Weekly, 24 October 1993.Google Scholar
Rydning, Antin F.
1991Qu’est-ce qu’une traduction acceptable en B? Les conditions d’acceptabilité de la traduction fonctionnelle réalisée dans la langue seconde du traducteur. Oslo: University of Oslo.Google Scholar
Sager, Juan C.
1994Language Engineering and Translation – Consequences of automation. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schiavi, Giuliana
1996 “There is always a teller in a tale”. Target 8(1): 1–21. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schleiermacher, Friedrich
[1813] 1963 “Ueber die verschiedenen Methoden des Uebersezens”. In Störig (ed.) 1963, 38–70.Google Scholar
Schreiber, Michael
1998 “Übersetzungstypen und Übersetzungsverfahren”. In M. Snell-Hornby et al. (eds) 1998, Handbuch Translation. Tübingen: Stauffenburg, 151–154.Google Scholar
Schulte, Rainer, and John Biguenet
(eds) 1992Theories of Translation. An anthology of essays from Dryden to Derrida. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Schultze, Brigitte
(ed.) 1987Die Literarische Übersetzung: Fallstudien zu ihrer Kulturgeschichte. (Göttinger Beiträge zur Internationalen Übersetzungsforschung, vol. 1.) Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag.Google Scholar
Schwarzwald-Rodrigue, Ora
1993 “Mixed translation patterns: the Ladino translation of Biblical and Mishnaic Hebrew verbs”. Target 5(1): 71–88. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Searle, John
1983Intentionality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Séguinot, Candace
1982 “The editing function of translation”. Bulletin of the Canadian Association of Applied Linguistics 4(1): 151–161.Google Scholar
1988 “Pragmatics and the explicitation hypothesis”. TTR 1(2): 106–113. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1989 “The translation process: an experimental study”. In C. Séguinot (ed.) 1989, The Translation Process. School of Translation, York University: H.G. Publications, 21–53.Google Scholar
1991 “A study of student translation strategies”. In Tirkkonen-Condit (ed.) 1991, 79–88.Google Scholar
Sell, Roger
1990Literary Pragmatics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Shlesinger, Miriam
1992 “Lexicalization in translation: an experimental study of students’ progress”. In C. Dollerup and A. Loddegaard (eds) 1992, Teaching Translation and Interpreting 1: Training, talent and experience. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins, 123–127. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Shveitser, Alexander
1993 “Equivalence and adequacy”. In Zlateva (ed.) 1993, 47–56.Google Scholar
Snell-Hornby, Mary, H.G. Hönig, P. Kußmaul, and P.A. Schmitt
(eds) 2004Handbuch Translation. (Second edition.) Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
Snell-Hornby, Mary
1988Translation Studies. An integrated approach. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006The Turns of Translation Studies. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Snell, Bruno
1975Die Entdeckung des Geistes. (4th edition.) Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Steiner, Erich
1988 “Describing language as activity: an application to child language”. In R.P. Fawcett and D.J. Young (eds) 1988, New Developments in Systemic Linguistics, Vol. 2. Theory and applications. London: Pinter, 144–173.Google Scholar
Steiner, George
1975After Babel. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stetting, Karen
1989 “Transediting – a new term for coping with a grey area between editing and translating”. In G. Caie, et al. (eds) 1989, Proceedings from the Fourth Nordic Conference for English Studies. Copenhagen: Department of English, University of Copenhagen, 371–382.Google Scholar
Störig, Hans J.
(ed.) 1963Das Problem des Übersetzens. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.Google Scholar
Suojanen, Tytti, Kaisa Koskinen and Tiina Tuominen
2015User-Centred Translation. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Swales, John
1991Genre Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tabakowska, Elzbieta
1993Cognitive Linguistics and Poetics of Translation. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Taivalkoski-Shilov, Kristiina, and Myriam Suchet
(eds) 2013La traduction des voix intra-textuelles / Intratextual Voices in Translation. Montréal: Éditions québecoises de l’œuvre.Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah, and Muriel Saville-Troike
(eds) 1985Perspectives on Silence. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja
1990 “Professional vs. non-professional translation: a think-aloud protocol study”. In M.A.K. Halliday, J. Gibbons, and H. Nicholas (eds) 1990, Learning, Keeping and Using Language. Selected papers from the Eighth World Congress of Applied Linguistics. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins, 381–394. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(ed.) 1991Empirical Research in Translation and Intercultural Studies. Selected papers of the TRANSIF Seminar, Savonlinna 1988. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
2004 “Unique items – over- or under-represented in translated language?” In A. Mauranen and P. Kujamäki (eds) 2004, Translation Universals. Do they Exist? Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins, 177–184. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Toma, Peter
[1976] 1989 “An operational machine translation system”. In Chesterman (ed.) 1989, 162–172. (Originally published in R.W. Brislin (ed.) 1976, Translation. Applications and Research. New York: Gardner Press Inc., 249–260.)Google Scholar
Tommola, Jorma
1986 “Translation as a language process: an empirical approach”. In Y.M. Gambier (ed.) 1986, TRANS.Turku: School of Translation Sudies, University of Turku, 118–140.Google Scholar
Toury, Gideon
1980In Search of a Theory of Translation. Tel Aviv: Porter Institute.Google Scholar
1985 “A rationale for descriptive translation studies”. In Hermans (ed.) 1985, 16–41.Google Scholar
1991 “What are descriptive studies into translation likely to yield apart from isolated descriptions?” In Leuven-Zwart and Naaijkens (eds) 1991, 179–192.Google Scholar
1995Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012Descriptive Translation Studies – and Beyond. (Revised edition.) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tymoczko, Maria
2006 “Reconceptualizing Western translation theory: Integrating non-Western thought about translation”. In T. Hermans (ed.) 2006, Translating Others (vol. 1). Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing, 13–32.Google Scholar
Tytler, Alexander F.
[1790] 1978Essay on the Principles of Translation. (Amsterdam Classics in Linguistics 13.) Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ullmann-Margalit, Edna
1977The Emergence of Norms. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ulrych, Margherita
2009 “Translating and editing as mediated discourse: focus on the recipient”. In R. Dimitriu and M. Shlesinger (eds) 2009, Translators and Their Readers. In Homage to Eugene A. Nida. Brussels: Editions du Hasard, 219–234.Google Scholar
Vehmas-Lehto, Inkeri
1989Quasi-correctness. A critical study of Finnish translations of Russian journalistic texts. Helsinki: Neuvostoliittoinstituutti. Available at https://​helda​.helsinki​.fi​/bitstream​/handle​/10138​/154308​/quasicor​.pdf​?sequence​=1.
Venuti, Lawrence
1992 “Introduction”. In L. Venuti (ed.) 1992, Rethinking Translation. London: Routledge, 1–17.Google Scholar
1995aThe Translator’s Invisibility: A history of translation. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1995b “Translation, authorship, copyright”. The Translator 1(1): 1–24. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vermeer, Hans J.
1989 “Skopos and commission in translational action”. In Chesterman (ed.) 1989, 173–187.Google Scholar
1992Skizzen zu einer Geschichte der Translation. Vols 1 and 2. Frankfurt am Main: Verlag fur Interkulturelle Kommunikation.Google Scholar
1997 “Translation and the ‘meme’”. Target 9(1): 155–166. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1998 “Starting to unask what translatology is all about”. Target 10(1): 41–68. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vieira, Else R.P.
1994 “A postmodern translational aesthetics in Brazil”. In M. Snell-Hornby, F. Pöchhacker, and K. Kaindl (eds) 1994, Translation Studies: An interdiscipline. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins, 65–72. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vinay, Jean-Paul, and Jean Darbelnet
[1958] 1969Stylistique Comparée du français et de l’anglais. Paris: Didier.Google Scholar
Vuorinen, Erkka
1994 “Kääntäjän ‘tarkkuudesta’ ja ‘vapaudesta’ sekä hyvästä kääntämistavasta”. Kääntäjä 2: 1–3.Google Scholar
Weaver, Warren
1955 “Translation”. In W.N. Locke and A.D. Booth (eds) 1955, Machine Translation of Languages. New York: Wiley, 15–23.Google Scholar
Wierzbicka, Anna
1991Cross-cultural Pragmatics. The semantics of human interaction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Will, Frederic
1973The Knife in the Stone. The Hague: Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Willamowitz-Moellendorff, Ulrich von
[1925] 1963 “Was ist Übersetzen?” In Störig (ed.) 1963, 139–169.Google Scholar
Willems, Dominique, and Bart Defrancq
(eds) 2004Contrastive Analysis in Language: Identifying Linguistic Units of Comparison. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Williams, Bernard
[1985] 1993Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy. London: Fontana.Google Scholar
Wilss, Wolfram
1977Übersetzungswissenschaft. Stuttgart: Klett.Google Scholar
1982The Science of Translation. Problems and methods. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
1988Kognition und Übersetzen. Zu Theorie und Praxis der menschlichen und der maschinellen Übersetzung. Tübingen: Niemeyer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wittgenstein, Ludwig
1953Philosophical Investigations. (Parallel English translation byG.E.M. Anscombe.) Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wolf, Michaela, and Alexandra Fukari
(eds) 2007Constructing a Sociology of Translation. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wright, Georg H. von
1968An Essay in Deontic Logic and the General Theory of Action. (Acta Philosophica Fennica 21.) Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Xiao, Richard
(ed.) 2010Proceedings of The International Symposium on Using Corpora in Contrastive and Translation Studies (UCCTS 2008). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholar Publishing.Google Scholar
Zabalbeascoa, Patrick
2000 “From techniques of translation to types of solutions”. In A. Beeby, D. Endinger, and M. Presas (eds) 2000, Investigating Translation. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins, 117–127. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zalán, P.
1990 “Zur Problematik von Normen und Übersetzen”. In R. Arntz and G. Thome (eds) 1990, Übersetzungswissenschaft. Ergebnisse und Perspektiven. Tübingen: Narr, 55–58.Google Scholar
Zanettin, Federico, Silvia Bernardini, and Dominic Stewart
(eds) 2003Corpora in Translator Education. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.Google Scholar
Zeldin, Theodor
[1994] 1995An Intimate History of Humanity. London: Minerva (Mandarin Paperbacks).Google Scholar
Zlateva, Palma
(ed.) 1993Translation as Social Action. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Subjects

Linguistics

Semantics

Translation & Interpreting Studies

Translation Studies
BIC Subject: CFP – Translation & interpretation
BISAC Subject: LAN023000 – LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES / Translating & Interpreting
U.S. Library of Congress Control Number:  2015045490 | Marc record