Article published in:
FORUM
Vol. 13:1 (2015) ► pp. 6586
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Lee, Hyang & Won Jun Nam
2019. The past and future of translation studies in South Korea. Perspectives 27:3  pp. 419 ff. Crossref logo
Zhao, Yanfei & Huijuan Ma
2019. Mapping translation studies in China based on Holmes/Toury Map. FORUM. Revue internationale d’interprétation et de traduction / International Journal of Interpretation and Translation 17:1  pp. 99 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 26 october 2021. 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

Baker, M.
(1996) Linguistic and cultural studies: Complementary or competing paradigms in Translation Studies?. In: Angelika Lauer, Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast, Johann Haller and Erich Steiner (eds.) Übersetzungswissenschaft im Umbruch: Festschrift fur Wolfram Wilss zum 70. Geburstag. Tübingen, Gunter narr. p. 9–19.Google Scholar
Brownlie, S.
(2003) Distinguishing some approaches to translation research: The issue of interpretative constraints. The Translator. 9 (1), p. 39–64. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chesterman, A.
(1998) Causes, translations, effects. Target. 10(2), p. 201–230. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2000) What constitutes “progress” in Translation Studies?” In: Birgitta Englund Dimitrova (ed.) Översättning och tolkning. Rapport från ASLA:shöstsymposium, Stockholm, 5-6 november 1998. Uppsala, ASLA, p. 33–49.Google Scholar
Cherterman, A. & Arrojo, R.
(2000) Shared ground in Translation Studies. Target. 12(1), p. 151–160. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Doorslaer, L. V.
(2007) Risking conceptual maps. In: Gambier, Y. & Doorslaer, L. V. (eds.) The Metalanguage of translation. Amsterdam & Philadelphia, John Benjamins, p. 27–43.Google Scholar
Gile, D.
(2001) Being constructive about shared ground. Target. 13(1), p. 149–153. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gile, D., Gambier, Y. & Doorslaer, L. V.
(eds.) (2012) Handbook of Translation Studies.volume 3. Amsterdam & Philadelphia, John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hermans, T.
(1999) Translation in systems: Descriptive and system-oriented approaches explained. Manchester, Saint Jerome.Google Scholar
(ed.) (2002) Crosscultural transgressions: Research models in Translation Studies II: Historical and ideological issues. Manchester, Saint Jerome.Google Scholar
Holmes, J. S.
(1988) Translated!: Papers on literary translation and Translation studies. Amsterdam, Rodopi.Google Scholar
Mossop, B.
(2001) Why should we seek common ground? Target. 13(1), p. 158–159. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pym, A.
(1998) Method in translation history. Manchester, Saint Jerome.Google Scholar
(2000) Why common ground is not automatically space for cooperation: On Chesterman versus Arrojo. Target. 12(2), p. 333–362.Google Scholar
Snell-Hornby, M.
(2006) The Turns of Translation Studies. Amsterdam & Philadelphia, John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Toury, G.
(1995) Descriptive Translation Studies and beyond. Amsterdam & Philadelphia, John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Venuti, L.
(1995) The Translatorʼs invisibility. London, Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Williams, J. & Chesterman, A.
(2002) The Map: A beginner's guide to doing research in Translation Studies. Manchester, Saint Jerome.Google Scholar