Article published in:
Target
Vol. 13:2 (2001) ► pp. 203–239

A three-level methodology for descriptive-explanatory Translation Studies

| Universidad Jaime I (Spain)
Drawing mainly on Vidal (1998), Tymoczko (2000) and Harvey (forthcoming), Hatim and Mason (1990, 1997) and Mason (2000), the present paper proposes a threefold analytical methodology consisting of: description, ideological explanation, and perlocutionary exploration of texts. In practice, the article examines the speeches uttered in Spanish and English before the European Parliament (EP) on 9th March 1993. The main focus of the study is transitivity shifts and their connection to ideological issues. This corpus has been chosen for various reasons. Amongst them, the paper sets out to test the conclusions reached by prior research (Trosborg 1997a; Koskinen 2000). Three basic questions are posed: 1. Are EP speeches odd, ‘out of place’/ ‘strange’/ ‘unusual’ (in short literal) as Koskinen (2000) maintains? (Descriptive component of analysis); 2. Does translation affect the ideological output of original texts? (Explanatory component of analysis); 3.Which perlocutionary questions may be raised as a result of the previous questions? (Perlocutionary component of analysis).
Keywords: CDA, description, explanation, European Parliament, Halliday, ideology, illocutionary, perlocutionary, translational shifts, transitivity
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • 1.Theoretical intertexts
  • 2.Theory put to work: Preliminary remarks
    • 2.1EP speeches as the research corpus
    • 2.2Some basic notions on transitivity
  • 3.A critical analysis of EP speeches
    • 3.1Description
      • 3.1.1Expansion
      • 3.1.2Contraction
      • 3.1.3Dematerialization
      • 3.1.4Materialization
      • 3.1.5Different types of material processes
      • 3.1.6Number of processes in source text and target text
    • 3.2Explanation
    • 3.3Exploring repercussions
  • 4.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 13 June 2002
https://doi.org/10.1075/target.13.2.02cal
References
Baker, Mona
1996 “Linguistic and cultural studies: Complementary or competing paradigms in Translation Studies?”. Angelika Lauer, Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast, Johann Haller and Erich Steiner, eds. Übersetzungswissenschaft im Umbruch: Festschrift für Wolfram Wilss zum 70. Geburtstag. Tübingen: Gunter Narr 1996 9–19.Google Scholar
Bell, Roger T
1984 “Language style as audience design”. Language in society 131. 145–204.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bell, Roger T.
1991 Translation and translating: Theory and practice. London and New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Benson, James D. and William S. Greaves
1987 “A comparison of process types in Poe and Melville”. Ross Steele and Terry Threadgold, eds. Language topics: Essays in honour of Michael Halliday II1. Amsterdam—Philadelphia: John Benjamins 1987 131–143.Google Scholar
Berry, Margaret
1975 An introduction to systemic linguistics I: Structures and systems. London and Sydney: B.T. Batsford Ltd.Google Scholar
1977 An introduction to systemic linguistics II: Levels and links. London and Sydney: B.T. Batsford Ltd.Google Scholar
Bloor, Thomas and Meriel Bloor
1995 The functional analysis of English: A Hallidayian approach. London, New York, Sydney and Auckland: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Burton, Dreirdre
1982 “Through glass darkly: Through dark glasses”. Carter 1982 : 195–214.Google Scholar
Butt, John and Carmen Benjamin
1988 A new reference grammar of modern Spanish. London, New York, Sydney and Auckland: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Calzada Pérez, María
1997 Transitivity in translation: The interdependence of texture and context. A contrastive study of original and translated speeches in English and Spanish from the European Parliament. Edinburgh: Harriot Watt University. [Unpublished PhD Thesis.]Google Scholar
Carter, Roland
ed. 1982 Language and literature: An introductory reader in stylistics. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Chesterman, Andrew and Rosemary Arrojo
2000 “Shared ground in Translation Studies”. Target 12:1. 151–160.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Eagleton, Terry
1991 Ideology: An introduction. London and New York: Verso.Google Scholar
Eggins, Suzanne
1994 An introduction to systemic functional analysis. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
Fairclough, Norman
1995 Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. London and New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Fowler, Roger
1996 “On critical linguistics”. Carmen Rosa Caldas-Coulthard and Malcolm Coulthard, eds. Texts and practices: Readings in critical discourse analysis. London and New York: Routledge 1996 3–14.Google Scholar
Francis, Gill and Anneliese Kramer-Dahl
1992 “Grammaticalizing the medical case”. Michail Toolan, ed. Language, text and context: Essays in stylistics. London and New York: Routledge 1992 56–90.Google Scholar
Godayol, Pilar
2000 Espais de frontera: Gènere i traducció. Vic: Eumo editorial.Google Scholar
Halliday, M.A.K.
1967a “Notes on transitivity and theme in English”. Part I: Journal of linguistics 3:1. 37–81; Part II: 1967b Journal of linguistics 3:2. 199–244; Part III: 1968 Journal of linguistics 41. 179–215.Google Scholar
1994 An introduction to functional grammar. London, New York, Sydney and Auckland: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Harvey, Keith
1998 “Translating camp talk: Gay identities and cultural transfer”. The translator 4:2. 295–321.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Forthcoming. “‘Events’ and ‘horizons’: Reading ideologies in the ‘binding’ of a translation”. To appear in María Calzada Pérez ed. Apropos of ideology: Translation studies on ideology / Ideologies in Translation Studies Manchester St. Jerome
Hatim, Basil and Ian Mason
1990 Discourse and the translator. London and New York: Longman.Google Scholar
1997 The translator as communicator. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hodge, Robert and Gunther Kress
1993 Language as ideology, Second Edition. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Chris
1982 “Systemic grammar and its use in literary analysis”. Carter 1982 :83–99.Google Scholar
Koskinen, Kaisa
2000 “Institutional illusions: Translating in the EU Commission”. The translator 6:1. 49–67.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kress, Gunther
1976 Halliday: System and function in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Martin, J.R. [= Martin R. Jacobson] and Christian Matthiessen and Clare Painter
1997 Working with functional grammar. London, New York, Sydney and Auckland: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Mason, Ian
2000 “Audience design in translating”. The translator 6:1. 1–22.Google Scholar
Moliner, Maria
1998 Diccionario de uso del español. Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar
Puurtinen, Tiina
2000 “Translating linguistic markers of ideology”. Andrew Chesterman, Natividad Gallardo San Salvador and Yves Gambier, eds. Translation in context: Selected contributions from the EST Congress, Granada 1998. Amsterdam—Philadelphia: John Benjamins 2000 177–186.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pym, Anthony
1996 “Open letter on hybrids and translation”. Available online from http://​www​.fut​.es​/~apym​/on​-line​/hybrids​/hybrids​.html (July 14, 2001).Google Scholar
Schäffner, Christina
1997 “Strategies of translating political texts”. Trosborg 1997 :119–143.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Seco, Manuel
1998 Diccionario de dudas y dificultades de la lengua española. Madrid: Espasa Calpe.Google Scholar
Simpson, Paul
1993 Language, ideology and point of view. London and New York: Routledge.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
The new Oxford dictionary of English
1998 Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, Geoff
1996 Introducing functional grammar. London, New York, Sydney and Auckland: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Thompson, John B.
1990 Ideology and modern culture: Critical and social theory in the era of mass communication. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Trosborg, Anna
ed. 1997 Text typology and translation. Amsterdam—Philadelphia: John Benjamins.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1997a “Translating hybrid political texts”. Trosborg 1997 :145–158.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tymoczko, Maria
1999 Translation in a postcolonial context. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
2000 “Translation and political engagement: Activisim, social change and the role of translation in geopolitical shifts”. The translator 6:1. 23–47.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Van Dijk, Teun A.
1998 Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Vidal Claramonte, Maria del Carmen África
1998 El futuro de la traducción: Últimas teorías, nuevas aplicaciones. València: Alfons el Magnànim.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 11 other publications

Ayyad, Ahmad Y.
2012. Uncovering ideology in translation. Journal of Language and Politics 11:2 ► pp. 250 ff. Crossref logo
Bartłomiejczyk, Magdalena
2021. Interpreting nonmainstream ideology (Euroscepticism) in the European Parliament. Perspectives ► pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Koskinen, Kaisa
2011.  In Handbook of Translation Studies [Handbook of Translation Studies, 2], ► pp. 54 ff. Crossref logo
Koskinen, Kaisa
2021. Shared culture?. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies ► pp. 143 ff. Crossref logo
Lee, Changsoo
2007. A Study of Transitivity Shifts in English-to-Korean Translation1. FORUM. Revue internationale d’interprétation et de traduction / International Journal of Interpretation and Translation 5:1 ► pp. 113 ff. Crossref logo
Li, Xin
2018.  In The Reconstruction of Modality in Chinese-English Government Press Conference Interpreting [Corpora and Intercultural Studies, 1], ► pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Schäffner, Christina
2012. Unknown agents in translated political discourse. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 24:1 ► pp. 103 ff. Crossref logo
Schäffner, Christina
2019. Translation and Discourse Analysis. Slovo.ru: Baltic accent 10:3 ► pp. 28 ff. Crossref logo
Wang, Xi
2021. Construing Community with a Shared Future in President Xi Jinping’s Diplomatic Discourse (2013–2018): The Role of Personal Pronouns we and they. Critical Arts 35:3 ► pp. 35 ff. Crossref logo
Yu, Hailing & Canzhong Wu
2018. Images of the Chinese government projected in its work reports: Transformation through translation. Lingua 214 ► pp. 74 ff. Crossref logo
Zhu, Chunshen
2004. Repetition and signification. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 16:2 ► pp. 227 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 april 2022. 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.