Though there are no clear-cut boundaries between the philosophy of translation and translation studies, they are obviously not the same. They differ not only in how they address their subject matter but also in that they occupy different “niches” in the culture. In the terminology of Bourdieu, they partake in different, though possibly partly overlapping cultural fields. This article attempts to create a meeting place for two representatives of these disciplines: Paul Ricœur, a leading figure in French hermeneutics of the 20th century, and Gideon Toury, a prominent researcher in the field of translation studies. Ricœur’s concept of the (non-existing) “third text” is compared with Toury’s concept of “the adequate translation as a hypothetical construct”, which was proposed in the 1980s and negated in the 1990s; and Ricœur’s view of translation as “equivalence without adequacy” is compared with Toury’s stand on this issue. The possibility of working with both and reading each of them in light of the other is examined by applying their ideas to a test case—three Hebrew translations of Kipling’s “If ”. The underlying assumption is that establishing links between translation studies and the philosophy of translation can contribute to the understanding of the phenomenon, which is the subject matter of both.
Kipling, Rudyard. 1976 (1892). “If”. T.S. Eliot, ed. A choice of Kipling’s verse. London: Faber and Faber. 273–274.
Kipling, Rudyard1976 (1899). “The White Man’s Burden”. A choice of Kipling’s verse (ibid.). London: Faber and Faber. 136–137.
Or, Amir, tr. 2001 (1998). “Im” (“If ”). Asher Reich, ed. A kiss through the veil: Hebrew verse translations by many hands compared. Tel Aviv: Am Oved. 156. [Hebrew]
Orland, Yaakov, tr. 2001 (1954). “Im”. A kiss through the veil (ibid.). 156–157. [Hebrew]
Ratosh, Yonatan, tr. 2001 (1968). “Ki” (“If ”). A kiss through the veil (ibid.). 155. [Hebrew]
Reichman, Hananya, tr. 2001 (1964). “Im”. A kiss through the veil (ibid.). 154–155. [Hebrew]
Shalom, S. (Shalom Yoseph Shapira), tr. 2001 (1960). “Im…”. A kiss through the veil (ibid.). 157. [Hebrew]
Tchernikhovsky, Shaul. 2001 (1935). “Im nixašta la-or” (“If you believe in light”). A kiss through the veil (ibid.). 161–162. [Hebrew]
Ullman-Margalit, Edma, tr. 2004. “If”. Ha-aretz 15.01.04. [Hebrew]
Secondary Sources
Benjamin, Walter. 1992. “The task of the translator”. Illuminations, tr. Harry Zohn. London: Fontana, 1992. 70–82.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1993. “Some properties of fields”. Sociology in question, tr. Richard Nice. London: Sage, 1993. 72–77.
Davis, Kathleen. 2001. Deconstruction and translation. Anthony Pym, ed. Translation theories explained, vol. 81. Manchester: St. Jerome.
Derrida, Jacques. 2004 (1999). “What is a ‘relevant’ translation?”. Lawrence Venuti, ed. The translation studies reader. London and New York: Routledge, 2004. 423–446.
Diamond, James S.1986. Homeland or Holy Land?: The “Canaanite” critique of Israel. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Dorfman, Eran. 2004. “The hermeneutics of translation”. Introduction to Paul Ricœur, On translation. Tel Aviv: Resling, 2004. 7–19. [Hebrew]
Eco, Umberto. 1995. The search for the perfect language (the making of Europe), tr. James Fentress. Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell.
Gertz, Nurith. 1986. “Social myths in literary and political texts”. Poetics today 7:4. 621–639.
Miron, Dan. 1975 (2nd edition). “On the poetry of Yonatan Ratosh”. Four faces of contemporary Hebrew literature. Jerusalem: Schocken, 1975. 195–256. [Hebrew]
Porat, Yehoshua. 1989. Weapon and pen in his hand: The life of Uriel Shelah. Tel Aviv: Makhbarot Le-sifrut. [Hebrew]
Reagan, Charles E.1996. Paul Ricœur: His life and his work. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
Ricœur, Paul. 2006. On translation, tr. Eileen Brennan. London and New York: Routledge.
Steiner, George. 1975. After Babel: Aspects of language and translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Toury, Gideon. 1980. In search of a theory of translation. Tel Aviv: The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics.
Venuti, Lawrence. 1992. “Introduction”. Lawrence Venuti, ed. Rethinking translation: Discourse, subjectivity, ideology. London and New York: Routledge, 1992. 1–17.
Vlastos, Gregory. 1954. “The third man argument in the Parmenides”. Philosophical review 63. 319–349.
Weissbrod, Rachel. 1991. “Translation of prose fiction from English to Hebrew: A function of norms (1960s and 1970s)”. Mildred L. Larson, ed. ATA (American Translators’ Association), vol. V1. New York: State University of New York at Binghamton, 1991. 206–223.
Weissbrod, Rachel. 2002. “‘You’ll be a man, my son!’—Yonatan Ratosh as a translator of poetry”. Michal Ephratt, ed. Yonatan Ratosh: Poetry and language. Haifa: University of Haifa Press, 2002. 133–153. [Hebrew]
Cited by (4)
Cited by four other publications
Al-Moteri, Modi, Ibrahim R. Alqarni, Ahmed AbdElbagy Ibrahim Elryah, Virginia Plummer, Mohammed Almalki & Ali Sorayyaei Azar
2024. The sustainability effects of two reading interventions on Saudi nursing students’ comprehension of scientific research. PLOS ONE 19:10 ► pp. e0309898 ff.
Kokkola, Sari
2024. The invisible ubiquity of philosophy in translation studies: towards a re-articulation of the discipline’s relationship with philosophy. Translation Studies 17:2 ► pp. 216 ff.
2013. Argument and Argumentation: A Review of Literature for Clarification of Translated Words. Journal of The Korean Association For Research In Science Education 33:6 ► pp. 1119 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 7 november 2024. 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.