Cover not available
Article published In:
Target
Vol. 8:1 (1996) ► pp.49–73

Directionality in Translation Processes and Practices

| English Department, University of Athens
In this article an attempt is made to systematically approach directionality in translation processes and practices from a cognitive point of view. Within the framework of cognitive semantics, it is argued that translation is an instance of conceptual metaphor, whereby conceptual structures of the target language are mapped onto the source text in order to make it understood by the TL reader. The relevance of this position for the study of translation becomes obvious when considered against existing practices in professional and nonprofessional translating. Thus, the directionality from target to source is experimentally shown to correlate with another type of directionality, namely, translating from or into one's mother tongue, and can explain observable facts in the performance of translation tasks.
Article outline
  • 0.Introduction
  • 1.Theoretical Framework
  • 2.Directionality in Translation
    • 2.1Types of Directionality
    • 2.2Translation Practices and the Translator
    • 2.3The Translator's Mother Tongue and Directionality
  • 3.An Experiment of Directionality in Translation
  • 4.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 1 January 1996
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/target.8.1.04mar
References (54)
References
Texts
Maugham, W. Somerset. 1930. Cakes and Ale. London-New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Mωμ Σóμԑϱσԑτ. 1993. Tσάɩ ϰαɩ ματαɩoᵹoξíα. Mԑτάϕϱση: Φώντας Koνᵹʋλης. Aθήνα: Kαστανώτης.Google Scholar
Moνϱσԑλάς, Kώστας. 1989. Bαμμένα Kóϰϰɩνα Mαλλɩά. Aθήνα: Kέᵹϱoς.Google Scholar
Mourselas, Kostas. 1992. Red Dyed Hair, tr. Fred A. Reed. Athens: Kedros.Google Scholar
Studies
Baker, Mona. 1992. In Other Words: A Coursebook on Translation. London and New York: Routledge.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Broeck, Raymond van den. 1986. “Contrastive Discourse Analysis as a Tool for the Interpretation of Shifts in Translated Texts”. House and Blum-Kulka 1986 : 37–47.Google Scholar
Chesterman, Andrew. 1993. “From ‘Is’ to ‘Ought’: Laws, Norms and Strategies in Translation Studies”. Target 5:1. 1–20.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dendrinos, Bessie. 1992. The EFL Textbook and Ideology. Athens: N.C. Grivas Publications.Google Scholar
Enkvist, Nils Erik. 1984. “Contrastive Linguistics and Text Linguistics”. Fisiak 1984 : 45–67.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fairclaugh, Norman. 1989a. Language and Power. London: Longman.Google Scholar
. 1989b. Discourse and Power. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. 1977. “Scenes-and-frames Semantics”. Antonio Zampolli, ed. Lin-guistic Structure Processing. Amsterdam: North Holland, 1977. 55–81.Google Scholar
1985. “Frames and the Semantics of Understanding”. Quaderni di Semantica 6:2. 222–253.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. Beryl T. Atkins. 1992. “Toward a Frame-Based Lexicon: The Semantics of RISK and Its Neighbours”. A. Lehrer and E.F. Kittay, eds. Frames, Fields and Contrast: New Essays in Semantic and Lexical Organization. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1992. 75–102.Google Scholar
Fisiak, Jaceked. 1984. Contrastive Linguistics: Prospects and Problems. Berlin-New York-Amsterdam: Mouton. [Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs, 22.]   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gerloff, Pamela. 1986. “Second Language Learners’ Reports on the Interpretive Process: Talk-aloud Protocols of Translation”. House and Blum-Kulka 1986 : 243–262.Google Scholar
Gutt, Ernst-August. 1991. Translation and Relevance: Cognition and Context. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hartmann, Reinhard R.K. 1980. Contrastive Textology. Heidelberg: Julius Groos. [Studies in Descriptive Linguistics, 5.]Google Scholar
Hatim, Basil and Ian Mason. 1990. Discourse and the Translator. London: Longman.Google Scholar
House, Juliane. 1986. “Acquiring Translational Competence in Interaction”. House and Blum-Kulka 1986 : 179–191.Google Scholar
House, Juliane and Shoshana Blum-Kulka, eds. 1986. Interlingual and Intercultural Communication: Discourse and Cognition in Translation and Second Language Acquisition Studies. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Jääskeläinen, Riitta. 1989. “Translation Assignment in Professional vs. Non-Professional Translation: A Think-Aloud Protocol Study“. Séguinot 1989 : 87–98.Google Scholar
. 1990. “Some Differences between Professionals’ vs. Novices’ Translation Processes: Reactions to the Translation Assignment”. Nyyssänen et al.. 1990: 43–51.Google Scholar
Jääskeläinen, Riitta and Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit. 1991. “Automatised Processes in Professional vs. Non-Professional Translation: A Think-Aloud Protocol Study”. Tirkkonen-Condit 1991 : 89–110.Google Scholar
Johnson, Mark. 1992. “Philosophical Implications of Cognitive Semantics”. Cognitive Linguistics 3:4. 345–366.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kopczyński, Andrzej. 1984. “Problems of Quality in Conference Interpreting”. Fisiak 1984 : 283–300.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kress, Gunter. 1989. Linguistic Processes in Sociocultural Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kussmaul, Paul. 1994. “Semantic Models and Translating”. Target 6:1. 1–13.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago-London: The University of Chicago Press.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1992. “The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor”. Andrew Ortony, ed. Metaphor and Thought, 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994. 1–51.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago-London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, I: Theoretical Prereq-uisites. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
1992. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, II: Descriptive Applications. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Lörscher, Wolfgang. 1994. “Process-Oriented Research into Translation and Implications for Translation Teaching”. Paper distributed in advance of the XXVIII International Conference on Cross-Language Studies and Contrastive Linguistics held at Rydzyna, Poland, December 15-17, 1994.Google Scholar
Marmaridou, A. Sophia S. 1987. “Semantic and Pragmatic Parameters of Meaning: On the Interface between Contrastive Text Analysis and the Production of Translated Texts”. Journal of Pragmatics 111. 721–736.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1991. “Cognitive Structures in BBC Financial Reports”. ERIC Resources in Education: Language and Linguistics. Washington D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
1994. “Conceptual Metaphor in Greek Financial Discourse”. Phillipaki-Warburton et al. 1994. 247–252.Google Scholar
Nyyssönen, Heikki, Leena Kuure, Elise Kàrkkàinen and Pirkko Raudaskoski, eds. 1990. Proceedings from the 2nd Finnish Seminar on Discourse Analysis, Oulu, September 27-28, 1988. Oulu: University of Oulu.Google Scholar
Phillipaki-Warburton, Irene, Katerina Nicolaidis and Maria Sifianou, eds. 1994. Themesin Greek Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rosch, Eleanor. 1977. “Human Categorization”. Neil Wallren, ed. Studies in Cross-Cultural Psychology, I1. London: Academic Press, 1977. 1–49.Google Scholar
Séguinot, Candaceed. 1989. The Translation Process. Toronto: H.G. Publications, School of Translation, York University.Google Scholar
Selinker, L. 1972. “Interlanguage”. IRAL 101. 219–231.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shreve, Gregory M., Christina Schäffner, Joseph H. Danks and Jennifer Griffin. 1993. “Is There a Special Kind of ‘Reading’ for Translation?: An Empirical Investigation of Reading in the Translation Process”. Target 5:1. 21–41.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Snell-Hornby, Mary, ed. 1986. Übersetzungswissenschaft: Eine Neuorientierung. Tü bingen: Francke.Google Scholar
. 1988. Translation Studies: An Integrated Approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sperber, Dan and Deirdre Wilson. 1986. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Tabakowska, Elżbieta. 1993. Cognitive Linguistics and Poetics of Translation. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja. 1989. “Professional vs. Non-Professional Translation: A Think-Aloud Protocol Study”. Séguinot 1989 : 73–85.Google Scholar
, ed. 1991. Empirical Research in Translation and Intercultural Studies: Selected Papers of the TRANSIF Seminar, Savonlinna 1988. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Toury, Gideon. 1980. In Search of a Theory of Translation. Tel Aviv: The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics, Tel Aviv University.Google Scholar
. 1986. “Monitoring Discourse Transfer: A Test-Case for a Developmental Model of Translation”. House and Blum-Kulka 1986 : 79–94.Google Scholar
Vannerem, Mia and Mary Snell-Hornby. 1986. “Die Szene hinter dem Text: ‘Scenes-and- frames semantics’ in der Übersetzung”. Snell-Hornby 1986 : 184–205.Google Scholar
Weizman, Elda. 1986. “An Interlingual Study of Discourse Structures: Implications for the Theory of Translation”. House and Blum-Kulka 1986 : 115–126.Google Scholar
Zydatiss, W. 1982. “Text Type Oriented Contrastive Linguistics and Its Implications for Translation Pedagogy at University Level”. IRAL 20:3. 175–191.Google Scholar
Cited by (21)

Cited by 21 other publications

Afrouz, Mahmoud
2024. Exploring normal vs. service translators’ orientation in rendering realia in The Holy Qur’an . FORUM. Revue internationale d’interprétation et de traduction / International Journal of Interpretation and Translation 22:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Gierszal, Sylwia & Andrzej Łyda
2023. Exploring the impact of directionality on disfluencies in simultaneous interpreting. East European Journal of Psycholinguistics 10:2 DOI logo
Yenkimaleki, Mahmood & Vincent J. Van Heuven
2023. Effects of directionality on consecutive interpreting between English and Persian. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice 17:1 ► pp. 95 ff. DOI logo
Wang, Yifang
2021. The Impact of Directionality on Cognitive Patterns in the Translation of Metaphors. In Advances in Cognitive Translation Studies [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 201 ff. DOI logo
Zuluaga Molina, Juan Felipe & Antonio Tamayo Herrera
2021. A Quantitative Exploration to Directionality Among Sworn Translators and Interpreters in Colombia. Mutatis Mutandis. Revista Latinoamericana de Traducción 14:2 ► pp. 601 ff. DOI logo
Ferreira, Aline & John W. Schwieter
2017. Directionality in Translation. In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition, ► pp. 90 ff. DOI logo
Colina, Sonia & Claudia V. Angelelli
2015. T&I pedagogy in dialogue with other disciplines. Translation and Interpreting Studies ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Colina, Sonia & Claudia V. Angelelli
2017. Translation and interpreting pedagogy in dialogue with other disciplines. In Translation and Interpreting Pedagogy in Dialogue with Other Disciplines [Benjamins Current Topics, 90], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Huang, Libo
2015. Direct and Inverse Translations of Jia Pingwa’s Novels: A Corpus-Based Stylistic Comparison. In Style in Translation: A Corpus-Based Perspective [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 79 ff. DOI logo
NICODEMUS, BRENDA & KAREN EMMOREY
2013. Direction asymmetries in spoken and signed language interpreting. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 16:3 ► pp. 624 ff. DOI logo
Nicodemus, Brenda & Karen Emmorey
2015. Directionality in ASL-English interpreting. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 17:2 ► pp. 145 ff. DOI logo
Miryang Kim
2010. Translation of Korean Shamatic Songs into English: Strategies for Readability. The Journal of Translation Studies 11:4 ► pp. 57 ff. DOI logo
김순영
2009. The Impacts of L1/L2 Translators in Literary Translation: An Analysis of Multiple Translations of the Buckwheat Season. The Journal of Translation Studies 10:4 ► pp. 41 ff. DOI logo
Elorza, Izaskun
2008. Promoting Intercultural Competence in the FL/SL Classroom: Translations as Sources of Data. Language and Intercultural Communication 8:4 ► pp. 261 ff. DOI logo
Pavlović, Nataša
2007. Directionality in Translation and Interpreting Practice. FORUM. Revue internationale d’interprétation et de traduction / International Journal of Interpretation and Translation 5:2 ► pp. 79 ff. DOI logo
Malkiel, Brenda
2004. Directionality and translational difficulty. Perspectives 12:3 ► pp. 208 ff. DOI logo
Malkiel, Brenda
2006. The effect of translator training on interference and difficulty. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 18:2 ► pp. 337 ff. DOI logo
Halverson, Sandra L.
2003. The cognitive basis of translation universals. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 15:2 ► pp. 197 ff. DOI logo
Stewart, Dominic
2000. Poor Relations and Black Sheep in Translation Studies. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 12:2 ► pp. 205 ff. DOI logo
Feinauer, Ilse
1998. 'N BEKENDSTELLING VAN DIE PROJEK: TAALGEBONDE VERSKUIWINGS TUSSEN AFRIKAANS EN ENGELS. South African Journal of Linguistics 16:sup35 ► pp. 51 ff. DOI logo
Li, Jing & Isabel De la Fuente
1970. Traducción directa e inversa de modismos chinos: estudio empírico de la direccionalidad de traducción al español. Estudios de Traducción 8 ► pp. 133 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 september 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.