Article published in:Toward Comparative Translation and Interpreting Studies
Edited by Sergey Tyulenev and Binghan Zheng
[Translation and Interpreting Studies 12:2] 2017
► pp. 213–230
The relative need for Comparative Translation Studies
This article asks to what extent Comparative Translation Studies is needed and realistic to achieve. The difficulties of comparative approaches in other disciplines are related to translation studies, where ‘comparative’ up to now has been used for several levels of analysis. An important difference with most other disciplines is that comparison seems to be more self-evident in a trans-discipline like translation studies, where transfer between two or more sides is always immanently present. The selection of the units of analysis/comparison is a pitfall, particularly when working with larger units at a systemic or sociocultural level when studying cultural (ex)change. It is suggested that existing tools used in translation studies can be helpful in structuring the approach and the methodology: both mixed-method models from descriptive translation studies and existing conceptual maps in the discipline.
Keywords: universality, categorization, methodology, cultural change, otherness, Eurocentrism, conceptual maps, descriptive translation studies
- Clear definitions, fuzzy concepts
- Levels of comparison and levels of comparative TS
- Otherness and (ex)change
- Comparative pitfalls in other disciplines
- Euro- and other -centrisms
- Support from maps
Published online: 25 October 2017
Chang, Nam Fung
Gambier, Yves, and Luc van Doorslaer
(eds) 2015 Translation Studies Bibliography, 12th online release, approx. 28,000 items. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. www.benjamins.nl/online/tsb (accessed on 27 May 2016).
Kothari, Rita, and Judy Wakabayashi
Lambert, José, and Hendrik van Gorp
Pokorn, Nike K.
Reese, Stephen D.
Saldanha, Gabriela and Sharon O’Brien
Schweissinger, Marc J.
Tse, Chung Alan
van Doorslaer, Luc
van Doorslaer, Luc, and Peter Flynn
Cited by 1 other publications
Lee, Hyang & Won Jun Nam
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 11 november 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.