Cover not available
Article published In:
Translation Spaces
Vol. 3 (2014) ► pp.167–191

Rethinking translation studies

Since Holmes’ founding statement for translation studies in 1972, four decades have passed. During that time some trends seem to have developed in the discipline, and it is time to stop and take stock. This paper touches upon issues essential to understanding translation studies today, such as (1) the nature of translation; (2) the research scope of translation studies; (3) interdisciplinary orientation and its implications; (4) research methods; and (5) the relationship between translation theory and practice. An examination of these issues indicates that the discipline of translation studies is increasingly subject to opposing or competing research approaches and is exhibiting a kind of disciplinary fragmentation. There are imbalances in the research methods used and in the topics that emerge in the research literature. There is a growing gap between translation theory and practice. This paper tries to examine the reasons for these trends and offer perspectives on ways to reach some common disciplinary and professional ground.
Keywords: definition, translation practice, translation theory, data-based research., evidence-based, interdiscipline
Published online: 28 November 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.3.08sun
References (81)
Achinstein, Peter. 2008. “Evidence.” In The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Science, edited by Stathis Psillos, and Martin Curd, 337–348. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Babbie, Earl R. 2010. The Practice of Social Research. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cangage Learning.Google Scholar
Baker, Mona. 1992. In Other Words: A Coursebook on Translation. London and New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bassnett-McGuire, Susan, and André Lefevere. 1998. Constructing Cultures: Essays on Literary Translation. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Benjamin, Walter. 2012. “The Translator’s Task.” In The Translation Studies Reader, edited by Lawrence Venuti, 75–83. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1984. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
. 1986. “The forms of capital.” In Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, edited by John G. Richardson, 241–258. New York: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
Burawoy, Michael. 2005. “For Public Sociology.” American Sociological Review 70 (1): 4–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cattrysse, Patrick. 2001. “Multimedia and Translation: Methodological Considerations.” In (Multi) media Translation: Concepts, Practices, and Research, edited by Yves Gambier, and Henrik Gottlieb, 1–12. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chelliah, Shobhana L., and Willem J. de Reuse. 2010. Handbook of Descriptive Linguistic Fieldwork. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Chesterman, Andrew. 2002. “On the Interdisciplinarity of Translation Studies.” Logos and Language 3 (1): 1–9.Google Scholar
Chesterman, Andrew, and Rosemary Arrojo. 2000. “Shared Ground in Translation Studies.” Target 12 (1): 151–160. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chesterman, Andrew, and Emma Wagner. 2002. Can Theory Help Translators?: A Dialogue Between the Ivory Tower and the Wordface. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Clark, B. 2006. “Linguistics as a Science.” In Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, edited by Keith Brown, 227–234. Amsterdam and London: Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Colina, Sonia. forthcoming. Fundamentals of Translation. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logo
Cooke, Roger. 1991. Experts in Uncertainty: Opinion and Subjective Probability in Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Creswell, John W., and Vicki L. Plano Clark. 2011. Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
DeForge, Bruce R. 2010. “Research Design Principles.” In Encyclopedia of Research Design, edited by Neil J. Salkind, 1252–1259. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
Eagleton, Terry. 2008. Literary Theory: An Introduction. Anniversary ed. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Gaber, John. 2010. “Applied Research.” In Encyclopedia of Research Design, edited by Neil J. Salkind, 35–37. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
Gambier, Yves, and Henrik Gottlieb. 2001. “Multimedia, Multilingua: Multiple Challenges.” In (Multi)-media Translation: Concepts, Practices, and Research, edited by Yves Gambier, and Henrik Gottlieb, viii–xx. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gambier, Yves, and Luc van Doorslaer. 2009. The Metalanguage of Translation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gentzler, Edwin. 2001. Contemporary Translation Theories. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Gile, D. 2005. The Liberal Arts Paradigm and the Empirical Science Paradigm. Accessed January 15, 2014. [URL].
Gile, Daniel, Gyde Hansen, and Nike K. Pokorn. 2010. Why Translation Studies Matters. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gottschall, Jonathan. 2008. Literature, Science, and a New Humanities, Cognitive Studies in Literature and Performance. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gratton, Chris, and Ian Jones. 2004. Research Methods for Sport Studies. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gravetter, Frederick J., and Lori-Ann B. Forzano. 2009. Research Methods for the Behavioral Science. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
Gutting, Gary. 1998. “Post-structuralism.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward Craig, 596–600. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Halverson, Sandra. 1999. “Conceptual Work and the ‘Translation’ Concept.” Target 11 (1): 1–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hermans, Theo. 2013. “What is (not) translation?” In The Routledge Handbook of Translation Studies, edited by Carmen Millán, and Francesca Bartrina, 75–86. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hoggart, Richard. 1970. Speaking to Each Other, Volume 2: About Literature. London: Chatto and Windus.Google Scholar
Holmes, James S. 1988. “The Name and Nature of Translation Studies.” In Translated! Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies, edited by James S. Holmes, and Raymond van den Broeck, 67–80. Amsterdam: Editions Ropopi.Google Scholar
Ivir, Vladimir. 2004. “Descriptive and Prescriptive Approaches in the Linguistic Study of Translation.” In Übersetzung-Translation-Traduction. Ein internationales Handbuch zur Übersetzungsforschung /An International Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, edited by Harald Kittel, Armin Paul Frank, Norbert Greiner, Theo Hermans, Werner Koller, José Lambert, and Fritz Paul, 276–284. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman. 1959. “On Linguistic Aspects of Translation.” In On Translation, edited by R.A. Brower, 232–239. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Jeffries, Vincent. 2009. “Redefining the Nature and Future of Sociology: Toward a Holistic Sociology.” In Handbook of Public Sociology, edited by Vincent Jeffries, 1–23. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
Jones, Francis R. 2009. “Literary translation.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, edited by Mona Baker, and Gabriela Saldanha, 152–157. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Joseph, John E. 1998. “Why isn’t translation impossible?” In Language at Work, edited by Susan Hunston, 86–97. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Koskinen, Kaisa. 2010. “What Matters to Translation Studies? On the Role of Public Translation Studies.” In Why Translation Studies Matters, edited by Daniel Gile, Gyde Hansen, and Nike K. Pokorn, 15–26. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuhiwczak, Piotr, and Littau Karin. 2007. A Companion to Translation Studies. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuhiwczak, Piotr, and Karin Littau. 2007. “Introduction.” In A Companion to Translation Studies, edited by Piotr Kuhiwczak, and Littau Karin, 1–12. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakatos, Imre. 1970. “Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes.” In Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, edited by Imre Lakatos, and Alan Musgrave, 91–195. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1999. “Cognitive Models and Prototype Theory.” In Concepts: Core Readings, edited by Eric Margolis, and Stephen Laurence, 391–421. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lamont, Michele, and Annette Lareau. 1988. “Cultural Capital: Allusions, Gaps and Glissandos in Recent Theoretical Developments.” Sociological Theory 6 (2): 153–168. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Margolis, Eric, and Stephen Laurence. 2014. “Concepts.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta. [URL].
Martin, Robert M. 2010. “Meaning: Overview of Philosophical Theories.” In Concise Encyclopedia of Philosophy of Language and Linguistics, edited by Alex Barber, 433–438. Boston, MA: Elsevier.Google Scholar
McRobbie, Angela. 1997. “The Es and the Anti-Es: New Questions for Feminism and Cultural Studies.” In Cultural Sudies in Question, edited by Marjorie Ferguson, and Peter Golding, 170–186. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moran, Joe. 2002. Interdisciplinarity, The New Critical Idiom. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Munday, Jeremy. 2009. The Routledge Companion to Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Neubert, Albrecht. 2001. “Shared Ground in Translation Studies Dependent on Shared Views of Looking at Translation.” Target 13 (2): 333–338. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Neubert, Albrecht, and Gregory M. Shreve. 1992. Translation as Text. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.Google Scholar
Newell, William H. 2001. “A Theory of Interdisciplinary Studies.” Issues in Integrative Studies 191: 1–25.Google Scholar
Newmark, Peter. 2004. “Non-literary in the Light of Literary Translation.” The Journal of Specialised Translation (JoSTrans) 11: 8–13.Google Scholar
. 2009. “The Linguistic and Communicative Stages in Translation Theory.” In The Routledge Companion to Translation Studies, edited by Jeremy Munday, 20–35. Londona and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Patton, Michael Quinn. 1997. Utilization-focused Evaluation: The New Century Text. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Perry, Fred L. 2005. Research in Applied Linguistics: Becoming a Discerning Consumer. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Pickering, Michael. 2008a. “Introduction.” In Research Methods for Cultural Studies, edited by Michael Pickering, 1–14. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
. 2008b. Research Methods for Cultural Studies. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Popper, Karl R. 1959. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Prinz, Jesse. 2006. “Concepts.” In Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Donald M. Borchert, 414–420. New York: Thomson Gale.Google Scholar
Pym, Anthony. 1998. Method in Translation History. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
. 2010. Exploring Translation Theories. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Reiss, Katharina. 2000. Translation Criticism: The Potentials and Limitations. Translated by Erroll F. Rhodes. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Repko, Allen F. 2008. Interdisciplinary Research: Process and Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
Rosch, Eleanor, and Carolyn Mervis. 1975. “Family Resemblances: Studies in the Internal Structure of Categories.” Cognitive Psychology 71: 573–605. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Šajkevič, Anatolij JA. 1992. “Bibliometric Analysis of Index Translationum.” Meta 37 (1): 67–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sale, Joanna E.M., Lynne H. Lohfeld, and Kevin Brazil. 2002. “Revisiting the Quantitative-Qualitative Debate: Implications for Mixed-Methods Research.” Quality & Quantity 36 (1): 43–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schäffner, Christina. 2009. “Functionalist Approaches.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, edited by Mona Baker, and Gabriela Saldanha, 115–121. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Snell-Hornby, Mary. 2006. The Turns of Translation Studies: NewParadigms or Shifting Viewpoints? Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Snell-Hornby, Mary, Franz Pöchhacker, and Klaus Kaindl. 1994. Translation Studies: An Interdiscipline. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sobin, Nicholas. 1987. “The Variable Status of Comp-trace Phenomena.” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 5 (1): 33–60. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stam, Henderikus J. 2010. “Theory.” In Encyclopedia of Research Design, edited by Neil J. Salkind, 1498–1502. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
Thomas, R. Murray, and Dale L. Brubaker. 2000. Theses and Dissertations: A Guide to Planning, Research, and Writing. Westport, CN: Bergin and Garvey.Google Scholar
Toury, Gideon. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tymoczko, Maria. 2005. “Trajectories of Research in Translation Studies.” Meta 50 (4): 1082–1097. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. Enlarging Translation, Empowering Translators. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Vandepitte, Sonia. 2008. “Remapping Translation Studies: Towards a Translation Studies Ontology.” Meta 53 (3): 569–588. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weiten, Wayne. 2010. Psychology: Themes and Variations. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
Williams, Jenny, and Andrew Chesterman. 2002. The Map: A Beginner’s Guide to Doing Research in Translation Studies. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Wakabayashi, Judy, and Rita Kothari. 2009. Decentering Translation Studies: India and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wolf, Michaela, and Fukari Alexandra. 2007. Constructing a Sociology of Translation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Gambier, Yves & Ramunė Kasperẹ
2021. Changing translation practices and moving boundaries in translation studies. Babel. Revue internationale de la traduction / International Journal of Translation 67:1 ► pp. 36 ff. DOI logo
Ji, Yadong & Benjamin R. Bates
2020. Measuring intercultural/international outgroup favoritism: comparing two measures of cultural cringe. Asian Journal of Communication 30:2 ► pp. 141 ff. DOI logo
Ločmele, Gunta
2018. Translating and Networking in Virtual Learning Environments. In Multilingual Writing and Pedagogical Cooperation in Virtual Learning Environments [Advances in Linguistics and Communication Studies, ], ► pp. 243 ff. DOI logo
Risku, Hanna
2017. Ethnographies of Translation and Situated Cognition. In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition, ► pp. 290 ff. DOI logo
Gambier, Yves
2016. Traduction et texte : vers un nouveau double paradigme. Signata :7 ► pp. 175 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 july 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.