Article in:
Translation and Translanguaging in Multilingual Contexts
Vol. 8:3 (2022) ► pp. 211231
References
Abdullatief, Muhammad J. H.
2018 “Cultural Satirical Features in Translation: The Pessoptimist as a case study.” In Key Cultural Texts in Translation, ed. by Kirsten Malmkjær, Adriana Serban, and Fransiska Louwagie, 275–297. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baker, Mona
1993 “Corpus Linguistics and Translation Studies: Implications and Applications.” In Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair, ed. by Mona Baker, Gill Francis, and Elena Tognini-Bonelli, 233–250. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1996 “Corpus-based Translation Studies: The Challenges that lie Ahead”. In Terminology, LSP and Translation. Studies in Language Engineering in Honour of Juan C. Sager, ed. by Harold Sommers, 175–186. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bernardini, Silvia, and Dorothy Kenny
2020 “Corpora”. In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, ed. by Mona Baker, 110–115. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, Shoshanna
1986 “Shifts of Cohesion and Coherence in Translation.” In Interlingual and Intercultural Communication: Discourse and Cognition in Translation and Second Language Acquisition Studies, ed. by Juliana House, and Shoshanna Blum-Kulka, 17–35. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
Boase-Beier, Jean
2004 “Translation and Style.” Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics 13(1): 9–11. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006Stylistic Approaches to Translation. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
2020Translation and Style. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Boase-Beier, Jean, and Marian de Vooght
eds. 2019Poetry of the Holocaust: An Anthology. Todmorden: Arc Publications.Google Scholar
Boase-Beier, Jean, and Michael Holman
eds. 1998The Practices of Literary Translation: Constraints and Creativity. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Boase-Beier, Jean, Peter Davies, Andrea Hammel, and Marion Winters
eds. 2017Translating Holocaust Lives. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Boria, Monica, Ángeles Carreres, María Norriega-Sánchez, and Marcus Tomalin
eds. 2020Translation and Multimodality: Beyond Words. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bundgaard, Kristine, and Tina Paulsen Christensen
2019 “Is the Concordance Feature the New Black? A Workplace Study of Translators’ Interaction with Translation Resources while Post-editing TM and MT Matches.” The Journal of Specialised Translation 311: 14–37.Google Scholar
Carl, Michael, Silke Gutermuth, and Silvia Hansen-Schirra
2015 “Post-editing Machine Translation: Efficiency, Strategies, and Revision Processes in Professional Translation Settings.” In Post-editing Machine Translation: A Usability Test for Professional Translation Settings, ed. by Aline Ferreira, and John W. Schwieter, 145–174. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Charlston, David
2014 “Translatorial Hexis: The Politics of Pinkard’s Translation of Hegel’s Phenomenology .” Radical Philosophy 1861(Jul/Aug): 11–22.Google Scholar
2018 “Hegel’s Phenomenology: A Comparative Analysis of Translatorial Hexis .” In Key Cultural Texts in Translation, ed. by Kirsten Malmkjær, Adriana Serban, and Fransiska Louwagie, 221–233. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Choi, Jinsil
2022Government Translation in South Korea: A Corpus Based Study. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dagut, Menachem B.
1976 “Can Metaphor Be Translated?.” Babel 22 (1): 21–33. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dickins, James
2005 “Two Models for Metaphor Translation.” Target 17 (2): 227–273. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ericsson, K. Anders, and Herbert A. Simon
1980 “Verbal Reports as Data.” Psychological Review 871: 215–251. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1984Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data. Cambridge, MA.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
González Núñez, Gabriel
2022 “Translation Studies and Public Policy.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Translation, ed. by Kirsten Malmkjær, 181–197. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grice, Paul
1957 “Meaning.” The Philosophical Review 661: 377–88. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gutt, Ernst-August
1990 “A Theoretical Account of Translation – without a Translation Theory.” Target 2(2): 135–164. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1991Translation and Relevance: Cognition and Context, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hagström, Warren O.
1965The Scientific Community. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Hempel, Carl G.
1967Fundamentals of Concept Formation in Empirical Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hermans, Theo
1996 “The Translator’s Voice in Translated Narrative.” Target 8(1): 23–84. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, James S.
1972/1988 “The Name and Nature of Translation Studies.” Expanded version of a paper presented at the Third International Congress of Applied Linguistics, Copenhagen, 1972. In Translated! Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies with an Introduction by Raymond van den Broeck. Amsterdam: Rodopi 1988, pp. 67–80.Google Scholar
Holmes, James
1988Translated! Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies with an Introduction by Raymond van den Broeck. Amsterdam: Rodopi. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hubscher-Davidson, Séverine, and Michael Borodo
eds. 2012Global Trends in Translator and Interpreter Training: Mediation and Culture. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Jakobsen, Arnt Lykke
1998 “Logging Time Delay in Translation.” In LSP Texts and the Process of Translation, ed. by Gyde Hansen, 73–101. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Working Papers in Translation.Google Scholar
1999 “Logging Target Text Production with Translog .” In Probing the Process in Translation: Methods and Results, ed. by Gyde Hansen, 9–20. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
2006 “Research Methods in Translation – Translog.” In Computer Keystroke Logging and Writing: Methods and Applications, ed. by Kirk P. H. Sullivan, and Eva Lindgren, 95–105. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
2017 “Translation Process Research.” In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition, ed. by John W. Schwieter, and Aline Ferreira, 21–49. Malden: John Wiley and Sons. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jakobsen, Arnt Lykke, and Lasse Schou
1999 “Translog Documentation.” In Probing the Process in Translation: Methods and Results, ed. by Gyde Hansen, 151–186. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson
1980Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lowrie, Walter
translator 1946Kierkegard’s The Concept of Dread. Oxford: Geoffrey Cumberledge.Google Scholar
Malmkjær, Kirsten
2003 “What Happened to God and the Angels? An Exercise in Translational Stylistics.” Target 15(1): 39–62. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2004 “Translational Stylistics.” Language and Literature 13(1): 13–24. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2018 “Angst and Repetition in Danish Literature and its Translation: From Kierkegaard to Kristensen and Høeg.” In Palgrave Handbook of Literary Translation ed. by Jean Boase-Beier, 251–268. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Meylaerts, Reine
2017 “Studying Language and Translation Policies in Belgium: What Can we Learn from a Complexity Theory Approach?.” Parallèles 29(1): 45–59.Google Scholar
Mossop, Brian
2007 “Empirical Studies of Revision: What we Know and Need to Know.” JoSTrans: The Journal of Specialised Translation 81: 5–20.Google Scholar
Munday, Jeremy S.
2007Style and Ideology in Translation: Latin American writing in English. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Newmark, Peter
1990A Textbook of Translation. New York: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Nida, Eugene
1964Toward a Science of Translating: With Special Reference to Principles and Procedures Involved in Bible Translating. Leiden: E.J. Brill. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nietzke, Jean, Silvia Hansen-Schirra and Carmen Canfora
(2019) “Risk management and post-editing competence.” JoSTrans: The Journal of Specialised Translation 311, 239–259.Google Scholar
O’Hagan, Minako, and David Ashworth
2002Translation-mediated Communication in a Digital World: Facing the Challenges of Globalization and Localization. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Olohan, Maeve
2017 “Technology, Translation and Society: A Constructivist, Critical Theory Approach.” Target 29(2): 264–283. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pym, Anthony
1994 “Twelfth-century Toledo and Strategies of the Literalist Trojan Horse.” Target 6(1): 43–66. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011 “What Technology Does to Translating.” Translation & Interpreting 3(1): 1–9.Google Scholar
Reiss, Katharina
1971Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Übersetzungskritik. Munich: Max Hueber.Google Scholar
Sakamoto, Akiko
2022 “Translation and Technology.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Translation, ed. by Kirsten Malmkjær, 55–74. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schaeffer, Moritz, and Michael Carl
2017 “Language Processing and Translation.” In Empirical Modelling of Translation and Interpreting, ed. by Silvia Hansen Schirra, Oliver Czulo, and Sascha Hofmann, 117–154. Berlin: Language Sciences Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schäffner, Christina
2004 “Metaphor and translation: Some Implications of a Cognitive Approach.” Journal of Pragmatics 36(7): 1253–1269.Google Scholar
2012 “Finding Space under the Umbrella: The Euro Crisis, Metaphors, and Translation.” JoSTrans: The Journal of Specialised Translation 17b1: 250–270.Google Scholar
Schäffner, Christina, and Mark Shuttleworth
2013 “Metaphor in Translation: Possibilities for Process Research.” Target 25(1): 93–106. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Shuttleworth, Mark
2011 “Translational Behaviour at the Frontiers of Scientific Knowledge: A Multilingual Investigation into Popular Science Metaphor in Translation.” The Translator 17(2): 301–323. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schleiermacher, Friedrich
1813 “Ueber die verschiedenen Methoden des Uebersezens” Lecture delivered to the Royal Academy of Sciences, Berlin, June 24 1813.
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson
1986Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Taibi, Mustapha, and Uldis Ozolins
2016Community Translation. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Toury, Gideon
1980 “Translated Literature: System, Norm, Performance: Toward a TT-oriented Approach to Literary Translation.” In Search of a Theory of Translation, 51–62. Tel Aviv, Tel Aviv University: The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics. Reprinted in: Poetics Today (1981), 2(4): 9–27.Google Scholar
1995Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Van den Broeck, Raymond
1988 “Introduction.” In Holmes, James S. Translated! Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies with an Introduction by Raymond van den Broeck, 1–5. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Venuti, Lawrence
1995The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
ed. 2017Teaching Translation: Programs, Courses, Pedagogies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Vermeer, Hans Josef
1978 “Ein Rahmen für eine allgemeine Translationstheorie.” Lebende Sprachen 23(3): 99–102. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vienne, Jean
1994 “Toward a Pedagogy of ‘Translation in Situation’.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 2(1): 51–59. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vinay, Jean-Paul, and Jean Darbelnet
1958/2000Comparative Stylistics of French and English: A Methodology for Translation. Translated and edited by Juan C. Sager and M.-J. Hamel. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre, and Dan Sperber
1990 “Outline of Relevance Theory.” Hermes: Journal of Linguistics 51: 40–56.Google Scholar
Øverås, Linn
1998 “In Search of the Third Code: An Investigation of Norms in Literary Translation.” Meta 43(4): 571–588. CrossrefGoogle Scholar