The debate on the invisibility of the translator first launched by Venuti (Venuti 1994) and also taken up by Simeoni in his seminal article on the translator’s habitus (Simeoni 1998) is usually understood in contrast to the relatively high visibility of authors of literary works or against the backdrop of literature and the numinous aura of the (national) creative writer. Though the importance of the role played by translators in introducing the work of foreign writers to readers in other cultures is in itself beyond dispute, their translations have been and continue to be a locus of broad institutional and public debate and even dispute both within and across cultures throughout history (see Literary translation and Literary Studies and Translation Studies). However, the debate on translator invisibility may have inadvertently obscured more complex relations between translators and authors, including former, more subtle or less visible delineations of authorship (see Davidson 2008, inter alia) and ‘translatorship’ (Toury 1995: 53) and, more particularly, how such delineations might be perceived or have been perceived in various cultures or throughout history. Next to this, we also have to consider how we should treat the authors of other works, like those working in philosophy or the social sciences for example, and their respective translators? In this respect, it would seem imperative to re-examine the role of genre as a determining factor in relationships between authors and translators (see genres, text-types and translation).
1986Speech Genres & Other Late Essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.
1992Les règles de l’art: Genèse et structure du champ littéraire. Paris: Seuil.
1995Language and Communicative Practices [Critical Essays in Anthropology]. Boulder: Westview Press. BoP
1999Translation in Systems: Descriptive and System-Oriented Approaches Explained. Manchester: St. Jerome. TSB
2011The Art of Translation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. [Translated by Patrick Corness; edited with a critical foreword by Zuzana Jettmarová.].
2010“The unbearable torment of translation: Milan Kundera, impersonation, and the joke.”TranscUlturAl 1 (3): 30–42. TSB
Oakes, Michael & Ji, Meng
2012“A corpus study of early English translations of Cao Xueqin’s Hongloumeng.”In Quantitative Methods in Corpus-based Translation Studies: A Practical Guide to Descriptive Translation Research, Michael Oakes & Meng Ji (eds), 175–208. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John BenjaminsTSB.
2002Orality and Literacy. London/New York: Routledge. BoP
2011“The translator as non-author, and I am sorry about that.”In Claudia Buffagni, Beatrice Garzelli & Serenella Zanotti (eds). TSB
1997Western Translation Theory from Herodotus to Nietzsche. Manchester: St. Jerome. TSB
2010Poetry & Translation: The Art of the Impossible. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. TSB
2005“The image trap: The translation of English-Canadian children’s literature into German.”In Children’s Literature Global and Local. Social and Aesthetic Perspectives, Emer O’Sullivan, Kimberley Reynolds & Rolf Romøren (eds), 227–239. Oslo: Novus Press.
1998“The pivotal status of the translator’s habitus.”Target 10 (1): 1–39. TSB
2006Theories on the Move. Translation’s Role in the Travels of Literary Theories. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi. TSB
Chan, Tak-hung Leo
2001“What’s modern in Chinese translation theory? Lu Xun and the debates on literalism and foreignization in the May fourth period.”TTR 14 (2): 195–223.
1995Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. BoP
2007“Translating culture vs. cultural translation.”In Translation: Reflections, Refractions, Transformations, Paul St-Pierre & Prafulla C. Kar (eds), 277–287. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John BenjaminsBoP.