Empirical approaches

Alexander Künzli
University of Geneva
Table of contents

Translation Studies has long been dominated by speculative and prescriptive writing, relying on theoretical entities or anecdotal evidence rather than on facts derived from direct experience or systematic observation. Holmes’ ‘map’ of Translation Studies, with its descriptive and applied branches, was developed in the 1970s and is considered by many as the founding statement for the emergent discipline. It was also a reaction against these shortcomings, and aimed to establish the use of the empirical method within Translation Studies (see Munday 2008: Chapter 1.4). Since then, empirical research has become an essential part of the field. Working empirically means analysing problems by means of data rather than relying solely on logical argument. Many researchers therefore make a distinction between empirical approaches on the one hand, and what are either termed non-empirical, semi-empirical, theoretical or rational approaches (for example, hermeneutics, deconstruction or postmodernism) on the other. This dichotomy is, however, debatable, as even empirical research generally is based on theoretical assumptions and/or supposed to develop or refine theories.

Full-text access is restricted to subscribers. Log in to obtain additional credentials. For subscription information see Subscription & Price.

References

Breakwell, Glynis M., Hammond, Sean, Fife-Schaw, Chris & Smith, Jonathan A
2006 Research Methods in Psychology. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Coolican, Hugh
2004 Research Methods and Statistics in Psychology. London: Hodder Arnold.Google Scholar
Genette, Gérard
1997 Paratexts: Thresholds of Interpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gile, Daniel
2009 “Research for training, research for society in Translation Studies.” In Translation research projects 2, Anthony Pym & Alexander Perekrestenko (eds), 35–40. Tarragona: Intercultural Studies Group.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Giroux, Sylvain & Tremblay, Ginette
2009 Méthodologie des sciences humaines. La recherche en action. Saint-Laurent, Québec: Éditions du Renouveau Pédagogique Inc.Google Scholar
Hansen, Gyde
2013 “The translation process as object of research.” In The Routledge Handbook of Translation Studies, Carmen Millán & Francesca Bartrina (eds), 88–101. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Munday, Jeremy
2013 “The role of archival and manuscript research in the investigation of translator decision-making.” Target 25 (1): 127–141. DOI logo  TSBGoogle Scholar
2008 Introducing Translation Studies. Theories and Applications. London: Routledge.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Reiss, Katharina
1981 “Der Übersetzungsvergleich. Formen – Funktionen – Anwendbarkeit.” In Kontrastive Linguistik und Übersetzungswissenschaften: Akten des Internationalen Kolloquiums Trier/Saarbrücken, 25.–30.09.1978, Wolfgang Kühlwein, Gisela Thome & Wolfram Wilss (eds), 311–319. München: Wilhelm Fink Verlag.Google Scholar
Robert, Isabelle
2012 La révision en traduction. Les procédures de révision et leur impact sur le produit et le processus de révision. Antwerp: University of Antwerp.Google Scholar
Robson, Colin
2002 Real World Research. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Further reading

Sun, Sanjun & Shreve, Gregory
2012 Reconfiguring Translation Studies. http://​sanjun​.org​/ReconfiguringTS​.html [Accessed on 8 July 2013].