Functionalist approaches

Christiane Nord
University of Applied Sciences, Magdeburg - Stendal

Table of contents

Functionalist approaches to translation are derived from a general theory of translation called Skopostheorie, brought forward by the German scholar Hans J. Vermeer in the late 1970s and early 1980s. It was soon taken up by several scholars who were teaching at the schools for translator and interpreter training in Germersheim (University of Mainz) and Heidelberg, who applied it to their translation classes. It has now followers all over the world, particularly in countries, where translation needs are pressing for various reasons, like South Africa or China. After a short overview of the development of Skopostheorie (for a more detailed account see Nord 2012), the article will describe the basic concepts of the theory and the various fields of application, which are usually referred to as “Functionalist Approaches” (cf. Nord 1997a). The last section will give a short outlook on present and future functionalist research.

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

References

Göpferich, Susanne
1995“A pragmatic classification of LSP texts in science and technology.” Target 7 (2): 305–326. Crossref logo  TSBGoogle Scholar
Holz-Mänttäri, Justa
1984Translatorisches Handeln: Theorie und Methode. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakademia.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Hönig, Hans G. & Kußmaul, Paul
1982Strategie der Übersetzung. Ein Lehr- und Arbeitsbuch. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Nida, Eugene A
1964Toward a Science of Translating. With special reference to principles and procedures involved in Bible translating. Leiden: Brill.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Nobs, Marie-Louise
2006La traducción de folletos turísticos. ¿Qué calidad demandan los turistas? Granada: Comares.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Nord, Christiane
1988/2005Textanalyse und Übersetzen. Heidelberg: Groos. English translation: Text Analysis in Translation. Amsterdam: Rodopi.  TSBGoogle Scholar
1997aTranslating as a Purposeful Activity. Functionalist Approaches Explained. Manchester: St. Jerome.  TSBGoogle Scholar
1997b“A functional typology of translations.” In Text Typology and Translation, Anna Trosborg (ed.), 43–66. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Crossref logo  TSBGoogle Scholar
2003a“What about function(s) in Bible Translation?” ATA Chronicle vol. XXXIII, 03/2003: 34–38.. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
2003bKommunikativ handeln auf Spanisch und Deutsch. Ein funktionaler übersetzungsorientierter Sprach- und Stilvergleich. Wilhelmsfeld: Egert.  TSBGoogle Scholar
2012 “Quo vadis, functional translatology?Target 24 (1): 25-41.. Crossref logo  TSBGoogle Scholar
Pöchhacker, Franz
1995“Simultaneous interpreting: a functionalist perspective.” Hermes – Journal of Linguistics 14: 31–53.. Crossref logo  TSBGoogle Scholar
Prieto Ramos, Fernando
(2002): “Beyond The Confines Of Literality: A Functionalist Approach To The Sworn Translation Of Legal Documents.” Puentes 2: 27–35.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Reiss, Katharina
1971Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Übersetzungskritik – Kategorien und Kriterien für eine sachgerechte Beurteilung von Übersetzungen. Munich: Hueber. [English translation: Translation Criticism – the Potentials & Limitations. Categories and Criteria for Translation Quality Assessment. Manchester: St. Jerome.]  TSBGoogle Scholar
Reiss, Katharina & Vermeer, Hans J
1984Grundlegung einer allgemeinen Translationstheorie. Tübingen: Niemeyer. [English translation: Towards a General Theory of Translational Action: Skopos Theory Expained. 2013. Trans. Christiane Nord. London/New York: Routledge.] The translator is human too: a case for instrumentalism in multilingual specialised communication. Crossref logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Risku, Hanna
1998Translatorische Kompetenz. Kognitive Grundlagen des Übersetzens als Expertentätigkeit. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Schäffner, Christina
1997“From ‘Good’ to ‘Functionally Appropriate’: Assessing Translation Quality.” Current Issues in Language and Society 4 (1): 1–5. Crossref logo  TSBGoogle Scholar
Schäffner, Christina & Wiesemann, Uwe
2001Annotated Texts for Translation: English – German. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, Peter A
1989“Kulturspezifik von Technik-Texten: Ein translatorisches und terminographisches Problem.” In Kulturspezifik des translatorischen Handelns Hans J. Vermeer (ed.), 53–87. Heidelberg: Institut für Übersetzen und Dolmetschen.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Schopp, Jürgen F
1993“Der Übersetzer als ‘Typograph’: Von der druckreifen Übersetzung zum druckfertigen Translat.” TexTconText 8: 237–257. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Vermeer, Hans J
1978“Ein Rahmen für eine allgemeine Translationstheorie.” Lebende Sprachen 23: 99–102. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
1987“What does it mean to translate?” Indian Journal of Applied Linguistics 13(2): 25–33. Crossref logo  TSBGoogle Scholar
Von Wright, Georg Henrik
1968An Essay in Deontic Logic and the General Theory of Action. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar