Interpretive approach

Marianne Lederer
University Paris III – Sorbonne Nouvelle
Table of contents

The Interpretive Theory of Translation (ITT) is a coherent construct with high explanatory power, based on practical experience of both interpreting and translation. It was built up little by little, starting from the middle of the 1960s, both to answer the need to know more about the translation process (oral and written) and to meet the requirements of teaching the skills of T&I.

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


Barbizet, Jacques
1968“Les bases neuro-anatomiques de la genèse de la signification dans le langage oral.” In Mécanismes cérébraux du langage oral et structure des langues, Robert Husson, H. et al. (eds), 51–62. Paris: Masson & Cie.Google Scholar
Chernov, Ghelly V
2004Inference and Anticipation in Simultaneous Interpreting. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Chesterman, Andrew & Emma Wagner
2002Can Theory Help Translators? A Dialogue Between the Ivory Tower and the Wordface. Manchester: St. Jerome.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Delisle, Jean
1980L’analyse du discours comme méthode de traduction. 1980. Ottawa: Presses de l’Université d’Ottawas. Trans. Patricia Logan & Monica Creery. 1988. Translation: an Interpretive Approach. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Durieux, Christine
1988Fondement didactique de la traduction technique. Paris: Didier Erudition.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Gile, Daniel
1995Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Gutt, Ernst-August
1991Translation and Relevance – Cognition and Context. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Henry, Jacqueline
2003La traduction des jeux de mots. Paris: Presses Sorbonne Nouvelle.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Israël, Fortunato
1990“Traduction littéraire et théorie du sens.” In Etudes traductologiques, Marianne Lederer (ed.), 29–44. Paris: Minard Lettres Modernes.  TSBGoogle Scholar
1998“La plénitude du texte.” In Quelle formation pour le traducteur de l’an 2000?, Fortunato Israël (ed.), 251–60. Paris: Didier Erudition.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Kertesz, Andrew
1988“Cognitive Function in Severe Aphasia.” In Thought Without Language, L. Weiskranz (ed.), 451–463. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Laplace, Colette
2005“La genèse de la Théorie Interprétative de la Traduction.” In La Théorie Interprétative de la Traduction, Vol. 1, Fortunato Israël et Marianne Lederer (eds), 21–66. Caen: Minard Lettres Modernes.Google Scholar
Lederer, Marianne
1981La Traduction simultanée – fondements théoriques. Paris: Minard Lettres Modernes.Google Scholar
1994La Traduction aujourd’hui – le modèle interprétatif. Paris: Hachette. Nouvelle édition 2006. Caen: Minard Lettres Modernes. Trans. Ninon Larché. 2003. Translation – The Interpretive Model. Manchester: St Jerome.Google Scholar
Nida, Eugene
1975Language Structure and Translation. Stanford: Stanford University Press.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Nord, Christiane
1992“Text Analysis in Translator Training.” In Teaching Translation and Interpreting – Training, Talent and Expertise, Cay Dollerup & Anne Loddegaard (eds), 39–48. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logo  TSBGoogle Scholar
Piaget, Jean
1967La psychologie de l’intelligence. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
Pinker Steven
1994The Language Instinct – The New Science of Language and Mind. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Plassard, Freddie
2007Lire pour traduire. Paris: Presses Sorbonne Nouvelle.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Roux-Faucard, Geneviève
2008Poétique du récit traduit. Caen: Minard lettres Modernes.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Seleskovitch, Danica
1968L’Interprète dans les conférences internationales. Problèmes de langage et de communication. Paris: Minard. Trans. Stephanie Dailey & Norman Mc Millan. 1978. Interpreting for International Conferences. Arlington: Pen & Booth.  TSBGoogle Scholar
1975Langage, langues et mémoire – Etude de la prise de notes en interprétation consécutive. Paris: Minard lettres Modernes.Google Scholar
1988“Technical and Literary Translation: a Unifying View.” In Translators and Interpreters Mean Business, Catriona Picken (ed.), 83–88. London: Aslib.  TSBGoogle Scholar
1992“Fundamentals of the Interpretive Theory of Translation.” In Expanding Horizons, Proceedings of the Twelfth National Convention of the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, Jean Plant-Moeller (ed.), 1–13. Silver Spring MD: RID.Google Scholar
2004“The Practice and Theory of Consecutive and Simultaneous Interpretation.” International Encyclopedia of Translation Studies 1: 779–789. Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Seleskovitch, Danica, Lederer, Marianne
1989Pédagogie raisonnée de l’interprétation. Luxembourg: OPOCE and Paris: Didier Erudition, (20 édition augmentée 2002). Trans. Jacolyn Harmer: A Systematic Approach to Teaching Interpretation. 1995. Silver Spring: RID.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Setton, Robin
1999Simultaneous Interpretation: a Cognitive-Pragmatic Analysis. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logo  TSBGoogle Scholar