Linguistics and translation

Kirsten Malmkjær
University of Leicester
Table of contents

The relationship between translation and linguistics has not always been harmonious; in particular, translation scholars have accused linguists of misapprehending translation ‘as a mere transcoding process’ (Snell-Hornby 1988: 3) and of being obsessed with a notion of equivalence which does not itself remain stable with variation in the terms used to denote it in different languages.

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

References

Catford, J.C
1965 A Linguistic Theory of Translation: An Essay in Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Grice, H.P
1975 “Logic and conversation.” In Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, P. Cole & J.L. Morgan (eds), 41–58. London: Academic Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Gutt, Ernst-August
1990 “A theoretical account of translation – without a translation theory.” Target 2 (2): 135–164. DOI logo  TSBGoogle Scholar
2000 [1991] 2nd edition. Translation and Relevance: Cognition and Context. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Manchester: St Jerome.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood
1961 “Categories of the theory of grammar.” Word 17: 241–292. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1978 Language as Social Semiotic. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman
1959 “On Linguistic aspects of Translation.” In On Translation. Reuben A. Brower (ed.), 232–239. New York: Oxford University Press.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Malmkjær, Kirsten
2005 Linguistics and the Language of Translation. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Nida, Eugene A
1964 Toward a Science of Translating: With Special Reference to Principles and Procedures Involved in Bible Translating. Leiden: E. J. Brill.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Sapir, Edward
1921 Language: An Introduction to the Study of Speech. New York: Harcourt, Brace.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Snell-Hornby, Mary
1988 Translation Studies: An Integrated Approach. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Sperber, Dan & Wilson, Deirdre
1986 Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Toury, Gideon
1980 “Translated literature: System, norm, performance: Toward a TT-oriented approach to literary translation.” In Search of a Theory of Translation, Tel Aviv, Tel Aviv University, The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics, 35–50. Reprinted in: Poetics Today (1981), 2 (4): 9–27.Google Scholar
Vinay, Jean-Paul & Darbelnet, Jean
1958 Stylistique comparée du français et de l’anglais. Paris: Editions Didier. English translation and edition by Juan Sager & M.-J. Hamel 1995 Comparative Stylistics of French and English: A Methodology for Translation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.  TSBGoogle Scholar