Official translation

Denise Merkle

Table of contents

The concept of Institutional translation has attracted considerable attention of late, while generating controversy in response to the “ambiguity of the concept of institution” (Kang 2009: 141) with translation scholars referring “either to translating in or for specific organizations” (ibid.). The literature invariably refers to institutional translation as “mostly centred on translation practice at large and important institutions” (Kang 2009: 144), without necessarily making a clear distinction between official and non-official language contexts (e.g. Pym 2004), or between national and supranational contexts (Koskinen 2008). Furthermore, “the concept is slowly but clearly being used as a means of understanding and studying translation practice in general” (Kang 2009: 144), adding to the ubiquity of the term. A potential subfield of institutional translation which could help nuance meaning and fine tune contributions to theory is “official translation” with a further subdivision between national and supranational contexts. While this term is also polysemic, its potential application is, nevertheless, far narrower than that of institutional translation. However, the term is rarely found in the Translation Studies literature, other than to distinguish certified and notarized translations of official documents (birth or death certificate, driver’s license, school transcripts, etc.) from those that are not.

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

References

Branchadell, Albert
2011“Minority languages and translation.” In Handbook of Translation Studies, vol. 2, Yves Gambier & Luc van Doorslaer (eds), 97–101. Amsterdam: John Benjamins  TSB. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Daviault Pierre
1944“Traducteurs et traduction au Canada.” Mémoires de la Société royale du -Canada 38: 67–89.Google Scholar
Kang, Ji-Hae
2009“Institutional translation.” In The Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, Mona Baker & Gabriela Saldanha (eds.), 141–145. Abingdon/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Koskinen, Kaisa
2008Translating Institutions. An Ethnographic Study of EU Translation. -Manchester: St. Jerome.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Meylaerts, Reine
2011“Translation justice in a multilingual world: An overview of translation regimes.” Meta 56 (4): 743–757. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Mossop, Brian
1988“Translating institutions: A missing factor in translation theory.” TTR 1 (2): 65–71. Crossref logo  TSBGoogle Scholar
1990“Translating institutions and ‘idiomatic’ translation.” Meta 35 (2): 342–355. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
New Zealand Government
1987 [Reprint 2005]. Maori Language Act 1987. http://​www​.legislation​.govt​.nz​/act​/public​/1987​/0176​/latest​/DLM124116​.html [Accessed on 30 March 2013].
OECD – United Nations Group of Experts on Geographic Names
2002Glossary of Terms for the Standardization of Geographical Names. New York: United Nations. http://​stats​.oecd​.org​/glossary​/index​.htm [Accessed on 30 March 2013].Google Scholar
Pym, Anthony
2004“The use of translation in international organizations.” In Übersetzung, Translation, Traduction . Ein internationales Handbuch zur Übersetzungsforschung. An International Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. Encyclopédie internationale de la recherche sur la traduction, volume 1, Harald Kittel, et al. (eds), 85–92. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.  TSBGoogle Scholar