Reception is a term that, since its introduction in literary studies in the 1960s, shifted the focus from the text and the author to the reader. The bottom line is that a text has no meaning without the contribution of the reader. In the conceptualisation of reception we can distinguish two main traditions: a European and an American one. One of the most influential scholars in the first was the German Hans-Robert Jauss who worked within the framework of the ‘Rezeptionsaesthetik’ (aesthetic of reception) in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Jauss introduced the term ‘Erwartungshorizont’ (horizon of expectations) to designate the set of cultural norms, assumptions and criteria that shape the way in which readers understand and judge a literary work at a given time. The process by which the reader concretises the potential of the text into a specific meaning or sense is what Jauss calls reception. Jauss’ main goal was to find new ways to write literary history. He claimed that the evolution of the audience, not the historical period of the author, explains the history of a literary text. A second important scholar of this ‘Konstanzer Schule’ (Constance School) is Wolfgang Iser. He introduced the concept ‘Leerstelle’ (Textual Gaps). For Iser, texts provide only a schematic structure, leaving many things unexplained to the reader. Through the reading process, the reader fills in the gaps and realizes the meaning of the text in a subjective and imaginative way.
2006“Penetrating the Dutch polysystem: The reception of Virginia Woolf, -1920–2000.”Poetics Today 27 (3): 501–568.
2009Relevant Abuse? Effects of Abusive Subtitling Strategies on Viewer Assessment of TV Anime. Dublin: Dublin City University [Ph.D. Thesis].
2011“The translator’s subjectivity and its constraints in news transediting: A perspective of reception aesthetics.”Meta 56 (1): 119–144. TSB
1978/1990“The position of translated literature within the literary polysystem.”In The Translation Studies Reader, Lawrence Venuti (ed.). 3rd edition. 192–197. London/New York: Routledge. TSB
1995“Establishing a framework for a typology of subtitle reading strategies: DK viewer reactions to deviations from subtitling standards.”Translatio 14 (3–4): 388–409.
1999“Towards a sociology of translation. Book translations as a cultural world-system.”European Journal of Social Theory 2 (4): 429–444. TSB
2010Poetry Translation through Reception and Cognition: The Proof of Translation is in the Reading. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
1995“Reception of subtitles. The non-existent ideal viewer.”Translatio 14 (3–4): 376–383.
2013“Child and adult readers’ processing of foreignised elements in translated South African picturebooks.”Target 25 (2): 180–227. BoP
1995Linguistic Acceptability in Translated Children’s Literature [Publication in Humanities 15]. Joensuu: University of Joensuu.
Van den Broeck, Raymond
1988Literatuur van elders: over het vertalen en de studie van vertaalde literatuur in het Nederlands. Leuven: Acco. TSB
Further essential reading
2006Translation and Conflict. A Narrative Account. London: Routledge. BoP
1980Is There a Text in This Class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities. -Cambridge: Harvard University Press. BoP
Jauss, Hans Robert
1982Toward an Aesthetic of Reception. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
1978The Act of Reading: A Theory of Aesthetic Response. London: Routledge.
Machor, James L. & Goldstein, Philip
2001Reception Study. From Literary Theory to Cultural -Studies. London/New York: Routledge.