Sandra Halverson
Table of contents

Talking about a concept of translation in Translation Studies (henceforth Translation) means immediately butting up against fundamental issues concerning how one views the world and things in it, the feasibility or appropriate means of knowing anything about that world, the status of knowledge and of cultural, political, and academic practices and relationships, as well as the tension and conflict that accompany differences of opinion in any and all of these areas. Indeed, the very activity of engaging with the concept may be referred to as “defining”, “conceptualizing”, “discoursing”, or “theorizing”, among other things, depending on one’s stance. This diversity of beliefs is reflected in Translation Studies in the evolution from the ideal of a definitive Translation to the exploration of multiple Translations.

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


Arrojo, Rosemary
2002“Lessons learned from Babel.” Target 14: (1), 137–143. DOI logo  TSBGoogle Scholar
Bryman, Alan
2008 3rd edition. Social Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chesterman, Andrew & Arrojo, Rosemary
2000“Shared Ground in Translation Studies.” Target 12 (1): 151–160. DOI logo  TSBGoogle Scholar
Delabastita, Dirk
2003“Translation Studies for the 21st Century: Trends and Perspectives.” Génesis. Revista científica do ISAI 3: 7–24.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Gambier, Yves & Umbaldo Stecconi
(eds) forthcoming (2016).World Atlas of Translation.
Gutt, Ernst-August
2000Translation and Relevance. Cognition and Context. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Halverson, Sandra
1999“Conceptual work and the ‘translation’ concept.” Target, 11 (1): 1–31. DOI logo  TSBGoogle Scholar
2008“Translations as institutional facts. An ontology for ‘assumed translation’. In Beyond descriptive Translation Studies. Investigations in homage to Gideon Toury, Anthony Pym, Miriam Schlesinger & Daniel Simeoni (eds), 343–361. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins  TSB. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hebenstreit, Gernot
2007“Defining patterns in Translation Studies: Revisiting two classics of German Translationswissenschaft.” Target 19 (2): 197–215. DOI logo  TSBGoogle Scholar
Hermans, Theo
2007The Conference of the Tongues. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Jakobson, Roman
1959/2004 2nd edition. “On Linguistic Aspects of Translation.” In The Translation Studies Reader, Lawrence Venuti (ed), 138–143. London: Routledge.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Koller, Werner
1989“Equivalence in translation theory.” Translated by Andrew Chesterman. In Readings in Translation Theory, Andrew Chesterman (ed.), 99–104. Helsinki: Oy Finn Lectura.  TSBGoogle Scholar
1995“The concept of equivalence in Translation Studies.” Target 7 (2): 191–222. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martín de León, Celia
2008“Skopos and beyond. A critical study of functionalism.” Target 20 (1): 1–28. DOI logo  TSBGoogle Scholar
Nida, Eugene & C.R. Taber
1969The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden: E.J. Brill.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Pym, Anthony
1995“European Translation Studies, une science qui dérange, and Why Equivalence Needn’t be A Dirty Word”, TTR: Traduction, Terminologie, Rédaction 8 (1): 153–176. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007“On history in formal conceptualizations of translation.” Across languages and Cultures 18 (2): 153–166. DOI logo  TSBGoogle Scholar
2010Exploring Translation Theories. London: Routledge.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Tymoczko, Maria
2007Enlarging Translation, Empowering Translators. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Toury, Gideon
1995Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Vermeer, Hans
1987“What does it mean to translate?” Indian Journal of Applied Linguistics 13: 25–33.  TSBGoogle Scholar