Book review
Andrew Chesterman. Memes of Translation: The Spread of Ideas in Translation Theory (Revised Edition).
(Benjamins Translation Library 123). Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2016. xii + 225 pp. DOI logo

Reviewed by Susana Valdez
NOVA School of Social Sciences and Humanities, University of Lisbon Centre for English Studies
Publication history

Date received: 8 November 2016

Date accepted: 14 November 2016

Published online: 20 September 2017

Table of contents

Targeted mainly at professional translators, translation trainees and their teachers, Memes of Translation sets out ambitious metatheoretical, theoretical and practical aims, which it reaches. Its first aim is to propose a conceptual framework that meaningfully links varied and distinct views of translation. Its second is to build a Popperian theory of translation – oriented by “tentative theory, error elimination and the evolution of objective knowledge” (x) – in combination with norm theory and (partially) action theory. The guiding “building-blocks are the concepts of norm, strategy and value” (x). Finally, the volume aims to show that translation theory is useful and applicable to translation practice. First published in 1997, this 2016 revised edition with minor corrections and improvements also offers an “Update” section at the end of each chapter with references to more recent research and furthermore addresses criticisms of the 1997 version. The book remains mandatory (re)reading.

Full-text access is restricted to subscribers. Log in to obtain additional credentials. For subscription information see Subscription & Price. Direct PDF access to this article can be purchased through our e-platform.

References

Chesterman, Andrew
1996 “Teaching Translation Theory: The Significance of Memes.” In Teaching Translation and Interpreting 3, ed. by Cay Dollerup and Vibeke Appel, 63–71. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2000 “Memetics and Translation Studies.” Synaps 5: 1–17.Google Scholar
2005 “The Memetics of Knowledge.” In Knowledge Systems and Translation, ed. by Helle V. Dam, Jan Engberg, and Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast, 17–30. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006 “A Note on Norms and Evidence.” In Translation and Interpreting – Training and Research, ed. by Jorma Tommola and Yves Gambier, 13–19. Turku: University of Turku, Department of English Translation Studies.Google Scholar
2007 “On the Idea of a Theory.” Across Languages and Cultures 8 (1): 1–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009 “The View from Memetics.” Paradigmi 27 (2): 75–88.Google Scholar
2016 “Moving Conceptual Boundaries: So What?” Keynote paper 8th EST Conference, 15–17 September 2016.
Dawkins, Richard
1976 The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dreyfus, Hubert L., and Stuart E. Dreyfus
1986 Mind over Machine. New York, NY: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Fédération Internationale des Traducteurs (FIT)
(1963) 1994 “The Translator’s Charter.” Accessed October 2, 2016. http://​www​.fit​-ift​.org​/translators​-charter/
Gambier, Yves
2008 “Stratégies et tactiques en traduction et interprétation.” In Efforts and Models in Interpreting and Translation Research, ed. by Gyde Hansen, Andrew Chesterman, and Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast, 63–82. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Pöchhacker, Franz
2004 Introducing Interpreting Studies. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Popper, Karl. R.
1972 Objective Knowledge. An Evolutionary Approach. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Vermeer, Hans J.
1997 “Translation and the ‘Meme’.” Target 9 (1): 155–166. DOI logoGoogle Scholar