Book review
Giuseppe Palumbo. Key Terms in Translation Studies
London, New York: Continuum, 2009. viii + 212 pp. ISBN 978-0-8264-9825-0

Reviewed by Henri Bloemen
Antwerp and Leuven

Table of contents

The answer to the question whether a science or a more or less delimitated field of knowledge, like Translation Studies (TS), should need a well defined terminology, or at least a terminology that is as defined as the discourse it belongs to, should be as categorically positive as the question itself as to how many of them are needed is problematic. It is a well-known fact that terminology is at the core of a discipline’s identity. In the case of a modern discipline like TS, which has developed into and understands itself as an interdiscipline, identity in a traditional sense is under pressure. This is and even should be reflected in the relative inner soundness or unambiguousness of its terminology. This is not meant negatively: it is a necessary characteristic of a true interdiscipline, and it would only be problematic if the relative terminological soundness would find its expression in the number of its terminologies and not in its inner structure.

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

Baker, Mona (ed.)
1998, 2009Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London, New York: Routledge.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Kittel, Harald, Paul Armin Frank, and Norbert Greiner et al. (eds)
2004, 2007Übersetzung. Translation. Traduction. Ein internationales Handbuch zur Übersetzungsforschung. An International Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. Encyclopédie internationale de la recherche sur la traduction, 2 vols. Berlin: de GruyterGoogle Scholar
Shuttleworth, Mark, and Moira Cowie
1997Dictionary of Translation Studies. Manchester: St Jerome.Google Scholar