#1 Sept 16 2009 - Studies on Translation Theories
What Is Translation? James S. Holms, ‘The Name and Nature of Translation Studies’ in Venuti (2004): 180-92; ‘Translation Today: Old and New Problems’ by Hans J. Vermeer in Hornby (2002): 1-16.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Copyright 2009
NTNU GITI BLOG
All rights reserved | Powered by
Blogger
Blogger Templates created by Deluxe Templates
Wordpress Theme by EZwpthemes
Blogger Templates created by Deluxe Templates
Wordpress Theme by EZwpthemes
1 意見:
In terms of the first reading on Holmes's 'The name and nature of translation studies', what I do find interesting is how Holmes generates the terms 'translation studies'. Through his discussion on the naming of this discipline, the complex and broad nature of this field is revealed. This concept may seem quite ordinary. However, to be honest, before I had the chance to contact any theory of translation, I have already had some experience in the practice of translation. At that time, as a novice translator, what seemed to be important to translation were the text and the purpose of that particular translation, rather than what is woven and underpinning this practice. And I think my previous assumption of translation might also be a quite prevalent viewpoint among translators who could potentially see translation as a practice that can be managed without the guiding of theories. And if we read through Holmes’s categories on translation studies, we would know that translation is something more than a simple ‘input—output’ process. Therefore, I would say despite the fact that his categories or the content of those categories might need to be revised to follow the development on translation studies to date (e.g. on translation aids has developed quite a lot with the development of computer and Internet), this article did draw a new perspective on what has long been ignored and understated, that is, translation itself as a study.
Another issue I would like to raise is about translation policy that we have talked about during the class. On the class, we talked about how translation assessment might affect the status of translators and the whole profession. And I have some thoughts on it. If we are going to assess someone’s translation ability, what might the nature of the construct ‘translation ability’? Are we simply measuring some kind of bilingual ability? Or is there something more? This construct might affect how the assessment is formed and how it is conducted. As I have done some study on language assessment for my master dissertation, I am very curious about how assessment of translation might be developed. Though I know I cannot answer the question I’ve raised above right now. I hope that maybe through getting to know the theories of translation in this course, I might have some insight on the nature of the construct of ‘translation ability’.
張貼留言