internationalization of translation studies (2009)

8/11/2019 Internationalization of Translation Studies (2009)

1/23

This article was downloaded by: [88.15.196.196]On: 09 October 2014, At: 02:48Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

The TranslatorPublication details, including instructions for authors

and subscription information:

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rtrn20

Why Translators Should Want

to Internationalize Translation

StudiesMaria Tymoczko

a

aUniversity of Massachusetts, USA

Published online: 21 Feb 2014.

To cite this article:Maria Tymoczko (2009) Why Translators Should Wantto Internationalize Translation Studies, The Translator, 15:2, 401-421, DOI:

10.1080/13556509.2009.10799287

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2009.10799287

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the Content) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, orsuitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressedin this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not theviews of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content shouldnot be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions,

claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilitieswhatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connectionwith, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/13556509.2009.10799287http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/13556509.2009.10799287http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rtrn20http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2009.10799287http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/13556509.2009.10799287http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rtrn20


2/23

forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19

6]at02:4809October2014
http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditionshttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions


3/23

ISSN 1355-6509 St Jerome Publishing, Manchester

The Translator. Volume 15, Number 2 (2009), 401-21 ISBN 978-1-905763-14-6

Why Translators Should Want to

Internationalize Translation Studies

MARIA TYMOCZKO

University of Massachusetts, USA

Abstract. The role of the translator and the conceptualization oftranslation are both in a period of notable change. Some of thischange is happening because the profession of translation is inter-

nationalizing rapidly and thus old Eurocentric and other localizedideas no longer fully respond to the demands of the eld. Global-ization is also exercising transformative pressures on the practicesof translation, in part driven by new technologies. Frameworks tointerrogate the discourses of translation studies and to developbroader conceptualizations of translation so as to meet the chal-lenges coming from both inside and outside the eld are needed by

scholars, by teachers of translation, and most of all, by translatorsthemselves. Linking theory and pragmatics, this article explores how

consideration of a broad eld of ideas about translation from manyparts of the world offers new models of practice, greater potentialfor creativity, enhancement of the translators agency, new ethicalpositioning, the ability to assess translational phenomena withgreater acuity, and a reservoir of conceptualizations for meetingchallenges of the present and the future.

Keywords. Agency, Ethics, Globalization, Internationalization, Paradigm

shifts, Translation practice, Translation theory.

It is increasingly obvious that the profession of translator and the practice

of translation are in a period of rapid change. Anthony Pym (2000:191-92)

has observed that the very fact that the names for translation and translator

are changing indicates a rethinking of the profession of translator and the

nature of translation itself. For example, there are calls for translators to be

reconceptualized as cultural mediators, a trend which Pym (ibid.:191) notesis already happening at the upper end of the translation profession (cf. Katan

1999/2004, Cronin 2003). Similarly, terms like localizationindicate a move-ment away from the old transfer hypothesis that has dominated Eurocentric

thinking about translation since the late Middle Ages. Some of this change is

occurring because the eld of translation studies is expanding to include an

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



4/23

Why Translators Should Want to Internationalize Translation Studies402

ever larger international domain and thus old Eurocentric ideas about transla-

tion are no longer relevant to the entire eld.1After canvassing practices of

translation in several parts of the area historically dominated by Chinese culture

specically Japan, Korea and Vietnam Judy Wakabayashi concludes thatthere must be a reconsideration of the nature and denition of translation,

which cannot in its narrow and conventional sense encompass all the ways in

which texts have been reprocessed and recongured in East Asia (2005:61).

By contrast, writing about translation in the present and future contexts of

globalization and thus coming from an almost diametrically opposite direc-

tion, Michael Cronin argues that conceptions of translation and the translator

must be reshaped because of the impact of the technologies of globalization;

he concludes that translators can no longer be conceived of independently

of the technologies with which they interact (2003:112). These comments byPym, Wakabayashi and Cronin epitomize the necessity of re-conceptualizing

translation and translators and point to an emerging consensus. They illustrate

different but convergent effects of the increased networking and interdepend-

ence of the world. It is clear that translation studies must use new frameworks

to interrogate its own discourses and to develop broader views of translation in

order to respond to pressures coming from inside and outside the eld alike.

Signs of the necessity to rethink fundamentals include the following symp-

tomatic changes. First, it has become more and more difcult in many types

of translation to keep the source text and target text distinct. For example,in many forms of localization it is impossible to indicate clearly source text

and target text, and in the translation of Web sites and advertisements this

distinction is also not always relevant. Similarly, many multilingual national

and supranational bodies including Switzerland and the European Union

have effaced this distinction by designating ofcial documents in all major

languages as having equal legal standing and as originals. This is true in

the EU, notwithstanding the fact that EU institutions together probably con-

stitute the largest employer of translators in the world, and these translators

are responsible for producing EU documents. If these ofcial documents arein fact originals, we must ask why translatorsare being hired to write and

produce them.2

Second, in many cases the target text bears little similarity to the source

text except in function as conceived in the most general way: say, to promote

or sell a product. The target text can look different, convey different verbal

messages and be completely self-standing. This disparity is especially notable

in multimodal translation.

1Indeed one can argue that many of the truisms of Eurocentric thinking about translation

have never been fully applicable even within Europe itself. See Tymoczko (2007:60-68)

for examples.2This paradox, in which translations become originals as a result of authentication by

authorities, is explored at length in Hermans (2007:3-17, esp. 12 ff; 22, 26-27, 121-23).

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



5/23

Maria Tymoczko 403

Third, the locus of translation is changing. The need for shorter turnaround

times associated with the electronic networking of the world means that fewer

and fewer translation projects are executed by a single translator at a single

site. Increasingly, translation is undertaken by teams whose only connection isa virtual electronic network. Moreover, much translation is being outsourced

beyond Europe and the Americas to countries, often India and China, where

there are large cadres of translators willing to work for low wages. The locus

of translation is also changing because of the need to translate into or out of

Asian languages that few translators in Europe and the Americas master.

In these symptomatic changes the role of technology is paramount. Technol-

ogy makes it possible to coordinate efforts of translators from many different

locations around the globe. Moreover, computer-assisted translation is shifting

the translators task from generating text to editing electronically generatedtext. Technology is even driving the production of source texts, which are

being designed precisely for computer-assisted translation.

Before continuing, let us pause to consider some questions of termin-

ology. Here I am using the termEurocentricto refer to ideas, perspectivesand practices that initially originated in and became dominant in Europe,

spreading from there to various other locations in the world, where in some

places, such as the United States and the rest of the Americas, they have also

become dominant. Such ideas are commonly referred to as Western. At

this point in time, however, when Western ideas have permeated the worldand there is widespread interpenetration of cultures everywhere, the term

Western is problematic.3 Hence, when I talk about internationalizingor de-Westernizing translation studies, what I am actually proposing is to

de-centre inherited Eurocentric conceptualizations that continue to be com-

monplace and even dominant in the eld despite their decreasing relevance.

Though I give preference to the termEurocentricin this article, at times it isalso used interchangeably with the term Western.

Ironically the terms internationaland internationalizingare also worth

considering. Too often internationalhas had a very local and Eurocentric setof associations: for example, in order to achieve an international perspective

on a topic, it has sufced to consider the range of difference embodied within

Europe itself, as the range of examples in many translation studies textbooks

indicates. Alternatively, internationalhas been used to refer to bilateral rela-tions between part or all of Europe and one nation or one area outside Europe:

say, for example, China and England. By contrast when I call for a turn to

the international, I mean turning to the fully international. I am referring to a

conception of the international that includes all languages and all cultures: east

and west, north and south, large and small, powerful and weak, rich and poor,traditional and modern, oral and literate, and more. Moreover, when I refer to

3Additional considerations about these issues are found in Tymoczko (2007:15-16, 324-

25) and sources cited.

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



6/23


internationalizingtranslation studies, I do not envision merely increased as-sociations of individuals or groups, good as that is, but a process in which we

as scholars, teachers and translators move beyond our enclosed mental worlds

to look beyond the boundaries of our own cultures, to see what we can learnconceptually and practically about translation from the world at large.

Let us return to the question of the changes facing translation studies.

One way of distilling and conceptualizing the changes underway in the eld

of translation has been proposed by Ernst-August Gutt. Gutt (2000a:166; cf.

2000b:209-11) notes that (in Eurocentric contexts) translation has tradition-

ally been conceived as an interpretive activity: the relevance of translation

lies in informing addressees of what someone else has said, written or

thought. He observes (2000a:166; cf. 2000b:47-68, 215-20), however, that

at present the term translationis increasingly used for communication thatconstitutes a descriptive use of language. That is, at present translation doesnot necessarily constitute reported speech but can be a new utterance whose

primary purpose is an independent statement about or reference to the subject

matter itself. Thus translation is often performative, productive and discursive.

Localizations, advertisements and other types of contemporary commercial

translations exemplify this shift, as do many news reports, political statements

and ofcial translations of nations or governmental bodies such as the EU,

where documents issued simultaneously in the major languages all have the

status of originals. It is in this sense that translation practice is shifting fromthe interpretive to the performative in many circumstances.4

These changes affect many aspects of the theory and practice of transla-

tion. Not surprisingly, many translators and translation scholars also perceive

these shifts as threats and sources of anxiety because they seem to undermine

all that people have learned about translation as transfer, as well as about the

importance of delity, the concept of equivalence, the sacredness of the word,

and so on.

The question that must be asked therefore is the following: how can or

should translators and the eld of translation studies go forward to meet thechallenges of the day? My answer to this question is that translation studies

should be internationalized and de-Westernized, in part because other para-

digms for translation that stress performance and change illuminate many

contemporary developments in the practice of translation and the tasks of

translators. There is a paradox here. It is fair to say that Western-style trans-

lation has become dominant in much of the world, especially in the realm of

commercial translation where Western and Westernized corporations drive the

translation market. Western ideas about translation are also dominant because

the technologies changing translation are themselves principally Western.Teaching is yet another vehicle for the spread of Western ideas about translation

across the world, because instructional materials for professional translators

4See also the discussion in Hermans (2007:7, 24).

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



7/23

Maria Tymoczko 405

are often based on resources developed in Western contexts. Here the role of

Eugene Nidas work in translator training in China, or the Arabic textbooks

in Iraq based on the work of Peter Newmark, stand as examples.

In making this argument about the normative extension of Eurocentric ideasabout translation, I am thinking especially about the transfer hypothesis, coded

in the principal words for translation used in Western Europe notably English

translation, French traduction, Spanish traduccin, German bersetzung, andsimilar words in many other European languages. These words suggest the idea

that translation involves close transfer of the message (particularly the semantic

meaning) of the source text. Transfer takes the form of a carrying across, a

leading across, or a setting across in which semantic meaning is privileged.

The idea of transfer has been the dominant conceptual model for translation in

Western Europe since the late Middle Ages, and it is important not to lose sightof the fact that it has been a productive and successful model.5This Western

model of translation has been particularly useful for bureaucracies of various

sorts, including commercial organizations, governments, colonial regimes

and even religious institutions. The model of translation as transfer has also

been enormously important since the Renaissance in disseminating scientic

and technical knowledge over a large multilingual culture area. Thus it has

much to do with the technical, economic, military and political supremacy

of Westernized countries, driving expansionism and various other forms of

dominance. The utility of this conceptualization of translation is one reason

that the model has been attractive outside Eurocentric domains.

At the same time and this is the other half of the paradox many Western

translators currently have a sense that they are losing ground in the global

market. Online bidding, for example, is seen as favouring cost-competitive

translators in Asia. Moreover, as we have seen, in many translation contexts

the traditional transfer model simply no longer obtains. New translation types

and processes are required.

As I have indicated, de-Westernizing the discipline and the profession in

favour of a broad internationalization is one way to meet these challenges.

Why do I make this suggestion? What conceptualizations and practices of

translation are to be found internationally that will be useful to translators and

translation scholars? Here I explore a small selection of ideas and practices

in languages and cultures beyond European ones that offer conceptualiza-

tions of translation and models of practice so as to expand the repertory of

contemporary translation studies. Moving beyond Eurocentric discourses

will also enhance the creativity and agency of translators and suggest a new

ethical positioning for translators. Finally, it will improve the ability to assess

translational phenomena with greater acuity and secure cognitive reserves to

meet challenges of the future.

5Obviously there have been counter movements to this dominant discourse, such as lesbelles indlesin seventeenth-century France. Such translation movements, however, are

the exceptions that prove the rule.

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



8/23


1. Alternative conceptualizations of translation

If, as Pym observes, the shift in the very terms for translation is signicant, it

makes sense to explore terms for translation in world languages other than Eu-ropean ones. Models and conceptualizations embedded in words for translation

used around the world can help translators and scholars understand and respond

to current shifts in the eld of translation. Here, of course, I can only give a

few examples from among the many thousands of words for translation that

exist in the worlds languages,6but nonetheless they illustrate how the cognitive

metaphors inherent in many words for translation can shift translation studies

away from conceptualizing translation primarily as (semantic) transfer.7

A prime example is the most common Chinese locution for translation,

fanyi, which includes the sense turning over. The term is represented by thecharacter forfan, which means turning (a page) but also somersault, ip,and the character foryi, which means interpretation, but is also a homonymof the word meaning exchange.8The two terms,fanandyi, were both usedindependently for the activity of translation, but by the 12th century they were

completely interchangeable (Cheung 2006:202). The conceptfanyiis linkedto the image-schema of embroidery: if the source text is the front side of an

embroidered work, the target text can be thought of as the back side of the

same piece. Like the reverse of an embroidery which typically in modern

Chinese handwork has hanging threads, loose ends and even variations in pat-terning from the front a translation in this conceptualization can be viewed

as different from but complementary to the original.

A translation is not expected to be equivalent in all respects to the original

and transfer per se is not the primary goal. At the same time, of course, the

working side of an embroidery teaches much about its construction. Both

images embroidery and turning (a page) suggest that in Chinese discourses

text and translation are related as front and back of the same object. They can

also be thought of as positive and negative of the same pattern if the embroidery

or weaving technique imaged is brocade which is smooth on both sides but the

pattern appears in opposite colours and directions. This is the image proposed

in the 10th century by the Buddhist monk Zan Ning in commenting on the

6A more extensive discussion is found in Tymoczko (2007:68-77) and sources cited. See

also Chesterman (2006) for a longer list of terms and a discussion of some implications

of their image-schemas.7For more than a quarter century, linguists have documented the importance of cognitive

metaphors and image-schemas for conceptual orientations. The seminal work was publishedin Lakoff and Johnson (1980), which has remained a classic; Halverson (1999a, 1999b)

has adopted this approach productively within translation studies.8Additional Chinese terms for translation, their image-schemas and implicit metaphors,

and their theoretical implications are discussed in Cheung (2005/2009, 2006). Yican alsobe translated as exegesis (Cheung 2006:121).

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



9/23

Maria Tymoczko 407

meaning offan: the meaning can be conveyed by likening it to turning overa piece of brocade on both sides the patterns are the same, only they face in

opposite directions (Cheung 2006:177).9If one considers the implications of

the homonym ofyi, meaning exchange, it is clear that translation in Chinais also linked to trade, commerce and mutual interactions, a meaning that isreected in etymological stories about the origin of the practice of translation

as ancillary to the invention of intercultural exchange and trade. Together the

images behindfanyisuggest the sort of exchange in which gures turn to faceeach other, facilitating cultural communication and interchange.10

Other words also exemplify conceptualizations, image-schemas and

discourses related to translation that go far beyond Westernized views. For

example, tarjama, the Arabic word for translation, has quite different associa-

tions from translation as transfer (Tymoczko 2007:70-71 and sources cited).With its rst meaning as biography, tarjamasuggests that a translation has anarrative quality and that the translator is a sort of narrator with the power that

role entails.11There are additional interesting meanings for tarjama, includ-ing denition and in-depth analysis, that indicate frameworks for thinking

about translation as something other than a transfer process; indeed, in the

Arabic tradition of translating scientic and mathematical texts, the translator

held as much authority as the author of the source text and was expected to

be equal as a scholar.

The narrative associations of tarjamaare found in other terms for transla-tion as well. For example, the Igbo words tapiaand kowaboth have the sensebreak it up and tell it (in a different form) (Tymoczko 2007:71 and sources

cited). These terms stress the translators role as narrator and they imply change

and translational creativity. The emphasis of the processes behind tapiaandkowais on accommodation to the reception standards of the target audience.

Conceptualizations of translation pertinent to shifts in translation practices

at present are also indicated by words used in the various languages of India:

anuvad(literally following after), rupantar(change in form), and chaya(shadow, used of very literal translations) (Tymoczko 2007:68-70 and sources

cited). The rst two of these Indian words suggest that alteration in form and

variation are to be expected in a translation, and they too suggest oral standards

of evaluation. Anuvad, for example, derives from a root meaning speaks;

9See also the commentary on the passage in Cheung (2006:186-87), where a comparison

is made between the Chinese image-schema and a similar one occurring in Spanish in

Don Quixote.10

I am indebted for some of this material to personal communications with Martha Cheungand Liu Xiaoqing. For a discussion and critique of translation as exchange, see Cheung

(2005/2009) and sources cited; cf. Cheung (2006:174-75, 178, 193, 199, 201).11In a private communication, Gideon Toury has pointed out that tarjamacomes from aroot connected with speaks, underscoring the oral nature of translation. In turn the oral

quality can be related to the narrative aspect of translation as a form of (story)telling.

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



10/23


the term emphasizes the performance of a text, rather than literal rendition.

The temporal metaphor behind anuvadalso contrasts with the spatial ones ofWestern European words for translation. Insofar as translation is derivative in

Indian paradigms, it has this status because it comes after the source text intime, but the temporal relationship does not impute the creativity of the transla-

tion. These qualities are underscored by the term chaya(literally shadow).As a Sanskrit gloss of a Prakrit text, chayasuggests that a translation shouldfollow at the heels of the source text, not deviating or departing from it in form

or content; at the same time the metaphor suggests that like a shadow, such

a translation will appear quite different, depending on the angle from which

the translator illuminates and interprets the source text. The shadowy nature

of chayaalso suggests to me that such a close translation is seen as having a

sort of lifeless quality in Indian culture.Equally enlightening are words for translation in the Austronesian lan-

guages, notably Malay tersalinand Tagalogpagsasalin, which are associatedrespectively with birth and with pouring liquids or granular solids (such as

rice) from one container to another (Tymoczko 2007:74-75). Tersalinsuggeststhe innovative and life-giving quality of translation while the image-schema

behindpagsasalinindicates that translation is a form of transfer, but a differentsort of transfer from Eurocentric conceptualizations: it is transfer involving

change, a process like pouring in which a uid substance alters shape in order

to adapt to the receiving vessel.These image-schemas and conceptual metaphors open up the domain

of translation far beyond semantic transfer. They validate possibilities for

the translators agency and for a range of translation types that Eurocentric

conceptions of translation as carrying across do not. A full exploration of this

question is obviously beyond the scope of this essay, requiring consideration

of cognates and lexical elds of many words for translation found worldwide,

local practices and products of translation, and local histories of translation,

with careful attention to diachronic shifts in all these factors. In turn, the his-

tories and practices of translation could be interrogated in light of the earlymeanings of the words for translation in each culture. Etymologies, word

meanings, image-schemas and cognitive metaphors are only a stimulus or

starting point for inquiry, suggestive of conceptual orientations toward trans-

lation, the growth of local concepts of translation, and, hence, the growth of

local forms of knowledge about translation.12

Its brevity notwithstanding, this summary of some conceptualizations of

12In many ways Chinese scholars are ahead in this type of interrogation of local concepts

and discourses about translation, investigating Chinese terminologies, practices, historiesand discourses about the subject. An excellent example is the deep and sustained inves -

tigation in Martha CheungsAn Anthology of Chinese Discourse on Translation(2006),which gives not only the primary texts documenting historical practices of and discourses

about translation but also scholarly analyses of the primary materials, tracking minutely the

changing meanings of Chinese terminology about translation, including the termfanyi.

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



11/23

Maria Tymoczko 409

translation outside Eurocentric domains conrms the ndings of descriptive

translation studies undertaken during the last several decades, which indicate

the need to think more broadly about the nature of translation. These studies

have documented that even in European contexts translation is seldom simplya transfer process involving the carrying across of semantic meaning. The

terms for translation discussed above also offer new tools for understanding

the changes currently shaping the profession of translation. Although some

of the ideas about translation suggested by the words considered above are

traceable in Western European traditions, these conceptualizations have been

masked by the image of translation as transfer that became dominant at the

end of the Middle Ages.13The hegemonic rise in Europe and the wider world

of the image-schema of translation as (semantic) transfer has narrowed ways

of conceiving translation to the point that it currently compromises translatorsexibility and adaptability.

In an effort to meet the needs of contemporary translation praxis and to de-

ne translation more adequately as an activity beyond semantic reproduction,

the functionalist schools of translation studies have attempted to expand the

conceptualization of translation in ways that have afnities to the image-schemas

and cognitive metaphors of the words for translation we have considered. To

see such ideas formalized in words, conceptualizations and practices dominant

outside Europe, however, gives weight, structure, validation and memorabil-

ity to many current formulations in translation studies, including those ofthe functionalists. Alternative models of translation break the compulsion

that many Western and Westernized translators still feel to remain focused

at the level of the word or the sentence in both their conceptualizations and

processes of translation.

2. New models of practice

Many contemporary translation practices, including group protocols, virtual

networks and aspects of computer-assisted translation, are also illuminatedby international evidence that goes beyond Eurocentric models. The proto-

cols of contemporary media translation illustrate some of the issues. CNN

has approximately seven minutes to translate a news item that breaks in one

country into more than forty languages; any slower and local channels can

scoop the network by picking up the original CNN broadcast and retransmit-

ting the news in local languages.14Clearly such translation practices require a

13Consider the connections betweenfanyi, turning over, for example, and Latin convertere,

Spanish convertir, Italian versione, and Old English wendan and awendan, all havingmeanings related to turning. See Tymoczko (2007:72n41) and sources cited.14I am indebted here to information discussed in the panel Semiotranslation: A Research

Model for Intersemiotic Translation, consisting of presentations by Gregor Goethals, Robert

Hodgson, Ubaldo Stecconi, Siri Nergaard, and Nicola Dusi, at the conference Research

Models in Translation Studies, Manchester, England, April 2000.

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



12/23


decentralized cooperative network. It would be too expensive and impractical

to have assembled at any one place a full-time staff of translators competent

in more than forty languages.

Here the history of group translation methods in China offers a way tothink about practices where central reporting stations act as (pragmatic and

ideological) controllers of exibly assembled teams. China has practised group

translation for more than two thousand years, spanning the period from the

early translations of the Buddhist scriptures to the group translation protocols

of the Peoples Republic of China. At the height of Buddhist sutra translation

in China, the translation teams involved hundreds, even thousands of people

(Cheung 2006:8), and coordinated the efforts of people from different geo-

graphical areas. It is interesting to note that the title of translator was given

consistently to the acknowledged sutra expert, even if he knew little or noChinese (Hung 2006:151), rather than the actual individuals who had linguistic

expertise in both the source and target languages. This translation history offers

a very different lens for understanding translation practices than do Eurocentric

traditions focused on the individual, suggesting different standards for assess-

ing the translators visibility, for example, and allowing translation studies to

move away from canons modelled by Western individualism.

Equally signicant are the narrative models associated with translation

practices in Africa, India and elsewhere, for they revalorize oral translation

and the performative aspects increasingly demanded of translators at present inmultimodal translation, localization and other contemporary practices. These

paradigms underscore and legitimate the initiative, authority and agency of

the individual translator. The cognitive metaphors of words for translation

in these cultures acknowledge the necessity of breaking up the source text

and reformulating it to adapt to the receiving audience, thus indicating an

expectation that the target text can differ signicantly from the source text.

In these traditions the emphasis has been on reception standards, adaptation

to accepted text types, and a manageable information load, moving the focus

away from the specic words of the source text to larger textual segments oreven the whole text. The question of evaluating similarity and equivalence in

translation in such contexts is obviously quite different from that dominant in

Eurocentric contexts, and such conceptualizations are highly relevant to many

translation practices at present.

The scholarly tradition of translation into Arabic offers yet another model

of practice that contemporary translators can apply to contemporary tasks.

Because in Arabic tradition the knowledge of the translator was expected to

be equal to or greater than that of the author of the source text, again change

and updating were expected in the translated product. This is certainly a modelthat valorizes many contemporary translation practices, ranging from those

expected in technical and scientic translation to in-house translation in large

organizations.

Applying these terms for translation to contemporary practices, one might

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



13/23

Maria Tymoczko 411

think of localization as a form ofpagsasalin that is, translation as reshapinga uid message, just as pouring a liquid into a new vessel entails changing the

shape of the substance. Similarly, a legal translation might be seen in terms of

the root sense offanyi, as a form of turning over that entails parts of the textstaking on different colours and orientations to suit the new legal and culturalcontext. The power of Chinese characters to induce a form of autotranslation

(Tymoczko 2007:73-74) also illuminates issues pertaining to the translation of

logos and branding markers, the introduction of new products and associated

innovative concepts, and the operations of certain forms of computer-assisted

translation protocols.

In understanding and articulating contemporary shifts in translation prac-

tices, it is helpful to see that in many cultures around the world throughout

history fairly radical changes in translation products have been compatiblewith the standing of a target text as a good translation. Indeed the performative

practices of change, updating, revision for accuracy and accommodation to

the receiving audience have been routinely demanded from good translators

in many cultures, even if these criteria meant departing signicantly from the

semantic meaning of the source text. Thus in diverse ways evidence from

beyond Eurocentric domains illuminates the trajectory of current translation

practices demanded in the globalizing world.

3. Potential for creativity

I have argued inEnlarging Translation, Empowering Translators(2007:54-106) that translation is a cluster concept, rather than a concept bounded by

logical conditions or even by a prototype structure. Similar to game or lan-

guage, no necessary and sufcient conditions sufce to pick out all translations

and only translations across language, culture and time. Moreover, in cross-

cultural contexts there is no bounded group of properties that can be used to

determine the centrality, gradience, and weight of category exemplars and

hence membership in the category, as prototype approaches require. From aninternational perspective, translation must be seen as a cluster concept in order

to accommodate the diversity suggested by the many cognitive metaphors and

practices documented throughout the world across time, even though locally

at a particular place and time translation types and practices might be

governed by prototype structures.

De-Westernizing translation studies and adopting a cluster concept ap-

proach encourage creativity in translation practices because they allow many

possibilities to open up potentially all the practices that have been performed

in the world throughout history and all those that can be invented, includingfuture options as yet unforeseen. If this idea is taken seriously, translators are

encouraged to borrow, blend and invent new translation strategies to meet

their current immediate and long-range needs. Consciously working within

an open concept of translation that includes practices developed throughout

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



14/23


the world removes some of the constraints translators feel to perform what

has already been approved in their own specic cultural contexts, allowing

them to transcend the limits imposed by dominant models, to perform new

translation strategies and to invent new translation types that meet the manygoals now demanded of translators. There is a keen demand for innovation,

initiative and creativity in the current climate of globalization rather than mas-

tery of a predetermined set of translation skills. More fully internationalizing

translation studies can aid in responding to these demands both on the level

of the profession and on the level of the individual translator.

These are all reasons for translation studies to avoid retreating into separate

branches divided along national lines or the lines of distinct cultural traditions

of translation. Clearly translators trained in more than one conceptual frame-

work for translation have an advantage over those who operate more rigidlywithin a single framework. In addition to having more exibility and creativity,

such translators are able to problem-solve more easily when faced with new

translation tasks, empowered as they are with more than one perspective on

translation and more than one way of viewing a translational task. This may

be one reason the locus of translation is shifting beyond Eurocentric areas.

4. Enhancement of the agency of translators

We have looked at how de-Westernizing translation studies can enhance thecreativity of translators, but the agency conferred by familiarity with models

of translation from around the world goes beyond creativity. The common

words for translation in modern European languages became current at the

end of the Middle Ages when there was a widespread demand in Western

Europe to translate the Latin Bible into the vernacular languages, an impetus

that began in earnest in the 12th century and culminated in the Reformation.

The view of translation as transfer can be understood in part as an attempt

to impose normative limits on medieval oral methods of translation, which

are evident in many translated medieval texts. In oral cultures considerabletextual alteration is often practised, tolerated and even desired in translation,

as we have seen. The words for translation that became dominant in Western

European languages at the end of the Middle Ages implicitly set new norms

associated with literacy and sacralized the written word. These shifts were

partly motivated by the desire to control meaning associated with preserving

orthodoxy in religious translation, but no doubt the new norms were also at-

tractive to emerging secular bureaucracies of commercial and state interests,

which were also concerned with delity and control of meaning.

This control of meaning has important implications for translators. Therole of translators in making meaning has frequently been effaced in Eurocen-

tric tradition, in some respects systematically so. In general there are strong

cultural determinants in how meaning is constituted in translation, and it is

in the interest of those in power to deny translators an active role in making

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



15/23

Maria Tymoczko 413

meaning and to disavow the constructivist nature of meaning in translation.

This institutionalized disavowal impinges on how translation is viewed and

how translators are trained and supervised. Social structures are established

to limit, dene and regulate meaning in translation and elsewhere, in largepart because power rests on the way meaning is controlled and constructed

as much as it does on physical coercion. The interest in controlling meaning

is not characteristic of Eurocentric cultures alone but is found in all cultures.

Control of meaning occurs at every level of human society, from the global

to the level of nations and cultures, from the local to the level of intimate

groupings such as families. At all levels those in power attempt to dene and

stipulate meaning, to establish and regulate discourses and to circumscribe

expression. In Eurocentric cultures, however, the conceptualization of transla-

tion as transfer has been a signicant part of the system of control of meaningsince the late Middle Ages.15

Societies are deeply invested in the allegiance and loyalty of their transla-

tors and develop methods to prevent translators from becoming traitors. The

most effective way to ensure the allegiance of translators is to regulate mean-

ing, to keep translators inscribed within dominant politicized meanings and to

efface this inscription at the very inception of translators careers. That is, the

most effective way to ensure translator loyalty is to efface choice, to deny the

constructivist nature of meaning, to make discourse look natural, to disperse

ideology and to undercut ethical initiatives associated with reinterpretationsof meaning. Many of these modes of control in Eurocentric contexts are as-

sociated with imaging translation as a specic type of transfer. It is perhaps

no surprise that these ideas about translation should have been disseminated

and adapted internationally during the last century.

Being aware of cognitive metaphors for translation from around the world

helps translators and scholars in all cultures to challenge Eurocentric traditions

of control in translation, particularly the control of meaning. Many image-

schemas for translation worldwide release translators from the constraints of

semantic transfer and a problematic quest for equivalence, offering them agreat deal more freedom to create texts, to make meaning, to be active cul-

tural agents. This freedom is particularly important at present in adapting to

the challenges of globalization and the new demands currently being made

on translators.

5. New ethical positioning

Dominant Western views of translation as transfer transfer of meaning in

particular undercut the ethical agency of the translator. The idea of transferof the sacred Word derived from Bible translation keeps the focus on the

15See also Hermans (2007:76, cf. 83), who argues that Western views of translation attempt

to silence the translators voice and to make translation monologic.

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



16/23


microlevels of textual delity. It is no accident that professional codes of ethics

also stress these microlevels, as well as the translators immediate obligations

to the employer, effacing larger spheres of responsibility to communities and

the world.Eurocentric conceptualizations of translation are associated with the meta-

phor of the translator as standing between in the transfer process, a metaphor

that has been taken up and even lionized widely in translation studies. As I

have argued elsewhere (Tymoczko 2003/2009), however, the metaphor of

between suggests that the translator is neutral, above history and ideology;

the translator is merely a faithful transfer station between two cultural points.

The consequence is the evisceration of the agency of translators as responsible,

committed and engaged agents.

Knowledge of conceptualizations and practices of translation from

around the world offers standards of comparison that help translators see the

limitations of Eurocentric views. It facilitates awareness of the association of

Western models of translation with cultural and ideological dominance and

helps to reveal the ideological frameworks within which translators operate

in general. Such a comparative process of assessing translation is in fact use-

ful to translators working in every culture of the world as they struggle with

traditional constraints on translation during the current period of innovation,

whether those traditions are Western or not: a broad knowledge of viewsabout translation from many parts of the world benets all translators what-

ever their culture. Exposure to other models of translation helps translators

develop self-reexivity, which is essential for empowerment and the exercise

of ethical agency.

Translators everywhere and at all times have been vulnerable to becoming

mouthpieces for the dominant regimes of their cultures. At present new forms

of this type of jeopardy are emerging along with the widespread networking

of the world. A chief peril posed by globalization for translators whether

they are from Eurocentric contexts or not is that they can become vehicles

for the assertion of dominant Western values around the world, ideas that

serve specic corporate and military interests and that are vehicles of neoco-

lonialism. For translators and scholars from Europe, the Americas and other

Western countries, this means colluding in Western exploitation; for scholars

and translators elsewhere, it means becoming classic subalterns who buy into

hegemonic thinking in the service of dominant global powers. Having the

broadest possible conceptualization of translation helps translators keep ethi-

cal issues in focus; it reminds translators that translation methods themselvescan serve ideology. The alternative to such awareness is that the profession

of translation and the discipline of translation studies both of which are

purportedly dedicated to cultural exchange will instead become vehicles of

cultural homogenization and even oppression.

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



17/23

Maria Tymoczko 415

6. Assessing translational phenomena with greater acuity

Broad knowledge of paradigms and practices of translation found worldwide

gives translators, scholars and teachers the ability to assess translationalphenomena with greater acuity and to conceptualize translation tasks more

clearly, in part by offering additional vocabulary and models for understanding

current changes affecting translation processes and products. Such knowledge

moves people away from assessing translation tasks in narrowly restricted

ways developed in and often limited to particularized contexts.

In translation studies current theoretical frameworks suffer from being

based on an implicit and unexamined foundation of Western understandings.16

Eurocentric conceptions of translation are deeply rooted in literacy practices

as opposed to oral practices still dominant in much if not most of the world.Eurocentric ideas about translation are also imbricated in practices of bibli-

cal translation and shaped by the history of translating Christian sacred texts.

Moreover, Western conceptions of translation are heavily inuenced by the

tight connection of language and nation in Europe, which has often dened

normal nations as monolingual and monocultural.17Eurocentric conceptu-

alizations of translation are connected with the practices of empire as well.

Clearly these are not acceptable bases for founding an international discipline

of translation studies, for developing translation theory, for modelling interna-

tional standards of translation practice, and for understanding the full breadthof translational phenomena.

In a strong sense translation studies has thus far taken a local European form

of knowledge about translation based on Western European assumptions and

universalized it as a general theory. Insofar as translation studies is intended

to serve the internal needs of Europe, that basis for the discipline may be suf-

cient, but plainly it cannot sufce to respond to the current rapid changes

in the profession of translation associated with globalization, when both the

role of translators and the practice of translation are shifting.18The disjunction

between what we theorize in translation studies and what our students practice

as translators has important consequences.

Cognitive scientists have established that background knowledge affects

not only initial acquisition of a concept but also later categorization judgments

16The narrow foundations of translation theory and translation studies as a discipline are

reected in many central pretheoretical assumptions (Tymoczko 2006). See Stecconi (2004,

2007) for an approach to establishing a new foundation.17

One thinks, for example, of the attempts to suppress Celtic languages in the British Islesand France or Francos suppression of languages such as Catalan in Spain.18This rethinking of translation studies within larger international frameworks can be seen

as an appeal for what Chakrabarty (2000:20) has called plural normative horizons based

on normative and theoretical thought enshrined in other existing life practices and their

archives.

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



18/23


(Murphy 2002:173). Thus, in attempting to understand the complex cross-

cultural concept translation and to make responsible and effective choices,

translators are aided by early and explicit knowledge of a broad range of trans-

lation types and a broad range of diverse local conceptualizations. Looking ata large range of views and practices of translation, including divergent concep-

tualizations originating outside Eurocentric contexts, will help practitioners

and scholars to perceive, astutely assess and creatively meet contemporary

changes in the profession. For example, the various cognitive metaphors

that associate translation with change such as translation as turning over or

translation as breaking apart and narrating in a different form offer ways to

think about, evaluate and approach the new types of translation tasks being

required of contemporary practitioners.

Cognitive scientists have also stressed that it is not possible to see thefull range of a phenomenon from within a single framework in which vari-

ous aspects of the phenomenon remain constant (Murphy 2002:42, Lakoff

1987:82). De-Westernizing translation studies so as to introduce a broad array

of cognitive frameworks permits greater understanding of the entire eld of

translational phenomena and more precise analysis of translation challenges

and choices. Such a cognitive grounding offers a great advantage to practising

translators in their ability to assess the tasks they undertake.

7. Cognitive reserves for meeting the challenges of the future

Ironically many of the conceptual riches that we have been considering are at

risk of vanishing. The global dominance of Western ideas about translation is

obliterating traditional conceptualizations of translation in many cultures. If

this continues, the result will be the loss of tremendous conceptual and practical

resources: the loss of particular cultural conceptualizations of translation is

an example of the sort of tremendous loss that occurs when entire languages

die out.

In translation theory and practice, one way this happens is that scholars and

translators get educated away from their own cultures ideas about translation.

ebnem Susam-Sarajeva, for example, has argued that even when researchers

initially have as their goal the desire to understand and explain translational

and maybe, therefore, social and cultural phenomena in their own systems

of origin, the more they work withcentral models and tools, the more theyare meant to workforthem (2002:199). Early in their careers, scholars andtranslators outside Eurocentric contexts often begin to internalize Western

theory; they then come to (dis)regard their own cultures concepts of andthinking about translation as old-fashioned, irrelevant and simplistic, setting

them aside in favour of dominant Western views, even though tools originat-

ing in Eurocentric contexts do not necessarily prove useful when extended to

other cultural situations (Susam-Sarajeva 2002:195-96, 199). Susam-Sarajeva

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



19/23

Maria Tymoczko 417

observes that self-colonization is the state a large part of the world nds itself

in today (ibid.:198). In a similar vein, Martha Cheung warns that for scholarsoutside Eurocentric domains to be content with modern translation theories

inspired by Western scholarship is tantamount to cultural self-disinheritance(2005/2009:38/72).

The de-Westernization and enlargement of translation and of translation

studies that I am arguing for here can be thought of in terms of biodiversity.

The biodiversity in question, however, is cultural biodiversity and biodiversity

of the mind, those special types of diversity most characteristic of human

life and most associated with human well-being. The survival value for hu-

man beings of retaining diverse ideasandpracticesof translation that haveevolved over thousands of years in different human cultures should be obvious.

Among human activities and ideations, preserving varied conceptualizationsabout translation is particularly adaptive because such ideas encode diverse

ways of mediating between cultures and across languages. This reservoir

of knowledge about how translation can and should work promotes human

cooperation, which is as much a matter of human survival and global welfare

as is the health of the physical environment.

The plasticity, pliability, diversity, and adaptability (Legrand 2005:34)

of local knowledge about translation thus constitute a cognitive and cultural

heritage from the past, a legacy that comes to us from the depths of time and

that will contribute to human well-being in the future as well as the present.Preservation and dissemination of knowledge about the worlds different his-

tories, concepts and practices of translation guard a supply of understandings

that will facilitate the growth of ideas about translation and the development

of new translation practices in the future. The worlds diverse ideas about

translation are the reserves for dispositions and practices that human beings

need now and that they will need in times to come in order to meet the demands

of communication in a rapidly changing and often contentious world. We

must cherish this diversity of ideas this biodiversity of the mind because

it will sustain translators as they cope with challenging tasks, adapt to new

technology, solve ethical dilemmas and negotiate sensitive cultural interface.

The worlds ideational reserves about translation can help translators to act

creatively and powerfully and to become effective intellectual and ethical

agents. Only by fully internationalizing conceptualizations of translation can

translators retain this potential for the future.

8. A paradigm shift in translation studies

Times of rapid change such as our own are stimulating, as well as anxiety

provoking. In translation studies the current period is exciting because many

new domains are opening for translation. Translators around the world are

breaking out of cultural straitjackets, including those that have constrained

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



20/23


translation in many cultures for centuries. Supplied with new technological

tools, translators also need internal resources to face change openly, exibly

and innovatively.

In order to achieve the benets discussed above most effectively, thediscipline of translation studies itself will have to commit to a programme

of internationalization. Without the support of an academic discipline, it is

difcult for translation professionals to nd the resources to adapt, to inno-

vate and to have their individual creativity result in durable and transferable

knowledge. Many cutting-edge responses to contemporary challenges now

occur behind closed doors. Corporations and governments develop innova-

tive translation protocols, software and team structures to respond to the new

demands on translators, but anti-disclosure contracts make it difcult or even

impossible for translators in these closed spheres to share their innovationswith the profession as a whole.

At a time requiring rapid response, only an organized international dis-

cipline can hope to survey the scope of change, to gather data broadly, to

acknowledge in a comprehensive way challenges that individual translators

perceive piecemeal, to respond in a systematic way to what is needed and to

disseminate that information broadly. Although individuals can and do respond

and innovate in their specic contexts, a discipline makes it possible to move

forward effectively and cohesively on a large scale. Paradoxically it also takes

a discipline to conserve and transmit innovations, to avoid reinventing thewheel, as happens when innovations are dispersed and enclosed in corporate

and governmental structures. Additionally, as an academic discipline, transla-

tion studies can assume ethical positions that are not indebted to or controlled

by special interests.

A prime job of an academic discipline during a period of change is to

articulate the nature of the changes being faced: to delineate continuities as

well as ruptures. A discipline retains the long view of its subject matter and

resists passing fads. It maintains large intellectual frameworks within which

the conditions of the present can be situated. As a discipline translation stud-ies can look back to more than two thousand years of documented translation

discourses and practices, as well as translation in oral conditions that antedates

literacy altogether and that continues to be relevant to the present.

How translation studies responds to current changes and to the intensi-

ed networking of the world is critical. Decisive responses in times of rapid

change are particularly important in disciplines that involve practice as well

as theory.19What is needed at present is a paradigm shift a shift toward the

truly international and away from all cultural enclosures, including Eurocen-

tric ones.

19Here translation studies stands with the natural sciences and many of the social sciences

more than with the humanities, notwithstanding the fact that most translation programmes

are located within the humanities and most translation teachers are trained as humanists.

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



21/23

Maria Tymoczko 419

In facing change, translation studies must welcome and incorporate

relevant input from all parts of the globe. If the discipline does not meet

these contemporary challenges adequately, then ironically students trained in

translation programmes will be less able to innovate than intelligent, broadlyeducated people who know about the world, culture, politics, technology and

language, even if they have no training in translation per se.

We have looked at a number of reasons to shift the eld away from lim-

ited Eurocentric perspectives and to become fully international, but the same

argument can be made about any other single cultural orientation. There are

many other motivations for fully internationalizing than those considered

here justice, respect for other cultures, equity in intellectual disciplines,

curiosity about new ideas, and so forth. Indeed there can be no retreat from

an international discipline of translation studies where all languages, culturesand nations contribute to the dialogue. As translators stand on the edge of the

unknown in a time of change, no single tradition whether it is European,

Chinese or any other can alone point the way forward. Rather, strength lies in

the coming together of many traditions in which all are enriched and enlarged

as they face the contemporary world.20

The benets for translation theory and practice of internationalizing its

conceptualizations are obvious even from the few examples I have discussed

in this essay. The project of using ideas about translation from the world as a

whole to face contemporary challenges is a clear instance of why an academicdiscipline related to translation is essential. Individual translators, teachers

and scholars can have many of the insights I have discussed here, but only an

international scholarly discipline can collectively undertake the explorations

I am outlining in order to internationalize its own domain in a systematic

fashion. It is not possible for a single individual to accomplish in a compre-

hensive way the work necessary to understand current changes in the role

of translators and emerging practices of translation and to investigate these

shifts in terms of a broad range of conceptualizations about translation from

around the world. Moreover, an academic discipline can ensure the intellectualintegrity of scholarship, set rigorous standards for testing and interrogating

intellectual propositions, provide opportunities for sharing knowledge and

allow for broad and inclusive dialogue leading to improved investigations.

The case of de-Westernizing translation studies is an ideal example of why

an international academic discipline is essential for supporting the profession

of translation: it is the pooling of knowledge of colleagues from around the

world that is currently moving translation beyond its traditional narrow limits

in specic cultures, including Eurocentric ones.

Scholarly discourses that range across many languages and cultures can

20Cf. Hermans (2007:152), following Zhang Longxi and Gadamer. See also Hermanss

comments (ibid.:152-56) on the difference between appropriation and a communal enter-prise entailing self-reexivity on the part of all.

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



22/23


articulate the relationship of current conditions in the profession of transla-

tion to the varied conceptualizations, practices and histories of translation

in the world, preserving this collective knowledge for the future. Only an

international discipline can recognize, validate and nd means of preservingthe cognitive reserves inherent in the conceptualizations about translation of

the diverse cultures of the globe, particularly those that stand at the margins

of current dominant practices. Commitments to establishing and preserving

knowledge about translation from the whole world and to training translators

in the broadest possible frameworks are key to a vital discipline of translation

studies. Through all these activities translation studies contributes to building

the internal resources of translators. If translation studies can de-centre Western

dominance and move beyond the many forms of cultural self-enclosure in its

pedagogies, the eld will immeasurably strengthen its scholars, teachers and,most of all, its practising translators. It is heartening to see that the paradigm

shift toward the full internationalization of translation studies binding to-

gether the past, the present and the future of translation around the world is

not just a pious hope for the future but has already begun.

MARIA TYMOCZKO

Comparative Literature, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003,USA. [email protected]

References

Chakrabarty, Dispesh (2000)Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial Thought andHistorical Difference, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Chesterman, Andrew (2006) Interpreting the Meaning of Translation, in Mickael

Suominen (ed.)A Man of Measure: Festschrift in Honour of Fred Karlssonon his 60th Birthday, SKY Journal of Linguistics19: 3-11.

Cheung, Martha P. Y. (2005/2009) To Translate Means To Exchange? A

New Interpretation of the Earliest Chinese Attempts to Dene Translation(Fanyi), Target17:1.27-48; reprinted in Mona Baker (ed.) TranslationStudies(4 vols), Volume I, London & New York: 61-80.

------ (ed.) (2006)An Anthology of Chinese Discourse on Translation, Volume 1,Manchester: St. Jerome.

Cronin, Michael (2003) Translation and Globalization, London: Routledge.

Gutt, Ernst-August (2000a) Issues of Translation Research in the Inferential

Paradigm of Communication, in Maeve Olohan (ed.)Intercultural Faultlines:Research Models in Translation Studies I: Textual and Cognitive Aspects,

Manchester: St. Jerome, 161-79.------ (2000b) Translation and Relevance: Cognition and Context, Manchester:

St. Jerome.

Halverson, Sandra (1999a) Conceptual Work and the Translation Concept,

Target11(1): 1-31.

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



23/23

Maria Tymoczko 421

------ (1999b) Image Schemas, Metaphoric Processes, and the Translate Con-

cept,Metaphor and Symbol14(3): 199-219.Hermans, Theo (2007) The Conference of the Tongues, Manchester: St. Jerome.Hung, Eva (2006) And the Translator Is : Translators in Chinese History,

in Theo Hermans (ed.) Translating Others(2 vols), Volume I, Manchester: St.Jerome, 145-60.

Katan, David (1999/2004) Translating Cultures: An Introduction for Translators,Interpreters and Mediators, Manchester: St. Jerome, second edition.

Lakoff, George (1987) Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What CategoriesReveal about the Mind, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

------ and Mark Johnson (1980)Metaphors We Live By, Chicago: University ofChicago Press.

Legrand, Pierre (2005) Issues in the Translatability of Law, in Sandra Bermann

and Michael Wood (eds) Nation, Language, and the Ethics of Translation,Princeton: Princeton University Press, 30-50.

Murphy, Gregory L. (2002) The Big Book of Concepts, Cambridge: MIT Press.Pym, Anthony (2000) On Cooperation, in Maeve Olohan (ed.) Intercultural

Faultlines: Research Models in Translation Studies I: Textual and CognitiveAspects, Manchester: St. Jerome, 181-92.

Stecconi, Ubaldo (2004) Interpretive Semiotics and Translation Theory: The

Semiotic Conditions to Translation, Semiotica150: 471-89.------ (2007) Five Reasons Why Semiotics is Good for Translation Studies, in

Yves Gambier, Miriam Shlesinger and Radegunis Stolze (eds) TranslationStudies: Doubts and Directions, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 15-26.

Susam-Sarajeva, ebnem (2002) A Multilingual and International Transla-

tion Studies?, in Theo Hermans (ed.) Crosscultural Transgressions: ResearchModels in Translation Studies II: Historical and Ideological Issues, Manches-ter: St. Jerome, 193-207.

Tymoczko, Maria (2003/2009) Ideology and the Position of the Translator: In

What Sense is a Translator In Between?, in Mara Calzada Prez (ed.)

Apropos of Ideology: Translation Studies on Ideology Ideologies in Transla-

tion Studies, Manchester: St. Jerome, 181-201; reprinted in Mona Baker (ed.)Translation Studies(4 vols), Volume III, London & New York: 375-94.

------ (2006) Reconceptualizing Translation Theory: Integrating Non-Western

Thought about Translation, in Theo Hermans (ed.) Translating Others (2vols.), Volume I, Manchester: St. Jerome, 13-32.

------ (2007) Enlarging Translation, Empowering Translators, Manchester: St.Jerome.

Wakabayashi, Judy (2005) Translation in the East Asian Cultural Sphere: Shared

Roots, Divergent Paths?, in Eva Hung and Judy Wakabayashi (eds) Asian

Translation Traditions, Manchester: St. Jerome, 17-65.

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19


internationalization of translation studies (2009)

Documents