Translation and relevance
In this study I argue that the phenomenon commonly referred to as ~translation~ can be accounted for naturally within the relevance theory of communication developed by Sperber and Wilson: there is no need for a distinct general theory of translation. Most kinds of translation can be analysed as varieties of Interpretive use. I distinguish direct from indirect translation, where direct translation corresponds to the idea that translation should convey the same meaning as the original, including stylistic effects, and indirect translation involves looser degrees of faithfulness. I show that direct translation is merely a special case of interpretive use, whereas indirect translation is the general case. More generally, the different kinds of translation, with the various principles and guidelines that have been proposed to account for them, can be explained in terms of the interaction between the principle of relevance and contextual factors, without recourse to typological frameworks. I end by arguing that the communicative success of a translation is not determined by conformity to any stipulations of translation theory, but by the causal interaction between stimulus, context and interpretation rooted in
Gutt, Ernst-August
Linguistics
Translation and relevance. In this study I argue that the phenomenon commonly referred to as ~translation~ can be accounted for naturally within the relevance theory of communication developed by Sperber and Wilson: there is no need for a distinct general theory of translation. Most kinds of translation can be analysed as varieties of Interpretive use. I distinguish direct from indirect translation, where direct translation corresponds to the idea that translation should convey the same meaning as the original, including stylistic effects, and indirect translation involves looser degrees of faithfulness. I show that direct translation is merely a special case of interpretive use, whereas indirect translation is the general case. More generally, the different kinds of translation, with the various principles and guidelines that have been proposed to account for them, can be explained in terms of the interaction between the principle of relevance and contextual factors, without recourse to typological frameworks. I end by arguing that the communicative success of a translation is not determined by conformity to any stipulations of translation theory, but by the causal interaction between stimulus, context and interpretation rooted in
translation relevance study argue phenomenon commonly_refer translation account naturally within relevance_theory communication develop sperber_wilson need distinct general_theory translation kind translation analyse variety interpretive use distinguish direct_indirect translation direct_translation correspond idea translation convey mean original include stylistic effect indirect translation involve loose degree faithfulness show direct_translation merely special case interpretive use whereas indirect translation general case generally different_kind translation various principle guideline propose account explain_term interaction principle relevance contextual_factor without recourse typological framework end argue communicative success translation determine conformity stipulation translation_theory causal interaction stimulus context interpretation root