Conceptualising the translation theory with different perspectives

Most students of the translation studies department have some kinds of ideas and prejudices on translation, translators and different kinds of translation before they start studying at the department. With the experience they gain in the field as a translator and their readings of other translators’ and/or scholars’ ideas on translation, these views are shaped into a completely different form most of the time. Tymozcko’s paper is quite good at summarising these prejudices which are also the prejudices of Western culture against translation studies.

Common in three readings is that translation studies needs to refresh its perspective on the certain concepts such as the scope of translation studies, definitions of text-types, or what is central in translation studies if we want to understand what is going on in it the world apart from us or what is going on in the periphery with Susam-Sarajeva’s words. If we want to figure out Chinese, or Indian, or African terms on translation we should not look at them with the theories on Western tradition since these theories do not cover a universal idea on translation. This can only be managed by embracing and celebrating variety, disunity and hybridity in translation approaches. Every culture and every language have a different perspective on translation shaped by this culture itself. Therefore, universalism may not be possible, or it may be too generalizing for that matter. Thus, instead of a revised Western theory claiming to be universal we should first deconceptualise then reconceptualise the translation history and theory.

Like feminist scholars trying to rewrite history in order to challenge patriarchal history writing and to find out the roles and contributions of women to the history, scholars of translation studies should also rewrite translation history with a polyculturalist* perspective in order to be able to include plurilingualism and cultural relativism into translation history and make translation thick on their own.

*“Revolutionizing Culture Part One”. July 15^th, 2003. See Justin Podur’s interview with Michael Albert www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/10125

REFERENCES

Hermans, Theo. 2007. The Conference of the Tongues. Manchester : St Jerome Publishing, 2007.

Susam-Sarajeva, Şebnem. 2002. A 'Multilingual' and 'International' Translation Studies? [ed.] Theo Hermans. Crosscultural Transgressions: Research Models in Translation Studies II Historical and Ideological Issues. Manchester : St Jerome Publishing, 2002, pp. 193-207.

Tymoczko, Maria. 2006. Reconceptualizing Translation Theory: Integrating Non-Western Thought about Translation. [ed.] Theo Hermans. Translating Others vol.1. s.l. : St. Jerome Publishing, 2006, pp. 13-32.