Main objective of reconceptualising translation theories is to present that there is a dominant ethnocentric perspective in translation studies and propose different methods/ways to overcome this ethnocentricism. As Ceyda mentioned in her paper, thick translation, none-translation, meta-translation, and involving self-reflexivity into the scope of translation studies may be the way to achieve this purpose.
However, differently from Ceyda, I do not think that Tymoczko only summarizes the given criticisms of postcolonial and poststructuralist translation theories. She criticizes all the suppositions on translation which have been taken for granted by the Western scholars since ages from early Bible translations to recent translations in courts. And redefining, or reconceptualising for that matter, cannot be achieved only by criticising poststructuralism or postcolonialism. These poststructuralist/postcolonialist ideas have been constructed on other ideas, and those as well were constructed on different others, thus they could become the centre in the translation studies. As Susam-Sarajeva rightfully states without questioning what is in the centre, we cannot form our criticisms against it from the periphery.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder