This is the first article in the "Translation Studies Forum: Translation Studies and Invariance" replying to Brian Mossop's article on "Invariance orientation: Identifying an object for translation studies" published on 4 May 2016. Whilst fully endorsing Mossop’s broad premise of giving a more central place in translation studies to professional practice and sameness rather than change, there are other more specific points of his proposal that are taken issue with in this reply. First, his insistence that the translator's mental stance at the moment of production needs to be sharply distinguished from the point of view of translation users, with the related claim that his proposal is neither sociological nor cultural. Second, his downright rejection of the methodology of comparing different translations of the same source text, which he brands as only aiming to find different degrees of variance. Third, his attempt at defining the exact scope of translation studies’ object of study by making a black-and-white distinction between "invariance-orientation", taken as the only criterion for inclusion, and "variance-oriented production", including a variety of language-related skills that today’s translators should in fact possess.

Response by Scarpa to “Invariance orientation: Identifying an object for translation studies”

SCARPA, FEDERICA
2017-01-01

Abstract

This is the first article in the "Translation Studies Forum: Translation Studies and Invariance" replying to Brian Mossop's article on "Invariance orientation: Identifying an object for translation studies" published on 4 May 2016. Whilst fully endorsing Mossop’s broad premise of giving a more central place in translation studies to professional practice and sameness rather than change, there are other more specific points of his proposal that are taken issue with in this reply. First, his insistence that the translator's mental stance at the moment of production needs to be sharply distinguished from the point of view of translation users, with the related claim that his proposal is neither sociological nor cultural. Second, his downright rejection of the methodology of comparing different translations of the same source text, which he brands as only aiming to find different degrees of variance. Third, his attempt at defining the exact scope of translation studies’ object of study by making a black-and-white distinction between "invariance-orientation", taken as the only criterion for inclusion, and "variance-oriented production", including a variety of language-related skills that today’s translators should in fact possess.
2017
22-ago-2016
Pubblicato
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14781700.2016.1207558
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Scarpa_Response by Scarpa to Invariance orientation Identifying an object for translation studies.pdf

Accesso chiuso

Descrizione: articolo
Tipologia: Documento in Versione Editoriale
Licenza: Copyright Editore
Dimensione 827.4 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
827.4 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
2892576_Scarpa_Response by Scarpa to Invariance orientation Identifying an object for translation studies-PostPrint.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Bozza finale post-referaggio (post-print)
Licenza: Digital Rights Management non definito
Dimensione 1.1 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.1 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11368/2892576
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 1
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 1
social impact