chronotopos – A Journal of Translation History
Not a member yet
120 research outputs found
Sort by
The Self-Discovery of Translation Studies. D’hulst, Lieven & Gambier, Yves (eds.) (2018): A History of Modern Translation Knowledge. Sources, concepts, effects. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: Benjamins.
Full text linkno abstract availableno abstract availableno abstract availabl
The Philosopher of Translation: Erich Prunč - Slavicist and Translation Studies Scholar
Full text linkno abstract availableno abstract availableno abstract availabl
Time Matters: Conceptual and Methodological Considerations in Translation Timescapes
Full text linkTime is a fundamental concept and context in translation history that merits more specific consideration than it has generally been accorded by translation scholars. This paper examines conceptual issues surrounding time, such as culture-specific time consciousness and teleological, linear and circular concepts of time, as well as change and continuity. It also explores some methodological issues relating to the treatment of time when writing translation histories, with a special focus on the principles and problems of periodization and how to structure narratives, including non-periodizing principles. Fernand Braudel’s three timescales of historical analysis are considered in terms of translation history, and the affordances of digital history in relation to time issues are also introduced. The paper concludes with a brief cautionary note about anachronistic interpretations and the compression of time when studying recent history.Time is a fundamental concept and context in translation history that merits more specific consideration than it has generally been accorded by translation scholars. This paper examines conceptual issues surrounding time, such as culture-specific time consciousness and teleological, linear and circular concepts of time, as well as change and continuity. It also explores some methodological issues relating to the treatment of time when writing translation histories, with a special focus on the principles and problems of periodization and how to structure narratives, including non-periodizing principles. Fernand Braudel’s three timescales of historical analysis are considered in terms of translation history, and the affordances of digital history in relation to time issues are also introduced. The paper concludes with a brief cautionary note about anachronistic interpretations and the compression of time when studying recent history.Time is a fundamental concept and context in translation history that merits more specific consideration than it has generally been accorded by translation scholars. This paper examines conceptual issues surrounding time, such as culture-specific time consciousness and teleological, linear and circular concepts of time, as well as change and continuity. It also explores some methodological issues relating to the treatment of time when writing translation histories, with a special focus on the principles and problems of periodization and how to structure narratives, including non-periodizing principles. Fernand Braudel’s three timescales of historical analysis are considered in terms of translation history, and the affordances of digital history in relation to time issues are also introduced. The paper concludes with a brief cautionary note about anachronistic interpretations and the compression of time when studying recent history
Interpreting prisoners-of-war. Sketches of a military translation culture in Finnish POW camps during World War II (1941-1944)
Full text linkIn the four years of Finland’s Continuation War against the USSR, Finnish troops captured 67,000 Soviet prisoners-of-war who were handled behind lines in an extended network of POW formations. Drawing from archived correspondence between the responsible military administration and the POW camp commanders, the article analyses the resources allocated for the management of communication issues as wells as the discourses concerning the interpreter’s tasks, role, trustworthiness, and positioning in the strenuous and violent conditions of POW camps.In the four years of Finland’s Continuation War against the USSR, Finnish troops captured 67,000 Soviet prisoners-of-war who were handled behind lines in an extended network of POW formations. Drawing from archived correspondence between the responsible military administration and the POW camp commanders, the article analyses the resources allocated for the management of communication issues as wells as the discourses concerning the interpreter’s tasks, role, trustworthiness, and positioning in the strenuous and violent conditions of POW camps.In the four years of Finland’s Continuation War against the USSR, Finnish troops captured 67,000 Soviet prisoners-of-war who were handled behind lines in an extended network of POW formations. Drawing from archived correspondence between the responsible military administration and the POW camp commanders, the article analyses the resources allocated for the management of communication issues as wells as the discourses concerning the interpreter’s tasks, role, trustworthiness, and positioning in the strenuous and violent conditions of POW camps
Übersetzen als „parteiisch sondierendes Recycling“. Peter Rühmkorfs Umgang mit Leben und Werk des Walther von der Vogelweide
Full text link1975 veröffentlichte Peter Rühmkorf (1929–2008) seinen 70 Druckseiten umfassenden Essay „Walther von der Vogelweide – Reichssänger und Hausierer“. Integriert in den Text waren 34 Übersetzungen von Gedichten Walthers, deren mittelhochdeutsche Fassungen im Anhang ebenfalls abgedruckt wurden. Wie es zu diesen Übersetzungen kam, wie Rühmkorf die Gedichte auswählte und präsentierte, welche übersetzerischen Verfahren er einsetzte und wie er sein Vorgehen – auch in Abgrenzung von bereits vorliegenden Übersetzungen – begründete, was das Übersetzen für sein eigenes Schreiben bedeutete, wie er dieses eigene Schreiben und die Walther-Übersetzungen im politischen Kontext der Nach-68er-Ära verortete, wie er die Walther-Publikation nutzte, um seine Position im konkurrenzgetriebenen Literaturbetrieb Westdeutschlands neu zu festigen, welche Rolle andere Akteure dieses Betriebs (Kritiker, Verlagsleute, Publizisten, Germanisten) dabei spielten – um diese Fragen geht es im Beitrag.In 1975 Peter Rühmkorf (1929–2008) published his 70 page essay "Walther von der Vogelweide - Reichssänger und Hausierer". The text contained 34 translations of Walther\u27s poems, whose Middle High German versions were also printed in the appendix. How these translations came about, how Rühmkorf selected and presented the poems, which translation methods he used and how he justified his approach – particularly in distinction to already existing translations – what translating meant for his own writing, how he located his own writing and the Walther translations in the political context of the post-68 era, how he used the Walther publication to re-strengthen his position in the competitive West German literary field, what role other actors of this field (critics, publishers, authors and commentators, Germanists) played in it – these are the questions dealt with in the article.In 1975 Peter Rühmkorf (1929–2008) published his 70 page essay "Walther von der Vogelweide - Reichssänger und Hausierer". The text contained 34 translations of Walther\u27s poems, whose Middle High German versions were also printed in the appendix. How these translations came about, how Rühmkorf selected and presented the poems, which translation methods he used and how he justified his approach – particularly in distinction to already existing translations – what translating meant for his own writing, how he located his own writing and the Walther translations in the political context of the post-68 era, how he used the Walther publication to re-strengthen his position in the competitive West German literary field, what role other actors of this field (critics, publishers, authors and commentators, Germanists) played in it – these are the questions dealt with in the article
Eric Prunč - Slawist und Translationswissenschaftler - Der Translationspilosoph
No full textkein Abstract verfügbarkein Abstract verfügbarkein Abstract verfügba
Georg Venzkys geschickter Übersetzer. Vom Nutzen und Nachteil der Historie für die Translationswissenschaft
Full text link1734 erscheint in Gottscheds „Beyträge zur critischen Historie der deutschen Sprache, Poesie und Beredsamkeit“ die erste gesonderte deutschsprachige übersetzungstheoretische Abhandlung – Georg Venzkys „Das Bild eines geschickten Übersetzers“. Diese Schrift wird in ihren Grundzügen vorgestellt. Der Fokus wird dabei auf die Verortung dieser Abhandlung in übersetzungshistorischen (in der Regel literaturhistorischen) Darstellungen gelegt. Vorrangig werden dabei am Beispiel Venzkys und seines „Bildes“ translationshistoriographische Überlegungen angestellt und der Nutzen einer metahistoriographischen Perspektive für die Translationswissenschaft und (in geringerem Maße) für die Translationsdidaktik im Kontext der Forderung nach „Humanisierung“ der Übersetzungsgeschichte (Pym) und der Umsetzung dieser Forderung in der sich zur Zeit etablierenden übersetzerhistorischen Forschung – auch am Beispiel des Germersheimer Übersetzerlexikons – diskutiert.In 1734, the first seperate treatise on translation theory written in German was published in Gottscheds „Beyträge zur critischen Historie der deutschen Sprache, Poesie und Beredsamkeit“ – Georg Venzky’s „Das Bild eines geschickten Übersetzers“. This paper presents the main features of this treatise. It focuses on the location of this treatise in historical representations of translation (usually literary history). The main emphasis will be on translation-historiographical considerations using the example of Venzky and his “image”, and the usefulness of a meta-historiographical perspective for translation studies. Furthermore, but to a lesser extent, the benefit of a metahistoriographical perspective for translation didactics will be discussed. This will be done in the context of the demand for the “humanization” of the history of translation (Pym) and the implementation of this demand in the translation-historical research currently establishing itself – also by using the example of the Germersheim Translator\u27s Dictionary.In 1734, the first seperate treatise on translation theory written in German was published in Gottscheds „Beyträge zur critischen Historie der deutschen Sprache, Poesie und Beredsamkeit“ – Georg Venzky’s „Das Bild eines geschickten Übersetzers“. This paper presents the main features of this treatise. It focuses on the location of this treatise in historical representations of translation (usually literary history). The main emphasis will be on translation-historiographical considerations using the example of Venzky and his “image”, and the usefulness of a meta-historiographical perspective for translation studies. Furthermore, but to a lesser extent, the benefit of a metahistoriographical perspective for translation didactics will be discussed. This will be done in the context of the demand for the “humanization” of the history of translation (Pym) and the implementation of this demand in the translation-historical research currently establishing itself – also by using the example of the Germersheim Translator\u27s Dictionary
Where does philosophy take place in translation? Reflections on the relevance of microstructural translation units within philosophical discourse
Full text linkIn the course of the cultural and social turn the problem of the translation unit has been widely marginalized by the attention towards other problems. However, the increasing interest of different disciplines in translation processes occurring in the context of academia and philosophy presses translation studies to (re)consider this issue giving rise to the following questions: What are the crucial translation units which trigger the transformation of a thought collective or the transfer of a thought style (Fleck)? What is the relationship between translation processes on the micro-level of the scientific text and the “transfer” of philosophical thought or the transformations within knowledge cultures? In order to understand the actual contribution of translators to the production of science, it is not enough to acknowledge that certain texts have been translated or not, and by whom. To gain insight into the agency of translators in academic discourse, it is indispensable that we look for their actual philosophical or scientific creativity. With this in mind, the article will focus on the most dense part of philosophical works with regard to technical terminology, namely the glossary. There, micro-structural translation units are concentrated and veritably “put on display”. The aim is to show how this site of terminological meticulousness opens up for the translator a sphere of influence and creativity in the sense of knowledge production.In the course of the cultural and social turn the problem of the translation unit has been widely marginalized by the attention towards other problems. However, the increasing interest of different disciplines in translation processes occurring in the context of academia and philosophy presses translation studies to (re)consider this issue giving rise to the following questions: What are the crucial translation units which trigger the transformation of a thought collective or the transfer of a thought style (Fleck)? What is the relationship between translation processes on the micro-level of the scientific text and the “transfer” of philosophical thought or the transformations within knowledge cultures? In order to understand the actual contribution of translators to the production of science, it is not enough to acknowledge that certain texts have been translated or not, and by whom. To gain insight into the agency of translators in academic discourse, it is indispensable that we look for their actual philosophical or scientific creativity. With this in mind, the article will focus on the most dense part of philosophical works with regard to technical terminology, namely the glossary. There, micro-structural translation units are concentrated and veritably “put on display”. The aim is to show how this site of terminological meticulousness opens up for the translator a sphere of influence and creativity in the sense of knowledge production.In the course of the cultural and social turn the problem of the translation unit has been widely marginalized by the attention towards other problems. However, the increasing interest of different disciplines in translation processes occurring in the context of academia and philosophy presses translation studies to (re)consider this issue giving rise to the following questions: What are the crucial translation units which trigger the transformation of a thought collective or the transfer of a thought style (Fleck)? What is the relationship between translation processes on the micro-level of the scientific text and the “transfer” of philosophical thought or the transformations within knowledge cultures? In order to understand the actual contribution of translators to the production of science, it is not enough to acknowledge that certain texts have been translated or not, and by whom. To gain insight into the agency of translators in academic discourse, it is indispensable that we look for their actual philosophical or scientific creativity. With this in mind, the article will focus on the most dense part of philosophical works with regard to technical terminology, namely the glossary. There, micro-structural translation units are concentrated and veritably “put on display”. The aim is to show how this site of terminological meticulousness opens up for the translator a sphere of influence and creativity in the sense of knowledge production
Chronotopos - Eine Einladung
Full text linkkein Abstract verfügbarkein Abstract verfügbarkein Abstract verfügba
Wessen Übersetzung? Möglichkeiten und Grenzen des Begriffs „übersetzerisches Œuvre“ am Beispiel der Klagenfurter Übersetzerin Hertha Lorenz (1916-1989)
Full text linkHertha Lorenz (1916–1989) war eine österreichische Lektorin, Übersetzerin und Schriftstellerin. Ihre Arbeit blieb über Jahrzehnte mit dem Klagenfurter Eduard-Kaiser-Verlag verbunden. Über diesen Verlag wurden Bücher vertrieben, in deren verlegerischem Peritext Lorenz als Übersetzerin oder Bearbeiterin markiert war. Dabei handelte es sich überwiegend um europäische Klassiker der Weltliteratur (Boccaccio, Charlotte Brontë, Dickens, Dostoevskij, Dumas, Hugo, Maupassant, Ovid, Poe, Sienkiewicz, Stendhal, Tolstoj, Twain u. a.). Der translationshistoriographische Versuch, Lorenz‘ übersetzerisches Œuvre zu rekonstruieren, stößt auf Schwierigkeiten in Bezug auf die eindeutige Zurechnung von Translaten zu ihrer Person, Schwierigkeiten, die mit dem kollaborativ-transformativen Charakter translatorischer Prozesse und mit der Situiertheit translatorischer Arbeit in einem historisch konkreten „literaturbetrieblichen“ Setting zusammenhängen. An ausgewählten Beispielen aus ihrem Werk sollen diese Schwierigkeiten erörtert werden.Hertha Lorenz (1916–1989) was a literary editor, translator and writer from Austria. Over decades, she was closely affiliated with the Klagenfurt-based Eduard Kaiser publishing house. In the publisher’s peritexts, Lorenz is given as either the translator or the editor (“revised by”) of various publications, predominantly European classics of world literature, such as Boccaccio, Charlotte Brontë, Dickens, Dostoyevsky, Dumas, Hugo, Maupassant, Ovid, Poe, Sienkiewicz, Stendhal, Tolstoy or Twain. A historical reconstruction of Lorenz\u27s translatorial oeuvre requires the ability to accurately attribute work to her as an individual and thus needs to disambiguate the translatorship of publications. Here, we have to consider (a) the collaborative-transformative character of translatorial processes on the one hand, and (b) the situatedness of translatorial work within a particular literary and publishing scene on the other. These issues will be addressed on the basis of selected extracts from Lorenz’s work.Hertha Lorenz (1916–1989) was a literary editor, translator and writer from Austria. Over decades, she was closely affiliated with the Klagenfurt-based Eduard Kaiser publishing house. In the publisher’s peritexts, Lorenz is given as either the translator or the editor (“revised by”) of various publications, predominantly European classics of world literature, such as Boccaccio, Charlotte Brontë, Dickens, Dostoyevsky, Dumas, Hugo, Maupassant, Ovid, Poe, Sienkiewicz, Stendhal, Tolstoy or Twain. A historical reconstruction of Lorenz\u27s translatorial oeuvre requires the ability to accurately attribute work to her as an individual and thus needs to disambiguate the translatorship of publications. Here, we have to consider (a) the collaborative-transformative character of translatorial processes on the one hand, and (b) the situatedness of translatorial work within a particular literary and publishing scene on the other. These issues will be addressed on the basis of selected extracts from Lorenz’s work