1,721,037 research outputs found
Introduction : Pierre Swiggers, architect and maître d’œuvre in linguistics and grammatical historiography
No full textA privileged voice? J. Hector St. John de Crevecoeur's 'History of Andrew, the Hebridean' in French and Dutch translation
Full text linkThis article looks at the English, French, and Dutch versions of the “History of Andrew, the Hebridean,” an allegorical tale of a Scotsman’s successful adaptation in colonial America by the eighteenth-century French–American author J. Hector St. John de Crevecoeur. This story was first published as part of the third letter of Crevecoeur’s Letters from an American Farmer (1782). It reappeared two years later in Lettres d’un cultivateur american, the author’s self-translation of his work into French, as well as in the expanded second French edition, published in 1787. Finally, the story figures in Brieven van eenen Amerikaenschen landman, an anonymous Dutch translation of the English original published around the same time as the first French edition, and which so far has received little scholarly attention. By examining how these different versions of the tale of the Hebridean relate to each other, the article attempts to pinpoint the differential quality of auctorial translations vis-a-vis allographic ones. Our analysis reveals that the assumption that self-translators should be regarded as “privileged” translators (Tanqueiro) is in need of correction in that it fails to consider the allographic and plural nature of historically embedded self-translations
The Grammar of Moluche in Thomas Falkner\u27s A Description of Patagonia (1774)
Full text linkProceedings of the Twenty-Second Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society: Special Session on Historical Issues in Native American Languages (1996
Witte tanden en kissing teeth : de vertaling van verbale en niet-verbale codes in meertalige literatuur
No full text
Argumentative Voice in English Eighteenth-Century Translations of Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Du contrat social (1762)
No full textThis study compares two contemporary English translations of one of Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s major works on the nature of society and the institution of political sovereignty, Ducontrat social; ou principes du droit politique (1762). The case study intends to elucidate the extent and nature of translators’ interpretative discursive presence in their rendering of philosophical discourse. The analysis considers a selection of excerpts in source and target texts and traces instances of the implicit argumentative mediation of the translator, which mainly surfaces in the addition of rhetorical emphasis (amplificatio) and the explicit expression of implied meaning, but also in the alteration of denotation and down toning or omission of arguments (brevitas). The discussion reveals that both the 1764 and 1791 translations of the Social Contract primarily render the author’s arguments in a more emphatic and explicit tenor, which indicates the translators’ “associative attitude” (Hermans, 2010) to the discourse represented. The 1791, “revolutionary” rendering of Du contrat social moreover shifts the meaning of the proposition in places by introducing a clearer connotation of despotism in references to royal power.Cette étude compare deux traductions anglaises contemporaines d’un des principaux ouvrages de Jean-Jacques Rousseau sur la nature de la société et l’institution de la souveraineté politique, Du contrat social; ou principes du droit politique (1762). L’étude de cas vise à éclairer davantage l’étendue et la nature de la présence discursive interprétative des traducteurs dans leur rendu du discours philosophique. La présente contribution analyse une sélection d’extraits dans les textes source et cible afin de dégager les traces de médiation argumentative implicite du traducteur. Cette médiation se manifeste principalement par l’emphase rhétorique (amplificatio) et l’explicitation de sens implicites, mais aussi par l’altération de la dénotation et l’affaiblissement ou l’omission d’arguments (brevitas). L’étude révèle que les traductions de 1764 et 1791 du Contrat social expriment la plupart du temps les arguments de l’auteur de façon plus emphatique et explicite, conformément à une « attitude associative » de la part des traducteurs (Hermans, 2010) dont les interventions corroborent le discours d’origine. La traduction « révolutionnaire » du Contrat social de 1791 a en outre tendance dans les passages où il est question du pouvoir royal à instiller une connotation qui dénonce plus ouvertement le despotisme monarchique
- …
