Cover not available

Article published In: FORUM
Vol. 15:1 (2017) ► pp.51–66

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Translation universals revisited

 | Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary
Published online: 4 September 2017
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/forum.15.1.03rob
Abstract
According to the results of translation-based empirical research within the descriptive paradigm, transfer operations and the shifts that occur as a result of translators’ interventions are governed by norms, which represent general, standard practices built on informal social consensus (Toury, G. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). Based on the scientific analysis of norms and general rules, the so-called translation universals were formulated describing the factors and qualities that distinguish translations from source texts and from authentic texts not produced through translation but originally written in the target language (Baker, M. 1993. Corpus Linguistics and Translation Studies: Implications and Applications. In: Baker, M., Francis, G., Tognini-Bonelli, E. (eds), Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. 233–250. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). In the present study, I aim to summarise the theoretical conclusions drawn so far from the description of these observed translational features, as well as the results of the research into linguistic phenomena and laws that characterise translations in general, then I will synthesise and graphically represent the lessons learned in a theoretical model. Hopefully, it will provide help to understand and process the research data gained so far and in the future.
Résumé
Selon les résultats des recherches empiriques menées au sein du paradigme descriptif, les opérations de transfert effectuées par des traducteurs et les changements qui se produisent à la suite des interventions des traducteurs sont régis par des normes représentant des pratiques générales construites sur un consensus social informel (Toury, G. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). Sur la base de l’analyse scientifique des normes et des règles générales ont été formulés les soi-disant universaux de la traduction décrivant les facteurs et les qualités qui distinguent les traductions des textes sources et des texts écrits à l’origine dans la langue cible. Dans cette étude, je tente de résumer les conclusions théoriques tirées jusqu’ à présent de la description des caractéristiques de la traduction, ainsi que les résultats de la recherche sur les phénomènes linguistiques et les lois propres aux traductions en général, puis de récapituler et représenter graphiquement les enseignements dans un nouveau modèle théorique.
Article outline
  • 1.The concept of translation universals
  • 2.Phenomena categorised as translation universals
  • 3.The case against translation universals
  • 4.Revisiting translation universals
    • 4.1 Toury’s (1995) two laws and gravitational pull
    • 4.2The revisited theoretical model of translation universals
  • 5.Conclusion and outlook
  • References
References (57)
References
Baker, M. 1993. Corpus Linguistics and Translation Studies: Implications and Applications. In: Baker, M., Francis, G., Tognini-Bonelli, E. (eds), Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. 233–250. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1996. Corpus-based translation studies: The challenges that lie ahead. In: Somers, H. (ed.), Terminology, LSP and Translation. Studies in language engineering in honour of Juan C. Sager. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. 175–186. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bánhegyi, M. 2011. A fordításközpontú diskurzus – társadalom hatásmodell gyakorlati alkalmazása. [The Application of the Translation-centred Discourse-Society Interface Model] Fordítástudomány 14 (1): 69–81.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baumgarten, N. 2007. Converging Conventions? Macrosyntactic Conjunction with English and and German und . Text and Talk 27 ( 2): 139–170. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Becher, V. 2010. Abandoning the notion of “translation-inherent” explicitation. Against a dogma of translation studies. Across Languages and Cultures 11 ( 1): 1–28. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, S. 1986. Shifts of Cohesion and Coherence in Translation. In: House, J. Blum-Kulka, S. (eds), Interlingual and Intercultural Communication. Discourse and Cognitionin Translation and Second Language Acquisition. Tübingen: Narr. 17–35.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2004. Beyond the Particular. In: Mauranen, A., Kujamaki, P. (eds), Translation Universals: Do they exist? Amsterdam: Benjamins. 33–49. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2010. Why Study Translation Universals? In: The Digital Depository of the University of Helsinki. [URL]
Frawley, W. 1984. Translation: literary, linguistic and philosophical perspectives. Delaware: University of Delaware Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. (ed.) 1963. Universals of Language. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2007. Investigating gravitational pull in translation: the case of the English progressive construction. In: Jääskeläinen, R., Puurtinen, T., Stotesbury, H. (eds.), Texts, process and corpora: research inspired by Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit. Joensuu: Publications of the Savonlinna School of Translation Studies 5. 175–195.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2010. Translation universals or cross-linguistic influence: conceptual and methodological issues. Paper presented at the 6th EST Congress Why Translation Studies Matters in Leuven, 3rd September 2010.
Heltai, P. 2002. The influence of socio-physiological factors on translating ability. In: Dóth J. (szerk.), Szaknyelvoktatás és fordítás. Tanulmányok a Szent István Egyetem Alkalmazott Nyelvészeti Tanszékének kutatásaiból. Gödöllő: Szent István Egyetem. 69–74.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2005. Explicitation, Redundancy, Ellipsis and Translation. In: Károly, K., Fóris, Á. (eds.), New Trends in Translation Studies. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. 45–75.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2011. Az explicitáció mint kommunikációs univerzálé. [Explicitation as a Communication Universal] In: Navracsics, J., Lengyel, Zs. (eds), Lexikai folyamatok egy- és kétnyelvű közegben: pszicholingvisztikai tanulmányok II. [Lexical Processes in Mono- and Bilingual Contexts: Studies in Psycholinguistics II.] Budapest: Tinta Könyvkiadó. 124–133.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
House, J. 1997. Translation Quality Assessment. A Model Revisited. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2004. Linguistic Aspects of the Translation of Children’s Books. In: Kittel, H., Frank, A. P., Greiner, N., Hermans, T., Koller, W., Lambert, J., House, J., Schultze, B. (eds), Übersetzung/Translation/Traduction. Berlin, New York: de Gruyter. 683–697.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2008. Beyond Intervention: Universals in Translation? trans-kom 1 (No. 1): 6–19. [URL]
Károly, K. 2007. Szövegtan és fordítás. [Discourse Studies and Translation] Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2012. A referenciális kohézió a fordítási univerzálék tükrében. [Referential Cohesion and Translation Universals] Magyar nyelvőr 136 ( 3): 304–325.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Klaudy K. 1996. Back Translation as a Tool for Detecting Explicitation Strategies in Translation. In: Klaudy, K., Lambert, J. and Sohár A. (eds.), Translation Studies in Hungary. Budapest: Scholastica. 99–114.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Klaudy, K. 1998. Explicitation. In: Baker, M. (ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London: Routledge. 80–84.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2000. Explicitation Strategies within Lexical and Grammatical Translational Operations. In: Lendvai E. (ed.), Applied Russian Studies in Hungary. Pécs: Krónika Kiadó. 101–113.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2002. A fordítási univerzálékról (különös tekintettel az egyszerűsítésre). [On Translation Universals (with Special Regards to Simplification)] In: Fóris Á. et al. (eds), A nyelv nevelő szerepe. [The Pedagogical Role of Language] Pécs: Lingua Franca. 481–486.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2003. Languages in Translation. Lectures on the theory, teaching and practice of translation. Budapest: Scholastica.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2004. Az implicitációról. [On Implicitation] In: Navracsics J., Tóth Sz. (eds), Nyelvészet és interdiszciplinaritás. [Linguistics and Interdisciplinarity] Szeged: Generália. 70–75.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Klaudy K. 2009. The Asymmetry Hypothesis in Translation Research. In: Dimitriu, R. & M. Shlesinger (eds), Translators and their readers. In Homage to Eugene A. Nida. Brussels: Les Editions du Hazard. 283–303.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kujamäki, P. 2004. What happens to “unique items” in learners’ translations? In: Mauranen, A., Kujamaki, P. (eds.), Translation Universals: Do they exist? Amsterdam: Benjamins. 187–204. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Laviosa, S. 1998. The English Comparable Corpus: A Resource and a Methodology. In: Bowker, L., Cronin, M., Kenny, D., Pearson, J. (eds.), Unity in Diversity: Current Trends in Translation Studies. Manchester: St. Jerome. 101–112.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2009. Universals. In: Baker, M. (ed.), Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London: Routledge. 306–311.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Laviosa-Braithwaite, S. 1998. Universals of Translation. In: Baker, M. (ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation. London: Routledge. 288–291.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levý, J. 1965. Will Translation Theory be of Use to Translators? In: Italiaander, R. (ed.), Übersetzen. Vorträge und Beiträge vom Internationalen Kongress literarischer Übersetzer in Hamburg. Frankfurt-am-Main: Athenäum. 77–82.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Makkos, A., Robin, E. 2014. Explicitation and Implicitation in Back-translation. Current Trends in Translation Teaching and Learning 51: 151–182.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Malmkjær, K. S. 2008. Norms and Nature in Translation Studies. In: Anderman, G., Rogers, M. (eds), Incorporating Corpora: The Linguist and the Translator. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. 49–59.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nida, E. 1964. Toward a Science of Translating. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Olohan, M., Baker, M. 2000. Reporting that in Translated English. Evidence for Subconscious Processes of Explicitation. Across Languages and Cultures 1 (2): 141–159. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Øverås, L. 1998. In Search of the Third Code: An investigation of norms in literary translation. Meta 43 ( 4): 1–20. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pápai, V. 2004. Explicitation: A universal of translated text? In: Mauranen, A., Kujamaki, P. (eds), Translation Universals. Do they exist? Amsterdam: Benjamins. 143–164. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Puurtinen, T. 2004. Explicitation of clausal relations: A corpus-based analysis of clause connectives in translated and non-translated Finnish children’s literature. In: Mauranen, A., Kujamaki, P. (eds), Translation Universals: Do they exist? Amsterdam: Benjamins. 165–176. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pym, A. 2008. On Toury’s laws of how translators translate. In: Pym, A., Shlesinger, M., Simeoni, D. Beyond Descriptive Translation Studies. Investigations in homage to Gidon Toury. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 311–328. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2010. Exploring Translation Theories. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Robin, E. 2015. Nyelvi babona a fordításokban. [Language Superstitions in Translations] In: Benő A., Fazekas E., Zsemlyei B. (eds), Többnyelvűség és kommunikáció Kelet-Közép-Európában. [Multilingual Contexts and Communication in Central Eastern Europe] Kolozsvár: MANYE. 167–174.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Saldanha, G. 2004. Accounting for the Exception to the Norm: a Study of Split Infinitives in Translated English. Language Matters, Studies in the Languages of Africa 35 ( 1): 39–53. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2008. Explicitation Revisited: Bringing the reader into the picture. Trans-kom 1 ( 1): 20–35.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Seguinot, C. 1988. Pragmatics and the Explicitation Hypothesis. TTR Traduction, Terminologie, Rédactio 1 ( 2): 106–114. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Szepesy, Gy. 1986. Nyelvi babonák. [Language Superstitions] Budapest: Gondolat.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tirkkonen-Condit, S. 2004. Unique items – over- or under-represented in translated language? In: Mauranen, A., Kujamaki, P. (eds), Translation Universals: Do they exist? Amsterdam: Benjamins. 177–186. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2004. Probabilistic explanations in translation studies. In: Mauranen, A., Kujamaki, P. (eds), Translation Universals: Do they exist? Amsterdam: Benjamins. 15–32. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tymoczko, M. 1998. Computerized corpora and the future of Translation Studies. Meta 43 ( 4): 653–659. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vanderauwera, R. 1985. Dutch Novels Translated into English. The Transformation of a Minority Literature. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vinay, J. P., Darbelnet, J. [1958] 1995. Comparative Stylistics of French and English. A methodology for Translation. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weissbrod, R. 1992. Explicitation in Translations of Prose-Fiction from English to Hebrew: a Function of Norms. Multilingua 11 ( 2): 153–171. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Başer, Zeynep
2025. Examining Abstracts from Self-Translation Perspective: A Corpus-Based Study on the Use of Active/Passive Voice and Tenses. Üniversite Araştırmaları Dergisi 8:3 ► pp. 341 ff. DOI logo
Jia, Juan, Muhammad Afzaal & Swaleha Bano Naqvi
2022. Myth or reality? Some directions on translation universals in recent corpus based case studies. Frontiers in Psychology 13 DOI logo
Zeifert, Mateusz & Zygmunt Tobor
2022. Legal Translation Versus Legal Interpretation. A Legal-Theoretical Perspective. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique 35:5 ► pp. 1671 ff. DOI logo
Nádvorníková, Olga
2021. Contexts and Consequences of Sentence Splitting in Translation (English-French-Czech). Research in Language 19:3 ► pp. 229 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 9 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue