Poor Relations and Black Sheep in Translation Studies
Published online: 4 May 2001
https://doi.org/10.1075/target.12.2.02ste
https://doi.org/10.1075/target.12.2.02ste
Abstract
The opposition of translation into the mother tongue (L1 translation) vs. translation into the foreign language (L2 translation), with its clear relationship of superiority/inferiority in translation circles, is just one of a series of binary oppositions prevalent in the literature with an apparently similar relationship. These include principally (i) target language vs. source language, and (ii) original texts vs. translated texts. This paper examines what implications such oppositions might have for the L1 translation vs. L2 translation issue, particularly within the developing field of corpus linguistics, subsequently taking a look at some L1 and L2 translations and reflecting upon their degree of acceptability or unacceptability in the light of the discussions proposed.
Résumé
L’opposition entre les traductions en langue maternelle (L1) et en langue étrangère (L2) a la réputation parmi les traducteurs de correspondre à une relation de supériorité/infériorité; or, c’est simplement l’une des oppositions binaires maniées par les chercheurs, et par eux douées d’une relation apparemment similaire: elles concernent principalement (i) la langue cible vs. la langue source et (ii) les textes originaux vs. les textes traduits. Cet article étudie les implications de pareilles oppositions pour la question de la traduction en L1 et en L2, singulièrement en rapport avec les études de corpus. Il examine de plus près quelques traductions en L1 et en L2, prenant en considération, à la lumière des discussions en cours, leur degré d’acceptabilité ou d’inacceptabilité.
Article outline
- 0.Introduction
- 1.Opposition 1: L1 Translation vs. L2 Translation
- 2.Opposition 2: Target Language vs. Source Language
- 2.1.Preliminary Remarks
- 2.2.TL vs. SL and the Rise of Corpus Linguistics
- 3.Opposition 3: Original Texts vs. Translated Texts
- 3.1.Distribution Patterns in Translated Texts
- 3.2.The Status of Translated Text
- 3.3.Readers’ Reactions to Translated Texts
- 4.Implications of the Oppositions Discussed for L2 Translation
- 4.1.The Bad News
- 4.2.The Good News
- 5.Translation: Parameters of Acceptability
- 5.1.L1 and L2 Translation: Banana Skins and Tightropes
- 5.2.Readers’ Expectations: Tourist Literature
- 5.3.Tourist Literature: A Test Case of L2 Translation
- 6.Conclusions
- Notes
References
References (38)
Baker, Mona. 1993. “Corpus Linguistics and Translation Studies: Implications and Applications”. Baker et al. 1993: 233–250.
Baker, Mona, Gill Francis and Elena Tognini-Bonelli, eds. 1993. Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Chesterman, Andrew. 1997. Memes of Translation. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Congrat-Butler, S. ed. 1979. Translation and Translators: An International Directory and Guide. New York: R.R. Bowker Company.
Crystal, David. 1987. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dodds, John. 1995. “All’antica commedia degli errori: Or Crappy English in Italian Restaurants”. Rivista Internazionale di Tecnica della Traduzione. Edizioni Università di Trieste 1. 143–147.
Duff, Alan. 1981. The Third Language: Recurrent Problems of Translation into English. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Frawley, William. 1984. “Prolegomenon to a Theory of Translation”. William Frawley, ed. Translation: Literary, Linguistic, and Philosophical Perspectives. London-Toronto: Associated University Presses, 1984. 159–175.
Hermans, Theo. 1991. “Translational Norms and Correct Translations”. Leuven-Zwart and Naaijkens 1991: 155–169.
Laviosa, Sara. 1997. “How Comparable Can Comparable Corpora Be?”. Target 9:2. 289–319.
. 1998a. “The English Comparable Corpus: A Resource and a Methodology”. Lynne Bowker, Michael Cronin, Dorothy Kenny and Jennifer Pearson, eds. Unity in Diversity: Current Trends in Translation Studies. Manchester: St Jerome, 1998. 101–112.
. 1998c. “Core Patterns of Lexical Use in a Comparable Corpus of English Narrative Prose”. Laviosa 1998b: 557–570.
Laviosa-Braithwaite, Sara. 1997. “Investigating Simplification in an English Comparable Corpus of Newspaper Articles”. Klaudy Kinga and János Kohn, eds. Transferre Necesse Est: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Current Trends in Studies of Translation and Interpreting, 5–7 September, 1996. Budapest: Hungary, 1997. 531–540.
Leuven-Zwart, Kitty M. van and Ton Naaijkens, eds. 1991. Translation Studies: The State of the Art. Proceedings of the First James S Holmes Symposium on Translation Studies. Amsterdam-Atlanta, GA: Rodopi.
Malmkjær, Kirsten. 1993. “Who Can Make Nice a Better Word than Pretty?: Collocation, Translation, and Psycholinguistics”. Baker et al. 1993: 213–232.
Marmaridou, A. Sophia S. 1996. “Directionality in Translation Processes and Practices”. Target 8:1. 49–73.
McAlester, Gerard. 1992. “Teaching Translation into a Foreign Language—Status, Scope and Aims”. Cay Dollerup and Annette Loddegaard, eds. Teaching Translation and Interpreting: Training, Talent and Experience. Papers from the First Language International Conference. Elsinore, Denmark, 31 May-2 June 1991. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1992. 291–297.
Parks, Gerald. 1998. “Towards a Sociology of Translation”. Rivista Internazionale di Tecnica della Traduzione. Edizioni Università di Trieste 3. 25–35.
Pym, Anthony. 1992. “In Search of a New Rationale for the Prose Translation Class at University Level”. Interface: Journal of Applied Linguistics 6:2. 73–82.
. 1996. “Venuti’s Visibility”. Review of Venuti 1995. Target 8:1. 165–177.
Rydning, Antin F. 1991. Qu’est-ce qu’une traduction acceptable en B?: Les conditions d’acceptabilité de la traduction fonctionnelle réalisée dans la langue seconde du traducteur. Oslo: University of Oslo. [Doctoral Thesis.]
Shuttleworth, Mark and Moira Cowie. 1997. A Dictionary of Translation Studies. Manchester: St Jerome.
Snell-Hornby, Mary. 1995. Translation Studies: An Integrated Approach. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Stewart, Dominic. 1999. “Translators into the Foreign Language: Charlatans or Professionals?”. Rivista Internazionale di Tecnica della Traduzione. Edizioni Università di Trieste 4. 41–67.
Toury, Gideon. 1991. “Experimentation in Translation Studies: Achievements, Prospects and Some Pitfalls”. Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit, ed. Empirical Research in Translation and Intercultural Studies. Tübingen: Gunter Narr, 1991. 45–66.
. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Cited by (10)
Cited by ten other publications
Giczela-Pastwa, Justyna
Liu, Zhao & Ce Sun
Song, Hua
2022. A corpus-based comparative study of explicitation by investigating connectives in two Chinese translations of The Lord of the Rings
. Babel. Revue internationale de la traduction / International Journal of Translation 68:1 ► pp. 139 ff.
Wang, Yifang
King, Ross
Marco, Josep
2019. Living with parallel corpora. In Parallel Corpora for Contrastive and Translation Studies [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 90], ► pp. 39 ff.
Malkiel, Brenda
2006. The effect of translator training on interference and difficulty. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 18:2 ► pp. 337 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 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.
