recent developments in Translation Studies some historical and theoretical developments in Translation Studies

These considerations concern (1) the shift from formal to functional approaches in Translation Studies, (2) translators and Translation Studies, (3) translators and their (cultural) contexts, (4) views on language use, and (5) translation practice

From formal to functional models of translation Skopos Theory is a prime example of such a functional approach in that it anchors translations in their socio-cultural contexts and views translated texts from within such contexts. Translation is seen as the particular variety of translational action which is based on a source text.

Any form of translational action, including therefore translation itself, may be conceived as an action, as the name implies. Any action has an aim, a purpose. The word skopos, then, is a technical term for the aim or purpose of a translation. an action leads to a result, a new situation or event, and possibly to a “new” object. Translational action leads to a “target text” (not necessarily a verbal one); translation leads to a translatum (i.e. the resulting translated text), as a particular variety of target text.

The aim of any translational action, and the mode in which it is to be realized, are negotiated with the client who commissions the action. The translator is “the” expert in translational action. He is responsible for the performance of the commissioned task, for the final translation.

One practical consequence of the skopos theory is a new concept of the status of the source text for a translation, and with it the necessity of working for an increasing awareness of this, both among translators and also the general public.

Translation Studies has shifted from contrasting language systems to contrasting (translated) texts and has moved on to examine the cultural, social, and historical contexts in which they were produced. This process has placed translators centre stage once again, both theoretically and in real terms.

since translation is regarded as language used to mediate between cultures, we can explore the specifics of each situation, the "when, where, how and why" as Nord (1991) puts it.

Skopos Theory recognizes actors, the context and products of their action, and the values that make their actions important or 'relevant'.

Vermeer's "relevant factors of Skopos Commission: Who Asks Whom? At the top of the hierarchy he places commission, the idea being that there can be no translation without a commission. Let us define a commission as the instruction, given by oneself or by someone else, to carry out a given action—here: to translate. According to Vermeer, a commission is a client's order for a specific translation. Reputation is part of the cultural and symbolic capital accruing to a translator.

A commission comprises (or should comprise) as much detailed information as possible on the following: (1) the goal, i.e. a specification of the aim of the commission; (2) the conditions under which the intended goal should be attained (naturally including practical matters such as deadline and fee). The statement of goal and the conditions should be explicitly negotiated between the client (commissioner) and the translator, for the client may occasionally have an imprecise or even false picture of the way a text might be received in the target culture. Here the translator should be able to make argumentative suggestions. A commission can (and should) only be binding and conclusive, and accepted as such by the translator, if the conditions are clear enough.

If a commission cannot be realized, or at least not optimally, because the client is not familiar with the conditions of the target culture, or does not accept them, the competent translator (as an expert in inter cultural action, since translational action is a particular kind of intercultural action) must enter into negotiations with the client in order to establish what kind of “optimal” translation can be guaranteed under the circumstances.

The Skopos of a translation is therefore the goal or purpose, defined by the commission and if necessary adjusted by the translator.

The brief: who sets it? In the Skopos theory, the brief is the set of specifications on how a translation job should be done (Nord 1997)

Translators and publishers may agree on the aim of a text and translate it accordingly, but they may be surprised by what readers do with it. This, again, is determined by the readers‘ understanding of the genre in their own cultures, or, as Vermeer puts it: "the decisive criterion is always the Skopos" (Vermeer 2000: 223). A translatum must function in a new language in another culture and is indeed oriented towards it.

Skopos: who decides? In functionalist approaches, the role of the source text differs from that in formalist approaches, which often focus exclusively on source texts. This difference is captured by Vermeer's idea of a 'dethronement' of the source text. The source text is no longer the foremost criterion for a translator's decisions; it is just one of many sources of information used by translators.

Reiss suggests ‘specific translation methods according to text type’ (Reiss 1976: 20). These methods can be described:

Reiss’s work in the 1970s builds on the concept of equivalence but views the text, rather than the word or sentence, as the level at which communication is achieved and at which equivalence must be sought

Reiss links the three functions to their corresponding language ‘dimensions’ and to the text types or communicative situations in which they are used. The main characteristics of each text type are summarized by Reiss

INFORMATIVE (1) The TT of an informative text should transmit the full referential or conceptual content of the ST. The translation should be in ‘plain prose’, without redundancy and with the use of explicitation when required. ‘Plain communication of facts’: information, knowledge, opinions, etc. The language dimension used to transmit the information is logical or referential, the content or ‘topic’ is the main focus of the communication, and the text type is informative.

EXPRESSIVE (2) The TT of an expressive text should transmit the aesthetic and artistic form of the ST. The translation should use the ‘identifying’ method, with the translator adopting the standpoint of the ST author. Creative composition’: the author uses the aesthetic dimension of language. The author or ‘sender’ is foregrounded, as well as the form of the message, and the text type is expressive.

OPERATIVE (3) The TT of an operative text should produce the desired response in the TT receiver. The translation should employ the ‘adaptive’ method, creating an equivalent effect among TT readers. ‘Inducing behavioural responses’: the aim of the appellative function is to appeal to or persuade the reader or ‘receiver’ of the text to act in a certain way. The form of language is dialogic, the focus is appellative and Reiss calls this text type operative.

AUDIOMEDIAL (4) Audio-medial texts require what Reiss calls the ‘supplementary’ method, supplementing written words with visual images and music. Audiomedial texts, such as films and visual and spoken advertisements which supplement the other three functions with visual images, music, etc.

Page 73 Munday Translation Studies Theories Functional characteristics of text types and links to translation methods

Reiss series of intralinguistic and extralinguistic instruction criteria by which the adequacy of a TT may be assessed: (1) intralinguistic criteria: semantic, lexical, grammatical and stylistic features; (2) extralinguistic criteria: situation, subject field, time, place, receiver, sender and ‘affective implications’ (humour, irony, emotion, etc.).

THE BASIC UNDERLYING ‘RULES’ OF THE THEORY (Reiss and Vermeer 1984: 119) (1) A translatum (or TT) is determined by its skopos. (2) A TT is an offer of information in a target culture and TL concerning an offer of information in a source culture and SL. (3) A TT does not initiate an offer of information in a clearly reversible way. (4) A TT must be internally coherent. (5) A TT must be coherent with the ST. (6) The five rules above stand in hierarchical order, with the skopos rule predominating.

Some explanation Rule 2 is important in that it relates the ST and TT to their function in their respective linguistic and cultural contexts. The translator is once again the key player in a process of intercultural communication and production of the translatum. The irreversibility in point 3 indicates that the function of a translatum in its target culture is not necessarily the same as in the source culture. Rules 4 and 5 touch on general Skopos ‘rules’ concerning how the success of the action and information transfer is to be judged: the coherence rule, linked to internal textual coherence, and the fidelity rule, linked to intertextual coherence with the ST.

The coherence rule states that the TT ‘must be interpretable as coherent with the TT receiver’s situation’ (Reiss and Vermeer 1984: 113). In other words, the TT must be translated in such a way that it is coherent for the TT receivers, given their circumstances and knowledge.

The fidelity rule merely states that there must be coherence between the translatum and the ST or, more specifically, between: the ST information received by the translator; the interpretation the translator makes of this information; the information that is encoded for the TT receivers.

However, the hierarchical order of the rules means that intertextual coherence (rule 5) is of less importance than intratextual coherence (rule 4), which, in turn, is subordinate to the Skopos (rule 1). This down-playing (or ‘dethroning’, as Vermeer terms it) of the status of the ST is a general fact of both Skopos and translatorial action theory but one which has caused much controversy. An important advantage of Skopos theory is that it allows the possibility of the same text being translated in different ways according to the purpose of the TT and the commission which is given to the translator. In Vermeer’s words: What the Skopos states is that one must translate, consciously and consistently, in accordance with some principle respecting the target text. The theory does not state what the principle is: this must be decided separately in each specific case.

5.4 TRANSLATION-ORIENTED TEXT ANALYSIS

Arguments against the skopos theory Objection (1) maintains that not all actions have an aim: some have “no aim”. Objection (1) can be answered prima facie in terms of our very definition of an action: if no aim can be attributed to an action, it can no longer be regarded as an action.

The notion of skopos can in fact be applied in three ways, and thus have three senses: it may refer to a. the translation process, and hence the goal of this process; b. the translation result, and hence the function of the translatum; c. the translation mode, and hence the intention of this mode.

Objection (1), then, can be answered as follows: if a given act of behaviour has neither goal nor function nor intention, as regards its realization, result or manner, then it is not an action in the technical sense of the word.

Objection (2) is a particular variant of the first objection Objection (2) is a particular variant of the first objection. It maintains that not every translation can be assigned a purpose, an intention; i.e. there are translations that are not goal-oriented.

there are three specifications of objection (2) that merit further discussion: a. The claim that the translator does not have any specific goal, function or intention in mind: he just translates “what is in the source text”. b. The claim that a specific goal, function or intention would restrict the translation possibilities, and hence limit the range of interpretation of the target text in comparison to that of the source text. c. The claim that the translator has no specific address ee or set of addressees in mind.