School of Manipulation
65
Anne Schjoldager* Interpreting Research and the ‘Manipulation School’ of Translation Studies
Abstract
This article examines, explains and puts into perspective what others have dubbed the ‘Manipulation School’. This group of scholars see themselves as working within descriptive translation studies (DTS), as defined by Holmes (1975), and their main methodological tool is a search for translational norms, first proposed by Toury (1980a). The article then explores how these ideas relate to current research on interpreting - especially Gile’s work - and it concludes that, with certain modifications, the theory of translational norms could be extended to interpreting.
1.
Introduction
In July 1993, two colleagues, Helle Dam and Friedel Dubslaff, and I participated in the summer programme of the CERA Chair for Translation, Communication and Cultures at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, organized by the Department of Literary Studies and headed by Prof. José Lambert. As PhD students of interpreting, our special reason for choosing to participate in the CERA programme was that this year its temporary Chair was held by Daniel Gile, an interpreting scholar1. However, though we expected mostly to be interested in what the CERA Chair Professor had to say about interpreting research, we soon discovered that the programme offered other interesting ideas concerning theory and research methodology. Many of the ideas put forward and discussed at the CERA programme may be said to originate in what others have dubbed the Manipulation School (Snell-Hornby 1988:22). This name was inspired by an anthology of essays, “The Manipulation of Literature: Studies in Literary Translation”, edited by Hermans (1985). Most of the scholars in this school, who
1 Previously, the Chair was held by Toury (1989), Vermeer (1990), Bassnett (1991), and
Neubert (1992). * Anne Schjoldager Department of English The Århus School of Business Fuglesangs Allé 4 8210 Århus (DK) Hermes,
Anne Schjoldager* Interpreting Research and the ‘Manipulation School’ of Translation Studies
Abstract
This article examines, explains and puts into perspective what others have dubbed the ‘Manipulation School’. This group of scholars see themselves as working within descriptive translation studies (DTS), as defined by Holmes (1975), and their main methodological tool is a search for translational norms, first proposed by Toury (1980a). The article then explores how these ideas relate to current research on interpreting - especially Gile’s work - and it concludes that, with certain modifications, the theory of translational norms could be extended to interpreting.
1.
Introduction
In July 1993, two colleagues, Helle Dam and Friedel Dubslaff, and I participated in the summer programme of the CERA Chair for Translation, Communication and Cultures at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, organized by the Department of Literary Studies and headed by Prof. José Lambert. As PhD students of interpreting, our special reason for choosing to participate in the CERA programme was that this year its temporary Chair was held by Daniel Gile, an interpreting scholar1. However, though we expected mostly to be interested in what the CERA Chair Professor had to say about interpreting research, we soon discovered that the programme offered other interesting ideas concerning theory and research methodology. Many of the ideas put forward and discussed at the CERA programme may be said to originate in what others have dubbed the Manipulation School (Snell-Hornby 1988:22). This name was inspired by an anthology of essays, “The Manipulation of Literature: Studies in Literary Translation”, edited by Hermans (1985). Most of the scholars in this school, who
1 Previously, the Chair was held by Toury (1989), Vermeer (1990), Bassnett (1991), and
Neubert (1992). * Anne Schjoldager Department of English The Århus School of Business Fuglesangs Allé 4 8210 Århus (DK) Hermes,
References: Aarup, Hanne (1989): Om simultantolkning. In: Hermes 3, 179-193. Aarup, Hanne (1993): Theory and Practice in the Teaching of Interpreting. In: Perspecti ves: Studies in Translatology 2, 167-174. University of Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press. Baaring, Inge (1984): Om omsætningsprocessen ved simultantolkning med tysk som udgangssproget. In: ARK 21 (Feb. 1984). Handelshøjskolen i København. Barik, Henri Charles (1969): A Study of Simultaneous Interpretation: A thesis submitted to the faculty of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Psychology. Unpublished. Barik, Henri Charles (1972): Interpreters Talk a Lot, Among Other things. In: Babel 18:1, 3-10. Bros-Brann, Eliane (1975): Critical comments on H.C. Barik’s article “Interpreters talk a lot, Among Other Things”, Babel No. 1, 1972, Vol.XVIII. In: Babel 21:2, 93-94. Catford, J. C. (1965): A Linguistic Theory of Translation. Oxford University Press. 87 Chesterman, Andrew (in press): The Successful translator: The evolution of homo trans ferens. Paper given at ADLA Conference, January 1993, The Århus School of Business. Déjean Le Féal, Karla (1990): Some Thoughts on the Evaluation of Simultaneous Interpretation. In: Bowen, David & Bowen, Margareta (eds.): Interpreting - Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow (American Translators Association Scholarly Monograph Series IV), 154-160. SUNY (State University of New York at Binghamton). Delabastita, Dirk (1989): Translation and mass-communication: Film and T.V. translation as evidence of cultural dynamics. In: Babel 35:4, 193-218. Delabastita, Dirk (1991): A False Opposition in Translation Studies: Theoretical versus/and historical approaches. In: Target 3:2, 137-152. Denissenko, Jurij (1989): Communicative and Interpretative Linguistics. In: Gran, Laura & Dodds, John (eds.) (1989): The Theoretical and Practical Aspects of Teaching Conference Interpretation: First International Symposium on Conference Interpret ing at the University of Trieste, 155-157. Udine: Campanotto Editore. Dillinger, Michael L. (1989): Component Processes of Simultaneous Interpreting: A the sis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Philosophiæ Doctor, August 1989. McGill University: Montreal. Dillinger, Michael L. (1990): Comprehension during Interpreting: What Do Interpreters Know that Bilinguals Don’t?. In: The Interpreters’ Newsletter 3, 41-58. Dubslaff, Friedel (1993): Die Funktionen anaphorischer Proformen beim Simultandolmetschen aud dem Deutschen. In: Hermes 11, 107-115. Even-Zohar, Itamar (1978): The Position of Translated Literature within the Literary Polysystem. In: Poetics Today 11:1, 1990, 45-51. Gerver, David (1976): Empirical Studies of Simultaneous Interpretation: A Review and a Model. In: Brislin, Richard W. (ed.): Translation: Applications and research, 165-207. New York: Gardner Press. Gerver, David & Sinaiko, H. Wallace (eds.) (1978): Language Interpretation and Com munication. New York, London: Plenum Press. Gile, Daniel (1988): An Overview of Conference Interpretation Research and Theory. In: Hammond, Deanna L. (ed.) (1988): Languages at Crossroads: Proceedings of the 29th Annual Conference of the American Translators Association, 363-371. Medford New Jersey: Learned Information. Gile, Daniel (1990a): Basic Concepts and Models for Conference Interpretation Train ing - First version. Paris; INALCO & CEEI (ISIT). Gile, Daniel (1990b): Research Proposals for Interpreters. In: Gran, Laura & Taylor, Christopher (eds.): Aspects of Applied and Experimental Research on Conference Interpretation: Round table on interpretation research, November 16, 1989, 226-236. Udine: Campanotto Editore.Gile, Daniel (1990c): Scientific Research vs. Personal Theories in the Investigation of Interpretation. In: Gran, Laura & Taylor, Christopher (eds.): Aspects of Applied and Experimental Research on Conference Interpretation: 88 Round table on interpretation research, November 16, 1989, 28-41. Udine: Campanotto Editore. Gile, Daniel (1991a): Methodological Aspects of Interpretation (and) Translation Research. In: Target 3:2, 153-174. Gile, Daniel (1991b): The Processing Capacity Issue in Conference Interpretation. In: Babel 37:1, 15-27. Gile, Daniel (in press): Opening up in Interpretation Studies. Forthcoming in: SnellHornby, Mary (ed.): Translation Studies: an Interdiscipline: Selected papers from the Translation Studies Congress, Vienna, 9-12 September 1992. University of Vienna. Gran, Laura & Dodds, John (eds.) (1989): The Theoretical and Practical Aspects of Teaching Conference Interpretation: First International Symposium on Conference Interpreting at the University of Trieste. Udine: Campanotto Editore. Gutt, Ernst-August (1991): Translation and Relevance: Cognition and Context. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Harris, Brian (1990): Norms in Interpretation. In: Target 2:1, 115-119. Herbert, Jean (1952): The Interpreters Handbook: How to become a conference inter preter. Genève: Libraire de l’université, Georg & Cie S.A. Hermans, Theo (ed.) (1985): The Manipulation of Literature: Studies in literary transla tion. London & Sydney: Croom Helm. Hermans, Theo (1991): Translational Norms and Correct Translations. In: van LeuvenZwart, Kitty & Naaijkens, Ton (eds.): Translational Studies: The State of the Art, 155169. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Hermans, Theo (in press): Norms and Models. Paper given at the CERA Chair for Translation, Communication, and Cultures at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, July 1993. Holmes, James S. (1975): The Name and Nature of Translation Studies. In: Holmes, James S. (1988): Translated Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies, 67-80. Amsterdam: Rodopi (Approaches to Translation Studies 7). House, Juliane (1981): A Model for Translation Quality Assessment. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag (gnv). Moser, Barbara (1978): Simultaneous Interpretation: A hypothetical model and its practical application. In: Gerver, David & Sinaiko, H. Wallace (eds.): Language Interpreta tion and Communication, 353-368. New York, London: Plenum Press. Moser-Mercer, Barbara (1991a): Neue Einsichten zur Verstehensphase beim Simultandolmetschen: (Review of “Component Processes of Simultaneous Interpreting” by Mike Dillinger (1989)). In: FEM 1, 43-44. Moser-Mercer, Barbara (1991b): Research Committee Paradigms Gained or the Art of Productive Disagreement. In: AIIC Bulletin XIX:2, 11-15. Genève. Newmark, Peter (1988): A Textbook of Translation. Prentice Hall International (UK) Ltd. Nida, Eugene A. & Taber, Charles R. (1974): The Theory and Practice of Translation (Helps for Translators VIII). Leiden: E.J. Brill. 89 Schjoldager, Anne (1993a): Empirical Investigation into Simultaneous Interpreting Skills. In: Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 2, 175-186. University of Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press. Schjoldager, Anne (1993b): Investigating SI Skills: Methodological and didactic reflections. In: Hermes 10, 41-51. Seleskovitch, Danica (1978): Interpreting for International Conferences (translation and adaptation of Seleskovitch (1968), Paris). Washington D.C.: Pen and Booth. Shlesinger, Miriam (1989): Extending the Theory of Translation to Interpretation: Norms as a case in point. In: Target 1:1, 111-115. Shlesinger, Miriam (1990): Factors Affecting the Applicability of the Oral-literate Continuum to Interpretation Research. In: Fructman, Maya & Kaddari, Menahem Zevi (eds.): Stylistics and the Literary Text: A special issue (Hebrew Linguistics 28-29-30), 49-56. Bar-Ilan University Press. Shlesinger, Miriam (in press): Intonation in the Production and Perception of Simultane ous Interpretation. Forthcoming in: Snell-Hornby, Mary (ed.): Translation Studies: an Interdiscipline: Selected papers from the Translation Studies Congress, Vienna, 912 September 1992. University of Vienna. Snell-Hornby, Mary (1988): Translation Studies: An integrated Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. approach. Sperber, Dan & Wilson, Deidre (1988): Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Toury, Gideon (1978): The Nature and Role of Norms in Literary Translation. In: Tory, Gideon (1980): In Search of a Theory of Translation (Meaning & Art 2), 51-62. Tel Aviv University: The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics. Toury, Gideon (1980a): In Search of a Theory of Translation (Meaning & Art 2). Tel Aviv University: The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics. Toury, Gideon (1980b): The Translator as a Nonconformist-to-be: Or: How to Train Translators So As to Violate Translational Norms. In: Poulsen, Sven-Olaf & Wilss, Wolfram (eds.) (1980): Angewandte Übersetzungswissenschaft: Internationales über setzungswissenschaftliches Kolloquium an der Wirtschaftsuniversität Århus, Däne mark, 19.-21- juni 1980, 180-195. Åhus, Dänemark. Toury, Gideon (1985): A Rationale for Descriptive Translation Studies. In: Hermans, Theo (ed.): The Manipulation of Literature: Studies in literary translation, 16-41. London & Sydney: Croom Helm. Wilson, Deidre & Sperber, Dan (1990): Outline of Relevance Theory. In: Hermes 5, 3556. 90