Translation theories either tend to describe general trends (ie Scheiermacher, Venuti, Domestication & Foreignisation) or get caught up in tiny specifics (ie University marking schemes, lexical choice). While skopostheorie and discourse linguistcs have helped, they still don't really help you make choices while you are translating.
Why hasn't a bridge been found between product and process orientated approaches as well?
2006-09-12 05:03:38 · 3 answers · asked by Jonathan D 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Languages
And we have our first dichotomy!
The debate over meaning v literal is dying out, thankfully. Now there is a general recognition that there are far more variables than that and that "natural talent" still needs to be honed.
Interesting responses so far.
2006-09-12 06:25:33 · update #1
Because linguists are too occupied with spouting jargon instead of thinking?
The two things that really help are a very good knowledge of both your languages and common sense.
2006-09-12 05:26:25 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that most people who translate rely on their natural talent and their instincts, and the general idea that translation should be meaning-based, rather than literal.
2006-09-12 06:17:30 · answer #2 · answered by Brigid O' Somebody 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because of the the large grandiose words used that scramble it up for us "plain text" types.
2006-09-12 05:05:54 · answer #3 · answered by Sgt Squid 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋