Mona Baker & Gabriela Saldanha. Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies (2nd edition)

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

Page281

(andunanswerable)thequestionofwhoorwhatisinfluencingtheiractions.For

Bourdieu,tolimitsocialscientificobservationtothepointofviewofagentsisto

treatagentsasinstrumentsofknowledge,leavingunexaminedtheobjective

structuresthathaveproducedthisknowledge.Hisultimateaimisnottogive

prioritytotheexplanationofthesocialscientistorthesocialactor,butto

apprehendthelimitsimposedonscientificknowledgeitself.InBourdieu’sview,

theselimitsdonotoriginateinsociallydeterminedsubjects,whetherinformants

orsocialanalysts,butinthesocialdeterminantsofdifferentformsofsocial

practice,includingsociologyitself.

NiklasLuhmannoffersaradicallydifferentviewofsociety,althoughlikeLatour

heconceivesofcontemporarysocietyintermsofcomplexitiesand

contingenciesratherthanasthesocialtotality(albeitbasedinstruggle)impliedin

Bourdieu’swork.ForbothLatourandLuhmann,thereisnooverarching,

integratingspacefromwherethedevelopmentofsocietycanbemeasuredor

coordinated.Luhmannelaboratesaviewofsocietythatisstructuredaccording

toaprincipleoffunctionaldifferentiation(Luhmann1985,1995,2006).The

worldisconstitutedbyamultiplicityoffunctionalsystems(e.g.law,finearts,

science,education,media)andwhathereferstoastheenvironments,

inhabitedbyhumansandnonhumansalike,thatsurroundthem.Incontrastto

Latour,however,Luhmann’stheoryreduceshumanindividualstomere

observers.Althoughsocialsystemsinteractwithenvironments,theyremain

essentiallyfreefromtheinfluenceofhumanactors.Functionalsystemsare

operationallyclosedandincommensurable;theyestablishandreproduce

themselvesautopoietically–i.e.theyareselfreferentialandselforganized–

drawingonpastandpresentresourcesfortheircontinuedexistence.

Interactionsbetweensystemandenvironment,whilstleavingthesystem’s

operationalclosureintact,can,however,setoffperturbationsorirritations,

whichmayprecipitatechangesinthesystem’sbehaviour.

CentraltoLuhmann’stheorizationofthesocialarehisviewsonmeaningand

whathereferstoascommunications.Drawingonphenomenology,Luhmann

suggeststhatsocialsystemsoperateinasimilarwayashumanmindsor

intentionalsubjects;theyprocessinformationalinputfromtheworldintheform

ofutterancesandthenselectwhatismeaningful.ForLuhmann,socialsystems

alsoprocessmeaningsselectively,effectivelyproducingthemselvesinand

throughcommunicationsjustasmindsproducethemselvesthroughthoughts.

Importantly,however,mindsandsystemsarekeptapartinLuhmann’sworld;

communicationsproduceonlycommunications.Communicationsproduce

themselvesbyencodinginbinarytermsothercommunicationsperceivedas

relevanttothesystem–forexample,intranslation,thehistoricalsource/target,

literal/freedichotomies–anddiscardingothersasmereirritations,unlessthese

areimportantenoughtoforcethesystemtoadjustitscodingorientations.Social

systemsdeveloprulesandregularitiessuchthat,intime,theybecomestructured

inpredictableways.Patternsofexpectationsbecomeestablishedwhich,

togetherwithhighlevelsofefficiencyandspecialization,allowthatsystemto

furtherdistinguishitselffromanother–thuscontributingtoandmaintainingboth

theirfunctionaldifferentiationandthecomplexcharacterofmodernsociety.

Translationscholarshaveexploredtherelevanceofthesetheoriestothefieldof

translationandinterpretinginanumberofways.Theseincludetherelationship

between,forexample,translatoragencyandsocialstructure,historical,social

andcognitiveprocesses,humanandnonhumanactors,andtranslation

products,processesandrelationsofpower.Theworkofthesetheoristshas

contributedtotheendeavourtomaketranslatorsandinterpretersmorevisible,

orinthecaseofLuhmann,invisibleassocialactors.Ithasalsoinformedthe

conceptualization,atboththetheoreticalandmethodologicallevel,ofempirical

researchdesignedtoexaminetranslationactivity,includingtraining,inthe

contextsofitsoccurrence.Bourdieu’swork,themostwidelydiscussedwithin

thefield,hasbeenappliedtoarangeofempiricalandtheoreticalissuesfrom

literaryandnonliterarytranslationtosignlanguageandpublicservice

interpreting(Simeoni1998;Gouanvic1997,1999,2001;Inghilleri2003,

2005a;Wolf2006;seealsothecollectionofarticlesinHeilbronandSapiro

2002;Inghilleri2005b).Latour’sActorNetworkTheoryhasbeentakenup

particularly,

Page282

thoughnotexclusively,totheorizethetranslationprocessfromtheperspectives

oftheactorsinvolved,includingthepivotalroleoftranslatorsthemselves

(Buzelin2005).Luhmann’stheoryhasbeenusedtoconceptualizetranslation

itselfasafunctionallydifferentiatedsystem,toexploretheselfreferentialnature

oftranslationcommunicationsasmetacommunicationsandtoexaminethe

autonomousrelationshipbetweentranslatortrainingandprofessionalpractice

(Hermans2007).

Theseemergentsociologicalperspectivesconstitutebothanewdirectionfor

workinthefieldoftranslationandapotentialshiftintherelationshipbetween

thisfieldandthesocialsciences.Sociologicalperspectiveshaveexpandedthe

focusofanalysisbeyondliterarytextstoincludenonliteraryandspokenand

signedtexts.Theyhavehighlightedthecentralpositionoftranslatorsand

interpretersthemselvesinthetranslationprocess.Andunlike

FUNCTIONALISTAPPROACHES,wheretheanalysisofthetranslator’s

roleisconcernedtodescribethispositioninlargelyneutraltermswithinawider

functionalnetwork,sociologicalapproacheshaveidentifiedtranslators’

professionaltrajectoriesandsocialpositioningsascrucialtoboththeprocess

andproductsoftranslationactivity.

Thedevelopinginterestinsociologicalperspectiveswithintranslationstudies

researchmayalsoimpactondiscussionstakingplacewithinthesocialsciences

morebroadly.Theroleofsocialtheoryintheanalysisofcontemporarysociety

hascomeunderincreasingscrutinyasthevisibleandinvisiblefactorsthatshape

individualandcollectivelivesappeartosometodefytraditionalsociologicalor

philosophicalattemptstocategorize,stabilizeortransformsocialphenomena.

Theemergentsociologicalperspectivesintranslationandinterpretingresearch

arereflectiveofsignificantlydistinctiveepistemologicalandontologicalpositions

withregardtowhatconstitutesknowledgeandunderstandingoftheworldand

howsocialtheoristscanbestinterveneinorcommentonit.Latourand

Luhmannargueforbetterobservationanddescriptionofmultiple,autonomous

socialrealitieswhileBourdieuwouldsupportthepossibilityandvalidityofa

transformativeagendaforsociologythroughdescriptionandscientific

explanation.Thesedifferenceshaveimplicationsforwhatformofintervention

eachbelievessocialtheorycanorshouldmakeincomplexcontemporary

societies.Translationscholarsundertakingworkinsocioculturalorsociological

researchparadigmsdealdirectlywiththeseissuesintheirfocusontheroleof

translationandmultiplemeaningsinthemulticulturalandmultilingualsettingsthat

comprisemodernsocialsystems.Translationresearchinthisarea,therefore,

hasthepotentialtoplayacriticalroleincurrentdebatesinthesocialsciences

aboutmodernityandtheinevitabilityofdifferentiation,contingencyand

incommensurabilityincontemporarysociallife.

Seealso:

ASYLUM;ETHICS;GLOBALIZATION;IDEOLOGY;REWRITING.

Furtherreading

Gouanvic1997;Simeoni1998;Casanova1999/2005;Heilbron1999;

HeilbronandSapiro1999;Gouanvic2002;Inghilleri2003,2005a,2005b;

Buzelin2005;Wolf2006.

MOIRAINGHILLERI

Strategies

Theterm‘strategy’connotesateleologicalcourseofactionundertakento

achieveaparticulargoalinanoptimalway.Problemsarise,however,indefining

theconceptmoreprecisely.AsChesterman(2005)hasnoted,notonlyisthe

term‘strategy’itselfoftenusedindifferentwaysintranslationstudies,buta

varietyofothertermscanbeusedtomeanthesamething:‘procedures’,

‘techniquesofadjustment’,‘transformations’,‘transferoperations’etc.Molina

andHurtadoAlbir(2002:507)observetwodifferentstrandsindefinitionsof

‘translationstrategy’:(a)theproceduralsense(oftenusedbythoseinvestigating

PSYCHOLINGUISTICANDCOGNITIVEAPPROACHEStotranslating),

and(b)thetextualsense.Thedistinctionhereismetonymicofthegreater

distinctionwhichsomehaveproposedbetweenprospectiveandretrospective

translationstudies(Koster2002:27;Wilss1977:67).