1. Theo Hermans (Cáp. 3)

8/19/2019 1. Theo Hermans (Cáp. 3)

1/3

‘From the point of view of the target literature, all translation implies a certain degree of

manipulation of the source text for a certain purpose’

Theo Hermans

Chapter 3: Points of Orientation

Theo Hermans presents the approach to translation studies known as Descriptive Translation

Studies, or Polsstems approach, an approach associated in particular with the names of !ideon

Tour and "tamar #ven$%ohar& 'fter exploring the (uestion of what constitutes a new paradigm for

research and whether DTS (ualifies as such )it does*, Hermans presents the +asic assumptions of

the approach, citing his own "ntroduction- to The Manipulation of Literature.

"n The Manipulation of Literature )./01*, Hermans poses three reasons that explain wh the stud

of literar translation in particular had remained such a neglected field2

.* The emphasis on creativit and originalit placed in the concept of literature since the 3omantic

period which leads to disdain a derivative form like translation as second$hand and second$rate&

4* 5inguists had dealt primaril with non$literar texts and have restricted themselves to the level of

the sentence instead of tackling larger textual and discursive entities&

6* The translator’s mind was seen as an inaccessi+le +ox&

"n The Manipulation of Literature, Hermans summarises the new approach, ela+orated + a group

of researchers who agreed on some +asic assumptions, in the following statement2

7hat the have in common is, +riefl, a view of literature as a complex and dnamic sstem8 a

conviction that there should +e a continual interpla +etween theoretical models and practical case

studies8 an approach to literar translation which is descriptive, target$oriented, functional and

sstemic8 and an interest in the norms and constraints that govern the production and reception of

translations, in the relation +etween translation and other tpes of text processing, and in the placeand role of translations +oth within a given literature and in the interaction +etween literatures&-

"n this chapter he takes each part of this statement and comments on it&

‘a view of literature as a complex and dynamic system’

The idea that literature can +e thought of as a sstem, a set of interdependent elements, has a

respecta+le pedigree& "n the context of empirical translation studies one term in particular has

gained prominence2 literature as a polsstem&

The point a+out the sstem is that it invites us to think in terms of functions, connections and

interrelations&

‘a conviction that there should be a continual interplay between theoretical models and practical

case studies’

The 3ussian Formalists were self$critical and methodologicall rigorous as well as radical and

innovative& The emphasi9ed the provisional nature of their theories and positions&


2/3

This willingness to revise and ad:ust the analtical apparatus can also +e seen in the ;anipulation

group, nota+l in Tour’s a+andoning the notion of the ‘'de(uate Translation’ when it proved

unworka+le&

The importance of case studies is twofold2 the illustrate the productivit of a theor and its

applica+ilit across a range of situations, and the serve to convince other sections of the scholarl

communit of the relevance of the theories and models&

‘an approach to literary translation which is descriptive...’

The ;anipulation’s group programme is ela+orated on a purel descriptive +asis& The want to

account for the occurrence and nature of translations, rather than providing value :udgements or

advice or guidelines for good translating&

Toda it is hard to determine whether it is possi+le for descriptions to +e neutral, o+:ective and

detached from the o+:ect of stud&

‘target-oriented, functional...’

This approach has an exclusivel target$oriented and functional orientation )which Hermans shows

to +e in part misguided, in that translations are not solel and exclusivel facts of the target sstem*&

‘Target$oriented’ stands in opposition to ‘source$oriented’8 ‘functional’ to ‘essentialist’& The term

‘target$oriented’ is opposed to the term ‘source$oriented’ in relation to the perceived status of

translation&

The ‘source$oriented’ approach measures the translation in the source text, with translation +eing

seen as a reproduction of the original, as a su+stitute which is derivative and needs to +e checked

against the original for faults and shortcomings& Thus, the authorit of the original is constantl

reaffirmed&


3/3

The polsstem theor viewed literar and cultural life as the scene of a continuous struggle for

power +etween various interest groups& "n this context, translation could +e seen as one of the

instruments which people could use to consolidate or undermine positions in a given hierarch&

'ccording to 'ndr= 5efevere, poetics, patronage and ideolog were more important constraints on

translation than linguistic differences& He also pointed out that manipulations do not occur onl in

translation& The ma also occur in the reeditions of a particular work& He also points out thatediting and redrafting texts, like translating them, means working with and under certain constraints

)economic, ideological or aesthetic*&

Translation can no longer +e regarded in isolation& "t should +e analsed as part of a whole sstem

of texts and the people who produce, support, propagate, oppose and censor them&

‘...and an interest in the norms and constraints that govern the production and reception of

translations, in the relation between translation and other types of text processing, and in the

place and role of translations both within a given literature and in the interaction between

literatures.’

The orientation on the receptor pole, on the impact of translation and on its constraining factors

explains the interest that much descriptive work had in translations norms&

>uestions surrounding the production, reception and historical impact on translation have occupied

a prominent place in the descriptive approach&

Historical case studies cover not onl individual translations, +ut also the historical discourse on

translation&

The histor of a societ’s thinking a+out translation informs us a+out that societ’s changing values

and +eliefs regarding language, identit and otherness&

This ‘historici9ing’ of translation and of translation concepts is paramount +ecause it shows us how

translation is differentl shaped over time&

Descriptive, target$oriented, functional and sstemic ? prescriptive, source$text oriented, linguisticand atomistic&

The central issue2 the function of the translation in the ‘target culture’ ? linguistic features of the ST&

Documents

1. Theo Hermans (Cáp. 3)