Journals / Turkish Studies - Language and Literature / 2021 / Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 4

Untranslatability in Translatıon Studies or the Impossibility of Translation

Pages
2319–2335
Publication Date
2022-11-06
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In addition, it has been observed that translation is a process of completion and interpretation, and in order to understand the concept of untranslatability, its linguistic, cognitive and philosophical layers must be understood and addressed.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:One of the most complicated issues in the history of translation is, undoubtedly, the concept of untranslatability.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Untranslatability also has an intricate structure that is by no means considered separate from the concept of translatability.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In addition, it has been observed that translation is a process of completion and interpretation, and in order to understand the concept of untranslatability, its linguistic, cognitive and philosophical layers must be understood and addressed.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

One of the most complicated issues in the history of translation is, undoubtedly, the concept of untranslatability. These debates have remained up to date, from studies of very early translation to modern translation studies today and have produced many products in theoretical terms. The untranslatability or the impossibility of translation from the past to the present has preserved its polymorphism and impure structure. Based on the nature of these concepts in the historical process, it has been observed that the sources have two different meanings and that the untranslatability reflects the interface between these two meanings and these two structures, and it has been attempted to understand how this reality is formed. Untranslatability is primarily a translation phenomenon that has been a key word in the debate on the impossibility of translation from ancient times to the present. The ongoing discussion of untranslatability has been conducted on the platforms of equivalence-seeking attempts regarding the sound image-concept relationship, the nature of meaning and philosophy of language in its historical course since eighteen century. Untranslatability has been handled within the framework of western dualistic approaches such as Universalist and Monadist, as well as the twentieth-century postmodern approaches, i.e. Deconstructive. The dualistic nature of the concept or its being an ambiguous phenomenon makes it possible to make more than one definition of untranslatability. Untranslatability also has an intricate structure that is by no means considered separate from the concept of translatability. Therefore, throughout the article, the role of “untranslatability", which incorporates the term “translatability” in the symbolic nature of language, in other words, in translation per se, is questioned based on this ascertainment. Also the discussions on "everything can be translated" or "nothing can be translated" at the two extremes and the opinions in between were included in the analysis within the framework of this connection. One of the important results is that the phenomenon of untranslatability can actually be used as a translation strategy that makes translation possible. In addition, it has been observed that translation is a process of completion and interpretation, and in order to understand the concept of untranslatability, its linguistic, cognitive and philosophical layers must be understood and addressed.

🔖

Cite This Article

GEZER, G. (2022). Untranslatability in Translatıon Studies or the Impossibility of Translation. Turkish Studies - Language and Literature, Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 4, 2319–2335. https://ajindex.com/articles/617790

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Abdul-Raof, H. (2001). Qur’an translation: Discourse, texture and exegesis. Curzon. Aldahesh, A. Y. (2014). (Un)Translatability of the Qur’ān: A theoretical perspective. International journal of linguistics, 6(6), 23-45. http://dx.doi.org/10.5296/ijl.v6i6.6497
  2. Apter, E. (2013). Against world literature: On the politics of untranslatability.Verso. Asghar, J. (2015). The power politics of translation: A study of translation-ideology nexus. Editorial Board, 32. Bacon, R. & Burke, R. B. (1928). The opus majus of Roger Bacon. Oxford University Press.
  3. Baker, M. & Saldanha, G. (2020). Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies. Routledge. Barthes, R. (1977). The death of the author. Roland Barthes: Image-music-text, 142-149.
  4. Fontana Press.
  5. Bassnett, S. (2011). Reflections on translation. Multilingual Matters. Benjamin, W. (1963). Theses on the philosophy of history. Illuminations. Harcourt Brace Jovano. Benjamin, W. (1997). The translator’s task, Walter Benjamin (S. Rendall, Çev.). TTR: Traduction, terminologie, redaction. 10(2), 151-165.
  6. Erudit. Berman, A. (1984/1992). The experience of the foreign: Culture and translation in romantic Germany. State University of New York Press.
  7. Boroditsky, L. (2011). How language shapes thought: the languages we speak affect our perceptions of the world. Scientific American. https://web.uvic.ca/~dbub/Cognition_Action/SpecialTopicsEssays_files/How%20Languag e%20Shapes%20Thought.pdf Caruth, C. (2006). Unclaimed experience: trauma, narrative, and history. The Johns Hopkins University Press.
  8. Catford, J.C. (1965). A linguistic theory of translation: An essay in applied linguistics. Oxford University Press.
  9. Chesterman, A. (2016). Memes of translation: The spread of ideas in translation theory. John Benjamins Publishing Company. Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin, and use. Praeger. Currie, M. (2013) The invention of deconstruction. Palgrave Macmillan. De Pedro, R. (1999). The translatability of texts: A historical overview. Les Presses de l'Université de Montréal. Derrida, J. (1978). Writing and difference, (A. Bass, Çev.). University of Chicago Press.
  10. Derrida, J. (1982). Margins of philosophy. University of Chicago Press.
  11. Derrida, J. (1985). The ear of the other: Autobiography, transference, translation. Schocken Books. Derrida, J. (1997) Of Grammatology, (G. C. Spivak, Çev.). The Johns Hopkinson University Press.
  12. Derrida, J. (1999). Göstergebilim ve gramatoloji. (T.Akşin, Çev.). Toplum Bilim: Jacques De