번역사(飜譯史) 연구의 학제성에 관한 소고(小考) - 런들의 견해에 대한 논쟁을 중심으로
A contemplation on the interdisciplinarity of translation historiography - Focusing on the discussion over Rundle’s view.
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper aims to raise an attention on translation historiography within translation studies, which is one of the important and necessary areas of study on translation yet relatively under-researched, by introducing the recent discussion over Rundle’s idea and by providing comments on it based on the author’s own experience in translation historiography. Rundle(2012) brings up an interesting and valid point concerning the inherent interdisciplinarity of translation historiography, by distinguishing its two different aims of research. He sees that translation historiography can either focus on constructing a translation history itself or on contributing to find a new insight into a particular context of history. The interest for the former usually remains within the realm of translation studies as a discipline, while the exploration to the latter direction can go on to expand an academic dialogue toward the historians of other disciplines. Rundle proposes to consider the potential fruitfulness of the latter direction of translation historiography. This idea of Rundle’s, which was presented in the position paper of the 2012 special edition of Translation Studies, seized the attention of many translation historians and became a core issue of the discussion on how to study translation in historical context. This paper will provide a close look into one of the newest discussion within translation studies, that is on one of the pertinent issues of translation historiography, that is its interdisciplinarity.
Abstract
This paper aims to raise an attention on translation historiography within translation studies, which is one of the important and necessary areas of study on translation yet relatively under-researched, by introducing the recent discussion over Rundle’s idea and by providing comments on it based on the author’s own experience in translation historiography. Rundle(2012) brings up an interesting and valid point concerning the inherent interdisciplinarity of translation historiography, by distinguishing its two different aims of research. He sees that translation historiography can either focus on constructing a translation history itself or on contributing to find a new insight into a particular context of history. The interest for the former usually remains within the realm of translation studies as a discipline, while the exploration to the latter direction can go on to expand an academic dialogue toward the historians of other disciplines. Rundle proposes to consider the potential fruitfulness of the latter direction of translation historiography. This idea of Rundle’s, which was presented in the position paper of the 2012 special edition of Translation Studies, seized the attention of many translation historians and became a core issue of the discussion on how to study translation in historical context. This paper will provide a close look into one of the newest discussion within translation studies, that is on one of the pertinent issues of translation historiography, that is its interdisciplinarity.
참고문헌 (23)
- 김정우, "한국 번역사 논의의 전제", 우리말연구, (16), pp.139~161 (2005), 우리말학회
- 김정우, "한국 번역사의 시대 구분", 번역학연구, 9(1), pp.29~69 (2008), 한국번역학회
- 유명우, "한국 번역사 정리를 위한 시론(試論)", 번역학연구, 3(1), pp.9~38 (2002), 한국번역학회
- 최효은, "번역사 연구방법을 통한 “단권 성경주석”(1934)의 고찰", 박사, pp.2016
- 최효은, "근대 기독교출판번역사 조사: 번역주체를 중심으로", 번역학연구, 17(2), pp.191~212 (2016), 한국번역학회
- Bandia, P. F., "Charting the future of translation history", pp.45~58 (2006), University of Ottawa Press
- Bandia, P. F., "Response", The Translator, 20(1), pp.112~118 (2014)
- Bassnett, S., "Translation Studies" (1980), Methuen
- Bastin, G. L., "Charting the future of translation history" (2006), University of Ottawa Press
- Berman, A., "The translation studies reader", pp.284~297 (2000), Routledge
- Daniels, R. V., "Studying history : how and why" (1981), Prentice-Hall
- Delabastita, D., "Response", Translation Studies, 5(2), pp.246~248 (2012)
- Hermans, T., "Response", Translation Studies, 5(2), pp.242~245 (2012)
- Holmes, J., "The translation studies reader", pp.180~192 (1972), Routledge
- Paloposki, O., "Translation history : audiences, collaboration and interdisciplinary", MonTI, 5, pp.213~239 (2013)
- Pym, A., "Method in translation history" (1998), St. Jerome Publishing
- Rundle, C., "Translation as an approach to history", Translation Studies, 5(2), pp.232~248 (2012)
- Rundle, C., "Theories and methodologies of translation history : the value of an interdisciplinary approach", The Translator, 20(1), pp.2~8 (2014)
- Santoyo, J-C., "Charting the future of translation history", pp.11~43 (2006), University of Ottawa Press
- St-Pierre, P., "Translation as a discourse of history", TTR, 6(1), pp.61~82 (1993)
- St-Pierre, P., "Response", Translation Studies, 5(2), pp.240~242 (2012)
- Venuti, L., "The translation studies reader" (2000), Routledge
- Venuti, L., "Translation, history, narrative", Meta, 50(3), pp.800~816 (2005)