Which were the happiest translators?
In this theoretical paper I engage critically several key issues in translation history theory raised by translation historians in recent years. These methodological and philosophical debates address crucial aspects of the discipline such as epistemic priorities in historical inquiry, the place of t...
| Autor: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2020 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona |
| Repositorio: | Dipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ddd.uab.cat:238035 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://ddd.uab.cat/record/238035 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | History of translation Methodology Exclusivism Pluralism Historical explanation Philosophy of history Historia de la traducción Metodología Exclusivismo Pluralismo Explicación histórica Filosofía de la historia |
| id |
ES_3e268d7fbb3ebcc672443e07ee401cc3 |
|---|---|
| oai_identifier_str |
oai:ddd.uab.cat:238035 |
| network_acronym_str |
ES |
| network_name_str |
España |
| repository_id_str |
|
| dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Which were the happiest translators? the case for methodological pluralism in translation history ¿Quiénes han sido los traductores más felices? |
| title |
Which were the happiest translators? |
| spellingShingle |
Which were the happiest translators? López-Alcalá, Samuel|||0000-0002-2274-9165 History of translation Methodology Exclusivism Pluralism Historical explanation Philosophy of history Historia de la traducción Metodología Exclusivismo Pluralismo Explicación histórica Filosofía de la historia |
| title_short |
Which were the happiest translators? |
| title_full |
Which were the happiest translators? |
| title_fullStr |
Which were the happiest translators? |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Which were the happiest translators? |
| title_sort |
Which were the happiest translators? |
| dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv |
López-Alcalá, Samuel|||0000-0002-2274-9165 |
| author |
López-Alcalá, Samuel|||0000-0002-2274-9165 |
| author_facet |
López-Alcalá, Samuel|||0000-0002-2274-9165 |
| author_role |
author |
| dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv |
History of translation Methodology Exclusivism Pluralism Historical explanation Philosophy of history Historia de la traducción Metodología Exclusivismo Pluralismo Explicación histórica Filosofía de la historia |
| topic |
History of translation Methodology Exclusivism Pluralism Historical explanation Philosophy of history Historia de la traducción Metodología Exclusivismo Pluralismo Explicación histórica Filosofía de la historia |
| description |
In this theoretical paper I engage critically several key issues in translation history theory raised by translation historians in recent years. These methodological and philosophical debates address crucial aspects of the discipline such as epistemic priorities in historical inquiry, the place of translation theories in historical narratives and the related issue of target audiences and constitute valuable contributions to current thinking on central aspects of translation history. I submit here, however, that several aspects of these methodological proposals pose a number of underlying problems, which I classify hierarchically as first-order and second-order difficulties, depending on their perceived epistemic relevance. The primary objection connects partly with what philosopher Paul Roth labels "methodological exclusivism" (Roth, 1987), understood in this essay as the notion that there exists one suitable method for translation history. Building on Roth, I argue for the contrary epistemic position, namely, "methodological pluralism" understood in its most basic meaning as the negation of exclusivism. I posit that methodological exclusivism is unjustifiable and that not only does it have the potential to severely limit freedom of inquiry in the discipline and the historian's choice in the pursuit of knowledge, but it may also produce truncated structures of explanation (McCullagh, 1998). |
| publishDate |
2020 |
| dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2 2020-01-01 2020 2020-01-01 |
| dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
Article http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 VoR http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85 |
| dc.type.openaire.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
| format |
article |
| dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv |
https://ddd.uab.cat/record/238035 |
| url |
https://ddd.uab.cat/record/238035 |
| dc.language.none.fl_str_mv |
Inglés eng |
| language_invalid_str_mv |
Inglés |
| language |
eng |
| dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv |
open access http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2 https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ |
| dc.rights.openaire.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
| rights_invalid_str_mv |
open access http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2 https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ |
| eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
| dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
| dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Dipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB instname:Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona |
| instname_str |
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona |
| reponame_str |
Dipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB |
| collection |
Dipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB |
| repository.name.fl_str_mv |
|
| repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
| _version_ |
1869406507047583744 |
| spelling |
Which were the happiest translators?the case for methodological pluralism in translation history¿Quiénes han sido los traductores más felices?López-Alcalá, Samuel|||0000-0002-2274-9165History of translationMethodologyExclusivismPluralismHistorical explanationPhilosophy of historyHistoria de la traducciónMetodologíaExclusivismoPluralismoExplicación históricaFilosofía de la historiaIn this theoretical paper I engage critically several key issues in translation history theory raised by translation historians in recent years. These methodological and philosophical debates address crucial aspects of the discipline such as epistemic priorities in historical inquiry, the place of translation theories in historical narratives and the related issue of target audiences and constitute valuable contributions to current thinking on central aspects of translation history. I submit here, however, that several aspects of these methodological proposals pose a number of underlying problems, which I classify hierarchically as first-order and second-order difficulties, depending on their perceived epistemic relevance. The primary objection connects partly with what philosopher Paul Roth labels "methodological exclusivism" (Roth, 1987), understood in this essay as the notion that there exists one suitable method for translation history. Building on Roth, I argue for the contrary epistemic position, namely, "methodological pluralism" understood in its most basic meaning as the negation of exclusivism. I posit that methodological exclusivism is unjustifiable and that not only does it have the potential to severely limit freedom of inquiry in the discipline and the historian's choice in the pursuit of knowledge, but it may also produce truncated structures of explanation (McCullagh, 1998).El presente artículo teórico es un análisis crítico de varios aspectos troncales de teoría de la historia de la Traducción debatidos recientemente por los historiadores de la materia. Dichos debates metodológicos y filosóficos abordan aspectos fundamentales de la disciplina (como las prioridades epistémicas en la investigación histórica, el lugar de las teorías de la traducción en la narración historiográfica y el asunto anejo de los grupos de lectores a los que se destina la historiografía de la traducción), y constituyen aportaciones valiosísimas al status quaestionis de la reflexión metodológica en la disciplina. Dicho esto, mi tesis aquí es que dichas propuestas metodológicas conllevan ciertos problemas que clasifico jerárquicamente en un primer y un segundo orden, en función de la relevancia epistemológica que percibo en ellos. Mi objeción principal enlaza en parte con lo que Paul Roth califica de «exclusivismo metodológico» (Roth, 1987), entendido en este trabajo como la noción de que existe un único método idóneo para hacer historia de la traducción. Basándome en Roth, abogo por la postura epistémica contraria, a saber, el «pluralismo metodológico», cuyo sentido más elemental es la negación del exclusivismo. Sostengo que el exclusivismo metodológico es injustificable y que tiene el potencial de limitar gravemente la libertad de investigación en la disciplina y el abanico de opciones del historiador en la búsqueda de conocimiento. Asimismo, entraña el riesgo de fomentar la producción de estructuras explicativas truncadas (McCullagh, 1998). 22020-01-0120202020-01-01Articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501VoRhttp://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85info:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://ddd.uab.cat/record/238035reponame:Dipòsit Digital de Documents de la UABinstname:Universitat Autònoma de BarcelonaInglésengopen accesshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2Aquest material està protegit per drets d'autor i/o drets afins. Podeu utilitzar aquest material en funció del que permet la legislació de drets d'autor i drets afins d'aplicació al vostre cas. Per a d'altres usos heu d'obtenir permís del(s) titular(s) de drets.https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:ddd.uab.cat:2380352026-06-06T12:50:31Z |
| score |
15.300724 |