Ian Mason (translation scholar) | Summary and Q&A

TL;DR

The conversation highlights the evolution of translation studies, from a focus on the text as a static entity to an interactive phenomenon involving the source text, production, and reception. It also discusses the role of dialogue interpreting and the distinction between the works of Julian House and Basil Mason.

Key Insights

• 🫵 Translation studies has evolved from viewing texts as static entities to approaching translation as an interactive phenomenon.
• 👨‍🔬 The inclusion of the source text and a focus on production, reception, and adequacy are common elements in translation studies research.
• 🖐️ Dialogue interpreting has played a significant role in shaping perspectives within translation studies.
• 📺 House's vision has shifted from a focus on equivalence to a more comprehensive understanding of translation.
• 📔 The distinction between House's and Mason's contributions in their co-authored books is not rigid, with both books being collaborative efforts.
• 🍉 The field of translation studies experienced significant growth in the 1990s, both in terms of publications and the establishment of translation courses.
• ❓ The postmodern direction of translation studies involves relativizing everything and a renewed focus on literary translation.
• 👨‍🔬 Research in dialogue interpreting has had a positive impact on understanding conference interpreting and a broader context for interpreting.
• 👨‍🔬 Translation studies research is currently divided on the subject of boycotting Israel, with some advocating for a boycott of Israeli institutions.

Transcript

search activities first welcome uh good yeah you're the name on some basic reference books in Translation studies uh translator a discourse in the translator and then uh translator as communicator and then the books on dialogue interpreting which we edit to volumes editor volumes right can you say what are the main research lines in those those wor... Read More

Questions & Answers

Q: What are the main research lines in translation studies?

The main research lines in translation studies revolve around the interactive nature of translating, with a focus on the source text and its inclusion in the process. It emphasizes the production, reception, and adequacy of target texts.

Q: Has there been a shift in House's vision due to dialogue interpreting?

While dialogue interpreting has influenced House's perspective, it is not solely responsible for the shift. He mentions being involved in teaching dialogue interpreting but states that his vision has evolved beyond a sole focus on equivalence.

Q: How were the main books co-written by House and Mason?

The first book, "Discourse in the Translator," was co-written by House and Mason, with chapters being jointly written and revised. The second book, "Translator as Communicator," was separately written by each author.

Q: Is it possible to distinguish between House's writing and Mason's in their co-authored books?

While it may be possible for some readers to discern the influence of each author, House mentions that there is no strict distinction between their contributions. Both books were collaborative efforts, with jointly written and revised chapters.

Summary & Key Takeaways

• The conversation discusses the main research lines in translation studies, emphasizing the interactive nature of translating and the inclusion of the source text in the process.

• It explores the shift from viewing texts as static entities to a more pragmatic approach in translation studies.

• House reflects on the development of his own perspective and the term "equivalence," as well as the influence of dialogue interpreting on his vision.