Chapter 10
Translation, Philosophy and Other Interdisciplinary Research
Abstract
This chapter explores influential theorists who have challenged foundational assumptions in translation theory across Western and Chinese contexts. George Steiner’s After Babel redefines literary translation through the German hermeneutic tradition, highlighting the translator’s complex role. Walter Benjamin poetically envisions translation as the revelation of a ‘pure’ language via literal translation, while Jacques Derrida deconstructs key certainties such as the source-target language divide, linguistic stability, and the possibility of equivalence. These critiques disrupt classical linguistic models, introducing new challenges for translation studies. Experimental approaches like Lewis’s ‘abusive affinity’ embrace norm-breaking to create more dynamic target texts. Unlike earlier theories centred on equivalence, these perspectives reject a unified framework, emphasizing the inherent instability of meaning transfer. Derrida’s insights anticipate Venuti’s later arguments that stable meaning in translation is unattainable, marking a significant shift in theoretical paradigms and expanding the scope of translation inquiry.
Video Introduction
Flashcards
Test your understanding of the foundational concepts within the chapter by using these flashcards.
Quiz
Test your understanding of this chapter with our multiple choice questions.
Research Questions
- Analyse Steiner’s ‘hermeneutic motion’ in another ST-TT pair. Compare your findings with the case study of Heaney’s preface to Beowulf analysed in the chapter.
- Read the feminist criticisms of Steiner in Chamberlain (1988/2021, see chapter) and Simon (1996, see Chapter 8). How far do you agree with their comments? Investigate other metaphors for translation.
- Philosophical texts contain specialized terminologies and experimental structures. Investigate what form a translation of a philosophical text might take. Look at published translations of Benjamin, Borges, Heidegger and Derrida to see what strategies have been employed. Compare translations of other texts, such as the work of Freud, in your languages.
- There is a strong ethical element to philosophical approaches to translation (compare also the ethical perspective in Chapters 8 and 9). Identify where these ethical points are in the theorists considered in this chapter. Look also at a selection of prefaces written by literary translators. How many seem to consider their work in an ethical or philosophical way?
Video Summary
Further Reading
Explore the chapter further using our combined reading list and free reading section.
For philosophical writings on translation
Some other well-known philosophical writings on translation are included in
Schulte R. and J. Biguenet (eds) (1992) Theories of Translation. An Anthology of Essays from Dryden to Derrida, Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
For example:
Ortega y Gasset, J. (1937/1992) ‘The misery and splendor of translation’, translated by E. Gamble Miller, pp. 93–112.
Paz, O. (1971/1992) ‘Translation: Literature and letters’, translated by I. del Corral, pp. 152–62.
See also:
Borges, J.-L. (1935/2021) ‘The translators of The Thousand and One Nights’, translated by E. Allen, in L. Venuti (ed.) (2021) The Translation Studies Reader, 4th edition, London and New York: Routledge.
For a different approach to hermeneutics
Stolze, R. (2011) The Translator’s Approach: Introduction to Translational Hermeneutics. Theory and Examples from Practice, Berlin: Frank and Timme.
For a general introduction to deconstruction and translation
Davis, K. (2001) Deconstruction and Translation, Manchester: St Jerome.
For more on Derrida
Derrida, J. (1972/1982) Margins of Philosophy, translated by A. Bass, London and New York: Prentice Hall.
Peter Florentsen
Florentsen, P. (1994). Translation, philosophy and deconstruction. Perspectives, 2(2), 225–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.1994.9961239
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0907676X.1994.9961239 This article discusses in more detail the central ideas of this chapter. Florentsen describes how deconstruction challenges Nida’s concept of equivalence of meaning (see Chapter 3). Instead, translation is presented as an untranslatable metaphor.