Nterview With OSÉ Ambert: Scientia Traductionis, n.7, 2010

207
cievtia 1raavctiovi., v., 2010

IN1LRVIL\ \I1l JOSL LAMBLR1

JOSL LAMBLR1

Jos Lambert is a proessor and scholar in Comparatie Literature and 1ranslation Studies,
and one o the ounders o CL1RA - Centre or 1ranslation Studies
1
- at the Uniersity o Leuen,
Belgium. Initially, when it was created in 1989, what later became CL1RA consisted o a special
research program whose purpose was the promotion o high-leel research in in 1ranslation Studies, a
perennial goal still pursued to this day. Nowadays, Jos Lambert seres as its honorary chairman. le is
also a co-editor o 1arget - vtervatiovat ]ovrvat of 1rav.tatiov tvaie.
2
and the author o more than 100
articles. Additionally, he co-edited such olumes as iteratvre ava 1rav.tatiov: êr Per.ectire. iv iterar,
tvaie. ,198,, 1rav.tatiov iv tbe Deretovevt of iteratvre. - e. 1raavctiov.
aav. te aeretoevevt ae. itteratvre. ,1993,, 1rav.tatiov ava Moaerviatiov ,1995,, 1rav.tatiov tvaie. iv
vvgar, ,1996, and Cro..cvttvrat ava ivgvi.tic Per.ectire. ov vroeav Oev ava Di.tavce earvivg ,1998,.
le has been a guest proessor at many uniersities around the world such as Penn Uniersity, New
\ork Uniersity, Uniersity o Alberta, Uniersity o Amsterdam and the Sorbonne, haing lectured in
many others as well. Starting in 2010,2 he will sere a 2-year tenure as a guest proessor at
Uniersidade lederal de Santa Catarina.

1he interiew here presented is an excerpt o a larger project still in the making and with a
broader agenda. In its broader ersion the project aims at collecting Jos Lambert`s opinions and
iews on a ariety o subjects related to 1ranslation Studies, rom its history to its many conceptual
and theoretical debates. In this excerpt the ocus o the interiew is on the history o our discipline as
seen rom his priileged point o iew. Moreoer, a ew questions make reerence to subjects
discussed by Gideon 1oury in his ,recent, article Incubation, birth and growth: Obserations on the
irst 20 years o 1arget`, published in 1arget 21:2, and to some assertions brought up in Alice Leal`s
text Being a CL1RA Student: A Critical Account o the 2009 Summer School`, published herein. As
a complement to the answers to the questions that reer to the latter text, Jos Lambert has added a
notice that relects his ulterior reading o that text, which he carried out sometime ater he had already
answered the questions ormulated or this interiew.

Gustao Altho
3
and Lilian lleuri
4

1
http:,,www.kuleuen.be,CL1RA,index,index.html
2
http:,,www.benjamins.com,cgi-bin,t_seriesiew.cgiseries~target
3
Gustao Altho has a major in Social Sciences rom Uniersidade lederal de Santa Catarina ,UlSC, and is a
PhD candidate at the Postgraduate 1ranslation Studies programme ,Ps-Graduaao em Lstudos da 1raduao -
PGL1, in the same institution. le is also the assistant editor o cievtia 1raavctiovi. and a researcher at Ncleo de
Lstudos do Pensamento Poltico ,NLPP, at UlSC. lis research interests include the theory and the history o
translation, the translation o philosophical texts and its problems, and political theory.
4
Lilian lleuri has a major in Portuguese Language and Brazilian Literature, a masters in 1ranslation Studies, and
has taught Brazilian Portuguese at Middlebury College ,Vermont, USA,. She is currently a PhD candidate at the
Postgraduate 1ranslation Studies programme ,Ps-Graduaao em Lstudos da 1raduao - PGL1, at
Uniersidade lederal de Santa Catarina ,Brazil,. ler ocus research area in 1ranslation Studies is Discourse
Analysis, Systemic-lunctional Linguistics, and Corpus Linguistics.
JOSL LAMBLR1

208

July, 2010

"#$%&#' ()'*+"&#,%#-. /$ 0,+1* 1#2$ &, '-2 3,+ ' 1#&&1$ 4#& '4,+& &5$
5#-&,)3 ,6 &5$ #%-&#&+&#,% ,6 05#"5 3,+ 0$)$ ' 6,+%*$) '%* 5'- 4$$% '
7$74$) 6,) 7'%3 3$')-8 9:(;<= /5'& #- &5$ 5#-&,)3 4$5#%* &5$
")$'&#,% ,6 &5#- "$%&)$ *$*#"'&$* $>"1+-#?$13 &, ()'%-1'&#,% @&+*#$-A /5'& 0$)$ &5$
*#66#"+1&#$- 6'"$* #% -$&&#%B #& +CA <%* 05'& ),1$ 5'- #& 4$$% C1'3#%B %,0'*'3- '-
()'%-1'&#,% @&+*#$- 4$",7$- 7,)$ '%* 7,)$ ' *#-"#C1#%$ ,6 B1,4'1 -",C$ '%* 3$& ,6
1,"'1 C)'"&#"$A D,$- 9:(;< $66$"&#?$13 6+%"&#,% '- '% '&&)'"&#%B C,1$ 6,) 7'%3
*#66$)$%& $>C$)#$%"$- '%* *#-"+--#,%- 5$1* '& &5$ 1,"'1 1$?$1 #% ()'%-1'&#,% @&+*#$-
&5),+B5,+& &5$ 0,)1*A
JOSL LAMBLR1: 1his is a ull program in itsel! 1hese are een, I would say, kind questions. I
mean, part o the answer is implied. It means that you are coninced that CL1RA means
something not just or a local institution but or the discipline. Now, I would say that this was
the initial ambition. O course, being aterwards responsible or what we hae done I am
coninced that we achieed at least part o the goals. But that is maybe promotional talk on
my behal. I would not try to be simply someone who promotes his own initiatie. I would
like to examine this in a more critical way - so sel-criticism is not bad.
1here is quite some literature written about CL1RA - so it is not or the irst time that many
people hae talked about the initiatie, and een big names in the discipline hae written
about it, like Daniel Gile
5
, lranz Pochhacker
6
, Andrew Chesterman
, etc, and this een

happened rom the ery start. Ater all, in Leuen, we started CL1RA as people who hae
always belonged to, say, departments o Literary Studies, which was ambiguous because
starting up a new discipline within existing departments is, by deinition, schizophrenic. And
we were in trouble. And by many people we hae been identiied, een up to this ery day, as
people who are not really experts in 1ranslation Studies and who are supposed to be linked,
rather, with literary translation, and so on.
I can reer to my article that I published in a Portuguese journal called Ceve.i.
8
in 2005 with
the proocatie question, the ironical title: Is 1ranslation Studies too literary`
9
Now, this
was, o course, not about CL1RA, not about me, but about the discipline - but o course I
was taking it on behal o mysel and o seeral things. Now, indeed, lots o things that we
hae tried to deelop hae been linked, or a certain time, with the question o literature,
translated literature, and many people dealing with translation were coninced that, ater all,
our positions were not really releant or translation but or particular areas in translation.
And in act this ambiguity - that`s what I explain in the article - was also linked with the irst

3
http:,,www.aiic.net,database,datasheet.cm,int1206.htm & http:,,cirinandgile.com,DGCVLN.htm
6
http:,,public.uniie.ac.at,index.phpid~1402
7
http:,,www.helsinki.i,~chesterm,
8
http:,,www.isag.pt,index.aspxpag~conteudos|reistagenesis|editorial
9
Is 1ranslation Studies too Literary`, Gnesis. Reista cientiica do ISAI. 1raduao e Interpretaao, 2005, 5 :
20.
S

209
maniestations o the colleagues coming rom 1el Ai and Israel to Leuen - these include
Gideon 1oury, Itamar Len-Zohar, Zohar Shait, Rakeet Shey ,now Rakeet Sela-Shey,,
Nitsa Ben-Ary and Shelly \ahalom ,now Shelly Charles,. And this initiatie is not a matter o
people, but it was the real start, irst o all, o research on translation at my uniersity and,
indeed, on translated literature, but with a larger ambition. But at that moment we were much
more narrowly linked with the Department o Literature. lence the title o our irst
important and still amous book - Susan Bassnett says this is really the historic symposium on
translation: Literature and 1ranslation: New Perspecties in Literary Studies`
10
. Now, in that
article I tried to show that this title was much too narrow. But o course, ater all you are
linked with institutional conditions, including een the people that came to us - and there
were lots o people who were not at all linked with Literary Studies! 1he most inluential
people in that symposium ery oten happened to hae partly literary background but this did
not really explain or account or eerything that they were suggesting and proposing.
1he origin o our ambition with CL1RA was to work out something that was deeloping
already in the mid-190s. But a ew people among us were young people and we were all
starting intellectuals at the uniersity, and we had no power. \e had important meetings at
the end o the 190s and beginning o the 1980s, and the ambition to work out a new orum
or research on translation, this ambition was deeloping because there was a group and there
were international contacts. So there was something like networking and we were meeting in
dierent symposia and dierent disciplines, and we deinitely wanted to do something. But
then working this out was more diicult because, inally, when you get into action the
agreement is not that obious. 1he real initiatie was taken by Gideon 1oury
11
, who, irst o
all, wanted to start a journal. 1he second moement, which came a little bit in the continuity
o that journal - 1arget - was that we started to plan this institute - CL1RA. 1his institute
was not really planned together by 1el Ai and Leuen. It was mainly an initiatie, say, in
Leuen and by seeral local people, well, locals and riends rom international institutions. So
the institutional conditions were a little bit better. And the act that we had already a orum
and that we had taken part in publications and so on constituted a stronger basis.
1here were also local ambitions and local possibilities that were improing. \e got some
external inance rom a bank in Belgium, CLRA Bank - and the name CL1RA is still
reerring to that. So due to some local conditions and due also to the Penn-Leuen Institute
12
,
which was a new institute or adanced studies in the area o literary and culture studies, we
had the opportunity to integrate translation as a priileged area or high leel training o
young scholars, say, PhD scholars, and also beyond. And this Penn-Leuen Institute was ery
important and gae us the opportunity to start up the training o researchers in translation,
and this was new. Now, I can tell that our initiatie has been used aterwards, seeral years

10
http:,,catalogue.nla.go.au,Record,2983415
11
http:,,www.tau.ac.il,~toury,
12
1he Penn-Leuen Institute or Literary and Cultural Studies ,198-1989, was a joint enture between the
Uniersity o Pennsylania ,nicknamed: Penn, and K.U.Leuen. It consisted o a Summer School entitled "1he
Penn-Leuen Institute or Literary and Cultural Studies" whose goal was to oer high leel sessions organized
and proided by prominent international sta to students rom ,at least, both continents. 1he Institute does not
exist any more ,198-1989,. ,1his inormation was proided by the interiewee.,
JOSL LAMBLR1

210

later, by seeral other institutes. So it has been copied. Now uniersities try to attract young
scholars in 1ranslation Studies and try to proide them with, say, specialized research
methodology. I can tell you that whether they say so or not it has been copied rom CL1RA.
So CL1RA has been the model or an international training o a new generation o scholars
in 1ranslation Studies and the number o people who publish about translation nowadays, the
number that has been inoled in the training sessions in Leuen is, I would say, in itsel, I
am ery proud about it, impressie! I could gie you long lists o names and you can een see
them on the website o CL1RA, we hae about 500 hundred student-researchers or PhDs on
ie continents.
So we started in 1989 and attracted people rom ie continents. But we also hae a list o top
people who hae been CL1RA Proessors and, unortunately, some among these colleagues
hae already died, they belong to history. All this means that CL1RA is also part o the
history o a new discipline. And I am coninced that CL1RA as well as our journal - 1arget -
hae played a ery important role in the establishment o 1ranslation Studies as a new
discipline, and een, I would say, in something that you notice locally in llorianpolis
13
. I
mean the institutionalization o a PhD program in 1ranslation Studies which in itsel is more
than symbolic, and which is absolutely new in the history o uniersities at the moment when,
in act, disciplines in the lumanities are rather under threat. So I am coninced that CL1RA
played a role in the international institutionalization o 1ranslation Studies not only because
there were new topics and new PhDs - PhDs are important! - but also new proiles and
people as well as the organization o scholarly societies, and so on. So I would say this is
probably the most important component in my answer.
And what were the goals Notwithstanding our origins, that is, our literary institutional
background, our goals were to establish 1ranslation Studies and not the study o translated
literature, and this is made clear in the article in Ceve.i..
@(. D, 3,+ &5#%2 ')&#"1$- #% E,+)%'1- '%* C'C$)- C)$-$%&$* #% ",%B)$--$- 5'?$ 5'* '
*#-&#%B+#-5'41$ 0$#B5& #% 5$1C#%B &, ",%-&#&+&$ ()'%-1'&#,% @&+*#$- '- ' *#-"#C1#%$A
/5'& 0$)$ &5$#) ),1$- #% &5$ ",%-&#&+&#,% ,6 ()'%-1'&#,% @&+*#$-A
LAMBLR1: I would say that these are important and interesting questions. Now, my main
answer is ery simple. \ithout claiming to answer on behal o the ull world o 1ranslation
Studies, but while being conscious o the act that I represent a particular approach to this
discipline and to its history, I would say my reply is deinitiely positie. So meetings and the
interaction between people studying translation hae been ery inluential - I am not sure i
they are as inluential now but I know ery particular moments where meeting people has
been ery important, not just because the people inoled were picturesque, or interesting, or
kind, or wonderul, but because o the things that happened when these people hae met.

13
1he mentioning o llorianpolis reers to Santa Catarina lederal Uniersity`s Postgraduate 1ranslation
Studies programme ,PGL1,: http:,,www.pget.usc.br,l~en.

211
Now, the question is more complex. It is concentrating on journals and papers at congresses.
Certainly rom the contemporary point o iew I would distinguish heaily between
congresses. So the sociological phenomenon o people meeting during organized meetings -
congresses, seminars, and so on - that's one thing. Very oten papers hae been published,
not always. Sometimes, some among these meetings were ery inluential without publishing.
But seeral among these meetings hae been inluential because the papers hae been
published and distributed. Now, in our contemporary age, and maybe at the beginning, this
was not that clear.
1here is also a book market in 1ranslation Studies, and a heay book market. Now, I do not
say that books are not inluential but in the use o books, journals and articles by centers, by
students, as in llorianpolis, or instance, I would say that I see dierent options and
priorities. And I, mysel, am a little bit skeptical about the impact that the contemporary book
market has on the discipline. Lspecially when I go to uniersities I can see in their libraries
,ery oten little libraries, because, o course, 1ranslation Studies is not a discipline like, say,
listoriography, that institutes are heaily dependent on indiidual books and, say,
monographical approaches to 1ranslation Studies. And I would say this is ery dierent rom
what is irst asked here: journals and paper and congresses.
Now, without saying that one is good and the other is bad, I would like to be more concrete
and more descriptie in my answer to this question by giing examples o cases that are really
o historical importance in the deelopment o the discipline. 1he irst example is the ery
well known article by James lolmes - I would say it is a classic!: "1he Name and Nature o
1ranslation Studies"
14
. It has been published irst as what we used to call at that moment, at
the beginning o the 190s, a "preprint". And it has been published as a preprint in 192 irst
and then in 195. 1he article has been published again in book orm - as one o the more
modern approaches to 1ranslation Studies is in book orm - in 1988, edited by Raymond an
den Broeck, rom Antwerp, another ery important colleague in the history o 1ranslation
Studies at that age ,he was already, say, near the end o his career,
15
. But this article, a little by
little brushed up, was already known in 195 and was quoted beore, and I am sure that the
irst ersion o this article goes back to the 1960s.
lolmes is not a gentleman who published that much and many among his key articles hae
been used seeral times. But this article was so programmatic and so central, and it was
recognized as such a basic contribution that lolmes himsel worked it out and it was really
the program o the discipline. Now, just to conirm or to make clear how inluential it was I
am almost sure that it is on the basis o this article that the name o the discipline,
"1ranslation Studies", has been disseminating. And I would say that a second ery important
moment in the dissemination o this concept, and een o the inluence o this article, but not
only this article, is the little book - it was not a big book - by Mary Snell-lornby
16
:

14
lolmes, James S. ,192,1988,. "1he Name and Nature o 1ranslation Studies." In: James S. lolmes,
1ranslated! Papers on Literary 1ranslation and 1ranslation Studies, Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 6-80.
13
http:,,www.benjamins.com,cgi-bin,t_authoriew.cgiauthor~2444
16
http:,,transienna.uniie.ac.at,orschung,proessuren,dr-mary-snell-hornby,
JOSL LAMBLR1

212

"1ranslation Studies: An Integrated Approach"
1
, published by Benjamins at the end o the
1980s. 1hat is because on behal o Mary Snell-lornby, and so on, or the irst time, or a real
international audience, and with a book that was going to be inluential - in this case we talk
about a book, not about articles, but she is reerring to that article - 1ranslation Studies was
in act integrated into the linguistic approach and een into large circles o translation
training. So this article by lolmes, which is used and quoted in all the basic texts by, say,
people like 1oury - but also by many, many people who nowadays, or instance, would hae
ery dierent approaches than 1oury`s - was really used in many meetings.
I would een say that the ull career o James lolmes was a conirmation o the importance
o the social component in the interaction between scholars in 1ranslation Studies rom
arious ields and rom many countries. It must be noted that lolmes was a globetrotter.
And one o his secrets, one o the reasons why he was so inluential, is that he collected
people. le was a great traeler, een in Lastern Lurope. le was an American liing in
Amsterdam, he was a poet, but also a scholar, and a scholar with a ery particular status in
Amsterdam - I had been working in his institute and I know ery well how he was behaing.
le brought together people like Itamar Len-Zohar
18
, irst, and Len-Zohar then brought
1oury into the picture. But lolmes had contacts with the people rom Czechosloakia, and
many among them, Russians, Van Den Broeck, who was a ery personal riend o lolmes,
and etc. So there was something like, I would say, a social phenomenon beore there was a
real question o publications. 1he publications came aterwards. And ery oten the
publications did not een come. So I know o lots o documents that hae been produced
and discussed and that hae neer really been published. So at the beginning there was maybe
een the non-publication o seeral papers - and ater all lolmes himsel did not publish that
much but was inluential and symptomatic.
Now, 1oury's paper, or instance, is a ery similar example. 1he irst ormulation o the idea
o norms in 1ranslation Studies, I can locate it ery well, was the result o the selection o
three proposals by 1oury to the organizing committee o the Leuen Conerence rom
196
19
. 1oury produced three proposals and we selected that one on "1he Nature and Role o
Norms in Literary 1ranslation". 1his was the irst ormulation o his article - it is on his
website
20
. Ater all, the ull career o 1oury and the ull deelopment o, say, Descriptie

17
Snell-lornby, Mary ,1988,1995,. 1rav.tatiov tvaie.. .v vtegratea .roacb. Amsterdam: Benjamins. More ino:
http:,,www.benjamins.com,cgi-bin,t_bookiew.cgibookid~Z2038
18
http:,,www.tau.ac.il,~itamarez,
19
It was entitled`Conerence on Literature and 1ranslation`.
20
http:,,www.tau.ac.il,~toury,works,G1-Role-Norms.htm. 1he title o the book chapter aailable ia this link
is a little bit dierent than the original paper: 1he Nature and Role o Norms in 1ranslation`. It is the chapter
n.2 o 1oury`s inluential book Descriptie 1ranslation Studies and Beyond, published by John Benjamins in
1995.

213
1ranslation Studies ,D1S, goes back to that article. So these are really the most programmatic
articles that I know in 1ranslation Studies, say, beore the 1990s.
21

Len in the beginning o the Luropean Society or 1ranslation Studies ,LS1,
22
in Vienna, in
1992
23
, at the International Congress 1ranslation Studies - An Interdiscipline`, the
introduction and seeral discussions held there - Mary Snell-lornby was the initiator there -
are ery much linked, and narrowly linked, with these texts. I know seeral other cases. And I
know also o conerences with ery innoatie approaches to translation, and short meetings,
and so on, that were not really that inluential - which does not mean they were not
important. I do not really try to support only my own iew, but the most impressie
discussions at conerences that I hae eer attended were the ones that took place in 196 at
the Leuen Conerence, where discussions were held during three, our days between James
lolmes, Itamar Len-Zohar, Gideon 1oury, Andre Leeere
24
, Susan Bassnett
25
, say, Jos
Lambert, and a ew others. 1here were also ie students o mine among them and there is at
least one who is suriing well in 1ranslation Studies, Lieen D`hulst
26
, but there was also
Kitty an Leuen and etc - the list o names that probably are indebted to this conerence or
their careers in 1ranslation Studies, this list is extremely impressie. So what were their roles
in the constitution o 1ranslations Studies Notwithstanding the act that I am reducing my
scope because, well, I am a simple indiidual being in my career, I think that the ery origin o
1ranslation Studies is linked with meetings, seminars and discussions, publications aterwards,
and the willingness to deelop new moements and networking, international networking -
een beyond the borderlines between, say, communist and non-communist Lurope - and
een intercontinental contacts.
So the real origin was meetings and the second thing was publishing - though in the
beginning we did not hae publishing. \hen I argue a little bit about these books it is because
I elt a little bit disappointed. 1he international inrastructure or publishing books is so
powerul now - een or 1ranslation studies. So what I missed at the beginning was exactly
that. I had tapes recorded o all these discussions that I call historic. I was so disappointed at
a gien moment that I hae destroyed them. So it is a real shame about my own career
noticing that we had no publishing power. Now this publishing power is aailable. So
something changed.
@(. F,+ 7$%&#,% &5'& G,17$-H #%61+$%"$ #% &5$ 6#$1* "'% 4$ '&&)#4+&$* &, 5#7 4$#%B '
IB1,4$&),&&$)J '%* &5'& 5$ ",11$"&$* C$,C1$ '%* -, 6,)&5= K,08 3,+ 3,+)-$16 5'?$ 4$$%
&)'?$11#%B '),+%* &5$ B1,4$ 6,) ' 05#1$8 5'?#%B $-&'41#-5$* ",%&'"&- '%* '&&$%*$*

21
Also critical in the establishment o D1S was 1oury`s book Descriptie 1ranslation Studies and beyond
whose reerences and 1able o Contents can also be ound on his website:
http:,,www.tau.ac.il,~toury,works,dts.html
22
http:,,www.est-translationstudies.org,
23
http:,,www.est-translationstudies.org,constitution.html : At the International 1ranslation Studies Congress
1ranslation Studies - An Interdiscipline in Vienna, the participants agreed on 12 September 1992 to establish an
international association to be known as the Luropean Society lor 1ranslation Studies - LS1.
24
http:,,www.utexas.edu,aculty,council,1998-1999,memorials,Leeere,leeere.html
23
http:,,www.contemporarywriters.com,authors,p~authC2D9C28A1123b1B23mUn1DD53
26
http:,,www.kuleuen.be,c,u0014681.htm
JOSL LAMBLR1

214

",%6$)$%"$- #% 7'%3 *#66$)$%& ",%&#%$%&- '%* $&"= /5'& "'% 3,+ &$11 +- '4,+& 3,+)
$66,)&-8 '%* &5$ $66,)&- ,6 6#B+)$- -+"5 '- G,17$-8 &, $-&'41#-5 ()'%-1'&#,% @&+*#$- '- '
*#-"#C1#%$ #% ?')#,+- C')&- ,6 &5$ 0,)1*A
LAMBLR1: \ell, I would say it is ery simple and that this is ery obious. It is like public
relations. It is an ambassador`s unction that is important and inluential also in research. O
course, I hae tried to do this and I was happy enough to be supported to do this. And o
course, I was not the only one. Gideon 1oury did the same, but in a dierent style. Now, the
act that he belongs to a country that has been in ery diicult situations and that is een,
let`s say this, boycotted by quite a ew people, een in the scholarly actiities, was not ery
promotional or him.
Now, I was able to use lots o networks and I am grateul or the openness o my own
academic world een though I am ery oten ery seere with uniersities, including with my
own. I hae been able to trael and to work abroad and to do this in a ery liberal, I would
say, spirit. I happened to be lucky also in Comparatie Literature because the day I became
the secretary o Comparatie Literature
2
, that is how I got to Canada ,Ldmonton, Montreal,.
I was also inited een by the South Arican Research Council
28
- well, Mandela was coming,
it was clear. I was inoled in distance learning, I was inoled in so many Luropean Union
projects, and etc. So I hae been lucky. But, o course, you hae to do it. And sometimes you
hae to do it though it is a mad world when you are traelling all the time, this is not simple,
een or amily reasons, and so on. But I am also grateul to my amily, to my colleagues -
not to all o them ;tavgb.). In act, my uniersity has been a real uniersity and een I hae
been more in trouble when trying to establish 1ranslation Studies than when trying to do
international research. So 1ranslation Studies was an enemy among many colleagues at my
uniersity. Notwithstanding this I could do it - o course, you need some support... Also it
was ull o interesting people rom the same generation, new people, new students, young
people, etc. I would say the academic career, whateer we may say and think about it, is a
wonderul and ascinating world and it is worthwhile.
Now, I would be much more seere with our uniersities as ar as the treatment o translation
as an academic issue is concerned. And now I do not mean it in terms o bureaucratic things.
But I think the real issue o translation is not really a question o language, and certainly not
o literature - this schizophrenic iew on translation as belonging to Linguistics or Literary
Studies, this is so old ashioned. I am coninced that translation is really at the heart o the
matter or unierse-city`. 1he world o knowledge cannot work without the dynamics o
translation. And een up to now, in the scholarship about this subject, this has hardly been
written down! I uniersities, irst o all, do not deelop, in an energetic way, an international
communication language - and or me it may be Lnglish, it may be other languages - they
will not support the world o knowledge. So they will not be worthy o being the leaders o

27
Associate Secretary o the lederation Internationale des Langues and Litteratures Modernes
,http:,,www.illm.ulg.ac.be,,.
28
1he Council or Scientiic and Industrial Research ,CSIR, - http:,,www.csir.co.za,

213
the unierse-city`. 1hat`s one thing. But something else is needed in addition: i they go or
one language only, they kill research! Now, one international language or scholarship, yes, we
need it! \our country has to deelop and to promote the knowledge o Lnglish, certainly, but
also o Spanish. But you need more, and you cannot hae two or three languages without
translation. And i they treat translation they will do exactly what the Belgians hae done with
languages. And i you obsere a little bit international policy and politics, including in my
country, you will see what happens in countries where the question o languages and cultures
and translations is not really taken seriously, not een by intellectuals and by uniersities. So
this is really a matter o lie and death or scholarship.
@(. F,+) ",%"$)% 0#&5 ")+"#'1 "),--),'*- #% '"'*$7#' 1$'*- +- &, 4)#%B +C &5$ &,C#" ,6
2$3 7,7$%&-8 ,) &+)%#%B C,#%&-8 #% ,+) *#-"#C1#%$= (5$)$6,)$8 #% 3,+) ?#$0 05'& ')$
&5$ 7'#% &+)%#%B C,#%&- &5'& ,""+))$* #% ()'%-1'&#,% @&+*#$-A G'?$ &5$-$ &+)%#%B
C,#%&- ,""'-#,%$* #%*#-C+&'41$ &5$,)$&#"'1 '%* ",%"$C&+'1 "5'%B$- &5'& )$1$B'&$*
C)$?#,+- &5$,)#$- ,) 'CC),'"5$- &, '% ,+&*'&$* ,) #%6$)#,) -&'&+-A
LAMBLR1: \ell, this is, o course, a question like write another book ater Mary Snell-
lornby`s 1he 1urns o 1ranslation Studies`
29
. ;tavgb.) But I am joking. I appreciate the
question.
I will try to keep a distance between, say, my indiidual reply and possible replies on behal o
colleagues who would disagree with me or who would hae a ery dierent approach to these
kinds o questions. But, still, o course, I hae my responsibility and I take it ully. Now, o
course, this is like writing another book. So by deinition my reply is selectie. I do my best
or not being eclectic as or me that is something dierent. So I gie a selectie answer to
these questions, more by examples and on the basis o the selection o important key
moments. I do not ully improise here. I hae seen these questions. I hae been thinking a
little bit about them and I hae been writing about this. lor instance, one o the articles where
I discuss a little bit this kind o questions is the article that I hae written or Ceve.i.
0
- een
though it is a journal that is not that well known, I did my best and it is one the articles that I
still am ery happy to hae written recently. Now, o course, its title, Is 1ranslation Studies
too Literary`, is a little bit o an ironical question and I borrow it rom a colleague as it was
ormulated or the irst time not by me but by \es Gambier
31
, who at the moment o its
ormulation was the president o LS1. So because it was used in LS1 I would say it is an
institutional question. le was asking the question whether 1ranslation Studies was too
literary, on behal, say, o people ocusing on the question o translation and research on
translation, which means that this question was being institutionalized at that moment. \es
Gambier was the successor o Mary Snell-lornby as the president o LS1, which means,
again, that these questions are not simply, say, ery isolated questions, I think they are more
or less symptomatic.

29
Snell-lornby, Mary. 1be 1vrv. of 1rav.tatiov tvaie.: êr Paraaigv. or biftivg 1ieroivt.. Benjamins 1ranslation
Library Vol. 66. Amsterdam,Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2006. 205 pp. ISBN 90 22 164 6
30
Is 1ranslation Studies too Literary`, Gnesis. Reista cientiica do ISAI. 1raduao e Interpretaao, 2005, 5 :
20.
31
http:,,www.multimodality.it,site,index.phpoption~com_content&task~iew&id~44&Itemid~81
JOSL LAMBLR1

216

Now, why is the question o translated literature, or literary approaches to translation, why is
it something, like, key \hy is it a priileged entry \ell, I will try not to orget that question
when I am supposed to indicate a ew turning points in the discipline. I go back to lolmes.
James lolmes is supposed to be one o the real athers o the discipline, although he is not
the only one. I know quite a bit o the listoriography o this discipline and ery oten I ully
disagree with, say, the key moments in the discipline and its main turning points, as you call
them. 1hat is the case because ery oten historians, in general, start writing about history
long ater the object o study has died out. Maybe I am also biased because I did not start
writing about this, say, many years later, but I did so rom the beginning o the history o the
concept o 1ranslation Studies. Now, I do not claim to be, say, the representatie o the
discipline, but at least I hae seen key moments and I hae seen, or instance, the interaction
between lolmes, 1oury and other names, and also where their iews were not coinciding at
all, whether they were changing, whether there hae been conlicts, and so on.
As or the main turning points, I get back to the question o 1ranslation Studies being
literary, or too literary. 1he question by Gambier was asked at the beginning o the century, in
2001 I guess, in Copenhagen. I wrote my article in 2005. I selected it because the question o
approaches to translation rom the point o iew o literature or Literary Studies - those are
not the same things - concerned many people inoled with research on translation, as it
related to the traditional position o 1ranslation Studies at uniersities. Now, I can shorten
my story and make a point, so this is really a thesis. It is ery clear that until this ery day in
uniersities 1ranslation Studies tends to be located somewhere - sometimes in Lnglish
Literature, sometimes in Comparatie Literature, sometimes in Computer Linguistics, and etc.
But the dominant dilemma is still simply, and still nowadays, either Linguistics or Literary
Studies. I would say that when we started dealing with translation, or us this was indeed more
or less unaoidable. Nowadays, I would say this is a ully outdated dilemma and I think this
deseres to be treated as a turning point - I mean, the redeinition o the position o research
on translation in the uniersity on the basis o, say, already established disciplines, such as
Linguistics and others.
Now, to summarize - and you can really check this in almost all handbooks, all basic books
on translation -, almost eerywhere you will see that 1ranslation Studies is still either
approached - not only 1ranslation Studies, but translation in general - rom the point o iew
o people who are inoled in issues o language or people who are inoled in the question
o literature. But in general the people who deal with literature and who include translation as
part o their approach to literature are the people who opened Literary Studies to cultural
issues. So this is a little bit o a larger approach. But o course I do not want to reduce
Linguistics to more narrow-minded boundaries than it deseres to be done, as Linguistics is a
ery large ield. But it is either Linguistics or Literary Studies. Now, the dilemma and also the
question Is it too literary`, rom my point o iew, this looks like a rather local debate. So
or me, it is an outdated dilemma. And this outdated dilemma has a lot to do with the act
that, o course, 1ranslation Studies, or research on translation, which are also not necessarily
the same thing, has been deeloped and initiated by seeral groups - ater all, in the Middle

217
Ages and throughout history the people who were starting to think about translation were
ery oten translators and sometimes philosophers. In act, literary theory or the theory o
language was hardly inoled.
One o the striking phenomena until today is the act that handbooks in Linguistics hae
hardly a spot or the question o translation. But translation theory, which is not 1ranslation
Studies, deeloped to a large extent in Linguistics, and in a particular kind o Linguistics as it
was part o the new kind o Linguistics that was ery heaily theoretical and een a little bit
structuralist. In act, there were quite a ew translators who also wrote on translation whereas
people dealing with the literary phenomena, which were reading and using translations all the
time, hardly thought about translation. It is only at the end o the 1960s that this changed a
little bit because there were a ew people who started approaching translation, say, on a
literary background. Now, to what extent they integrated the knowledge that had been
collected and gathered and deeloped in the area o Linguistics, this input was rather limited.
Among the irst books - and these were already mini-turning points - there were two or three
or our German books with a more literary background that integrated a little bit better the
linguistic deelopments. lor me, the real key book was the book by the Czech Jii Le
3233

because he knew the bibliography in seeral languages and rom seeral countries - just look
at his bibliography, not only the bibliography rom Linguistics but een Sociology - and he
knew the eastern Luropean deelopments, rom Roman Jakobson
34
to Juri Lotman
35
, and so
many other areas, up to the contemporary Czech structuralists, and so on. 1his was a turning
point because, or the irst time, someone was speaking about dierent disciplines. So there
was a struggle between disciplines.
Now, Mary Snell-lornby, 20 years later, published her ery successul book "1ranslation
Studies: An Integrated Approach"
36
. \hy is it a turning point Because this book is one o the
best-sellers in 1ranslation Studies. It was extremely inluential! It was one o the irst times
that reerences to the tradition o 1ranslation Studies and translation theory were
systematically selected not only rom Linguistics but also rom the more literary background.
And there was one common name used: 1ranslation Studies. And here the use o the label
deeloped by lolmes was extremely inluential. Now, is 1ranslation Studies too literary
1here were seeral groups that according to Snell-lornby were representaties o the new
approach to translation. One among them was the so called Manipulation School`. 1his is
the name that a ew people hae used - they hae not used it beore the mid 1980s - and
Manipulation School` was een used in a book published in 1985 by 1heo lermans
338
-
although lermans used the word manipulation` in the title o his book he told me one day
that it was a little bit o a kind o a joke. \e neer used it. In the 190s, and een in the

32
http:,,en.wikipedia.org,wiki,JiC599C3AD_LeC3BD
33
Le, Jiii ,1969,. Die Literarische bersetzung: 1heorie einer Kunstgattung`'. Athenum, lrankurt.
34
http:,,en.wikipedia.org,wiki,Roman_Jakobson
33
http:,,www.ut.ee,SOSL,lotman_eng.html
36
http:,,www.benjamins.com,cgi-bin,t_bookiew.cgibookid~Z2038
37
http:,,www.ucl.ac.uk,~ucldthe,index.htm
38
lermans, 1heo ,org,. 1be Mavivtatiov of iteratvre: tvaie. iv iterar, 1rav.tatiov. London and Sydney : Croom
lelm, 1985.
JOSL LAMBLR1

218

1980s, when discussing 1oury and other people, we neer used the word manipulation`. So
this is a label that has sold well. Now, I do not hae too many problems with this concept.
But Mary Snell-lornby talks about the Manipulation School` and since this book has been
inluential many people do so on the basis o what Mary Snell-lornby has written. So this is
really a turning point in the ormulation o the goals o a new discipline. And the irst
ormulation was, say, somewhere to be located in Gottingen, in Germany, in the Gottingen
group, which is and was also a literary group, and Snell-lornby does not talk too much about
that. Now, in that book, the manipulation` is supposed to be a literary approach to
translation.
\ou asked in one o your preious questions about congresses, papers, and so on, that hae
been decisie. I remember ery well the question I hae asked during the lirst James S.
lolmes Symposium on 1ranslation Studies", in Amsterdam, in 1990 ,the proceedings were
published in 1991
39
,. 1he keynote speakers, i I remember well, were irst Mary Snell-lornby
and then Lambert. And ater Mary Snell-lornby`s paper I hae asked her or an answer to
one o the ery particular paragraphs about the Manipulation School` in her book entitled
1ranslation Studies: An Integrated Approach`
40
. She said that according to 1heo lermans
one o the basic principles o what he called Manipulation School` in his book was that,
agreed on the ollowing rule, translation phenomenon cannot be accounted or on the basis
o Linguistics only. My question to her in 1990 or 1991 was: 1ell me, Mrs. Snell-lornby,
would you be coninced that the approach to translation can be based on linguistic
approaches only` And her answer was No!` So I consider this as a turning point. 1here are
so many other ones. 1here are seeral moments o that kind. 1hey may not hae been
recognized in public. Mary Snell-lornby in the publication o her paper in Amsterdam has
neer reerred to that question, but eeryone has noticed her answer. So there is a distance
between publications, congresses, and so on. But the dynamics o the discipline is indebted to
this.
Now, there are other turning points. So let`s leae that kind o sot talk. One o the turning
points in the discipline is certainly, irst o all, the recognition o the dialogue on behal o not
only Linguistics but the new deinition o translation training in relation with research, in
particular, or instance, the deelopment o Skopos theory
41
. Skopos theory comes with a
background in translation training. 1heir attempt to link translation training with translation
research, and een the attempt to integrate translation history and listoriography, I consider
this as a ery important decisie moment.

39
Kitty M. Van Leuen-Zwart and 1on Naaijkens. 1rav.tatiov tvaie.: 1be .tate of tbe .rt. Proceeaivg. of tbe ir.t
]ave. otve. ,vo.ivv ov 1rav.tatiov tvaie.. Amsterdam - Atlanta, Ropodi, Approaches to 1ranslation
Studies` 9, 1991, 208 p.
40
Snell-lornby, Mary ,1988,1995,. 1rav.tatiov tvaie.: .v vtegratea .roacb. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
41
1wo relant reerences: Schner, Christina. Skopos theory.` In Baker, Mona, ed. Routledge Lncyclopedia
o 1ranslation Studies. London: Routledge, 2001. 235-38. & Vermeer, lans J. A Skopos 1heory o 1ranslation:
Some Arguments lor and Against. leidelberg: 1extcontext, 1996.

219
Another ery important and real decisie moment, or instance, is the shit into Corpus
Linguistics
42
, say, since the people around Mona Baker
43
and so many more. \hy is this
important \e had Mona Baker as a CL1RA proessor and CL1RA obiously is heaily
indebted to D1S because it was on the basis o their ideas that we were coninced that you
cannot deal with translation without locating your insights on research, and this research, by
deinition, is linked with culture, and there is no undamental conlict between culture rom
the past and culture in our contemporary point o iew. Now, what has happened \hen
Corpus Linguistics has been integrated into research on translation what happened was in act
that the idea o research became linked with the idea o translation theory and theories once
and or all as an unaoidable principle. 1his is not made that explicit. 1his is more explicit in
the case o 1oury and D1S, but the other approaches do not contradict this principle, so they
take it or granted. Now, in act, Corpus Linguistics, as I see it, and in its deelopment, is a
ery important conirmation o the integration o translation research and translation history
into the entire discipline. Now, there is something else. It also shows that people who
represent these other approaches rom, say, preious years, cannot ignore rom now on the
contribution o Corpus Linguistics as one o the arguments or a systematic approach to
translation. 1hese are absolute key moments.
I see another key moment, but this is less clear - and I would een say that our discipline is to
be blamed or its late awareness o this problem. In my article in the de Gruyter
Lncyclopedia
44
where I hae treated the question o translation and globalization I hae
indicated that the idea o translation and globalization has been accepted, say, with great
diiculties, mainly ater 2000, hardly beore. Now, there is one exception - I know the
articles, I know almost the bibliography by heart. Anthony Pym
45
, Andr Leeere, mysel, we
had written a lot on the phenomenon o internationalization - the word globalization` was
not used, but the description and the analysis o these phenomena since the end o the 1980s
and during the 1990s is ery systematic. Now, in the bibliography o many people who now
deal with globalization I see that these people really are not aware o that bibliography - I
would say een scholars in 1ranslation Studies sometimes hae problems with inormation,
maybe een with amnesia. So why is it so important Because suddenly it becomes clear that
the question o translation cannot be approached only in binary terms, say, on the basis o the
dilemma source-target. It is clear that in many cultural enironments there are multilateral
distributions and kinds o dissemination. Now, many people tend to beliee and to assume
that this is a phenomenon o the end o the 20
th
or the beginning o the 21
st
century. 1his is
absolutely wrong! Otherwise, how can you deal with the history o translation ,with the Bible,
religious phenomena, legislation, So it means that the deelopments and the dynamics o
research on translation, little by little, rediscoer the past on the basis o new trends in our

42
http:,,en.wikipedia.org,wiki,Corpus_linguistics & http:,,www.corpus-linguistics.de,
43
http:,,www.monabaker.com,
44
Jos Lambert: 1ranslation and Globalization. Armin lrank, Norbert Greiner, 1heo lermans, larald Kittel,
\erner Koller, Jos Lambert, lritz Paul, lrsg. bersetzung - 1ranslation - 1raduction. Lin Internationales
landbuch zur bersetzungsorschung. An International Lncyclopedia o 1ranslation Studies. Lncyclopdie
internationale de la recherche sur la traduction. Berlin & New \ork: de Gruyter,landbcher zur Sprach- und
Kommunikationswissenschat,, Bd. II, 200: 1680-100.
43
http:,,www.tinet.cat,~apym,
JOSL LAMBLR1

220

contemporary iew on translation. But I would say: is this a problem I think that most
disciplines work and deelop in such a way.
@(. <- 6,) &5#- )$*#-",?$)3 ,6 &5$ C'-& &5'& 3,+ 7$%&#,% #& #- ,+) C$)"$C&#,% &5'& &5$
-+46#$1* ,6 &)'%-1'&#,% 5#-&,)3 -$$7- &, 5'?$ B'#%$* '% +C0')* 7,7$%&+7 #% )$"$%&
3$')-= D$?$1,C7$%&- -+"5 '- &5$ Re e rt oi re vovai at ae . bi . t ori ev. ae t a t raavc t i ov
LM
8
+%*$) &5$ *#)$"&#,% ,6 N$'% D$1#-1$
LO
8 P$,)B$ Q= R'-&#%S-
LT
i . t ori a ae t a 1raavc c i v e v
.ve ri c a at i va
LU
8 '%* &5$ V%&$)%'&#,%'1 /,)2-5,C ,% I;$&5#%2#%B W$&5,*- #%
()'%-1'&#,% G#-&,)3J8 05#"5 &,,2 C1'"$ '& X2'% Y%#?$)-#&38 (+)2$38 4$&0$$% Z[ \ZO
@$C&$74$) Z]]U
[]
8 -$)?$ '- $?#*$%"$ &, &5'&= V% &5'& /,)2-5,CS- ^_),B)'77$
9,%"$C&S
[`
8 6,) #%-&'%"$8 7'%3 a+$-&#,%- 0$)$ C),C,-$* #% ,)*$) &, *#)$"& &5$ *$4'&$-=
X%$ ,6 &5,-$ a+$-&#,%- "'11$* ,+) '&&$%&#,% '%* 0$ 0,+1* 1#2$ &, 5'?$ 3,+) ,C#%#,% ,%
#&= (5$ a+$-&#,% #-. IV% 05'& 0'3- "'% &)'%-1'&#,% 5#-&,)3 4$ #%-&)+7$%&'1 #% 6+)&5$)#%B
+%*$)-&'%*#%B ,6 5,0 "+1&+)$- #%&$))$1'&$ 0#&5 ,&5$) "+1&+)$- ,) 0#&5 &5$#) "+1&+)'1
,&5$)-AJ
LAMBLR1: I agree that translation history has gained an upward momentum in recent years.
But I would een say that James lolmes already insisted ery much on listoriography and its
position in the discipline, including also 1oury, and so on.
I ocus on your question. I was in that conerence, it was a good conerence, well organized,
with good people. I would een say I was a little bit disappointed at the end by the reduction
o their goals. So I think, indeed, that there you hae a group that might be able to deelop a
real better methodology o 1ranslation listoriography. My paper was not on translation
history but on translation listoriography, and I think they ery oten simpliy that.
\our question: can translation history be instrumental My answer is, ery simply, yes! And I
am een working a lot in that area. I am trying to deelop seeral articles on the whole
question o uniersities and their responsibilities in any discipline rom the point o iew o
the history o their own discipline. Say, Mathematics, Medicine, Lngineering, i they are not
worried about the diachronics in their own discipline, they may notice, one day or another,
what the consequences o amnesia may be - or any society, including scholarly societies.
So the unction o listory and listoriography has always been to unction as a scholarly-
based model or a better hypothetical approach to the uture. 1his implies that the uture is,
by deinition, dierent rom the past. So then you might say, in simple terms, one is not
linked with the other. But rom the moment you say een that it is not linked, you hae to
examine what your basis or comparison is. Now, I was a comparatist in the good old days -

46
http:,,aix1.uottawa.ca,~jdelisle,it_index.htm
47
http:,,aix1.uottawa.ca,~jdelisle,
48
http:,,www.mapageweb.umontreal.ca,basting,
49
http:,,www.histal.umontreal.ca,espanol,ersionsp.htm
30
http:,,www.thw.okan.edu.tr,index.htm
31
http:,,www.thw.okan.edu.tr,index_dosyalar,page0001.htm

221
without comparison we are not ery wise. So historical analysis o any tradition may be a
better way into the uture i people at least know what the rules o the game are. 1hat is why
you need concepts!
Now, to what extent can translation and translation history play a role I try to simpliy, but I
make it short - so v.eigver cè.t .ivtifier. Mathematics, Philosophy, Medicine, Sociology, any
discipline - and we use these disciplines in our uniersities -, they hae been deeloped
somewhere at a gien moment, they hae a past and they hae an intercultural past. 1here is
no discipline that has not been obliged to reormulate in a gien language things that hae
been ormulated in dierent languages. So the ery basis o any scholarly work is conditioned
by interlinguistic phenomena and translation can neer be oided as part o it. So I would say,
at least in theoretical-conceptual terms, translation is one o the key problems o uniersity -
but uniersities hae neer accepted this. So unierse-cities` are more cities` than
unierse`! 1hey are local manipulations o would-be uniersal knowledge. And dealing with
that issue should be one o the unctions o translation and 1ranslation Studies in uniersities.
@(. D,$- &5$ 5#-&,)3 ,6 &)'%-1'&#,% &5$,)3 5'?$ ' ),1$ #% &5$ C),*+"&#,% ,6 &)'%-1'&#,%
&5$,)3A X) ')$ &5$ *#-",+)-$- ,% &)'%-1'&#,% 6),7 &5$ C'-& 7$)$ "+)#,-#&#$-8 ,)
'%&#a+$-8 &5'& *$'1& 0#&5 ",%"$C&#,%- ,6 &)'%-1'&#,% '%* 1'%B+'B$ &5'& 5'?$ 1#&&1$ &, *,
0#&5 &5$ ",%"$C&#,%- '%* 'CC),'"5$- "+))$%&13 $-&'41#-5$*A G'?$ &5,-$ *#-",+)-$-
1,-& 7+"5 ,6 &5$#) 4$')#%B ,% 05'& "'% 4$ -'#* '4,+& &)'%-1'&#,%A
LAMBLR1: I think I hae answered the irst question implicitly - o course, or wise people -
and my reply is yes!
As or the second question, I like you ormulation here: mere curiosities, or antiques`. I
would say, in act, one cannot aoid thinking o, say, picturesque listoriography, but I know
other kinds o listoriography - so this is a particular way o dealing with history. So your
ormulation is a little bit - and I don`t blame you - a kind o a parody o real listoriography.
I mean, this is no real listoriography. 1hat is why in the conerence in 1urkey I said: I do
not see why you talk about translation history and not about listoriography. \hen you deal
with listoriography you make explicit in conceptual terms what your goals are and the rules`.
\ou hae already noticed that I am not someone who tries to exclude too many things. So I
hae nothing against een bad listoriography. 1hat is what you describe here. I call it bad
listoriography, but between brackets. It can be interesting and I know people who are ery
wise people and who know a lot in this area - and, ater all, ery oten we need them. \e
should not try to exclude people, we should try to promote people who hae explicit goals
that go or, say, priorities in our area. So excluding particular approaches to history,
listoriography, translation history. \ell, I don`t know how well you know Don uixote
and his battles against mills. \hy would we worry about that \hat we need is to know or
what kind o priorities we want to work and what kind o priorities in uniersities hae not
been recognized. So, or instance, the history o disciplines, and, say, the listoriography o
these disciplines, the history o sciences - I hae some contacts with some ery interesting
people there -, I think this is being underestimated because uniersities are not
JOSL LAMBLR1

222

interdisciplinary enough. Now, translation without interdisciplinarity, I am araid that this
does not make sense in uniersities. So only interdisciplinary approaches desere to be really
linked with 1ranslation Studies.
\ell, or me 1ranslation Studies changed rather basically - and that`s one o its turning points
again - the ery day when PhD titles and diplomas or 1ranslation Studies were accepted.
1his is ery important because it gies another position to listoriography, to
interdisciplinarity, to Sociology, to Political Sciences, to the history o religions, and so on.
Now, I hae nothing against people who are into, say, a literary approach to translation or a
linguistic one because they need to know well their ield. But they hae no arguments or
saying that they represent, simply, 1ranslation Studies. So that the idea o the Linguistic 1urn
in 1ranslation Studies, and so on, or me this is ully outdated. I hae nothing against this
attempt but it cannot be the goal o 1ranslation Studies as a discipline.
@(. V% &5#- #--+$ ,6 c i e vt i a 1raavc t i ovi . 8 <1#"$ Q$'1
[Z
8 ' 6,)7$) ",11$'B+$ ,6 ,+)- '&
Yb@9S- _,-&B)'*+'&$ ()'%-1'&#,% @&+*#$- C),B)'77$ c_d-eP)'*+'fg, $7 :-&+*,- *'
()'*+fg, \ _P:(h
[i
8 '%* 05, %,0 5,1*- ' &$'"5#%B C,-#&#,% '& &5$ Y%#?$)-#&3 ,6
j#$%%'8 5'- 0)#&&$% '% ')&#"1$ '4,+& 5$) $>C$)#$%"$ #% 9:(;<S- @+77$) @"5,,1 &5'&
&,,2 C1'"$ 4$&0$$% &5$ Ò
&5
'%* &5$ ZT
&5
,6 <+B+-&8 Z]]U
[L
= Q$'1H- '"",+%& 4)#%B- &,
1#B5& -,7$ ")#&#"#-7- &5'& W')&5' 95$+%B
[[
8 &5$ Z]]U 9:(;< _),6$--,)8 )$"$#?$* 6),7
5$) C$$)- '- I-5$ $7C5'-#-$* &5$ #7C,)&'%"$ ,6 ^&5$ 1,"'1S #% &5$ 95#%$-$ &)'*#&#,% '-
' 7$'%- &, 6#%* ^&5$ ,&5$)SJ= @5$ ",%&#%+$-. IV%*$$*8 &5#- a+$-&#,% ,6 05$&5$)
()'%-1'&#,% @&+*#$- -5,+1* 4$ 7,)$ 1,"'1 '- ,CC,-$* &, 7,)$ B1,4'1 "'7$ +C
&5),+B5,+& &5$ @+77$) @"5,,1 '%* &5$ #%&$)%'&#,%'1 ",%6$)$%"$ cI(5$ k%,0%
Y%2%,0%- ,6 ()'%-1'&#,% @&+*#$-J
[M
h &5'& 6,11,0$*8 0#&5 <%*)$0 95$-&$)7'% )'%2#%B
#& '7,%B-& &5$ 7,-& -#B%#6#"'%& ",%&$7C,)')3 a+$-&#,%- &5'& &)'%-1'&#,% -"5,1')-
-5,+1* &)3 &, '%-0$)=J /5'& #- 3,+) ?#$0 ,% &5#-A V%"#*$%&'1138 0,+1* #& 4$ ",))$"& &,
-'3 &5'& &5$)$ #- ' :+),C$'% '%* K,)&5e<7$)#"'% 5$B$7,%3 #% ,+) *#-"#C1#%$A @5,+1*
0$ '-C#)$ 6,) 7,)$ *#?$)-#&3A
LAMBLR1: I start by the last part o your question because it is the most simple one and then I
get to the beginning. As or the question i it would it be correct to say that there is a
Luropean and North-American hegemony in our discipline I would say that I know this
position and I hae een read it on the Internet. lor me this question is symbolic. It indicates
that the language o the Internet that is used or the interaction, and the obseration o the
interaction, between Lurope and other countries is being used as a key to the question o
1ranslation Studies, which, ater all, in my mind, as ar as I know the history o this new

32
http:,,ztwweb.trans.uniie.ac.at,moodle,user,iew.phpid~168&course~1
33
http:,,www.pget.usc.br,
34
http:,,CL1RA.mikt.net,orum,read.php4,104
33
http:,,www.kuleuen.be,cetra,people,Martha_Cheung.html
!"
1his eent took place at the K.U.Leuen between the 28
th
and 29
th
o August o 2009, and was organized as
an international conerence in honour o the twentieth anniersary o CL1RA and 1arget ,1989-2009,. lor more
inormation on the eent, please check http:,,www.kuleuen.be,CL1RA,anniersary,index.html.

223
discipline, I simply ind it ridiculous! It is simply ridiculous because it means that the channels
or communication - which is another matter than the question o research - and the political
power, and een the economic power, are used as a solution o scholarly questions. But ok,
that is or later. \et I am upset by this impression. I do not see this as the question o this or
that person, but I know it. I remember a similar discussion rom Comparatie Literature - so
I come rom Literary Studies, I learned something there - and there it was used in particular
to distinguish between Chinese Comparatie Literature and western Comparatie Literature.
1he American comparatists, years ago, distinguished between the Americans and the western
Luropeans. 1his is all, I would say, political and een partly nationalistic - I call it nationalistic
in order not to use a more heay word. 1his is simply a nonsensical simpliication o research
issues.
Now I come to the beginning o the question. O course, Alice Leal belongs to the 2009
generation o CL1RA. 1here were 20 generations more beore her and in those generations
the question that Martha Cheung asks was not inexistant but it was not ery important. It was
a ery central question in all the lectures by Martha Cheung. Now, I hae een taken part in
the discussion - not ery undamentally - and I een intend to write to Martha Cheung
because I know what she is puzzled about and this is indeed one o her key questions. 1his is
a ery typical question or scholars coming rom China and she is ormulating these questions
well and they are interesting. And it is clear, indeed, that the western world is too much
unaware o all the arious traditions in other parts o the world.
Now, as or the importance o the local and the question o the other`, I would not call it
the other`. I do not know o any research discipline at uniersities where, I would say, the
challenge o the concept o unierse-city` is not central. All uniersities are in trouble with
regard to haing inormation about what is going on elsewhere. I would say that it is
symbolic, probably, that people coming rom China and in a discipline like 1ranslation
Studies - notwithstanding the ery rich tradition o discussions about translation in Chinese
and Ancient Studies ,and I am a little bit inoled with it since the 1990s, so since the
beginning o CL1RA, - hae that impression, so this is all ery important and ery
symptomatic. loweer, it does not mean that this is, I would say, the key problem o
1ranslation Studies, it is one o the many key problems, as in all disciplines.
My main answer is that indeed the question, or the challenge, o uniersity is ery much in
parallel with what is now called globalization. But globalization is, in act, a ery economic
reductionist iew on the question o uniersity. My basic discussions o these issues are made
clear in the Vol.2 o the de Gruyter encyclopedia, the German encyclopedia, a remarkable
encyclopedia, under the item globalization`
5
. Is globalization an issue or 1ranslation
Studies O course it is. lence, I understand ery well Martha Cheung`s problems, especially
since she is coming rom a culture that was not really directly inoled in the deelopment o
1ranslation Studies.

37
C. ootnote 46.
JOSL LAMBLR1

224

Now, what I am sure is that Alice Leal is not reerring, or instance, to the moements that
hae taken place since the 1990s. In 1991, I organized, together with 1heo lermans and
other people, in 1okyo, a ery successul seminar in Comparatie Literature on translation
58
.
1his has been published, with lots o questions. But since then so much has been achieed in
this area, with contributions rom Southeast Asia and India. I mean, so much has been done
in the international channels, mainly in the Anglophone channels. So I would een say that
part o the questions asked by Martha Cheung is still partly conditioned een by, I would say,
colonial models. But this is a long story, although it is an interesting issue. 1he people who
work with us in 1ranslation Studies, well, you, o course, hae neighbours and neighbours
ery oten happen to lie next door and the internet does not sole all the problems.
So it is an important issue, I would not simpliy it and I would recommend using that article
on globalization where I indicate that, ater all, many, many among our colleagues had hardly
discoered that concept beore the beginning o the 21
st
century. And in that article I also
indicate that beore we started CL1RA, we already talked about internationalization. But
many people in 1ranslation Studies coming rom translation training institutes did not read
us! \hy Because they were coninced that we were literary people. But we didn`t talk about
literature: we talked about internationalization and not literature. I organized a session in the
lilm Congress in Braslia
59
- oh, heaen, in Braslia! - in 1993 or 1994 on the subject o
translation and the global illage. Nowhere in all the discussions on globalization rom recent
years has this been mentioned at all! And in the irst issue o 1arget I published an article on
translation and the internationalization o communication. Among, say, the prominent
translation scholars who reer to this article I see only Anthony Pym. Now, I guess that my
colleagues know the reiew o the journal 1arget. So they hae discoered globalization and
internationalization at the beginning o the 21
st
century. 1his was not the case, I would say,
or us, neither at the origins o 1arget, nor at the origins o CL1RA.
@(. ;$B')*#%B &5$,)$&#"'1 5$B$7,%38 Q$'1 C,#%&- ,+& &5'& D(@ -$$7$* &, 4$ &5$
*,7#%'%& &5$,)$&#"'1 6)'7$0,)2 #% *#-C1'3 '& 9:(;<S- @+77$) @"5,,1= V%
,CC,-#&#,% &, &5'&8 -5$ 5'- "'11$* +C G'%- j$)7$$)S- 0,)2 '- '% $>'7C1$ ,6 '
",%&)#4+&#,% &5'& -5,+1* 4$ 7$%&#,%$* #% &5$ -'7$ 4)$'&5 '- (,+)3S-= @5$ 5'- '1-,
'**$* &5'& 95)#-&#'%$ K,)*
M]
0'- ")#&#"#-$* I6,) &5$ 6'"& &5'& &5$ P$)7'% 6+%"&#,%'1
'CC),'"5 #- '11$B$*13 -,1$13 C)$-")#C&#?$ '%* 5'- %,& )'#-$* '%3 53C,&5$-$-J8 '%* -5$
'**$* -5$ 4$1#$?$- &5'& &5'& #- 4,&5 I#))$1$?'%& '%* +%6'#)J= @5$ &5$% )$?$'1- W')3
@%$11eG,)%43S- &5,+B5& ,% &5$ 7'&&$)8 %'7$13 &5'& &5$ *,7#%'%"$ 43 D(@8 '%* &5$
1'"2 ,6 #%&$)$-& #% &5$ P$)7'% 6+%"&#,%'1 'CC),'"58 6,) #%-&'%"$8 5'- ' 1,& &, *, 0#&5
&5$ 1'%B+'B$- #% 05#"5 &5$3 0$)$ 0)#&&$%8 %'7$13 :%B1#-5 '%* P$)7'% )$-C$"&#?$13=
G,0 *, 3,+ -$$ &5#- 05,1$ #--+$A

38
1he eent was the IIIth Congress o the ICLA ,International Comparatie Literature Association,. 1okyo,
23-28 August 1991.
39
http:,,www.estbrasilia.com.br,
60
http:,,www.christiane-nord.de,

223
LAMBLR1: In this case, gien that there are ery precise dierent questions, I will try to
answer them bit by bit. 1he questions are interesting and, to tell the truth, I would say I hae
a lot to say about them.
I would say I disagree! But the eeling and the impression is interesting. And I hae an easy
point o reerence or answering these questions. I would say that lots o things about these
questions I would answer them also in relation to Mary Snell-lornby`s book 1he 1urns o
1ranslation Studies`
61
. Now, let me try to be more clear.
O course, the questions are interesting. 1hey are a little bit linked with old traditional
discussions about what your approach is, what kind o school you are, etc. So CL1RA`s
summer school is a summer school and it is certainly inluenced, in particular, by the concepts
in D1S, no doubt about this. But I would disagree undamentally with this eeling that there
is an explicit willingness to reduce, say, research on translation to that approach. Not at all!
And it is ery simple. As a critical example - it may still be biased or limited - I reer to all the
seminars that Dirk Delabastita has gien, year ater year, or 20 years, on the arious
approaches to translation. So his panoramic iew on the arious methodological models and
so on is an illustration o the act that this impression gien here by Alice Leal is really
narrow. But there is more.
I understand a little bit this eeling. lor instance, mysel, I hae no problem recognizing this: I
am a strong adocate, still, o lots o the key tendencies o D1S, which does not mean at all
that I would oerlook contributions proided, or instance, by lans Vermeer
62
,well, o
course, they will in general be indicated as Skopos theory, but that is a little bit reductionistic
and I would aoid that,, and so on. But, irst o all, I would say that both 1arget and CL1RA,
which are not the same things, hae clearly indicated that, say, lans Vermeer, Christiane
Nord, the German unctional approach, or whateer you call it, or Skopos theory, are ery
welcome in our worldiew on translation. lans Vermeer was the second CL1RA Proessor
and Christiane Nord was one o the others. As or Mary Snell-lornby, I would not treat her
as someone who really belongs to the same group, but she is ery much in sympathy with it.
In her book it is so clear that all the time she tries to show that the German orientation, or
what she calls the German unctional approach, has also done this and that and that. And
een one o the sensitie points is that, all the time, she tries to show that the German
unctional approach has also some ery basic insights in the area o the study o translated
literature, which means that there is something like a polemical relationship here. I do not
think at all that this polemical relationship is supported, irst o all, neither by 1arget nor by
CL1RA. And I am ery bad at ease with this quote: She has also added that Christiane Nord
was criticised or the act that the German unctional approach is allegedly solely prescriptie
and has not raised any hypotheses``. I would like to know who among the sta members
rom CL1RA would eer hae produced such a quotation! I would say that I am bad at ease
with this idea because raising any hypotheses` or being solely prescriptie` are not releant

61
Snell-lornby, Mary ,2006, 1be 1vrv. of 1rav.tatiov tvaie., Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins &
http:,,www.benjamins.com,cgi-bin,t_bookiew.cgibookid~B1L2066
62
http:,,www.ask.uni-mainz.de,Dateien,kelletat-10-02-20-abschied_hj.pd
JOSL LAMBLR1

226

concerns neither or lans Vermeer nor or Christiane Nord nor or the other representaties
o what Mary Snell-lornby calls the German unctional approach. So this is absolutely not
air play. Now, maybe there was a misunderstanding or whateer.
O course, there are dierent approaches to the question o translation. And what Alice Leal
says is correct at least in one point. I do not see why in the deelopment o 1ranslation
Studies and the establishment o a scholarly basis or translation, why Vermeer and the
German colleagues should be put aside - there are many other ones such as lrank G.
Konigs
63
, Paul Kussmaul
64
, lans G. lonig
65
, and een the younger generation, certainly the
Vienna generation, lranz Pochhacker, Klaus Kaindl
66
, een rom other centers. \hat is called
here the German unctional school, well, maybe they happen to make use o German, but I
am ery bad at ease when in international scholarship they try to link schools with nations and
languages. And I am araid that this is the origin o this misunderstanding. Now, what
German group should we reer to here 1here are other Germans than these ones - Vermeer
himsel uses the concept o Skopos theory, no worry about that.
I was the chairman o a debate o a roundtable discussion o ery high leel in the second
year o CL1RA with 1oury and Vermeer. Now, what turned out to be ery clear, indeed, was
that their initial and inal goals in relation to translation were not really coinciding. \hat
1oury wanted to do rom the ery beginning was to establish a research discipline. Vermeer
was not excluding this but he was working in institutes where they were training translators,
whereas we were working in departments o Literary Studies. Now, Christiane Nord, Mary
Snell-lornby, they all come rom institutes where the training o translators was more central
than research about translation. And the issue is not about interdisciplinarity, because these
people are good in interdisciplinarity requirements. But they are more ocusing on the
perspectie o the translator. Now, i one thing is clear een in 1he 1urns o 1ranslation
Studies` by Snell-lornby is that their ocus and the irst goal is not really to establish an
academic discipline dealing with research on translation and methodology. 1his is one o the
reasons, or instance, why in her book, as one o the achieements o 1ranslation Studies,
there is no explicit mention o the new networking and cooperation, or instance, in PhD
leels, the deelopment o academic programs and PhDs in uniersities in so many countries,
and so on. It is ery clear that there is complementarity and that there is no radical opposition
here. And I am a little bit upset when this has turned up into a polemical distinction and
misunderstanding. So that instead o working on translation so many o my excellent
colleagues try to show that Mr. So and So is better than Mrs. So and So, or ice ersa, as i
this were the real issue. And sometimes this has to do with academic success, and so orth.
Ater all, we are all human beings. 1his is my real explicit position on this question.

63
http:,,www.sta.uni-marburg.de,~koenigs,
64
http:,,www.Luropeansocialsurey.org,index.phpoption~com_content&task~iew&id~40&Itemid~21
63
http:,,www.uebersetzerportal.de,nachrichten,n-archi,2004,2004-0,2004-0-09.htm
66
http:,,transienna.uniie.ac.at,orschung,orschungspersonal,habilitierte-orscherinnen,kaindl-c,

227
@(. Q$'1 7$%&#,%- &5'& :+),C$'% -"5,1')- '"2%,01$*B$ &5$ $>#-&$%"$ ,6 ' C,-&e
-&)+"&+)'1#-& c*$",%-&)+"&#,%#-&h &5,+B5& #% ()'%-1'&#,% @&+*#$- \ '*?,"'&$* 43 -+"5
6#B+)$- '- G'),1*, *$ 9'7C,-
MO
'%* ;,-$7')3 <)),E,
MT
\ 4+& &5'& &5$3 *,%H& 6$$1 &5'&
7+"5 #%61+$%"$* 43 #& \ -5$ $?$% C,#%&- ,+& &5'& &5$ 1'&&$)S- ",%&)#4+&#,%- #- %,&
'10'3- a+#&$ 0$11 +%*$)-&,,* 43 -+"5 -"5,1')- '& &5$#) ,0% '*7#--#,%= @5$ '**- &5'&
I*+)#%B &5$ ",%6$)$%"$ &5'& 6,11,0$* &5$ @+77$) @"5,,18 <%&5,%3 _37 -C,2$ '4,+&
&5#- #--+$ c#=$= &5$ 1'"2 ,6 #%&$)$-& #% D$",%-&)+"&#,% #% :+),C$h '- ' ^5#-&,)#"'1
",%61#"&S '%* '- ' ^7'#% C),41$7S 0#&5 05#"5 ^0$S 0#11 5'?$ &, *$'1 '& -,7$ C,#%&J=
/5'& #- 3,+) &'2$ ,% #&A V- _37 )#B5&A
LAMBLR1: \ell, I happen to hae rather explicit positions about this too. As or Pym being
right, I would say yes and no. \hat Pym said, I don`t remember ery well. I always listen to
Pym with great attention, and I know his style ery well and it is always interesting to listen to
him. But he is not saying exactly the same thing as Alice Leal is saying.
Deconstructionist iews are not a monopoly o laroldo de Campos and Rosemary Arrojo -
this looks ery Brazilian, by the way. I een hae indirect iews on, say, the reductionist iew
on research on translation in Brazil as it is displayed in a panoramic and explicit way not only
by Alice Leal here but also in Mary Snell-lornby`s book. One o the things I did at the
conerence in Ouro Preto
69
, and there were some representaties o the deconstructionist
iew in that conerence, I said that notwithstanding the tendency to summarize research on
translation in Brazil as being a little bit linked with laroldo de Campos` model or with
Deconstructionism - in a conerence with quite a ew people, a large number o people, one
that looked more or less like a normal conerence on 1ranslation Studies that could take place
in Canada or in \estern Lurope -, although this deconstructionist iew has been prominent
at a gien moment, a little bit ashionable, at the present moment it does not really hae such
an impact on the actual research going on. Now, when saying so I do not mean at all that this
deconstructionist iew is not important. I would also add that I know o research done on
that basis in lrance and elsewhere - well, there is Derrida and the whole tradition, so you
hae it eerywhere. And o course, Alice Leal here doesn`t say it is Brazilian, but many people
hae said so, that it is linked with Brazil. \ell, I am not that sure about that. I hae read a
PhD thesis in my country - well, more than one - on the basis o the Derrida research.
Is the Deconstructionist iew important in matters o translation I am sure that it is an
interesting approach. But I remember one o my discussions with Rosemary Arrojo - I know
her rather well and I was well in touch with her. Ater one o her conerences I made a ery
general remark and asked i, ater all, her iews that she links with Deconstructionism are that
dierent rom basic questions in research and she was ery bad at ease.
Now, when Pym says that there is a historical conlict, maybe there is, and that there are
contributions coming rom that area, maybe there are. I am sure there is an important

67
http:,,en.wikipedia.org,wiki,laroldo_de_Campos & http:,,www.schulers.com,donaldo,epico.htm
68
http:,,www2.binghamton.edu,comparatie-literature,aculty,arrojo-r.html
69
10th Brazilian 1ranslation lorum , 4th International 1ranslation lorum: Along the Paths o 1ranslation.
September -10, 2009 - Ouro Preto, Brazil.
JOSL LAMBLR1

228

contribution to be discoered there. But I know o other kinds o approaches about which
Anthony Pym has said the same. It is one o his critical roles in the discipline and he is plays it
ery well. So why not
I don`t try to summarize but I link this again with the tendency to stereotype approaches to
1ranslation Studies. I we hae tried to do something in the deelopment o a new discipline,
it was exactly the opposite, and I still beliee in it. I know weaknesses in our approaches and I
am sure that I am, mysel, struck with blindness and that I am limiting mysel. But we do our
best! Our goal was to deelop research on translation, not to go or one school or another
one. Now, again, as I said, many people try to sell their books well and to be better than their
neighbors. I would say I do not think I was really inoled in that area.
@(. V% ' )$"$%& #--+$ ,6 1ar ge t \ j,1= Z`8 V--+$ Z
O]
\ P#*$,% (,+)38 ",e6,+%*$) ,6
1arge t '1,%B 3,+)-$168 C+41#-5$* '% ')&#"1$ "'11$* IV%"+4'&#,%8 4#)&5 '%* B),0&5.
X4-$)?'&#,%- ,% &5$ 6#)-& Z] 3$')- ,6 1arge t J= V% #& 5$ ,66$)- ' -$)#$- ,6 ,4-$)?'&#,%- \
5'16e4'2$*8 5$ -'3- \ '4,+& 1arge t S- 6#)-& &0$%&3 3$')-= <& &5$ ,C$%#%B ,6 5#- ')&#"1$ 5$
-&'&$-. IV 5'?$ '10'3- 4$$% ,6 &5$ ,C#%#,% &5'& '"'*$7#" C$)#,*#"'1-8 "$)&'#%13 &5,-$
&5'& 0#-5 &, 7'2$ ' *#66$)$%"$8 -5,+1* %,& -#7C13 '"",7C'%3 ' 6#$1* ,6 -&+*38
*,"+7$%&#%B #&- '"&#?#&#$- c05#"5 &5$3 "$)&'#%13 *,h= (5$3 -5,+1* '1-, &'2$ C')& #%
-5'C#%B &5$ $?,1+&#,% ,6 &5$ *#-"#C1#%$ #% a+$-&#,%l 05$&5$) ",%")$&$138 43 C+&&#%B
6,)0')* ')$'-8 &,C#"- '%* a+$-&#,%- 6,) -&+*3 '%* *#-"+--#,%8 ,) 7,)$ '4-&)'"&138 43
#%-&#B'&#%B ' B$%$)'1 -"5,1')13 '&7,-C5$)$ 6,) ,&5$)- &, 4'-2 #% '%* C,--#413 '4-,)4=J
G'- 1arge t -+""$$*$* #% -5'C#%B &5$ $?,1+&#,% ,6 &5$ *#-"#C1#%$ ,6 ()'%-1'&#,%
@&+*#$-A V6 3$-8 #% 3,+) ?#$0 05'& $*#&,)#'1 *$"#-#,%- C),?$* &, 4$ 2$3 #% '&&'#%#%B &5'&
B,'1A
LAMBLR1: 1his quote rom 1oury`s article and your question, this is really ery important.
And this is ery good and critical, but it is not easy to answer. Neertheless, I do my best.
And, o course, I know that I must be, or I must look, ery biased because as or the last one
who can make such a critical sel-ealuation is the person who is in the picture and 1oury was
more in the picture than I was. So I really consider 1oury as the most creatie scholar in
1ranslation Studies - I hae said so in other circumstances. And I would say that een his
sentences here about his iew on 1arget, as you ormulated here - well, I hae read it in his
article but this is well ormulated -, it takes it seriously, and it also indicates a ery strong
critical distance towards his own initiaties.
Now, as has been the case, I simply try to indicate arguments - I am sure that I didn`t see
eerything. But I try to show how and why, probably, 1arget played an important role in the
institutionalization o the discipline. But, o course, not 1arget only, as there were other
initiaties. And I would een say that, or instance, LS1 was established with the same
ambitions - and as it was mentioned beore the irst president was Mary Snell-lornby. And
in their irst publications, een including publications by Daniel Gile, mysel and Mary Snell-

70
http:,,www.benjamins.com,cgi-bin,t_bookiew.cgibookid~1arget20213A2

229
lornby, one o the reasons why they were looking or PhD and research training was exactly
that. So the LS1 established in Vienna in 1992 used lots o ideas that were deeloped a ew
years earlier in other areas and, ater all, this was, I would say, a good coincidence because this
indicates how there was something like a common coniction and a common willingness to
establish the discipline. So it is as simple as that.
Now, how can we distinguish and indicate, well, which is due to 1arget or to LS1 or to
CL1RA and to other centers and indiiduals \ell, look in the Bible. 1here is something
written there like Let`s gie to Caesar what belongs to Caesar`, which is a beautiul opinion
but I am not always able to indicate that as well. But I see at least a ew eatures and I know
that they were explicit ambitions o 1arget, and explicit ambitions o 1oury. O course, they
hae also been inluential in our situation in CL1RA. I am absolutely sure that we hae neer
worried about the question o what belongs to Caesar or what not. \e wanted to deelop a
discipline! But I was thinking about these questions and among the things in 1arget that
probably relect, in a ery undamental way, a gien iew on research on translation it is that
there is this willingness to establish a new academic discipline, and to do that on the leel o
PhD and post-PhD project-oriented or project-based research.
Now, I gie you a ew indications and I can tell you that, or instance, in our ealuation o the
new contributions, we had a model, we had questions. Among the questions, or instance,
there was the absolute requirement in any contribution, and you can check it, that any one o
them was based on research ambitions, and that it was looking i the research situation was
new or not, i anything had already been established in that area, what was the state o the art,
whateer een the languages - but o course our languages are limited, and there, ery
honestly, we hae to recognize that our worldiew is limited. But as ar as possible we were
looking or this ery international - I wouldn`t say planetarian - challenge. Now, the link with
the state o the art, gien basic publications - rom whateer orientation - that were known
and aailable, that had to be taken into consideration. And i the contributors were not aware
o that, except i they were working along a ery dierent model, we accepted also that. So
contributions coming rom particular paradigms - i we can call them this -, we accepted
them i they had their own internal coherence. But in general we obliged the authors to make
clear what their assumptions were. 1his was linked with requirements that are basic
requirements or any discipline. \e tried to treat approaches to translation in the same way as
any scholarly topic in any discipline was treated and we had ideas about this. 1he same stood
or the cultural situation rom where the gien data were taken, and also or the
contextualization o these data and a possibility, een, to hae alternatie hypotheses, and so
orth. laing said that, the institutionalization o the discipline was the absolute priority in
the journal.
Another requirement, or instance, was to know also i a gien approach applied to ery
particular data. So ery microscopic research was welcomed as well as macroscopic research.
But ery microscopic research, when it cannot be established as a certain exemplary o
paradigmatic alue, that should be indicated - how general and how particular are the insights
that are established at the end o the article, what is the scholarly contribution, to what extent
is a gien contribution really a contribution to research and a contribution in a gien tradition,
JOSL LAMBLR1

230

and not necessarily only in 1ranslation Studies as such. Now, I would say a lot can be said
about 1ranslation Studies rom this point o iew and I am not going to insist much on this -
so the interdisciplinarity o 1ranslation Studies is one o the critical issues nowadays. Among
the other priorities and ambitions o 1arget when we were ealuating and selecting and
planning articles was also, or instance, to what extent was a gien contribution a contribution
to the dialogue and to the interaction with neighbouring disciplines, and the extension o the
ield o scholarship, where, or instance, research on language, on social relationships, on
media and een on business was inoled. So this was additional criteria or positie
ealuation.
Another thing, o course, this is ery clear, but also this is a ery critical point, is the
intercultural representatieness o what we were doing. Now, without saying at all that rom
this point o iew we were not supposed to be blamed or not to be under threat, I would say
that there was a ery systematic eort in that direction. And I would say that een the
Chinese, or the Southeast Asian or the Latin American orientation that are deeloping in a
spectacular way nowadays, or us, this was one o the positie things, and we tried to promote
it, and it is certainly one o the consequences o the moement deeloped not only by 1arget,
not only by CL1RA, but by so many people, that exactly this new worldiew, an enlarged
worldiew, was taken seriously and had a chance to, say, get through.
Now I hae been worried rom the beginning with something. \hen LS1 was ounded, we
had no money, CL1RA had no money, 1arget had no money either. So we could not go or, I
would say, diplomatic unctions and network eerywhere around the world. 1here was no
money or that. But eerything we could do, we did it. lor instance, when we went to 1okyo,
and so orth, or Comparatie Literature, we were working or 1ranslation Studies also. So
with limited resources we tried to do ery heay things also or the internationalization and
the international institutionalization o the discipline.
Now, 1oury`s article is analyzing the contributions rom the many countries and it also
indicates, say, surprising components o these eorts. I know ery well that there are other
countries, other cultures and other centers that do the same and that maybe nowadays are
more successul. \e started it up and I think we opened the gates. Now, it is good that other
people continue.
@(. (,+)3 -&'&$- #% 5#- ')&#"1$ &5'& #% &5$ $')13 ÙT]- '% <7$)#"'% ,) R)#&#-5 C+41#-5$)
0,+1* C),4'413 5'?$ )$-C,%*$* 0#&5 &5$ C+mm1#%B )$7')2 I&)'%-1'&#,% 05'&AJ &, '
C),C,-'1 ,6 C+41#-5#%B ' E,+)%'1 ,% ()'%-1'&#,% @&+*#$-= G$ ",%&#%+$-. I(5$ 6'"& &5'&
&5#- #- %, 1,%B$) &5$ "'-$ -5,+1* "$)&'#%13 4$ '&&)#4+&$*8 '& 1$'-& #% C')&8 &, 1arge t S-
,0% '"5#$?$7$%&- #% C+&&#%B &5$ *#-"#C1#%$ ,% &5$ 7'C=J /5'& ,&5$) E,+)%'1- 5'?$
'1-, 5$1C$* C+& ()'%-1'&#,% @&+*#$- ,% &5$ 7'C '%* -5'C$ &5$ $?,1+&#,% ,6 ,+)
*#-"#C1#%$8 4$ &5$3 C)$"+)-,)- ,) -+""$--,)- &, 1arge t cMe t a
1
8 11R
2
'%* abe t
Oi
8
7$%&#,%$* 43 (,+)3 $1-$05$)$8 ",7$- &, 7#%*hA

71
http:,,www.erudit.org,reue,meta,apropos.html

231
LAMBLR1: O course, so simply, like that, I cannot immediately say what is the picture, but
there is a picture. lirst, let me make one point about the origin o 1arget. Beore 1arget existed
we were dreaming about it - I knew all about the project. \e hae shown our proposal, say,
our business plan, to Gerald Prince
4
, a prominent expert in Narratology in the United States,
rom the Uniersity o Pennsylania, an absolute top guy, and he said: No doubt, you will
get it! \ou are sure to ind a top publisher or this journal.` And he was not an expert in
1ranslation Studies but he was an experienced, say, a world leel specialist in Narratology.
As or other journals, well, I would distinguish between journals deoted to translation that
existed already and new journals. And the act that I make this distinction already indicates
that the idea o establishing a new discipline has been successul - as 1oury says, to a large
extent this was one o the indications o the impact that 1arget had on the map or the
research on translation. I know lots o journals that existed beore, like Meta, and etc. A new
journal was 11R, and o course 1be 1rav.tator
:
, the St. Jerome`s one. Now, it is clear that the
new journals, in the ormulation o their goals, hae certainly established their positions in
relation to the position o 1arget. Now, o course, they all tried to hae something like a
proile, that is, a proile o their own. It means that 1ranslation Studies had become a market
een or research. So the 1ranslation Studies market exists. And it existed since a gien
moment. And the traditional journals een adapted their goals. lor instance, Meta was a
journal that supported ery heaily the production o translations, and good translations, and
the ealuation o translations. But it opened up its gates to be more research oriented. 1he
act that translation was not limited anymore to the question low to produce good
translations` is an illustration o the impact o a new paradigm.
Now, when Alice Leal, or instance, says that D1S is too dominating at CL1RA, not like the
ideas o Vermeer or o the proponents o the German unctional approach, there is at least
one dierence: the goals, neither o Vermeer nor o Nord nor o Snell-lornby, who hae
always been CL1RA proessors
6
, their goals were not, irst o all, to establish the academic
discipline. And the establishment o the PhD programs and research on translation is the
achieement not o one person nor another person nor one journal, and so orth: it is the
result o collectie eorts. But these collectie eorts are nearer the goals o D1S, as we see
it, than the goals o, say, the Skopos theory. And I do not blame anyone at all. I would say
that in the Skopos theory and in the German school there hae been excellent PhDs and I
know excellent and successul scholars who would now speak, indeed, about the
establishment o the discipline, and they will not try to say that this is due to this person or to
that person. It means that there is a new iew, a collectie assumption o what the tasks and
responsibilities in this area are. Making PhDs on translation that were not linked with, say, the
pragmatics o the translation task and the training o translators, this idea, beore the 1990s, I

72
http:,,www.erudit.org,reue,ttr,apropos.html & http:,,www.uottawa.ca,associations,act-
cats,Lnglish,Journal_11R,Journal_11R.htm
73
http:,,www.benjamins.com,cgi-bin,t_seriesiew.cgiseries~babel
74
http:,,ccat.sas.upenn.edu,roml,rench,people,prince.html
73
http:,,www.stjerome.co.uk,periodicals,journal.phpj~2
76
http:,,www.kuleuen.be,cetra,proessors,cetraproessors.html
JOSL LAMBLR1

232

would like to see, so people can demonstrate to me, where it has been expressed. So this is
new in the academic world and I would say that the progressie deletion o the borderline
between translation training institutes and uniersities, which was one o the eatures since
\orld \ar II, this has disappeared, and this has partly disappeared because there is a
common ground now in the area o PhD on 1ranslation Studies - I would say I know rom
which area in 1ranslation Studies this comes and rom which area it does not really come. So,
I would say, is this coming rom 1arget It is certainly not only 1arget and CL1RA, but the
common eorts and the parallel orientations, and also the act that so many people who also
came, or instance, rom the German ield. Apropos, so ar we did not mention at all - and
in your documents they are not mentioned at all - this ery impressie and remarkable center
in Gottingen, with their dozens o heay books and their dozens o PhDs
. \ell, they really

hae accepted the idea o research. And they would not say: \ell, we work along 1oury`
1hey een didn`t like his proposals too much, but they did exactly the research that he was
promoting - with dierent rules - and they went or PhDs degrees. And I hae been mysel
superisor o one o the PhDs coming rom Gottingen with a colleague member in the PhD
committee coming rom Gottingen to Leuen. So we worked together. So these are
achieements that in many panoramic states o the art ery oten are orgotten, but Gottingen
has been extremely important.
Now, there are more than journals. By the way, I should add that there are ery important
book series. And in these book series one o the important contributions comes rom the new
PhDs degrees. So this promotional moement in the book market is heaily supported by
PhDs. Len yesterday on the Internet I discoered a PhD rom Massachusetts, rom
Amherst
8
, whose adisor was Ldwin Gentzler
9
. le was one o our alumni in the year that
Susan Bassnett was teaching and I do not see that he is simply applying principles rom D1S,
he een tries to show that he is a little bit in disagreement, and ery oten he tries to show
een that he is in agreement with me but not really with 1oury nor with D1S, and so on. So
this is all looking or your position. But I don`t think that this is really the point. It indicates
that something has been achieed in common and in interaction. So the impact o the things
that I hae been discussing, this impact is ery obious, I would say, on almost eery place.
@(. <- 6,) &5$ *$"#-#,% &, 5'?$ :%B1#-5 '- &5$ 7'#%8 ,) '17,-& -,1$8 1'%B+'B$ ,6
C+41#"'&#,%8 (,+)3 -'3- &5'& I&5#- *#"&'&$ 5'* #7C,)&'%& #7C1#"'&#,%- 6,) 1arge t 8
$-C$"#'113 #% ?#$0 ,6 &5$ 6'"& &5'& #& 5'- &)'%-1'&#,% '- #&- -+4E$"&e7'&&$)=J G$ '1-,
-&'&$- &5'& I&5$ )$-&)#"&#,% ,% &5$ +-$ ,6 1'%B+'B$- 5'- %, *,+4& $>$)&$* '
",%-#*$)'41$ #7C'"& ,% &5$ B),0#%B 7')B#%'1#m'&#,% #% 1arge t ,6 )$-$')"5 "'))#$* ,+&
#% "$)&'#% C')&- ,6 &5$ 0,)1*8 +-#%B 1'%B+'B$- -+"5 '- V&'1#'% ,) _,)&+B+$-$8 $?$%
P$)7'%8 %,& &, 7$%&#,% 95#%$-$ '%* N'C'%$-$= <- #- 0$11 2%,0%8 '%* *$-C#&$ -,7$
"5'%B$- &5'& 5'?$ &'2$% C1'"$ ,6 1'&$8 7'%3 -"5,1')- -&#11 C)$6$) &, 0)#&$ '%* C+41#-5 #%

77
Proessor Lmeritus Armin Paul lrank o Georg-August-Uniersitt Gottingen is a standout representatie o
the Gottingen group and his books on the subject o translation are important representaties o the production
o that group. More ino: http:,,www.amstud.uni-goettingen.de,personal.phpmit_id~89&bereich~personal
78
http:,,www.umass.edu,complit,programs_phd.shtml
79
http:,,www.umass.edu,complit,people_ac.shtmlgentzler

233
0,)1* 1'%B+'B$- ,&5$) &5'% :%B1#-58 %,& &, 7$%&#,% &5$#) ,0% C')1'%"$= X%$ C1'"$
05$)$ &5#- -&'&$ ,6 '66'#)- 5'- 4$$% +%*$)B,#%B -,7$ "5'%B$ #- @C'#%8 05$)$ :%B1#-5
5'- 4$",7$ 7,)$ '%* 7,)$ ' 1'%B+'B$ ,6 -"#$%&#6#" ",77+%#"'&#,%=J (5$-$ ?')#,+-
-&'&$7$%&- #%-C#)$ ' -$)#$- ,6 a+$-&#,%- 05,-$ B$%$)'1 &,C#" 3,+ 5'?$ '1)$'*3 *$'1&
0#&58 #% 4),'*$) &$)7-8 ,% &5#- #%&$)?#$0l 1$& +- %')),0 #&- 6,"+- ' 1#&&1$ 4#& '- &, 5,0 #&
)$1'&$- &, C+41#"'&#,%-= `h G,0 *,$- &5#- 7,%,1#%B+'1 'CC),'"5 &, C+41#-5#%B ",C$
0#&5 &5$ 6'"& &5'& &5$ -+4E$"&e7'&&$) #% a+$-&#,%8 &)'%-1'&#,%8 C)$-+CC,-$- &5$
#%&$)C1'3 ,6 '& 1$'-& &0, 1'%B+'B$-A Zh 9,%-#*$)#%B (,+)3S- ,0% '*7#--#,% ,6 &5$
C),41$7 ,6 7')B#%'1#m'&#,% ,6 )$-$')"5 *+$ &, 1'%B+'B$ C,1#"#$- &5'& *, %,& C)#?#1$B$
*#?$)-#&38 05#"5 &,,1- "'% 4$ +-$* &, '11,0 1#%B+#-&#"'113e?')#$B'&$* ",%&)#4+&#,%- &,
&5$ 6#$1* &, B'#% 7,)$ ?#-#4#1#&3A ih X% &5$ 61#C-#*$8 05'& ')$ &5$ '*?'%&'B$- ,6 5'?#%B
' t i vgva f ravc a '- &5$ 1#%B+#-&#" ?$5#"1$ 6,) I#%&$)e'"'*$7#" ",77+%#"'&#,%-JA
LAMBLR1: So it is a long question. It is an interesting and complicated question and I am sure
that you remember well that last year ,2009, in llorianpolis I was heaily insisting on that.
As or 1oury`s position about this question o languages, I would say it is or the irst time
that I see, mysel, this ery explicit positioning on his behal. \e hardly discussed it in the
history o 1arget and I would say I blame mysel and I would blame the 1arget team or this.
But his iews are interesting and in general I would support them, but I would go urther.
Ater all, your questions go into that direction too.
Now, I would say that I am one o the adocates o a change o the language policy in
research on translation. Maybe we could not een aord talking about it at the beginning,
because you depend on publishing houses, you depend on publication channels, you need to
get recognized in the market situation, and so on. It is due to the act that, little by little,
1ranslation Studies and certain areas o publications hae been institutionalized that you can
try to moe and redeine the borderlines. But it is also because the issue o Lnglish as an
academic language is now much more o a hot topic, and I hope it will still become hotter
than it is now - it deseres to be so. I would say that the reduction o the language o
publication to mainly Lnglish - Lnglish as a dominant language - is one o the weaknesses o
our discipline and it is also a little bit counterproductie. And you can see it relected in many
publications. Len our top colleagues ery oten are themseles simpliying because they do
not look into other languages than Lnglish anymore. I published in lrench in the beginning
and more and more I moed into Lnglish because I realized that people did not een look at
the articles in lrench since they were not ery good at it. Now, Gideon 1oury, to be rank, is
not the most polyglot scholar in translation, but he knows a ew languages. le is ery much
aware o it. I know many among his countrymen who are much better in the
internationalization o languages. And one o the reasons, I would say, why he tried to work
with us was that at least we had access not only to lrench but also to the Latin languages. But
o course this is only a small part o this globe and we need much more.
Now, I would een say that this issue that you hae brought up here and your questions at the
end are particularly interesting and important because you write them rom Brazil. And I
would apply most o these questions to the academic policy o your country. I would say that
you absolutely need, irst o all, a better mastery, an actie mastery, o the dominant
JOSL LAMBLR1

234

international language, which is Lnglish ,een in my country, ery oten the people rom the
positie sciences say eerything in Lnglish`, but they need some specialists in Lnglish in
order to brush up their own articles,.
I hae written a lot about this and I am going to take part in an important conerence in
Lurope, in Lisbon, a conerence on Social Psychology, Organization 1heory, Management
Research, , and so on
80
. It is about multilingualism that we talk there and the role played by
translation in multilingualism, something you hae in eeryday language. But the question o
academic communication is a ery particular and priileged area, and this is still ery dierent
rom the question o translation in general. But to show that this is absolutely crucial and that
the academic world is on the borderline o business, I would say, look at the Internet and the
impact that the internet has on our world o publication and research.
@(. b#%'1138 1arge t #- '?'#1'41$ $1$"&),%#"'113 ,% vge vt ac ovve c t = G,0$?$)8 #&- ,%1#%$
'?'#1'4#1#&3 #- )$-&)#"&$* &, #&- 7,-& )$"$%& Z] #--+$-= G,0 '4,+& *,#%B -,7$ IE,+)%'1
')"5$,1,B3J '%* 7'2#%B &5$ $')1#$) #--+$- ,6 1arge t '?'#1'41$ $1$"&),%#"'113 '- 0$11A
LAMBLR1: 1his is a good question, it makes perect sense and it will be communicated to my
colleagues, so we will work on that. So by deinition the answer can only be yes!

]o.e avbert
]o.e.avbertart../vtevrev.be

1be ivterrier ra. covavctea b, Cv.taro .ttboff c itiav tevri
|virer.iaaae eaerat ae avta Catariva
gvattboffgvait.cov c titiavftevrigvait.cov

80
26th LGOS Colloquium, Lisbon, 2010. \aes o Globalization: Repetition and dierence in organizing oer
time and space. July 1 - 3, 2010

Nterview With OSÉ Ambert: Scientia Traductionis, n.7, 2010

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Nterview With OSÉ Ambert: Scientia Traductionis, n.7, 2010

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

207

cievtia 1raavctiovi., v., 2010

, etc, and this een

. \ell, they really

You might also like