Katan David (2003).

Following the Translators Rite of Passage from Local Reaction to Global

Perception Rites of Passage: Rational/Irrational, Natural/Supernatural, Local/Global. 4/6 ottobre
2001, Atti del XX Convegno Nazionale dell'Associazione Italiana di Anglistica Catania-Ragusa;
Carmela Nocera, Gemma Persico, Rosario Portale (eds), Rubbettino: Catanzaro, pp.
Following the Translators Rite of Passage from Local Reaction to Global
SensitivityPerception
Introduction
In Tthis paper discusses a translators rite of passageintercultural competence in terms of
a developmental model of intercultural sensitivityintercultural development, and
purports that the rite itself entails a significant and challenging change in belief and
status. During the passage, in fact, translators change response to other cultures from an
ethnocentric local reaction to a more global perception of difference, andon the way to
becomeing I wish to explore the connections between translators beliefs about self, the
other and their approach to translation. The rite of passage concerns the change of status,
or identity, as the translator moves from personal local reaction to global
sensitivityperception. A reaction tends to associated with unmeditated response, emotion
and (at times opposition. !erception, on the other hand, refers to insight or intuition, an
ability or capacity, and above all, awareness,
Traditional discussion, from "icero to #en$amin and beyond, regarding the translator
has consistently concerned the task of the translator. %ore recently, though, and
particularly with the rise of the &cultural turn (#a'er ())*, #assnett ())( in Translation
+tudies, discussion is now focussing on the identity, values and beliefs of the translator
him or herself. ,ne particular identity supported by a number of scholars has centred on
the need for a translator to be bicultural, intercultural or multicultura cultural mediators
(#ochner ()-(. /atan ())*, ()))a, ()))b. (e.g., 0ermeer, ()1-. 2ewson 3 %artin,
())(, +nell 2ornby, ())4, /atan, ())). 5hat this means is that a translator will have
developed 6an intercultural mind 7 a mindset capable of understanding from within and
without both ones own culture and other cultures8 (#ennett et al, ()))9 4-.
AThe two basic approaches to translation can also be seen in terms of local reaction (, or
text oriented, andor global perception (, or context oriented. The approach will tend to
depend on whether one believes language to be 6a system to transfer thoughts or the
meaning from one mind to another8 or 6a system for organi:ing thoughts to trigger
responses in others8 (2all ()1*9 ;*, #oylan 4<<<9(<*. Transference, or the conduit
belief has been the dominant norm. (()4=,sdafter %alinows'i4<<<9 (<* ()4=
Traditional discussion, from "icero to #en$amin and beyond, regarding the translator
has consistently concerned the task of the translator. %ore recently, though, and
particularly with the rise of the &cultural turn (#a'er ())*, #assnett ())( in Translation
+tudies, discussion is now focussing on the identity, values and beliefs of the translator
him or herself. ,ne particular identity supported by a number of scholars has centred on
the need for a translator to be bicultural, intercultural or multicultural (e.g., 0ermeer,
(
()1-. 2ewson 3 %artin, ())(, +nell 2ornby, ())4, /atan, ())). ,nes identity, and
approach to tas's will depend on beliefs, which are discussed below.
%odelling the translator
%odelling now forms the basis of many cognitive disciplines (/atan ()))a9 )47)=. The
model of cognition, or belief change, as proposed here is, at best, a simplified and ,
deleted, distorted and generalised representation of what happens in reality., and is The
cognitive models I will discuss are based on the presupposition that a persons cognitive
environment (map or model of the world is constructed through experience of the other,
but may have little or nothing to do with the world outside his or her own environmental
bubble ("ohen, (xxxx. This experience may either be a result of direct individual
experience, which is then generalised, or alternatively may be handed down and
internalised without >uestion. Importantly, as "hesterman points out 6culturally
transmitted ideas and practices can become more powerful than purely genetic
pressures8 ("hesterman, ())1a9 *. #eliefs, also, whether they be about other cultures or
about appropriate translation strategies have a habit of being interpreted as truths, which
also tend to be thought of as being timeless.
%odelling the rite of passages
?obinson (())19 4=( has suggested that %ilton #ennetts (())= Developmental %odel
of Intercultural +ensitivity (D%I+, which tracetraces an individuals experience of
another culture, 6might usefully be expanded to include translation and interpretation8.
In fact, I will use it to benchmar' statements made by translator and interpreter scholars
to exemplify. the type of beliefs that lie behind the two basic approaches to translation.
"learly, the individual statements cited below (ta'en also out of context should in no
way be thought of as classifying the translators themselves. The commentsy should,
rather, be ta'en as examples of how ones view of the world clearly affects deeply felt
beliefs about the &right or &correct way to translate the type of beliefs that lie behind
translation strategies. %ore importantly, the model highlights the rite of passage as a
waystage to multiculturality and towards a cultural mediators global vision.
@ogical @evels model
The first model proposed, adapted from the @ogical @evels model (see /atan ()))a,
()))b, suggests that beliefs about identity, the world, and in particular about &the
other, are the powerhouse in developing strategies. Aach of these belief levels will both
act on and be heavily influenced by the generally accepted norms of the time9
6descriptive of particular practices within a given community8 ("hesterton9 ())1a9 ;B9
Modeling the rite of passages
The D%I+, itself, is $ust one of a number of cross7cultural contact and conse>uence
models (#ennett ())-9 4;74*. As Cantini (4<<<9 =B points out 6each model usually
reflects a particular orientation, e.g., chronological progression, developmental
se>uences, psychological ad$ustments, or the stages and phases commonly experienced
4
by intercultural so$ourners8. These ad$ustments, it is suggested, can only ta'e place as
beliefs change through experience, learning and the ac>uisition of new s'ills and
resources (not discussed here. I will assume, for sa'e of argument, that translators in
some way will be &intercultural so$ourners..
%odelling is the basis of many cognitive disciplines (/atan ()))9 )47)=. The models of
cognition, or belief change, as proposed here are simplified, deleted, distorted and
generalised copies of what happens in reality. %ore importantly, as ,"onnor (4<<<9
(4- notes 6a model is not true. A model can only wor' D or not8.
5ith regard to rite of passage, %ilton #ennett (())= has developed an interesting
Developmental %odel of Intercultural +ensitivity (D%I+. This model, li'e many
similar models
(
is based on what #ennett et al call 6grounded theory8. The
authors#ennett They hypothisedhypothesised six discernable worldview states as a
result of statements about cultural difference made by various groups of people such as
exchange students, businesspersons and others. ,"onnor (4<<<9 (4- notes 6a model is
not true. A model can only wor' D or not8. These six states, do indeed appear to wor'
not only at an intuitive level, but also statistically9 According to #ennett et al (()))9 44
6tThese states have since been 6successfully replicated EFG with extremely high
interrater reliability EandG a factor analysis showed that the statements about cultural
difference &loaded into categories according to D%I+ theoretical prediction8 (#ennett et
al ()))9 44. #ennett et al ()))9 44. see also 2ammer, ())).
The stages (each with 4 or three levels are as follows9
The AT2H,"AHT?I" +TAIA+9 (.
denial, 4.
defence, =.
minimisation
T2A AT2H,?A@ATI0A +TAIA+9 B.
(
Cor this reason, it is common to explore intercultural competence in terms of the cross7cultural
contact and entry processes, the options available, the choices one ma'es, and the resultant
conse>uences. "ultural entry models often address some of these aspects. These include9 6+tages in
Developing an Intercultural !erspective8 (2oopes in !usch ()1). 6+even "oncepts in "ross7"ultural
Interaction8 (Iochenour and Janeway ())=, p. (. and 6+ix +tages from Athnocentrism to
Athnorelativism8 (#ennett ())=, p. 4). Aach model usually reflects a particular orientation, e.g.,
chronological progression, developmental se>uences, psychological ad$ustments, or the stages and
phases commonly experienced by intercultural so$ourners.
Iochenour, Theodore and Anne Janeway. ())=. 6+even "oncepts in "ross7"ultural Interaction9
A Training Design,8 (pp. (7) in Iochenour, Theodore, ed. Beyond Experience: The
Experiential Approach to Cross-Cultural Education. Karmouth, %A9 Intercultural !ress.
2oopes, David. ()1). 6Intercultural "ommunication "oncepts and the !sychology of Intercultural
Axperience,8 in %argaret !usch, ed. Multicultural Education: A Cross-Cultural Training
Approach. Karmouth, %A9 Intercultural !ress.
A "AHT?A@ ",H"A?H9
DA0A@,!IHI IHTA?"L@TL?A@ ",%!ATAH"A
Alvino A. Cantini http9MMwww.sit.eduMpublicationsMdocsMcompetence.pdf
=
acceptance, ;.
adaptation, *.
integration
I have actually combined two models here to allow for an important reversal in the cline,
which does not, though, affect the stages. The model &5 graph below is ta'en from
@evine and Adelman (())=9 B(, while the added numbers refer bac' to the #ennett
model9

Positive
Feelings
Negative
Time
From CULTURE SHOCK to ACCULTURATION
(1)
Honeymoon
period
(2 & 3)
Culture Shock
(4) Initial
adjustment
(-) Depression
(5 & 6)
Acceptance
&
Integration
Ethnorelative
Ethnocentric
#oth models were developed for people who have decided to live and wor' immersed in
another culture. #ennett (())=9 =< is very careful, in fact, to note that 6oppressed
people may navigate the development of intercultural sensitivity differently from those
in the dominant group8.
?obinson (())19 4=(, in touching on #ennetts model, suggests that 6these models
might usefully be expanded to include translation and interpretation8. In fact, I will use
the model to benchmar' statements made by translator and interpreter scholars. This
will, I believe, clarify the beliefs that lie behind translation strategies. %ore importantly,
the model highlights the rite of passage as a waystage to multiculturality and towards a
cultural mediators global vision
+tage ( 2oneymoonMDenial
Initial reaction to Nthe otherN begins as if the &other did not exist as a separate world,
though #ennett. (())-9 =B. is also careful to note that 6oppressed people may navigate
the development of intercultural sensitivity differently from those in the dominant
group8. it is the reaction of the tourist within hisMher environmental bubble Cues ta'en
from reality are interpreted according to an individual or locally shared model of the
world which is, at this stage, believed to be 6central to all reality8 (#ennett ibid())=9
=<. @evine and Adelmans &honeymoon refers to what it is that attracts in a second
language or culture. #ennetts model (see /atan forthcoming does not actually begin
with &honeymoon, #ennetts model, on the other hand, begins simply but with cognitive
naivety. In his model, at this stage, there is simply no response to the other, as the
B
differences are simply not, to use +perber and 5ilsons (()-*9 B4 term, &manifest . 2e
is also very careful to note that 6oppressed people may navigate the development of
intercultural sensitivity differently from those in the dominant group8.
Translators, not actually seeing or even reacting to the others cognitive environment,
but engrossed in own interpretationsat this level based on fulfilling our own
expectationsare either students or the unwitting tend to produce wor' that
provideproviders of the stoc'comic relief for tourists for comedians and wry smiles from
touristsin hotels and restaurants (see for examples,, #ryson ())<9 (, (1B. Dodds, ());.
/atan ()))a9 -4, -B. +tewart 4<<<9 1-71).
"learly, any translator, worthy of the name, will be aware of &the other, so translators
should begin translating as students or professional at stage 4.
+tage 49 Defence
hat is !ifferent is !angerous"
This is the title of 2of2ofestedes (())(9 (<) chapter (())(9 (<) on orientation to
perceived difference, and is the first response to 6"ulture shoc'89 6the emotional
reactions to the disorientation that occurs when one is immersed in an unfamiliar culture
and is deprived of familiar cues EFG6 (!aige, ())=9 4. It is at this stage we realise that
there is a difference. and hence that there is a real gap between our expected world and
the world we are dealing with 7 and we can no longer deny the fact. The most natural
reaction to difference in others behaviour, discourse patterns and value systems is to
defend our own, particularly because the threat is felt at the level of core beliefs
regarding what is &right, &normal and &correct.
This response is logically ethnocentric, the feeling being that #y model of the world is
the model of the world, and hence, any other model is not only wrong but is also a
destabilising threat. @ogically, then, the first defensive reaction tens to be one of
Denigration D a level that coheres with the events of +eptember ((
th
more than with
translation.
#ennett notes that 6Denigration8 of the target culture is the first reaction to difference at
this stage. It would be highly unusual to find translators willingly wor'ing and
translating for a culture they actively feel hostile towards, so we will move onto the next
level.
$uperiority
This second level in intercultural development 6emphasi:es the positive evaluation of
ones own cultural status8 (#ennett, ())=9 =1, and is the form of ethnocentric defence
that many translator scholars and practitioners wor' from. 0ery often, the feeling of
superiority is benign towards other cultures, and is bac'ed by logical arguments of
&progress, &development, with the implicit assumption that evolution following oneNs
own culture path is the best path for all cultures.
An example of this comes from Hewmar'ss (())=9 *) %aragraphs on Translation
comments regarding thea translation of a tourist brochure. 2e , entitles his
;
contributioncomment d &Jollity in Jesolo, a seaside resort and close to 0enice. 2e
begins with the textwith a >uote from a the tourist brochure advertising the resort9
65e as'ed9 5hy Jesolo for your holidaysO E...G &#ecause, the well7rounded
beauty in the illustration replies, &Jesolo can be reached so easily that my
husband is able to come and see me every wee'7end, and each time he finds
me more and more sun7tanned. I assume this is a close translation of the
Italian original, and, as it is sexist, the translator should have left out the
reference to the husband and confined himMherself to Jesolos accessibility and
its warm weather.8
2ere, Hewmar' is suggesting that a translator should manipulate the text to fit the his
local domestic (and superior culture. 2e presumes that his local interpretation of the
visual and verbal sign is universally (demeaning to women is the only interpretation.
and also that these signs should be replaced with a superior guiding belief (i.e. non7
sexist. ?egarding his first point, because the translation is &sexist. The generali:ed
belief underpinning his statement is that a picture of a 6well7endowed beauty8 who
spends the wee' suntanning herself, by herself, is doing this for her husband. A reader
within the Italian context of culture or habitus would note that anybody who can get
away from the humidy and the heat of the 0eneto region in the summer, does so and
either so$ourns in the mountains or by the sea (/atan ()))9((B. Jesolo is the closest
beach area to industrial %estre, and those that can (usually wives and children ta'e
refuge there, while the (hardly sexist husband has to remain in town and at wor' D till
the wee'end.
As translators, we are tied to a source text, but wetranslators need 6profound cultural
'nowledge8 (5olf ())19 (41 to be fully aware of the context of culture before we they
can begin to evaluate another cultures ways. As 5olf (())19 (41 says 6what is re>uired
is profound cultural 'nowledge gained by fieldwor'8.This 'nowledge would have
revealed the fact that it is an Italian family tradition for those who can (home7employed
wives and children to escape from the summer heat and the humidity of the urban areas
to the beach, and for the husbands to $oin them when they can D at the wee'end. %any
people of both sexes, it transpires from the translation, en$oy the effects of the suns
rays. ,b$ectively, this may well be dangerous for the s'in but is not necessarily
6wounding or demeaning to those whose sex, EFG leaves them vulnerable to the raw
power of words8 (#ryson, ())B9 B4;.
+econdly, and more importantly, Hewmar' believes that translators should censor text in
accordance with this locally imposed limiting belief.
&eversal
An interesting &option in the intercultural sensitivity model is the phenomenon of
&reversal. This still revolves around superiority, but in reverse. It is the 6denigration of
ones own culture and an attendant assumption of the superiority of a different cultureP
*
(#ennett ())=9 =). !eople in this position feel themselves to be, as exemplified by
0enuti (());9 4)( 6a nomad in my own country, a runaway from the mother7tongue8.
The reasons may be manifold, but generally involve 6EFG a disavowal of all E"(G values
and an embracing of unchanging E"4G values8 (%ilton ())=9 B<. 0enuti (())-9 (<
explains9 6it is this evocation of the foreign that attracts me EFG. This preference stems
partly from a political agenda that is broadly democratic9 an opposition to the global
hegemony of Anglish8.
#In fact, b#oth 0enuti and Hewmar' express the desire, through translation, to wish to
redress the balanceine>uality and to intervene to help the more vulnerable cultures.
0enuti (())-9 (<7(( also sees the vulnerability in terms of the ethnocentricity of
translation itself. The process is mainly one way, with the vast ma$ority of translation
being made out of Anglish. +econd9 6the very function of translating is assimilation, the
inscription of a foreign text with domestic intelligibilities and interests8. through
translation. they also both view &the other from a Defensive position.
.
Discussion of whether and how to curb (politically convenient mar'et forces is indeed
necessary. 2owever, generalising about &the other and ta'ing entrenched positions on
the !", masterMservant coreMperiphery debate is a local rather than global way of
reacting. The fact that Nthe otherN has more or less power, or tends to distort reality in a
particular way can only really be discussed when we have the fullest ob$ective picture
possible of the others map of the world.
The problem with the reversal response (superiority of the foreign culture is that by
ignoring the domestic culture value system we can create an unintentional strengthening
of negative stereotyping of the foreign (see also the debate in +chQffner 3 /elly72olmes
());9 =4.
+tage =9 %inimi:ation
Danila +eles'ovich, 6a brilliant interpreter and writer8, stated that 6Averything said in
one language can be expressed in another D on condition that the two languages belong
to cultures that have reached a comparable degree of development8 (in Hewmar' ()--9
*. This is type of comment represents the final ethnocentric stage in the #ennetts
model of intercultural sensitivity, and is the last to preserve the centrality of ones own
worldview. It overtly ac'nowledges cultural differences, but suggests that there is a
6Iolden ?ule8 (i'id9 B( above cultural differences, to which all cultures should or do
adhere to. The gaps themselves are viewedthat these are (as particularsuperficial details
not to be confused with a general universal similarities to which all people (and their
texts adhere to universalism in human behaviour, ways, beliefs and value systems.
Hewmar' (in +chQffner and /elly72olmes ());, -<, for example ma'es the following
statement9
I thin' theres been an over7emphasis in going from one culture to another
EFG travel literature, health, education. these are universal issues that go
beyond culture. Theyre sometimes dressed in cultural clothes, but thats as
1
far as it goes. !aul E/ussmaulGs point about the Anglo7+axon versus the
Iermanic style of academic writing is far more a universal >uestion of good
writing versus this 'ind of clouded 'ind of writing that you often get in
academic circles.
The 6good writing8 Hewmar' was referring to comes from the "lassical Iree' culture
and focuses on, among other things, 6restraint and clarity8. These norms have also been
incorporated into Irices %axims of "ooperation. %uch interest is now being turned to
the (nonuniversality of these %axims (cf. /atan, ()))a9 ()1. /atan +traniero7+ergio
4<<(9 44B7;. !ym 4<<<9 (-*. "hesterman (())1a9 ;-, in for example, states fact,
notes (())1a9 ;- they that Irices %axims 6must evidently be interpreted with respect
to particular cultures8, but then goes onto say9 6but I do not thin' that this detracts from
their universal applicability8. "hesterman 2e (())1b9 (;< is even clearer on the
%inimalists 6the Iolden ?ule8 (#ennett ())=9 B(9 at a conference entitled Translation
as (ntercultural Co##unication (())1b9 (;<9 6I will stic' my nec' out and claim that
clarity will survive as an ethical linguistic value long after the postmodernist textual
anarchists are dead and buried8. . 2is position is also criticised by !ym (4<<<9
(-*Hewmar' says much the same in +chQffner and /elly72olmes (());9 -<.
#eliefs li'e these propagate and become self7fulfilling norms, which, as "hesterman
himself reali:es (())1a9 *, become more real than reality itself. and indeed, it is not
easy to consider a rite of passage when no such passage is envisaged.

2ence, it can be >uite possible that cultural differences or gaps are simply not regarded
as relevant to translationThere is a clear logical lin' between this orientation and text7
based (copying translation strategies. Danila +eles'ovich, 6a brilliant interpreter and
writer8, says 6Averything said in one language can be expressed in another D on
condition that the two languages belong to cultures that have reached a comparable
degree of development8 (>uoted in Hewmar' ()--9 *. The implicit suggestion is that
differences between cultures is not an issue, at least for similarly developed cultures.
In the final analysis, translators who assume that universalism can bring cultures
together follow #ennetts expectancy norm (i'id9 B49 6&be li'e me8.
Translation nor#s
Cor translators, transcendent universalism (#ennetts term is extremely attractive. 5e
can have absolute, positivist translating solutions, 6norms8, which tell translators 6how
they ought to behave8 (2ermans ()))9 -, italics in the original. The clarity expectancy
norm is based, for example, on 6the communication norm8 ("hesterman ())19 11, my
italics
Translation norms tend to beare part and parcel of the norms that ma'e up the
environment of our domestic map of the world. they are, as 2ermans (()))9 ) points
out, 6inculcated as part of the process of sociali:ation8. The adaptation of the logical
-
neurological levels model has Anvironment as a habitus, rather than as the more classical
H@! a visible territory (,"onnor 4<<(9 4-74). ,ne particularly important environment
for translators and interpreters is the Auropean Lnion, probably the most important
institution to publicly support the right of each member state to be heard and read in its
own language. The result is that =);( people translate or interpret AL texts or rather,
6one person in eight at the "ommission wor's for its language services8 (europa.eu
4<<( for a princely sum of R-;,;;1,1=-,1<= (=.)(-.<<<.<<< (())) figures which is
e>ual to <.-S of the total AL budget.
Ket, within this habitus, is a surprisingly extreme version of minimisation with regard to
intercultural sensitivity, exemplified by the ALs own mental classification of 9
professions
4
9
74.8 Miscellaneous business activities n.e.c. 749
74.81 Photographic activities 7494
74.82 Packaging activities 7495
74.83 Secretarial and translation activities 7499
If we loo' in more detail at the translators fellow travellers, the list is depressingly clear
D translating and interpreting is text7based copying at the most local of levels9
74.83 Secretarial and translation activities
This class includes
! stenographic and "ailing activities
! t#ping
! other secretarial activities such as transcri$ing %ro" tapes or discs
! cop#ing& $lue printing& "ultigraphing and si"ilar activities
! envelope addressing& stu'ng& sealing and "ailing& "ailing list co"pilation& etc.& including %or advertising "aterial
! translation and interpretation
This class also includes
! proo%!reading
+tage B9 of the 5hat is important, from an intercultural point of view, is that these norms
are entirely legitimate intraculturally within certain contexts, but do not necessarily
carry the same weight across cultures (+collon and +collon ());9(=-. /atan ()))a9 ();7
()). ()))b9 B(1, for the simple reason that norms are determined by constellations of
values and beliefs about the world, which can never be same across cultures. If they
were, then there would be no gap, and no plural to the word culture.
Interestingly, in the final analysis, there does tend to be a Iolden rule, applicable across
cultures, at this stage of intercultural sensitivity. !eople who assume that universalism
can bring together cultures follow the expectancy norm, as #ennett (i'id9 B4 notes9 6&be
li'e me8.
Acceptance
&espect for 'ehaviour difference
4
AL Document =<=1M)<, 6Hace ?ev (8. The document is designed to provide a common basis for the statistical
classification and analysis of economic activities within the AL.
)
According to the developmental modelD%I+, this next stage 6represents a ma$or
conceptual shift from reliance on absolute, dualistic principles of some sort to an
ac'nowledgement of non7absolute relativity8 (ibid#ennett ())=9 B;. This is the rite of
passage, where the translator begins to perceive that hisMher ethnocentric model of the
world is not the only one, and that text7based copying, though possible, will not
communicate the same message across cultures. TheThe translators model of the world
is now framed to include local contexts of situation and culture, in much the same way
as 2asans (())4 2A! mothers contextualise their statements to frame their
applicapility and #ateson corrects the classic error of @ogical Typing (#ateson, ()149
(-<7()= with an interpretative frame9 culture (see /atan in print..
At this It is the first ethnorelative stage, and, as such, is extremely important for
translators., as 6people 6at this stage begin to recogni:e differences in communication
style8 (Bennetti'id ())=9 B;. As Hida (())19 =1 puts it9 P%any translators believe that
if they ta'e care of the words and grammar, the discourse will ta'e care of itself, but this
concept results from an insufficient understanding of the role of discourse structures in
interlingual communicationP.
This also represents the first stage ofis clearly then the first stage at which translators
accept the importance of context and mar's the beginnings of the &cultural turn an
orientation towards the context ( #assnett 3 @efevre ())<9 ((. /ondo, a Japanese7
Anglish interpreter has written cogently on intercultural communication,is extremely
aware of the context of culture and frames of interpretation yet is aware of the
conflictconstraints bound by theengendered by the established norms of interpreting. In
the end, though, he yields to the text7oriented norm9 , 6interpreters can wor' essentially
only with what has been expressed8 (())<9 *=. Hida, on the other hand, suggests 2e
suggests that translators should manipulating e the texts, not only with regard to
politeness mar'ers and face threatening acts but also with regard to the organi:ation of
time, space and thought processes,not in favour of a universal or superior rule, but
simply in respect of the different ways in which language each of which provide a gap
that the outsider reader cannot bridgedifferent triggers and responses in others.
D without the aid of the translator. 2e continues9
Intelligent secretaries in Horth America 'now how to delete overtly
complimentary statements from @atins, and to add appropriate expressions of
greeting and friendship from their Hnorth American bosses. ,therwise @atinos
will thin' that American business men will be reluctant to do business with
@atinos who appear to be too flattering and insincere.
"learly, ta'en literally this recognition of differences and wholesale acceptance of
outsider discourse norms leads to the form of domestication which Hida himself
extolled9 dynamic or functional e>uivalence (Hida 3 Taber ()*). As a bible translator
he has always ta'en the problem of reader upta'e and the gap extremely seriously9
(<
P?eader response can never be identical to the original due to different historical,
cultural and environmental contextsP (()*B9 (;).
2oweverKet, according to #ennett, this stagelevel of Acceptance is also one of
indirection and experimentation 7 leading to time consuming and patchy wor'translating
indecisions. Translators . (rather than Hidas bicultural secretaries As he says, there are
nowill not yet have 6developed ethnorelative principles for ta'ing action8 (#ennett,
())-9 4-. Interestingly, the s'opos theory, seems to fit very well into this stage9
6The Es'oposG theory does not state what the principle is...The s'opos theory merely
states that the translator should be aware that some goal exists ... The important point is
that a given source text does not have one correct or best translation only8 (.
0ermeer (4<<<9 44-. 2owever, the problem in translation is that, common to empathy
(one of the principle guidelines at this level, it is still a culture ( pro$ection of what the
differences could be. At this stage, it is still difficult to feel certain about the exactitude
of the behaviour7value e>uation, and what the array of possible upta'es from the foreign
text might be. Cor a number of successful translators, this stage will simply be an
embarrassing or painful memory, due to the well7intentioned translation gaffes
produced. or simply to the inordinate time it too' to translate before really getting a feel
for a text and how it might be read. As #ennett (ibid())=9 ;B puts it P$udgement is
paralysed by a plethora of e>ually valuable alternatives8. The translator, at this stage,
cannot yet fully disassociate from his or her own value system, nor can sMhe full
associate with the other culture.
&espect for )alue difference *or +.,!epression- )alue !ifference
During the ethnocentric stages, translators on the developmental path to intercultural
sensitivity still believe that their own personal or locally shared hierarchy of values is
the only valid system across all cultures. Ket, as #ennett (i'id9 B) points out, 6relativity
of cultural values is central to intercultural difference. At this stage of development,
there is the acceptance of the different worldview assumptions that underlie cultural
variation in behaviour8. The It should also be remembered that this understanding of the
logical an awareness of, and respect for, the logical relationship between other7
behaviour and other7value system is a essential if a translator wishes to consider reader
upta'e (/atan ()))a9 (;;71.
crucial andto intercultural perception.in translating possible text meanings as well as
contributing to a translators well7being. e>ually hidden aspect of the gap between
insider and outsider reading. A good example of significant upta'e differences comes
from Tom 5olfes Bonfire of the )anities, set in Hew Kor'. The price of almost
everything is clearly explained, for example9
+herman %c"oy9 P,nce you had lived in a T4.* million apartment on !ar'
Avenue 7 it was impossible to live in a T( million apartmentU Haturally, there
was no way to explain this to a living soulP.
((
E/ramerG carried a leather bag EFG which screamed PI cost T;<<P.
The use of technical costing is a perfectly standard way of explaining the value for some
cultures. As +apir (())B9 == is >uoted as saying in his lecture notes9 6,nly in American
culture could the phrase &fifty7fifty have evolved, for only here do we find such
willingness to measure intangibles. expression must be >uantitative.8 The >uantitative
expressions do not create a translation problem at the level of behaviour (the previous
developmental level. "osting of products is normal behaviour in most parts of the
globe. Dollars can either be translated into local currencies, or left as they are. ?anieri
"arano, the Italian translator, has $ust slightly modified the text, converting the numbers
into letters, according to good local literary style9
+e uno ha abitato in un appartamento di !ar' Avenue da due millioni e
seicentomila dollari, gli V impossibile andare ad abitare in un appartamento
da un milioneU Difficile spiegarlo a una persona >ualun>ue.

E/ramerG portava una borsa di cuoio [F] che urlava9 6Io costo cinuecento
dollari8
5hat happens, though, is that many outsider groups do not necessarily appreciate the
price being spelled out with so much technical clarity, except in a purely commercial
context between buyer and seller. The behaviour is pan7cultural, but at the higher levels
of strategy (when and how it is appropriate and values (why, the meaning the gaps are
wide. "arroll (()--9 (4-7), for example, explains how %editerranean cultures tend to
value the American propensity towards technical clarity9 6%oney. +omeone should tal'
about money. [...] the face of an American could easily be replaced by a dollar sign. a
sign of Nincurable materialismN, of arrogance, of power, of NvulgarN, unrefined pleasure8.
+o, a translation of this particular technical sign which does not mind the value gap, only
serves to strengthen the ethnocentric stereotype of American superficiality.
i

,n a more day7to7day level, Ho less importantly, asaccording to @evine and Adelman
(()-= point out, understanding the behavioural differences, such as those outlined by
Hida, without an understanding that there is also aof the gap differencet between belief
and value systems will, in the end, result in stress and also depression for the so$ourner.
This will be caused by the internal conflict in the evaluation of insider "ulture 4
behaviour using outsider "ulture ( values. At the beginning, I mentioned the translator
who is attracted or at least interested in Nthe otherN. The positive feeling towards a second
culture will not last long if a translator simply distorts the target text to ta'e account of
differences in communication style.
In fact, there are many writers (including insider writers suffering from reverse culture
shoc' who, while professing their passion for a particular cultures different way of
doing things, cannot seeperceive, let alone respect, the different logical values
supporting the different behaviour. 5hat they seerespond to, instead, is a conflict with
(4
their own value system. for example, criticism of the obscurity of the Italian (see /atan
()))9 ()1 or the hypocrisy of politeness in Anglish. as noted by As #eppe +evergnini
(in i'id9 4=B. Though he is, a declared Anglophile who and wor's for the Econo#ist,
put itwe can clearly see how his ironic comments belie a conflict with his "( value
system9 6the Anglish language is deliciously hypocritical. It doesnt force those who
spea' it to any of the embarrassing Italian fran'ness8. This comment, by the way, adds
another nail in the coffin of "hestermans universal belief infurther contextualises the
universe of ose who believe that &6clarity8. is an Anglish communication style ta'e
note.
,ne of the difficulties at this stage of intercultural sensitivity lies with the fact that
values are part of identity. If we are able to respect different values (at the level of
values then our identity will necessarily be affected. Internalising multiple value
systems can, of course, lead to personality disorders. It is much less threatening, on the
other hand, to denominali:e the fro:en 6values8 state, and to consider, instead, the
experiential roots attached to 6what a culture values8. 5e can respect these without
threat to our own identity.
A2owever, at the Acceptance stage t this stage, the translator is attempting to enlarge his
or her own culture7bound map of the world, rather than construct a separate map to
model the &6other8 system. 5ith a separate model to wor' with, translators will be in
the position to ma'e their own moral, professional, ethical and translation decisions. but
to do so, they firstwhich means that they need to be capable of ta'ing multiple positions.
-.+tage ;9 Adaptation
6...respect for the integrity of cultures, including ones own8 (#ennett, ())-9 4-
At this stage 6new s'ills appropriate to different world views are ac>uired as an additive
process8 (#ennett ibid())=9 ;4. I have discussed elsewhere the importance of the
ability to mindshift, and for the translator to be able to move between various perceptual
positions (()))a, ()))b. 5hat #ennett (())-9 4- points out at this stage is that people
cane 6use 'nowledge to intentionally shift into a different frame of reference8.
The &cultural turn mar'ed a series of reference shifts. isCwasocus shifted from formal
fidelity to the original text, to 6The &Death of the Author8 (Arro$o ())1 and interest in
reader response. It mar'ed the beginning of a discussion on the translators status, and in
particular, the translators (invisibility (i'id, 0enuti ());, ())-. This entailed a new
belief regarding the translators tas', as +nell72ornby (()--9 4= points out9 6the starting
point is the exact opposite of that represented by the linguistically orientated school E...G9
not intended e>uivalence but admitted manipulation8.
.ere ( si#ply /ish to co#plete the 0nified 1ield #odel introduced at the 'eginning. The
2ogical 2evels #odel3 as ( #entioned3 /ill change para#eters according to ti#e4 and in
particular3 'eliefs /ill change according to one5s position on the intercultural
develop#ent cline. As 'eliefs change3 so does every other level.
(=
The #odel of the /orld as seen through the syste# of 2ogical 2evels /ill also change
according to perceptual position: the degree in /hich one is fully associated *and
cannot perceive the other culture or the gaps- or disassociated *and can see the other
culture and the gaps-. .o/ a translator /ill #ind the gaps depends3 as /e have seen3 on
the 'eliefs that are held at that #o#ent in history. The final 0nified 1ield #odel
*adapted here- is as follo/s:
Core )alues 6eneralised 'eliefs Translation strategies (ndividual translation
decisions
7rientation to: a'out translator5s task
co##unication co##unication nor#s
difference the 8other5
hierarchy ideologies
9., E#pathy
The first level of adaptation is e#pathy3 /hich is an atte#pt to understand 'y i#agining
/hat the other side of the gap #ust 'e like. The translator5s perceptual position changes
/ith the reali:ation of *to use 2efevere5s ter#- the refraction". .o/ever3 the pro'le# in
translation is that3 co##on to e#pathy itself3 it is still an outsider5s pro;ection of /hat
the differences could 'e. At this stage3 it is still difficult to feel certain a'out the
exactitude of the gaps3 and /hat the array of possi'le uptakes fro# the foreign text
#ight 'e. 1or a nu#'er of successful translators3 this stage /ill si#ply 'e an
e#'arrassing or painful #e#ory3 due to the /ell-intentioned translation gaffes
produced4 or si#ply to the inordinate ti#e it took to translate 'efore really getting a feel
for a text and ho/ it #ight 'e read. As Bennett *i'id: <=- puts it >;udge#ent is paraly:ed
'y a plethora of e?ually valua'le alternatives". The translator3 at this stage3 cannot yet
fully disassociate fro# his or her o/n value syste#3 nor can s@he full associate /ith the
other culture.
9.A Pluralism
At this second level of Adaptation, disassociation and subse>uent association is
complete. It is here that the translator satisfies 6the re>uirement that understanding of
difference must derive from actual experience /ithin that cultural frame8 (ibid#ennett
())=9 ;;. And it is at this stage that a translator can be said to be 6bicultural8, with a
minimum of two maps in one mind. 2ermans discussion of polysystem theory shows
how translators are now much more prepared to loo' beyond the text to the system or
system of systems it is part of. As he says (()))9 ((<, 6it has benefited translation
research by placing translation s>uarely in a larger field of cultural activity8. #ut, as he
rightly points out, it this field is still vague and abstract. Also, as #ochner points out
(B
Associated
Ti#e@(ntercultural $ensitivity
Disassociated
(()-(9 (4, 'nowing more than one culture is a necessary, but not a sufficient condition
for cultural mediation, which is the next stage. 5hat the translator still needs is a belief
system which is ready to exploit specific translation competency s'ills (see !ym
forthcoming at the level of global perception rather than local reaction D which is the
next level.
).+tage *9 IntegrationMcultural mediation.
At this stage, 6,ne does not have culture. one engages in it8 (#ennett ())=9 ;4.
Translators, as mediators, 6see their identities as including many cultural options, any of
which can be exercised in any context, by choice at a certain stage8 (i'id9 *<.
B., Contextual Evaluation
The first level of integration is where 6one attains the ability to analy:e and evaluate
situations from one or more cultural perspectives EFG the outcome of this action is a
$udgement of relative goodness that is specific to some identified context (i'id9 *(. A
translator is not only able to mindshift and associate with both the +T source text and the
virtual TT target text (see /atan ()))a9 (4B7(4;, but is also able to ta'e a third
perceptual position (/atan 3 +traniero7+ergio 4<<(9 44<744(. /atan forthcoming,
which is disassociated from both cultures. In this meta7position3 they translators are
6conscious of themselves as choosers of alternatives8 (#ennett i'id9 *4, which fits with
!yms (forthcoming discussion of competence9 6the translation competence that
interests us is thus a process of choosing between viable alternatives8..
There In #ennetts model, there is a definite identity change here. The translator is now
a cultural mediator, (/atan a role I have discussed in ()))a, and ()))b and has a s.
5hat is useful to point out here is the difference between this stage and the previous
ones. 2ere, the translator has a suuopra7cultural clear aim or purpose (see also, 0ermeers
&s'opos, 4<<< and (unli'e at the empathy stage. The aimmission9 is to improve
crosscultural cooperation, and build trust and understanding between communities
(/atan ()))9 is able to decide what is best according to the options available,.
Translators are no longer paralysed by cultural relativity but can ma'e decisions
regarding any text, which means that decisions can be made according to what !ym
(4<<<9 ()< calls 6an ethics of contextuali:ed human relations rather than a barrage of
abstract universal rules8. 8>uic'ly and with $ustified (ethical confidence8 (!ym ())49
(1;. In short, as !ym puts it they have translational competenceThis, possibly
surprisingly, is also the essence of four out five of Hewmar's Cive !urposes of
translation (xxxx())=9 ;17-. The fifth, by the way, regards language teaching. . The
translator, now conscious of the gaps is ready to mind them from a third position,
evaluating the best alternative context by context.
).4 Constructive Marginality
This final level is where #ennett, himself, places the cultural mediator at this level. T
2owever, this stage is aThe person, here, has a meta7map of the world, over and above
any culture7bound mapslevel above cultures. A person at this level has no specific
(;
8cultural8 identity, and there are. 2is or her identity contains no un>uestioned
assumptions. As the heading title implies, marginality brings with it isolation. The
reason has much to do with thebeliefs about &the other insiderMoutsider gap. Cellow
insiders trust each other partly because they have similar boundaries, and share the same
gaps. A mediator, at this level, may help negotiate others gapscultural differences, but
will have few of his or her own to share.
2oweverI believe, however, that once a translator has reached mediation is e>ually
possible at the contextual evaluation stage, a where a translator has already fully
changed status andas mediator is already capable fully able to satisfy Tafts (()-(9 ;=
re>uirement that mediators are capable of 6interpreting the expressions, intentions,
perceptions, and expectations of each cultural group to the other EFG6 . 7 rather than
locally reacting to texts. (Taft ()-(9 ;=.
(<. %ind the Iap
An extension of this model, The Lnified Cield model (Dilts ())<9 (=-, will be proposed
after the has two interesting aspectsThe importance of a translators rite of passage in
relation to &the cultural turn and the changing status revolve principally around two
changes 9 time and perceptual position. 6Time8 is in fact an essential component.
Though a belief tends to be thought of as withstanding time, very few do. In reality, as
both the model and common sense suggest, beliefs about the world do change over time
in response to a variety of factors, though rational argument is very rarely one of them.
The change has more to do with the change in cognition, which can then help in opening
up options towards the interpretation of the surrounding reality (see Dilts ())<.
%ediators focus on the gaps between insider and outsider readingcultures loo'ing for a
winWwin situation where the target reader is encouraged to stretch his or her map of the
world to upta'e up new notions within his or her possible area of cooperation. 5ith
ethnorelativity the gaps between the two worlds are consciously reduced, whilst, on the
other hand, the beliefs inherent in the ethnocentric stages will tend to promote gap
strengthening strategies.
the culturessIn theory the mediator will manipulate the text $ust enough for the outsider
to gain an insight into the insider world from $ust outside hers. The reader is, as it were,
in the gap between the two worlds. In practice, of course, it is utopia to suggest that a
reader will be able to upta'e any significant differences as an insider would. If it ta'es a
so$ourner or translator years to move developmentally from the honeymoon period to
assimilation, the reader can hardly be expected, for example, to appreciate the
politeness of +tefanias re>uest, be transported to an Italian bar and cognitively ta'e up
the tastes, smells and all7important culture7bound rituals that surround the early morning
coffee during the reading of a text. but we may at least translate Pminding the gaps8. 5e
can partially reconstruct the re>uest in the gap between "alvinos world and that of an
(*
outsider. In the following example, +tefania is Italian, as is the coffee, and she is not
impolite9 6+he as'ed the waiter for an espresso, 6thic', double and really hot8.
(1
A model can only wor' D or not8. +tatements resolve the freeMfaithful debate and
highlight the need for translators to pass from local to global F
Horm flouters, as "hesterman (())19 ;B points out, threaten normality,
produce difference and are >uic'ly ostraci:ed or punished
#I#@I,I?A!2K
Arro$o ?., ())1, 6The &Death of the Author and the @imits of the Translators
0isibility, in +nell72ornby %., JettmarovX Y 3 /aindl, /. (eds., Translation as
(ntercultural Co##unication, Amsterdam 3 !hiladelphia, #en$amins, pp. 4(7=4.
#a'er, %ona (())* &@inguistics and "ultural +tudies. "omplementary or "ompeting
!aradigms in Translation +tudiesO&, in Angeli'a @auer, heidrun Ier:ymisch7Arbogast,
Johann 2aller and Arich +teiner (eds 0'erset:ungs/issenschaft i# 0#'ruch:
1estschridt fur olfra# ilss, Iunter Harr 0erlag Tubingen, )74<.
#assnett +usan (())( Translation $tudies, @ondon9 %ethuen
!ennett, ".ilton, #$, (%&&', 6NTowards (thnorelativismN) * +evelopmental "odel of
,ntercultural Sensitivity8N- in %. ?. Paige, %ichael, ?. .ed$/- Education for the
Intercultural Experience- Intercultural !ress, 0armouth- "aine, 9 Intercultural
!resspp., 1123'$
#ennett %. J., ())-, 6Intercultural "ommunication9 A "urrent !erspective8, in %. J.
#ennett (ed., Basic Concepts of (ntercultural Co##unication: $elected &eadings,
Intercultural !ress Inc., Karmouth, %A, pp. (7=B.
#ennett J., #ennett %. and3 5. Allen, ())), 6Developing "ulture in the @anguage
"lassroom8, in ?. %. !aige, D. @ange 3 K. A. Kershova (eds, Culture as the Core:
(ntegrating Culture into the 2anguage Curriculu#, "enter for Advanced ?esearch in
@anguage Ac>uisition, 5or'ing !aper (;, Lniversity of %innesota, (%I, pp. (=7B*.
#ochner +. (ed., ()-(, The Mediating %erson: Bridges 'et/een Cultures, +chen'man,
"ambridge.
#oylan, !., (4<<<, PTo #e or not to #e9 +uccess or Cailure in Intercultural
"ommunicationP, in D.onal @ynch 3 A.drian !ilbeam (eAds., .eritage and %rogress.
1ro# the %past to the 1future in (intercultural 0understanding., #ath9 @T+M+IATA?,
#ath, pp.(<*7((*.
#ryson, #., ())(, Mother Tongue: The English 2anguage, !enguin #oo's, @ondon.
#ryson, #., ())B, Made in A#erica, %artin +ec'er and3 5arburg, @ondon.
Chesterman- *.,ndrew %&&3a, Memes of Translation; the Spread of Ideas in
Translation Theory- John #en$amins, *msterdam and 3 Philadelphia.9 John
#en$amins.
Chesterman- *., ndrew (%&&3b, 6(thics of Translation8- in %. Snell24ornby %.- Y.
#ettmarov5 Y 3 /., 6aindl, .eds/, Translation as Intercultural Communication-
#en$amins, *msterdam and 3 Philadelphia9 #en$amins- pp. %732%89$
De #eaugrande, ?obert and Dressler, 5olfgang. (()-( Text and Context, @ondon9
@ongman.
(-
Dillon, Ieorge (())4 &Insider ?eading and @inguistic Corm9 "ontextual /nowledge
and the ?eading of @ingistic Discourse8, in %. Toolan (ed 2anguage Text and Context,
@ondon and Hew Kor'9 ?outledge
Dilts, ?obert (())< Changing Belief $yste#s /ith C2%, "alifornia9 %eta !ublications.
+odds #$- %&&:, ;*llantica commedia degli errori) <r Crappy (nglish in ,talian
Restaurants=- RITT- %- pp$ %7'2%73$
Auropean "ommission "ommunication Team Translation +ervice Auropa.eu
http9MMeuropa.eu.intMcommMtranslationMenMeylMen.pdf, last visited <BM<BM<4
Cantini, A. A., 4<<<, 6A "entral "oncern9 Developing Intercultural "ompetence, $(T
7ccasional %apers, (, pp. 4;7B4.
2all A. T., ()1*, Beyond Culture, Anchor !ressMDoubleday, Hew Kor'.
2all ()1*
Crayn, %ichael 3 David #ur'e (4<<< Celia5s $ecret: An (nvestigation, @ondon9 Caber
and Caber.
2all, A.T. (()-= The !ance of 2ife, Hew Kor'9 Anchor !ressMDoubleday.
2alliday, %.A./. 3 2asan, ?. (()-) @anguage, "ontext and Text9 aspects of language
in a social7semiotic perspective, ,xford9 ,xford Lniversity !ress.
2ammer, %. ?., ())), 6The Intercultural Development Inventory9 a %easure of
Intercultural +ensitivity8, in +. %. Cowler 3 %. I. %umford (eds., (ntercultural
$ource'ook: Crosscultural Training Methods, 0ol. 4, Intercultural !ress, Karmouth, %A,
pp.*(71).
/atan D., forthcoming, 65hen Difference is not Dangerous9 %odelling Intercultural
"ompetence for #usiness, in !. "ortese 3 D. 2ymes (eds., Textus3 ZZZ, 4, 2anguage
in and Across .u#an 6roups.
2ermans, Theo (())) Translation in $yste#s: !escriptive and $yste#ic Approaches
Explained, %anchester, +t. Jerome.
2ewson, @ 3 J. %artin (())( ?edefining Translation9 The 0ariational Approach,
@ondon, ?outledge.
.ofstede3 6eert *,BB,- Cultures and 7rgani:ations: $oft/are of the Mind3 2ondon:
Mc6ra/-.ill.
/atan D. 3 +traniero7+ergio, C., 4<<(, 6@oo' 5hos Tal'ing9 the Athics of
Antertainment and Tal' +how Interpreting8, The Translator, 0ol. 19 4, pp.
=
4(=74=-.
Italo "alvino (()1< 6li a#ori difficili3 Turin9 Ainaudi editore.
6atan- +.,avid %&&&b, ;>hat is it Thats Going on 4ere?) "ediating Cultural
Frames in Translation=- Textus ,,, pp.9 79&2718$
6atan +., avid (%&&&a, Translating Cultures, an Introduction for Translators,
Interpreters and Mediators- St$ #erome Publishing,9 "anchester$
6atan +., avid (%&&8b, ;The Translator as Cultural "ediator=- Duaderno
(Programma Sociologia Internaionale, Seione Relaione Internaionali- Duaderno,
n$ &8 @ 1- Iori:ia9 Istituto di +ociologia Interna:ionale. pp. (7((.
=
()
/atan, David (())*a PDeedes and %isdeedes9 the "ulture #ound Hature of Interpreting
%eaningP, in ". J. Taylor (ed, Aspects of English ((3 "ampanotto, Ldine. (4(7(B<.
/atan, David (())= P"onversational Implicatures and Translation Implications in
NTroilus and "ressidaNP, in I. "aliumi (ed, $hakespeare e la sua ereditE3 Atti del F)
Convegno Ca:ionale dellGAssoca:ione di Anglistica3 %ar#a3 AA-A= 7tto're ,BBA,
Adi:ioni Yara, !arma. =B17=;;. (4pp.
/atan, David (())4 PTradu:ione e significato pragmatico ne NI %ortiNP, &ivista
interna:ionale di tecnica di yradu:ione, <9 (((7(().
/atan D. 3 +traniero7+ergio, C., 4<<(, 6@oo' 5hos Tal'ing9 The Athics of
Antertainment in Tal' +how Interpreting8 in Anthony !ym (ed. The Translator: The
&eturn to Ethics, +pecial Issue, 4<<(9 4, pp. 4(=74=-
/ondo, %., ())<, N5hat "onference Interpreters +hould Hot #e Axpected to DoN, The
(nterpretersG Ce/sletter, =, pp. ;)7*;.
@efevre, A., 3 +. #assnett, ())<, 6!rousts Irandmother and the Thousand and ,ne
Hights9 The &"ultural Turn in Translation +tudies8, in +. #assnett and A. @efevre (eds.,
Translation3 .istory and Culture, ?outledge, @ondon., pp. (7(=.
Levine- +.eana , R$ and 3 *delman- ".ara , !$, (%&&', !eyond "anguage# Cross$
Cultural Communication- !rentice72all, (nglewood Cliffs- A#9. !rentice72all.
@evinson, +tephen ". (()-= %rag#atics, "ambridge9 "ambridge Lniversity !ress
%alinows'i, #., E()4=G ())B 6The !roblem of %eaning in !rimitive @anguages8, in %.
Janet (ed., 2anguage and 2iteracy in $ocial %ractice: A &eader, %ultilingual %atters,
@ondon, pp. (7(<.
AewmarB- P., aul (%&&', Paragraphs on Translation- #ristol9 "ultilingual "atters,
#ristol%
AewmarB- P., aul (%&CC, & Text'oo( of Translation- !rentice 2all, 4emel
4empstead9 !rentice 2all$
Aida ($ *$, (%&&3, ;The Principles of +iscourse Structure and Content in
Relation to Translating=- in 6$ 6laudy and 3 #$ 6ohn .eds./, Transferre )ecesse
Est# Proceedings of the *
nd
International Conference on Current Trends in Studies of
Translation and Interpreting +$, Septem'er, -../, !udapest, 0ungary, +cholastica,
!udapest9 +cholastica- pp$ '3271$
Paige "- R$- %&&'- ;<n the Aature of ,ntercultural (Dperiences and ,ntercultural
(ducation=- in "$ R Paige,. .ed$/, Education for the Intercultural Experience-
,ntercultural Press,9 0armouth- "aine- pp$%21%$
Pym *$- 1999- ;<n Cooperation=- in "$ <lohan .ed./- Intercultural 1aultlines#
Research Models in Translation Studies I% Textual and Cognitive &spects- St$ #erome-
"anchester- p$ %C(7()4*$
Robinson, +$, %&&3- !ecoming a Translator# &n &ccelerated Course- Routledge,9
London$
SchEffner C.hristina and 3 4$ 6elly24olmes .eds./, (%&&:, Cultural 1unctions of
Translation- "levedon9 "ultilingual "atters,. "levedon.
+collon, ?on and +u:anne 5ong +collon (()); (ntercultural Co##unication: A
!iscourse Approach, ,xford9 #lac'well.
4<
Snell24ornby- "., ary (%&CC, Translation Studies# an Integrated &pproach- John
#en$amins, *msterdam and 3 Philadelphia9 John #en$amins. .
Sperber +$ and 3 >ilson- +$- %&C8- Relevance- !lacBwell- <Dford$
Taft, ?., ()-( 6The ?ole and !ersonality of the mediatorP, in +. #ochner (ed., The
Mediating %erson: Bridges 'et/een Cultures, +chen'man, "ambridge, pp. ;=7--
Fenuti- L., awrence (%&&:, The Translator2s Invisi'ility 3 & 0istory of Translation-
Routledge, 9 London and 3 Aew 0orB$
Fenuti- L., awrence (%&&C, The Scandals of Translation- Routledge,9 London G Aew
0orB$
0ermeer, 2ans (4<<< 6+'opos and "ommission in Translational Action8, in The
Translation studies &eader, ?outledge9 @ondon, 44(74=4.
0ermeer, 2ans J. (()1- &Ain ?ahem f[r eine Allgemeine Translationstherie, 2e'ende
$prachen =9 ))7(<4.
>olf- ".,ichaela (%&&3, ;Translation as a Process of Power) *spects of Cultural
*nthropology in Translation=, in "$ Snell22hornby- H$ #ettmarovI and 3 6$ 6aindl
.eds$/- Translation as Intercultural Communication- #ohn !enJamins, 9 *msterdam
and 3 Philadelphia- pp. %1'2%'7$
0ermeer, 2. J., 4<<<, +'opos and "ommission in Translational Action8, in @. 0enuti
(ed., The Translation $tudies &eader, ?outledge, @ondon.
4(
i
Another example of the impact of a translation which does not ta'e account of the value gaps can be found in /atan
(())*.