@article{ART001355898},
author={이미경},
title={A Critical Review Contrasting Venuti’s “Ethics of Difference” and Foreignization with Berman’s Understanding of Foreignization},
journal={The Journal of Translation Studies},
issn={1229-795X},
year={2009},
volume={10},
number={2},
pages={83-104},
doi={10.15749/jts.2009.10.2.004}
TY - JOUR
AU - 이미경
TI - A Critical Review Contrasting Venuti’s “Ethics of Difference” and Foreignization with Berman’s Understanding of Foreignization
JO - The Journal of Translation Studies
PY - 2009
VL - 10
IS - 2
PB - The Korean Association for Translation Studies
SP - 83
EP - 104
SN - 1229-795X
AB - This paper explores two different aspects of “foreignization” in translation with respect to the translator’s role and the concepts of translation discourse. Foreignization is a notion that dates back to the well-known German theologian Friedrich Schleiermacher, and it has been discussed by many translation theorists with regard to its binary opposite, “domestication”. Lawrence Venuti, one of the most active post-colonial theorists in translation studies, tries to reveal the asymmetrical relations inherent in any translation project, intending to subvert the hegemonic language and culture by revealing the inequalities present in translation. Venuti starts his argument in a very controversial work based on the post colonial perspective, “The Scandals of Translation: Towards an ethics of difference,” by agreeing with Berman’s suspicions of “any literary translation that mystifies the inevitable domestication as an untroubled communicative act”. Berman suggests examining the deforming tendencies in translation “to receive the Foreign as Foreign,” which he calls “the analytic”. What makes the distinction between the ideas of Venuti and Berman is the translator’s status they define. Venuti claims that the translator should never be invisible and the translator’s “heterogeneous discourse” is critical in foreignizing translation. In contrast, Berman says the analytic in translation focuses on “the universals of deformation inherent in translating as such.” He maintains that the “negative analytic” should be extended by a “positive analytic”, an analysis of operations which have always limit the deformation, and it should be practiced in literary translation by a manipulation of signifiers.
KW - foreignization;Venuti;heterogeneous discourse;ethics of difference;Berman;the analytic
DO - 10.15749/jts.2009.10.2.004
ER -
이미경. (2009). A Critical Review Contrasting Venuti’s “Ethics of Difference” and Foreignization with Berman’s Understanding of Foreignization. The Journal of Translation Studies, 10(2), 83-104.
이미경. 2009, "A Critical Review Contrasting Venuti’s “Ethics of Difference” and Foreignization with Berman’s Understanding of Foreignization", The Journal of Translation Studies, vol.10, no.2 pp.83-104. Available from: doi:10.15749/jts.2009.10.2.004
이미경 "A Critical Review Contrasting Venuti’s “Ethics of Difference” and Foreignization with Berman’s Understanding of Foreignization" The Journal of Translation Studies 10.2 pp.83-104 (2009) : 83.
이미경. A Critical Review Contrasting Venuti’s “Ethics of Difference” and Foreignization with Berman’s Understanding of Foreignization. 2009; 10(2), 83-104. Available from: doi:10.15749/jts.2009.10.2.004
이미경. "A Critical Review Contrasting Venuti’s “Ethics of Difference” and Foreignization with Berman’s Understanding of Foreignization" The Journal of Translation Studies 10, no.2 (2009) : 83-104.doi: 10.15749/jts.2009.10.2.004
이미경. A Critical Review Contrasting Venuti’s “Ethics of Difference” and Foreignization with Berman’s Understanding of Foreignization. The Journal of Translation Studies, 10(2), 83-104. doi: 10.15749/jts.2009.10.2.004
이미경. A Critical Review Contrasting Venuti’s “Ethics of Difference” and Foreignization with Berman’s Understanding of Foreignization. The Journal of Translation Studies. 2009; 10(2) 83-104. doi: 10.15749/jts.2009.10.2.004
이미경. A Critical Review Contrasting Venuti’s “Ethics of Difference” and Foreignization with Berman’s Understanding of Foreignization. 2009; 10(2), 83-104. Available from: doi:10.15749/jts.2009.10.2.004
이미경. "A Critical Review Contrasting Venuti’s “Ethics of Difference” and Foreignization with Berman’s Understanding of Foreignization" The Journal of Translation Studies 10, no.2 (2009) : 83-104.doi: 10.15749/jts.2009.10.2.004
