翻译研究派

Second, even if the translator explicitly elaborates in an introduction or preface the main criteria and poetic system governing the translated text, that description may not correspond to the original intention. Thus, the scholar must trace the relationship between translation and original along an imaginary path, for texts documenting the path are virtually nonexistent.
Translation studies’ studies’ place in literary history
翻译研究派的主要内容
翻译研究派主要是探讨译文产生和作用为主的学 派，极大的冲击了当时翻译领域中以文学和语 言学研究为中心的两种主导研究模式。 七十年代，该学派主要采用译入文化文学研究手 段，侧重直观法和文学翻译。 八十年代，，该派学者Lambert（兰伯特）转向 客观描述和个案研究；Bassnett（巴斯奈特） 和Lefevere （列费维尔）转向文化研究模式， 将翻译置于一定历史条件下的各种社会关系中 进行研究。
Leabharlann Baidu
翻译研究派理论家的研究虽然各有侧重但 总的来说他们的方法论是一致的，都认为必须 先就需要进行对比的特征达成共识，再确定这 些决定性转换在作品中的什么地方出现，最后 才系统分析这些转换。 既包括共时性方面的结构分析，又包括历 时性方面的文学作品之间及社会文化的分析， 以此确定某一译文的意义和功能，这样就为描 述翻译过程提供了一种较为严密的方法。
However obvious the relationship may appear, such a description is not easy, for two reasons. First, almost invariably, no material for analysis exists except the two texts, the original and the translation, and the scholar has no access to what went on in the translator’s mind in term of the decision-making process.
More important than collecting the early essays in anthologies and fleshing out the historical record has been the attempt to recover the spirit of the times. Theo Hermans has addressed this spirit of discovery in the section called “An Invisible College” in Translation in Systems (1999).
“The task of the scholar who wishes to describe the relationship between the translated text and its original would seem to be obvious. He must attempt to determine the features of the translator’s two maps and to discover his system of rules, those of deviation, projection, and above all ,correspondence – in other words ,the translator’s poetic.” (Holmes,1978:77:1988:87)
New scholarship has added to the record of early translation studies. John McFarlane concluded his essay with a call to explore the procedures of translation, of what actual translations do: “Before we can begin to make value judgments about translation, we must know more about its nature, and it is suggested that an analysis of procedure-in the belief that translation is as translation does –is the approach that promises best”(1953：93). One can see the importance of McFarlane’s ideas, especially claims such as “translation is as translation does,” on the early translation studies scholars.
One of the pioneer leading the effort to develop a model for better describing translations in a comprehensive fashion has been José Lambert whose approach differs from early translation studies. José Lambert(兰伯特)，主要是译学客观 描述和个案研究。他将系统论与现实世 界紧密相联，开拓了将描写学派的翻译 理论研究指向大众文化的新起点。
Translation studies, which began with a fairly modest proposal, that of focusing on the translations themselves and better describing the process of the translation, has discovered that the task will be much more complex than initially conceived.
During the early years, the development of a personal network and the exchange of ideas was crucial to the emergence of the new field.
Holmes aware of the magnitude of such a task, argued that working out such a system codification and understanding the process of describing literature in above fashion is the next necessary step for the field.