Metalinguistic Knowledge/Awareness/Ability in Cognitive Translation Studies: Some Questions

Q2 Arts and Humanities Hermes (Denmark) Pub Date : 2018-06-11 DOI:10.7146/HJLCB.V0I57.106191
Sandra L. Halverson
{"title":"Metalinguistic Knowledge/Awareness/Ability in Cognitive Translation Studies: Some Questions","authors":"Sandra L. Halverson","doi":"10.7146/HJLCB.V0I57.106191","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":" Throughout the history of contemporary Translation Studies, theoretical, empirical and pedagogically oriented work has made use of a range of notions that assume a translator’s metalinguistic knowledge, or knowledge about language, rather than knowledge of a language or languages. Examples include ideas such as ‘translation strategies’, translational ‘problem-solving’, ‘the monitor model’ and models of translator competence. Issues related to learning, automatization, and consciousness also figure in many of the discussions. At the same time, studies in bi- and multilingualism and second (and third) language acquisition have also developed a range of related ideas and concepts to deal with some of the same issues and concerns in bi- and multilingual language production more broadly (see e.g. Jessner 2006: 40-43). Some recent translation process studies have begun to target questions related to metalinguistic awareness (e.g. Ehrensberger-Dow/Künzli 2010, Ehrensberger-Dow/Perrin 2009) while the underlying assumptions of some of the commonly used ideas are also being questioned (e.g. Muñoz Martín 2016a). The range of available ideas, the significant differences between them, and the increasingly important role these ideas are playing in cognitive translation research mandate a critical look at this conceptual field. In this paper, I present some current views on metalinguistic knowledge/awareness/ability within the bi- and multilingualism and second language acquisition (SLA) literature, and compare these to some of the most widely used constructs in Cognitive Translation Studies (CTS). The aim is to clear the conceptual ground and to single out some of the most pressing questions to be addressed regarding this particular aspect of translational cognition.  ","PeriodicalId":38609,"journal":{"name":"Hermes (Denmark)","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hermes (Denmark)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7146/HJLCB.V0I57.106191","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

 Throughout the history of contemporary Translation Studies, theoretical, empirical and pedagogically oriented work has made use of a range of notions that assume a translator’s metalinguistic knowledge, or knowledge about language, rather than knowledge of a language or languages. Examples include ideas such as ‘translation strategies’, translational ‘problem-solving’, ‘the monitor model’ and models of translator competence. Issues related to learning, automatization, and consciousness also figure in many of the discussions. At the same time, studies in bi- and multilingualism and second (and third) language acquisition have also developed a range of related ideas and concepts to deal with some of the same issues and concerns in bi- and multilingual language production more broadly (see e.g. Jessner 2006: 40-43). Some recent translation process studies have begun to target questions related to metalinguistic awareness (e.g. Ehrensberger-Dow/Künzli 2010, Ehrensberger-Dow/Perrin 2009) while the underlying assumptions of some of the commonly used ideas are also being questioned (e.g. Muñoz Martín 2016a). The range of available ideas, the significant differences between them, and the increasingly important role these ideas are playing in cognitive translation research mandate a critical look at this conceptual field. In this paper, I present some current views on metalinguistic knowledge/awareness/ability within the bi- and multilingualism and second language acquisition (SLA) literature, and compare these to some of the most widely used constructs in Cognitive Translation Studies (CTS). The aim is to clear the conceptual ground and to single out some of the most pressing questions to be addressed regarding this particular aspect of translational cognition.  
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
认知翻译研究中的元语言知识/意识/能力:若干问题
纵观当代翻译研究的历史,理论的、实证的和以教学为导向的工作已经使用了一系列的概念,这些概念假定译者具有元语言知识,或关于语言的知识,而不是一种或几种语言的知识。例子包括“翻译策略”、翻译“问题解决”、“监控模型”和译者能力模型等概念。与学习、自动化和意识相关的问题也出现在许多讨论中。与此同时,关于双语和多语以及第二(和第三)语言习得的研究也发展了一系列相关的想法和概念,以更广泛地处理双语和多语语言产生中的一些相同问题和关注(见e.g. Jessner 2006: 40-43)。最近的一些翻译过程研究已经开始针对与元语言意识相关的问题(例如Ehrensberger-Dow/ k nzli 2010, Ehrensberger-Dow/Perrin 2009),而一些常用概念的潜在假设也受到质疑(例如Muñoz Martín 2016a)。可获得的思想范围、思想之间的显著差异以及这些思想在认知翻译研究中日益重要的作用要求我们对这一概念领域进行批判性的审视。本文介绍了双语、多语和二语习得(SLA)文献中关于元语言知识/意识/能力的一些最新观点,并将其与认知翻译研究(CTS)中使用最广泛的一些构式进行了比较。目的是澄清概念基础,并挑出一些最紧迫的问题,要解决关于翻译认知的这一特定方面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Hermes (Denmark)
Hermes (Denmark) Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Master Narratives in US Contemporary War Discourse: Situating and Constructing Identities of Self and Other Discourse Analysis of the 2022 Australian Tennis Open: A Multimodal Appraisal Perspective Strategies of Justification in Resolving Conflicts of Values and Interests. A Comparative Analysis of Constitutional Argumentation in Cases of Animal Sacrifice consentimiento informado en la comunicación médico-paciente: análisis crítico del marco legislativo Introduction: Evaluation, Argumentation and Narrative(s) in Conflicting Contexts
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1