Defining explicitation in translation

KAMENICKÁ, Renata. Defining explicitation in translation. Sborník prací Filozofické fakulty Brněnské univerzity, Řada anglistická: Brno Studies in English 33. Brno: Masarykova univerzita v Brně, 2007, roč. 33/2007, č. 1, s. 45-57, 155 s. ISSN 1211-1791.

Základní údaje

• Originální název: Defining explicitation in translation
• Název česky: Definice překladové explicitace
• Autoři: KAMENICKÁ, Renata (203 Česká republika, garant, domácí).
• Vydání: Sborník prací Filozofické fakulty Brněnské univerzity, Řada anglistická: Brno Studies in English 33, Brno, Masarykova univerzita v Brně, 2007, 1211-1791.

Další údaje

• Originální jazyk: angličtina
• Typ výsledku: Článek v odborném periodiku
• Obor: 60200 6.2 Languages and Literature
• Stát vydavatele: Česká republika
• Utajení: není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství
• WWW: URL
• Kód RIV: RIV/00216224:14210/07:00033386
• Organizační jednotka: Filozofická fakulta
• Klíčová slova anglicky: explicitation; translation; definition; implicitation; specification; generalization; addition; omission
• Štítky: addition, Definition, explicitation, generalization, implicitation, omission, specification, Translation
• Příznaky: Mezinárodní význam, Recenzováno

Anotace

The paper discusses problems in defining explicitation (and implicitation) in translation for the purposes of descriptive translation studies, drawing on empirical material and theoretical concepts such as frame theory or figure/ground alignment. Inconsistencies in different approaches taken to the twin concepts in prescriptive theory as well as descriptive research are pointed out. The first main focus of the paper is the connection between explicitation/implicitation and specification/generalization, which is shown to be more complicated than usually described in literature. The second main focus of the paper is the borderline between explicitation/implicitation on the on hand and addition/omission on the other. It is argued that the borderline is intrinsically fuzzy, due to the cognitive mechanisms involved in retrieving implicit information that can be modelled by means of Fillmore's frames, understood as non-accidental networks of salient and less salient contiguities. It is argued that explicitation and implicitation should be treated as prototype categories.

Anotace česky

The paper discusses problems in defining explicitation (and implicitation) in translation for the purposes of descriptive translation studies, drawing on empirical material and theoretical concepts such as frame theory or figure/ground alignment. Inconsistencies in different approaches taken to the twin concepts in prescriptive theory as well as descriptive research are pointed out. The first main focus of the paper is the connection between explicitation/implicitation and specification/generalization, which is shown to be more complicated than usually described in literature. The second main focus of the paper is the borderline between explicitation/implicitation on the on hand and addition/omission on the other. It is argued that the borderline is intrinsically fuzzy, due to the cognitive mechanisms involved in retrieving implicit information that can be modelled by means of Fillmore's frames, understood as non-accidental networks of salient and less salient contiguities. It is argued that explicitation and implicitation should be treated as prototype categories.