Festschrift in Honour of Christina Schäffner
Kirsten Malmkjaer, Leicester: What’s The Point Of Universals, Then?
Kirsten Malmkjaer Leicester What’s The Point Of Universals, Then? 1 Introduction In their introduction to a collection of articles on translation competence, Schäffner and Adab (2000: viii) remark that translation competence “has thus far proved difficult to identify.” Their volume represents a significant contribu- tion to that effort and is widely quoted, as a search of “developing translation competence” on Google Scholar will demonstrate. Thanks to it and to further research that it has encouraged, we have arrived at a clear understanding of the very many skills and abilities and the many kinds of knowledge that translators need in order to be able to produce a product that is fit for purpose. In a rash moment (see Malmkjær 2009b: 132), I have hinted that the term ‘translation competence’ ought (also) to be used to designate a fundamentally unconscious mental state realised as (Malmkjær 2009b: 126) a translator’s knowledge of their languages simultaneously as one system, and as at least separable, and as related (as distinct from their ability to use their lan- guages individually). I now think that this was a mistake. I would advocate, instead, that we retain the term translation competence for the array of abilities that a translator needs in order to produce product fit for purpose, but that we also attend to the more basic, unconscious knowledge underlying these abilities, perhaps as defined above, and that we speak of this as translator competence. In this article, I would like to posit two translation...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.Or login to access all content.