Прикладное переводоведение и трансдисциплинарные исследования: понимание, изучение и трансформация перевода в профессиональных контекстах

Обложка

Цитировать

Полный текст

Аннотация

Исходя из общепринятых определений прикладной лингвистики, подчеркивающих ее инструментальность и практическую ориенированность на реальную жизнь, автор настоящей статьи стремится переместить акцент с междисциплинарности, которая в прошлом считалась основой связи прикладной лингвистики с переводоведением, на то, как ее отрасли системно сопряжены с зарождающейся парадигмой трансдисциплинарных исследований. Утверждается, что этот перенос акцента выступает как ключевой фактор, сложность и возможность для поступательного развития прикладного переводоведения, так как он направлен на рассмотрение ситуативных особенностей профессионального перевода. В статье показано, как трансдисциплинарность, ориентированная на исследование деятельности, представляет собой основу для изучения, понимания и узнавания того, что переводчики реально делают в рабочем контексте, с учетом определяющих условий, практик их усовершенствования, процессов и порядка деятельности, а также кардинальной трансформации професии на благо работодателей и заказчиков. Рассматриваются подходы к когнитивному переводоведению, в значительной мере опирающиеся на когнитивную парадигму 4EA и переводоведческую лингвоэтнографию, в рамках которых исследователи осваивают научные области, связанные со сложными социокогнитивными и социотехническими видами деятельности на рабочем месте. В статье предлагается модель трансдисциплинарного исследования деятельности в профессионельных условиях с целью необходимого перехода от междисциплинарности к трансдисциалинарности. Такая модель позволила бы исследовать профессиональные процессы и практики, продуктивно применять полученные результаты в ситуативных социокогнитивных и социотехнических контекстах на рабочих местах переводчиков, в организациях, которые являются их работодателями.

Об авторах

Гари Масси

Цюрихский университет прикладных наук

Автор, ответственный за переписку.
Email: gary.massey@zhaw.ch
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-7146-2606

директор Института письменного и устного перевода и заместитель декана Института прикладной лингвистики Цюрихского университета прикладной лингвистики (ZHAW), Швейцария. В сферу его научных интересов входят процесс перевода, переводческие и образовательные компетенции, обучение преподавателей и языковая индустрия. Он автор многочисленных публикаций, среди которых - главы в коллективных монографиях и статьи в международных журналах. Он также является соредактором издания “Bloomsbury Companion to Language Industry Studies” (Bloomsbury Academic, 2020).

Винтертур, Швейцария

Список литературы

  1. Abdallah, Kristiina. 2014. The interface between Bourdieu’s habitus and Latour’s agency: The work trajectories of two Finnish translators. In Gisella M. Vorderobermeier (ed.), Remapping Habitus in Translation Studies, 111-132. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789401210867_009
  2. Bernstein, Jay Hillel. 2015. Transdisciplinarity: A review of its origins, development, and current issues. Journal of Research Practice 11 (1). Article R1. http://jrp.icaap.org/ index.php/jrp/article/view/510/412 (accessed 30 April 2021).
  3. Brumfit, Christopher J. 1995. Teacher professionalism and research. In Guy Cook & Barbara Seidlhofer (eds.), Principle and Practice in Applied Linguistics, 27-41. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  4. Buzelin, Hélène. 2005. Unexpected allies: How Latour’s network theory could complement Bourdieusian analyses in translation studies. The Translator 11 (2), 193-218. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2005.10799198
  5. Buzelin, Hélène. 2007. Translations “in the making”. In M. Wolf and A. Fukari (eds.), Constructing a Sociology of Translation, 135-169. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  6. Cameron, Deborah, Elizabeth Frazer, Ben Rampton & Kay Richardson. 1992. Researching Language. Issues of Power and Method. London: Routledge.
  7. Chesterman, Andrew. 2002. On the interdisciplinarity of translation studies. Logos and Language 3 (1). 1-9.
  8. Clark, Andy & David J. Chalmers. 1998. The extended mind. Analysis 58 (1). 7-19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/analys/58.1.7
  9. Cravo, Ana & Josélia Neves. 2007. Action research in translation studies. Journal of Specialised Translation 7. 92-107. https://jostrans.org/issue07/art_cravo.php (accessed 28 March 2021).
  10. van Egdom, Gys-Walt, Patrick Cadwell, Hendrik Kockaert & Winibert Segers (eds.). 2020. Ergonomics. Special Issue of the Interpreter and Translator Trainer 14 (4). https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/ritt20/14/4 (accessed 28 March 2021).
  11. Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen. 2014. Challenges of translation process research at the workplace. MonTI 7 (2). 355-383. DOI: https://doi.org/10.6035/MonTI.2014.ne1.12
  12. Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen. 2015. An ergonomic perspective of professional translation. Meta 60 (2). 328-328. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7202/1032879ar
  13. Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen. 2017. An ergonomic perspective of translation. In John W. Schwieter & Aline Ferreira (eds.), Handbook of Translation and Cognition, 332-349. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119241485.ch18
  14. Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen & Andrea Hunziker Heeb. 2016. Investigating the ergonomics of the technologized translation workplace. In Ricardo Muñoz Martín (ed.), Reembedding Translation Process Research, 69-88, Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.128.04ehr
  15. Ehrensberger-Dow, M., Andrea Hunziker Heeb, Gary Massey, Ursula Meidert, Silke Neumann & Heidrun Becker. 2016. An international survey of the ergonomics of professional translation. ILCEA 27. https://journals.openedition.org/ilcea/4004 (accessed 28 March 2021). DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/ilcea.4004
  16. Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen & Riitta Jääskeläinen. 2019. Ergonomics of translation: Methodological, practical, and educational implications. In Helle V. Damm, Mathilde Nisbeth Brøgger & Karen Korning Zethsen (eds.), Moving Boundaries in Translation Studies, 132-150. London: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315121871
  17. Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen & Gary Massey. 2018. Watch and learn: How cutting-edge workplace research can help to improve working conditions for professional linguists. The Linguist 57 (5). 12-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21256/zhaw-4036
  18. Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen & Gary Massey. 2019. Socio-technical issues in professional translation practice. In Hanna Risku, Regina Rogl & Jelena Milošević (eds.), Translation Practice in the Field. Current Research on Socio-Cognitive Processes, 105-122. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.6.1.06ehr
  19. Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen & Gary Massey. 2020. Translation workplace-based research. In Minako O’Hagan (ed.), Routledge Handbook of Translation and Technology, 354-369. London: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315311258
  20. Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen & Sharon O’Brien. 2015. Ergonomics of the translation workplace: Potential for cognitive friction. Translation Spaces 4 (1). 98-118. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.4.1.05ehr
  21. Gambier, Yves. 2019. Impact of technology on translation and translation studies. Russian Journal of Linguistics 23 (2). 344-361. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22363/2312-9182-2019-23-2-344-361
  22. Gambier, Yves & Luc van Doorslaer. 2016. Disciplinary dialogues with translation studies: The background chapter. In Yves Gambier & Luc van Doorslaer (eds.), Border crossings: Translation Studies and Other Disciplines, 1-21. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.126.01gam
  23. Grabe, William. 2010. Applied linguistics: A twenty-first-century discipline. In Robert B. Kaplan (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Applied Linguistics, 34-44. 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195384253.013.0002
  24. Hirsch Hadorn, Gertrude, Susette Biber-Klemm, Walter Grossenbacher-Mansuy, Holger Hoffmann-Riem, Dominique Joye, Christian Pohl, Urs Wiesmann & Elisabeth Zemp. 2008. The emergence of transdisciplinarity as a form of research. Gertrude Hirsch Hadorn, Holger Hoffmann-Riem, Susette Biber-Klemm, Walter Grossenbacher-Mansuy, Donnique Joye, Christian Pohl, Urs Wiesmann & Elisabeth Zemp (eds.), Handbook of Transdisciplinary Research, 19-39. Berlin: Springer. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4020-6699-3_2 (accessed 28 March 2021).
  25. Hoffmann-Riem, Holger, Susette Biber-Klemm, Walter Grossenbacher-Mansuy, Gertrude Hirsch Hadorn, Dominique Joye, Christian Pohl, Urs Wiesmann & Elisabeth Zemp. 2008. The idea of the handbook. In Gertrude Hirsch Hadorn, Holger Hoffmann-Riem, Susette Biber-Klemm, Walter Grossenbacher-Mansuy, Donnique Joye, Christian Pohl, Urs Wiesmann & Elisabeth Zemp (eds.), Handbook of Transdisciplinary Research, 3-17. Berlin: Springer. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4020-6699-3_1 (accessed 28 March 2021).
  26. Holmes, James S. 2004. The name and nature of translation studies. In Lawrence Venuti (ed.), The Translation Studies Reader, 180-192. 2nd edn. London: Routledge. (Original work published 1972)
  27. Hubscher-Davidson, Séverine. 2008. A reflection on action research processes in translator training. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 2 (1). 75-92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2008.10798767
  28. Hutchins, Edwin. 2010. Cognitive ecology. Topics in Cognitive Science 2 (4). 705-715. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2010.01089.x
  29. Jahn, Thomas, Matthias Bergmann & Florian Keil. 2012. Transdisciplinarity: Between mainstreaming and marginalization. Ecological Economics 79. 1-10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.04.017
  30. Koskinen, Kaisa. 2008. Translating institutions: An Ethnographic Study of EU Translation. London: Routledge.
  31. Koskinen, Kaisa. 2020. Translatorial linguistic ethnography in organizations. In Sierk Horn, Philippe Lecomte & Susanne Tietze (eds.), Managing Multilingual Workplaces: Empirical, Methodological and Pedagogic Perspectives, 60-78. London: Routledge. DOI : https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429431128
  32. Kuznik, Anna. 2016. La traduction comme travail: perspectives croisées en ergonomie, sociologie et traductologie [Translation as work: Cross perspectives in ergonomics, sociology and translation studies]. ILCEA 27. https://journals.openedition.org/ilcea/4036 (accessed 28 March 2021). DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/ilcea.4036
  33. Kuznik, Anna & Joan Miguel Verd. 2010. Investigating real work situations in translation agencies. Work content and its components. Hermes Journal of Language and Communication in Business 44. 25-43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7146/hjlcb.v23i44.97263
  34. Lavault-Olléon, Elisabeth. 2011a. L’ergonomie, nouveau paradigme pour la traductologie [Ergonomics as a new paradigm for translation studies]. ILCEA 14. https://journals.openedition.org/ilcea/1078 (accessed 28 March 2021). DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/ilcea.1078
  35. Lavault-Olléon, Elisabeth (ed.). 2011b. Traduction et ergonomie [Translation and ergonomics]. ILCEA 14. Special Issue. https://journals.openedition.org/ilcea/1031 (accessed 28 March 2021). DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/ilcea.1031
  36. Lavault-Olléon, Elisabeth. 2016. Traducteurs à l’œuvre: une perspective ergonomique en traductologie appliquée. [Translators at work: An ergonomic perspective on applied translation studies]. ILCEA 27. https://journals.openedition.org/ilcea/4051 (accessed 28 March 2021). DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/ilcea.4051
  37. Lave, Jean & Etienne Wenger. 1991. Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815355
  38. Lewin, Kurt. 1946. Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues 2 (4), 34-46. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1946.tb02295.x
  39. Massey, Gary. 2019. The bigger picture: Experiential learning from the classroom to the organization. In Don Kiraly & Gary Massey (eds.), Towards Authentic Experiential Learning in Translator Education, 2nd edn., 210-231. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars.
  40. Massey, Gary, Peter Jud & Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow. 2015. Building competence and bridges: The potential of action research in translator education. In Paulina Pietrzak and Miklaj Deckert (eds.), Constructing Translation Competence, 27-48. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
  41. McCarty, Willard. (1999). Humanities computing as interdiscipline. http://www.iath.virginia.edu/hcs/mccarty.html (accessed 30 April 2021).
  42. Meidert, Ursula, Silke Neumann, Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow & Heidrun Becker. 2016. Physical ergonomics at translators’ workplaces: Findings from ergonomic workplace assessments and interviews. ILCEA 27. https://journals.openedition.org/ilcea/3996 (accessed 28 March 2021). DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/ilcea.3996
  43. Mitchell, Cynthia, Dana Cordell & Dena Fam. 2015. Beginning at the end: The outcome spaces framework to guide purposive transdisciplinary research. Futures 65. 86-96. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2014.10.007
  44. Munday, Jeremy. 2016. Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and Applications. 4th edn. London: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315691862
  45. Muñoz Martín, Ricardo. 2010a. On paradigms and cognitive translatology. In Gregory M. Shreve & Erik Angelone (eds.), Translation and Cognition, 169-187. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ata.xv.10mun
  46. Muñoz Martín, Ricardo. 2010b. The way they were: Subject profiling in translation process research. In Inger M. Mees, Fabio Alves & Susanne Göpferich (eds.), Methodology, Technology and Innovation in Translation Process Research, 87-108. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur Press.
  47. Muñoz Martín, Ricardo. 2013.. More than a way with words: The interface between cognitive Iinguistics and cognitive translatology. In A. Rojo & I. Ibarretxe-Antuñano (eds.), Cognitive Linguistics and Translation, 75-94. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110302943.75
  48. Muñoz Martín, Ricardo. 2016. Reembedding translation process research: An introduction. In Ricardo Muñoz Martín (ed.), Reembedding Translation Process Research, 1-19. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.128
  49. O’Brien, Sharon. 2012. Translation as human-computer interaction. Translation Spaces 1, 101-122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.1.05obr
  50. O’Brien, Sharon. 2015. The borrowers: Researching the cognitive aspects of translation. In Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow, Susanne Göpferich & Sharon O᾽Brien (eds.), Interdisciplinarity in Translation and Interpreting Process Research, 5-17. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.72.02obr
  51. O’Brien, Sharon & Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow. 2017. Why ergonomics matters to translators. ATA Chronicle XLVI (1). 12-14.
  52. Olohan, Maeve. 2017. Knowing in translation practice. A practice-theoretical perspective. Translation Spaces 6 (1). 160-181. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.6.1.08olo
  53. Pedersen, Daniel. 2019. Managing transcreation projects: An ethnographic study. In Hanna Risku, Regina Rogl & Jelena Milošević (eds.), Translation Practice in the Field. Current Research on Socio-Cognitive Processes, 105-122. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.105.03ped
  54. Perrin, Daniel. 2012. Transdisciplinary action research. Bringing together communication and media researchers and practitioners. Journal of Applied Journalism and Media Studies 1 (1). 3-23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1386/ajms.1.1.3_1
  55. Peters-Geiben, Lucia. 2016. La prévention comportementale et contextuelle: intégrer une approche ergonomique dans la formation des traducteurs [Behavioural and contextual prevention: Integrating an ergonomic approach into the training of translators]. ILCEA 27. https://journals.openedition.org/ilcea/4026 (accessed 28 March 2021). DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/ilcea.4026
  56. Pohl, Christian, Bernhard Truffer & Gertrude Hirsch Hadorn. 2017. Addressing wicked problems through transdisciplinary research. In Robert Frodeman (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity, 319-331. 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198733522.013.26
  57. Pym, Anthony. 2011. What technology does to translating. Translation and Interpreting 3 (1). 1-9. http://www.trans-int.org/index.php/transint/article/viewFile/121/81 (accessed 28 March 2021).
  58. Reason, Peter & Hilary Bradbury. 2006. The Handbook of Action Research. London: SAGE.
  59. Risku, Hanna. 2010. A cognitive scientific view on technical communication and translation. Do embodiment and situatedness really make a difference? Target 22 (1). 94-111. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/target.22.1.06ris
  60. Risku, Hanna 2014. Translation process research as interaction research: From mental to socio-cognitive processes. MonTI Special Issue 1. Minding Translation. 331-353. DOI: https://doi.org/10.6035/MonTI.2014.ne1.11
  61. Risku, Hanna. 2016. Translationsmanagement. Interkulturelle Fachkommunikation im Informationszeitalter [Translation management. Intercultural technical communication in the information age]. 3rd edn. Tübingen: Gunther Narr.
  62. Risku, Hanna. 2017. Ethnographies of translation and situated cognition. In John W. Schwieter and Aline Ferreira (eds.), The Handbook of Translation and Cognition, 290-310. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119241485.ch16
  63. Risku, Hanna, Regina Rogl & Jelena Milošević. 2019. Introduction. Translation practice in the field: Current research on socio-cognitive processes. In Hanna Risku, Regina Rogl & Jelena Milošević (eds.), Translation Practice in the Field: Current Research on Socio-Cognitive Processes, 1-24. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.105
  64. Risku, Hanna, Regina Rogl & Jelena Milošević. 2020. Researching workplaces. In Erik Angelone, Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow & Gary Massey (eds.), The Bloomsbury Companion to Language Industry Studies, 37-62. London: Bloomsbury Academic. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350024960.0007
  65. Rosenfield, Patricia L. 1992. The potential of transdisciplinary research for sustaining and extending linkages between the health and social sciences. Social Science & Medicine 35 (11). 1343-1357. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(92)90038-R
  66. Sdobnikov, Vadim V. 2019. Translation studies today: Old problems and new challenges. Russian Journal of Linguistics 23 (2). 295-327. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22363/2312-9182-2019-23-2-295-327
  67. Snell-Hornby, Mary, Franz Pöchhacker & Klaus Kaindl (eds.). 1994. Translation Studies: An Interdiscipline. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  68. Stokols, Daniel. 2006. Toward a science of transdisciplinary action research. American Journal of Community Psychology 38 (1). 63-77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-006-9060-5
  69. Strevens, Peter. 2003. Applied linguistics. In William J. Frawley (ed.), The International Encyclopedia of Linguistics, vol. 1, 112-114. 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-006-9060-510.1093/acref/9780195139778.001.0001
  70. Striebel, Carola, Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow & Gary Massey. 2017. Übersetzer-Arbeitsplatz [The translator’s workplace]. In Angelika Ottmann (ed.), Best Practices - Übersetzen und Dolmetschen [Best Practices in Translation and Interpreting], 322-334. Berlin: BDÜ Fachverlag.
  71. Wheeler, Michael. 2005. Reconstructing the Cognitive World: The Next Step. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

© Масси Г., 2021

Creative Commons License
Эта статья доступна по лицензии Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Данный сайт использует cookie-файлы

Продолжая использовать наш сайт, вы даете согласие на обработку файлов cookie, которые обеспечивают правильную работу сайта.

О куки-файлах