INTRODUCTION TransIatiOn studies:an emergi"g disCi卩 Ⅱne T∶ J。 ￡ f∶ ∶∵ 品 d∶ 兢 旒 ∷ r括 甘W∷ n11∶ 瞿 FsT∶ i乱 i找Γ 弘: present。 It ConCentrates on approaches that have been deve|oped during the t、 ^/en- tieth century`focusing ρartiCu|ar|y On the past thirty years。 It llvas`‖ during thls periOd that trans|atiOn studies emerged as a neⅥ /acadenη ic ne|d`at once internationa|and interdiscip"nary, The need for a reader is thus part|y institutiona|` created by the rapid gro、 、/th of the discip"ne` especia"y as evidenced by the pro"feratiOn Of trans- |ator training ρrograms Ⅵ/or丨 dⅥ/ide。 Recent surveys indicate mOre than250`offering a variety of certincates and degrees` undergraduate and graduate`training not on|y professiona| trans|atOrs` but a|so scho|ar-teachers of trans丨 ation and Of foreign |anguages and "teratures (Canη inade and Pym 1995/ periodicaHy updated at www。 fut。 es/~apym丿 H arr丨 s1997)。 This groⅥ/th has been accompanied by diverse forms Of trans|ation research and commentary` some oriented toⅥ /ard pedagogy` yet most faHing、 ^/ithin-or crossing _traditiona|acadenη ic discip"nes`such as|inguistics` |iterary criticisΠ η `ph"osOphy` and anthropo|ogy. The principa丨 aim of the reader is tO bring together a substan- tia| se丨 ection from th丨 s∨ aried mass of NA/riting`but in the form of a historiCa| survey that invites sustained examination of key theoretica| deve|opments of course` edited vo|umes a xvays xA/ork tO denne a吊 e|d` a body of knoⅥ /|edge` a teXtbook market` and sO they create as much as satisfy institutiona| needs` espe- ciaHy in the case of emergent discip"nes,In trans|ation studies`the broad spectrum of theories and research methodo|ogies nη ay doom any assessment of its current INTRODUCTION state to partia| representation` superflcia| synthesis` optirnistic canonization, This reader is intended` nonethe|ess` to be an introduction to the ne|d recognizab|e to the scho|ars who work with丨 n it。 But recognition must nOt be construed as mirror reneCti。 n。 The intention 丨s a|so to cha"enge any discip"nary cOmp|acency`tO produce a conso"dation that inter- rogates the xA/ays in、 ^/hich trans|ation is current|y researched and taught by revea"ng -even 丨f imp"c it|y_the "nη itatiOns of scho|ar丨 y knolv edge and pedagogica| prac- tices` to sholv what trans|ation studies have been and to suggest what they might be. Perhaρ s the most effective、 ^/ay to issue this cha"enge is to enab|e a historica| perspectiVe, \、 A trans|ator Ⅵ/ithout a historica| cOnsciousness`〃 Ⅵ/rote the French trans|ator and trans|ation theorist Antoine Berman/ remains \、 a prisOner to h丨 s Or her representation of trans|ating and to those representations that Convey the、 socia| ′ discourses′ of the rnoment′ (Berman1995∶ 61`my trans ation),In assemb"ng this reader/ I am suggesting that scho|ars of trans|ation` as Ⅵ/eH as trans|ators` can signi吊 cant|y advance their kA/ork by taking into accOunt the historica| contexts in Ⅵ/hich translation has been practiced and stud丨 ed, The readings are organized 丨ntO siX Chrono|ogica| sections丿 the date of pub"- catiOn for each reading aρ pears at the foot of its币 rst page,The docunη ents gathered in the品 rst section` a" predating the tv√ entieth century`have exel'ted such a p0、 、 ^/erfu| innuence on|ater practices and cOnη mentary as to、 foundationa|〃 ^/arrant the term、 The next five sect丨 ons are divided into decades of the tlventieth century。 ˇ∨hether a decade stands on its OxAln or is Combined vvlith others depends` in the 6rst instance` on the vo|ume of trans|ation connmentary pubhshed\∧ /ith"η it` sheer b丨 b"ographica| quantity (cf。 the bib"ographies in N1organ 1959` steiner 1975` Schu|te and Biguenet 1992). But there is a|so a qua"tative standard∶ as the readings n1ove towards the ρresent` the |eve| of soph丨 st丨 cation and 丨nventiveness does in fact rise` and new concepts`methods/and research pr0ects are deve|oped`justifying separate sections for the 1980s and the 199Os and beyond, The sections are each prefaced by introduCtory essays xlvhich describe |η ain trends in trans|atiOn studies/ estab"shing a context for cOnc丨 se eXpOsitions of the readin9s and caH"η g attention to the XlVork of innuentia| vAyriters` theorists` and scho|ars lArho are not represented by a reading.The section introduCtions are histor- ica| narratives that refer to theoretica| and methodo|Og丨 ca| advances and occasionaHy offer critica| eva|uations, Yet the stories they te" avOid any evO|u- tionary Iη ode| of progress` as weH as any systematiC critique。 I 、Ⅳanted to out"ne` hoⅥ/ever rapid|y` the history of the present moment in trans|at丨 on studies, And to some degree this meant asking questions of the past raised by the |atest tendencies in theory and research, The map Of trans|ation studies drawn here` its centers and peripheries` admis- s丨 Ons and exc|usions` renects the current fraglmentation of the 雨e|d 丨nto sub- specia ties` some empiricaHy oriented` some hermeneutic and "terary` and some 丨nnuenced by various forms of "nguistics and cu|tura| studies \∧ /hich have resu|ted 丨n produCtive syntheses, The effort to cast a Ⅵ/ide net has not encOmpassed certain areas of trans|ation research` 、、/hOse Vo|ume and degree Of specia"zation demand INTRODUCTION separate cOverage regard|ess of their importance to trans|ation studies (e。 g. inter- preting and lmachine trans|atiOn)。 And breadth of coVerage has "mited depth of representation for particu|ar theories and approaChes。 The section introductions airn` in brief space`to supp|y some omissions and tO sketch a histOrica|sett丨 ng。 And the bibⅡ ography not on|y identines parenthet|ca| references made thrOughout the bOok` but|ists additiona| pub"cat|ons by particu|ar|y inΠ uentia|or pro"nc authOrs. It Ⅵ/iH be C|ear that I have tried to cover much_for some` no doubt`too muCh- in an effort tO suggest the variety of trans|ation studies. The irnage Of the ne|d fashioned by this reader re佴 ects the contemporary scene a||the mOre c}Ose|y because it has been produced in consu|tation with many|eading XA/riters and trans|atOrs`theorists and scho丨 ars,They cOmmented on various versions of the tab|e of contents` responded to questions about particu|ar trans|ation tradi- tions and for|η s of research` suggested speci币 c texts` made "sts of names` and CritiCized my rationa|e and princip|es Of se|ection and organization.Any authOr or text that received a re|ative|y |arge number of recOmmendations earned some sort of representation here. In some cases` my cOnsu|tants encouraged me tO cOHect research that feH Outside their speGia|ty,And sOme he|ped s"mp|y`but rη ost tangib|y/ by a"owing their wOrk tO be reprinted、Λ/ithout Gharge. Their names and|ocatiOns∶ Kwame AnthOny Appiah(USA)`ROsemary ArrOjo (∪ sA)` IsabeHe Ber|man (France)` Annie Brisset (Canada)` Peter Bush (Spa丨 n)` AndrexA/Chesterman(Fin|and)` Kath|een Davis(∪ sA)` Dirk De|abastita(Be|gium)` Jacques Derrida(FranGe)`Itamar Even-Zohar(IsraeD` Peter FaⅥ /cett(∪ K)` Peter FranCe (UK)/ Sean GO|den (Spain)/ Jean-Rllarc Gouanvic (Canada)` BasH Hatim (∪ nited Arab Enη irates)` hllichae| Henry Heim (∪ sA)` Ju"ane H Ouse (Germany)` David Katan(Ita|y)`suzanne Ji" Levine(∪ SA)` PhHip E LeWis(USA)`Ian NqasOn (UK)`Rache|R/lay(USA)`Eugene Nida(Be|gium〉 `Christiane NOrd(Germany)`Ab(ˉ V ar|< N Ornes(∪ sA)`A|exis NOuss(Canada)`Anthony Pynη (Spain)` E|ena Reeves (USA)` |<atharina Reiss (Germany)` steven RendaH (France)` Richard Sieburth (USA)` sherry simon (Canada)` Gayatri Spivak (USA)` GideOn TOury (IsraeD` Harish Trivedi (India)` pˇ 1aria Tymoczko (UsA)` V argher|ta U|rych (Ita丨 y)` H ans ∨ermeer(Germany)`Luise von F|otoⅥ/(Canada)`and Patr丨 ck Zaba|beascOa(Spain). Those who eva uated the ρroject fOr ROut edge a|sO came frOm the internatiOna| colmmunity of trans|ation scho|ars∶ for the nrst edition` Neus CarboneH (Sρ ain)` M ichae Cronin(Ire|and)`|<eith Harvey(UK)`TheO Hermans(∪ K)`Efrain Krista| (∪ sA)`Caro| Ma丨 er(USA)`Kirsten Ma|mkjaer(UK)`Mark Shutt|ewOrth(UK)` and pˇ1artha Tennent (Spain)丿 for the second edition` susan Bernofsky (∪ SA)` Stefan Herbretcher(Ul<)` Lars O|e Sauerberg(Denmark)`Corinne Scheiner(USA)` Dan丨 e| Simeoni (Canada)`and Carnnen∨ a|ero-Garces(Spain). The nrst edit丨 on v￠ as decisive|y shaped by my Advisory Editor` N1ona Baker (∪ |<)`Ⅵ /ho eva|uated every decision I made`every document I vA/rote, She丨 s a trans- |ation scho|ar、 Ⅵ/as trained as a "nguist and Ⅵ/hOse ne|d 。f research is cOrpus ^/ho my Ⅵ/ork has fa"en Ⅵ/ithin "nguistics` Computerized ana|ysis of teXt co"ections氵 Ⅵ"terary/ith }arge critiCism differences_theoretica1 and cu|tura| studies, meth0d0|Ogica1 lA/e began xvith pedagogica}, some shared lA/hat、 ideas` butⅣe hada|so in INTRODUCTION common、 that trans|ation studies constitutes an emer- ^/as a set of basic assumptions∶ gent academic discip"ne丿 that research and cOmmentary on trans丨 atiOn frOm other discip"nes might be usefu}to trans|ation studies` but does not neCessarHy faH Ⅵ/ithin it氵 that many cu|tures have strong trans|ation traditions in the tⅥ /entieth century` but that tO be innuentia丨 internationaHy` Ⅵ/rit丨 ng about trans|ation needs to be XA/ritten in or trans丨 ated 丨nto an internationa"zed |anguage such as Eng"sh (cf.the rich traditions Of trans|ation cOnη mentary in Russian`Chinese` Braz"ian POrtuguese` and Cata an`among many other anguages`malor and minor).These assumptions did not make any easier the difncu|t pr。 cess of se|ecting texts。 On the cOntrary` they|ed to an effort to |imit the inevitab|e drift toⅥ /ard Eng"sh-丨 anguage traditions by cOnsidering various untrans|ated materia|s` by gathering previous|y pub"shed trans|ations`and by presenting ne\∧ /and improved trans|ations of c|assic documents。 In the end` this reader shoⅥ /s that native speakers of Eng"sh、 、/rote re|atiVe|y "tt|e of the ˇ∨estern trans|atiOn theory that has proved innuentia| during the tlVentieth century and certain|y before it, The differenCes between me and my advisOry editor were equaHy`if not more` signinGant because they resu|ted in many debates over the range of current approaches to trans|ation.