Earticle

초록

영어

Translation Studies seems to be in the pursuit of its rightful destination. Should it be a branch of empirical human science, based upon accurate hypothesis and verification? Or rather should it be a science of philosophical, speculative and interpretative descriptions? Several attempts have been made to explicate this matter in more concrete and undeniably persuasive manners with relevant theories and procedures learned from neighboring academic disciplines. Still, however, one can rarely find the very solutions that can encompass, or rather guide all the conflicting discussions witnessed in Translation Studies into the ultimate direction. Taking this situation into account, it is worthwhile to take note of Andrew Chesterman, a scholar from Finland who takes an meta-theoretical approach in Translation Studies. This paper gives an overview of major arguments made by Chesterman, whose basic idea is that Translation Studies can establish itself as a discipline of empirical human science based upon hypothesis and explanation. It then moves on to look at their implications and limitations. Concurrently, this paper intends to look into other points hardly noticed by Chesterman. That is, how, more interpretative and non essentialist discussions can be applicable to the area of Translation Studies.

목차

ABSTRACT
 I. 왜 체스터먼인가?
 II. 체스터먼에 의한 번역학의 방법론적 분류
 III. 첫 번째 문제제기 - 번역학의 지향이 ‘설명’이라고 말할 때 설명은 과연 어떤 의미인가?
 IV. 두 번째 문제제기- 체스터먼은 ‘과학성’을 어떻게 정의하는가?
 V. 체스터먼의 보편주의적 입장은 타당한가?
 VI. 생각해 볼 문제
 참고 문헌

키워드

저자

• 윤성우 [ Yun, seong-woo | 한국외국어대학교 ]
• 이향 [ Lee Hyang. | 고려대학교 ]

참고문헌

발행기관

간행물

표지보기 관심저널 등록

• 간행물명

  통역과 번역 [Interpretation and Translation]

• 간기

  연3회

• pISSN

  1229-6074

• 수록기간

  1999~2025

• 등재여부

  KCI 등재

• 십진분류

  KDC 717 DDC 400