Çeviribilimde Ortak Zemin Arayışları: Disiplinin Gidişatına Özdüşünümsel Bir Bakış

Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, çeviribilimin 1972’den günümüze kadar geçirmiş olduğu gelişim süre- cine ilişkin özdüşünümsel bir bakış sunmaktır. Bu amaç doğrultusunda, mevcut çalışma çeviribilimin “çeviri” olgusu etrafında kümelenen sorunsalları ele almayı hedefleyen bir akademik alan olarak özerkleşme yolunda hâlâ karşı karşıya olduğu zorlukları ortaya koymayı amaçlamaktadır. James Holmes çeviri odaklı araştırmaları ayrı bir bilim dalı olarak bütünleşme ve birleşmeye çağıralı nere- deyse bir yarım asır geçmiş olmasına rağmen çeviri odaklı araştırmalar alanı günümüzde hâlâ temel bilim-kuramsal sorunlarla mücadele etmektedir: Bu çalışma, çeviribilim alanında araştırma odağı (nesnesi) konusunda genel bir fikir birliği eksikliğinin yaşandığını göstermektedir; bunun sonucu olarak da çeviribilim hâlâ dilbilim, metindilbilim, edebiyatbilim, psikolinguistik, iletişimbilim, kültür araştırmaları ve sosyoloji gibi birçok bilim dalından terim, kavram ve kuram ödünç almaya devam etmektedir. Bu “dolaysız” disiplinlerarası etkileşim çeviribilim alanının translation studies, traductología ve traductologie gibi birçok araştırma geleneğine bölünüp parçalanmasına sebep olmaktadır. Çeviri- bilimcilerin alandaki birlikteliğin ve “ortak zemin”in kaybolmaya başladığıyla ilgili kaygılarına derleme kaynak ve antoloji yayınlarında da sıkça rastlanmaktadır. Fakat buna karşın günümüzde gelinen nokta, araştırmacıların çeviri olgusunu tüm unsurlarıyla açıklamaya hizmet edecek salt çeviribilimsel modeller oluşturmayı denemek yerine hâlâ diğer bilim dallarından model ve metodoloji ithal etmeye devam ettiklerini göstermektedir. Çeviribilimin yukarıda değinilen genel görünümü de göz önünde bulundu- rularak, bu çalışmada sistematik çeviri odaklı gözlem zemini oluşturma olanakları tartışılmaktadır. Nitekim sistematik çeviri odaklı gözlem zemininin tesis edilmesi, alanımızda yıllardır yaşanan bilim- kuramsal sorunların çözümüne katkıda bulunacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

çeviribilim, özdüşünüm, görgül bilim dalı, çeviri odaklı gözlem

In Search of Common Ground in Translatology: A Self-Reflective Look into Discipline’s Trajectory

The main goal of this paper is to provide a self-reflective look into the trajectory of translatology (Translationswissenschaft) from 1972 to the present. In accordance with this purpose, it aims to ad- dress the challenges which the discipline is still facing trying to achieve its autonomy as an academic field of research which should deal with the problems clustered round the phenomenon of “translation”. Although almost a half century has passed since James Holmes’ call for the consolidation of translation-oriented research as a separate discipline, the field of translation-oriented research is still struggling with basic scientific-theoretical problems: This study shows that there is still a lack of a general consensus regarding the research scope, i.e., the research object of the discipline as a result of which translatology keeps borrowing terms, notions and theories from various disciplines such as linguistics, text linguistics, literary studies, psycholinguistics, communication studies, cultural studies and, last but not least, sociology. This “direct” interdisciplinary interaction has led to a persistent fragmentation of the discipline into several research traditions such as translation studies, traductología and traductologie. Signs of scholars’ concerns of losing the communality and “common ground” in the discipline are also manifest in the publication of handbooks and readers. How- ever, the resulting situation today shows that scholars still import models and methodologies from other disciplines, let alone try to set proper translatological models which can serve to explain the phenomenon of translation with all its components. Taking also the overall picture of the discipline mentioned above into consideration, this study aims to discuss possible ways of creating a systematic translation-oriented observation structure which can help settling the main scientific-theoretical disputes in the discipline.

PDF

___

Buden, B. (2005). Der Schacht von Babel. Ist Kultur übersetzbar? Berlin: Kulturverlag Kadmos.
Chesterman, A. & Arrojo, R. (2000). Forum: Shared Ground in Translation Studies. Target, 12(1), 151-160. doi:10.1075/target.12.1.08che
Dizdar, D. (2006). Translation: Um- und Irrwege. Berlin: Frank und Timme.
Echeverri, Á. (2017). About maps, versions and translations of Translation Studies: a look into the metaturn of translatology. Perspectives, 25(4), 521-539. doi:10.1080/0907676X.2017.1290665
Even-Zohar, I. (1990). The Position of Translated Literature within the Literary Polysystem. Polysystem Studies [=Poetics Today], 1(11), 45-51.
Gerzymisch-Arbogast, H. (1994). Übersetzungswissenschaftliches Propädeutikum. Tübingen: Francke Verlag.
Gutt, E. A. (2000). Translation and Relevance: Cognition and Context. Manchester: St. Jerome.
Hermans, T. (2002). Preface. In T. Hermans (Ed.), Crosscultural Transgressions. Research Models in Translation Studies II: Historical and Ideological Issues (s. 1-7). Manchester: St. Jerome.
Hermans, T. (2006). Descriptive Translation Studies. M. Snell-Hornby, H. G. Hönig, P. Kußmaul, & P. A. Schmitt (Dü) içinde, Handbuch Translation (K. Kaindl, Çev., 2. geliştirilmiş b., s. 96-100). Tübingen: Stauffenburg.
Holmes, J. S. (1988). The Name and Nature of Translation Studies. In Translated!: Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies; with an introduction by Raymond van den Broeck (s. 67-80). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Hönig, H. G. & Kußmaul, P. (1982). Strategie der Übersetzung: Ein Lehr- und Arbeitsbuch. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
İşcen, İ. (2002). Çevrim Kuramı - Çeviribilim›in Temelleri Üzerine. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
İşcen, İ. (2008). Transformation und übersetzungswissenschaftliche Forschung - Zu den Grundproblemen der Übersetzungswissenschaft. Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovač.
İşcen, İ. (2010). Çeviribilim İçinde Söylem ve Çeviribilimsel Gerçeklik. Çeviribilim ve Uygulamaları Dergisi(20), 1-15.
Jäger, G. (1975). Translation und Translationslinguistik. Halle (Saale): VEB Max Niemeyer.
Kade, O. (1968). Zufall und Gesetzmäßigkeiten in der Übersetzung. Leipzig: VEB Verlag Enzyklopädie. Kade, O. (1977). Vermittelte Kommunikation, Sprachmittlung, Translation. Leipzig: VEB Verlag Enzyklopädie.
Kuhn, T. S. (2017). Bilimsel Devrimlerin Yapısı (9. b.). (N. Kuyaş, Çev.) İstanbul: Kırmızı Yayınları.
Nida, E. (1945). Linguistics and Ethnology in Translation-Problems. Word, 1(2), 194-208.
Nida, E. A. (1964). Toward a Science of Translating - With Special Reference to Principles and Procedures Involved in Bible Translating. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Nida, E. A. & Taber, C. (1969). The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Prunč, E. (2002). Einführung in die Translationswissenschaft. Graz: Institut für Theoretische und Angewandte Translationswissenschaft der Universität Graz.
Reiß, K. (1971). Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Übersetzungskritik: Kategorien und Kriterien für eine sachgerechte Beurteilung von Übersetzungen. München: Max Hueber.
Reiß, K. & Vermeer, H. J. (1984). Grundlegung einer allgemeinen Translationstheorie. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Siever, H. (2015). Übersetzungswissenschaft: Eine Einführung. Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto.
Snell-Hornby, M. (1986). Einleitung. In M. Snell-Hornby (Ed.), Übersetzungswissenschaft - Eine Neuorientierung: Zur Integrierung von Theorie und Praxis (s. 9-29). Tübingen: Francke Verlag. Snell-Hornby, M., Hönig, H. G., Kußmaul, P. & Schmitt, P. A. (2006). Vorwort. In M. Snell-Hornby, H. G. Hönig, P. Kußmaul, & P. A. Schmitt (Eds.), Handbuch Translation (p. V). Tübingen: Stauffenburg.
Stolze, R. (2003). Hermeneutik und Translation. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Stolze, R. (2008). Übersetzungstheorien: Eine Einführung (5. ed.). Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto.
Störig, H. J. (1969). Einleitung. In H. J. Störig (Ed.), Das Problem des Übersetzens (2. ed., s. VII-XXXIII). Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
Venuti, L. (2000). The Translation Studies Reader. New York: Roudledge.
Vinay, J. P. & Darbelnet, J. (1958). Stylistique Comparée du Français et de L’anglais: Méthode de Traduction. Paris: Marcel Didier.
Yıldırım, C. (2016). Bilim Felsefesi. İstanbul: Remzi Kitabevi.
Zanettin, F., Saldanha, G. & Harding, S.-A. (2015). Sketching landscapes in translation studies: A bibliographic study. Perspectives, 161-182. doi:10.1080/0907676X.2015.1010551
Zybatow, L. (2013). Auf der Suche nach Translationstheorie(n): Zwischenbilanz und Standortbestimmung der Translationswissenschaft. In F. Grucza (Ed.), Vielheit und Einheit der Germanistik weltweit (Akten des XII. Internationalen Germanistenkongresses Warschau 2010) (s. 283 - 293). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.