2024-03-28T22:19:38Zhttp://buleria.unileon.es/oai/requestoai:buleria.unileon.es:10612/63162023-02-13T14:35:00Zcom_10612_6171com_10612_374col_10612_6172
Pym, Anthony
2017-06-15T11:51:13Z
2017-06-15T11:51:13Z
2017-06-15
1696-7623
http://hdl.handle.net/10612/6316
It is possible that prose translations of verse actively assisted
in the progressive prosification of European Iyrical expression in the
nineteenth century. This "prose-effect hypothesis" implies that prose
translations did not merely reflect developments in the prose poem,
vers libre and poetic prose, but were causally related to these
developments. As such, the hypothesis is properly historical in that
it identifies a change process, it constructs an explanatory narrative,
it is potentially falsifiable on the basis of empirical evidence and it
addresses a contemporary problematic (it is pertinent to the position
of any translator faced with a choice between verse and prose as
target forms). My problem here is not with defending the hypothesis
as such, but with explaining its apparent incompatibility with several
widely held beliefs according to which nineteenth-century translating
was predominantly "Iiteralist", "mimetic" or oriented towards "formal
equivalence"
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacional
Historia
Traducción e interpretación
Complaint concerning the lack of history in translation histories
info:eu-repo/semantics/contributionToPeriodical