Review of Dinda L. Gorlée: Wittgenstein in Translation (2012).

It makes sense to review these two books together since they both address the concept of semiotranslation, Dinda L. Gorlée extending her previous writings on the subject by adding intermedial intertextuality argued as 'transduction', and Douglas Robinson subjecting semiotranslation to a sustained critique before offering his own icotic position.In agreement with her previous publications, Gorlée rejects any notion of translation as a simple substitution of linguistic expressions. Instead, the translation process and its results are seen as non-symmetrical, forever changing (...) over time and between cultures. 'Translation' now encompasses a broad spectrum of transformations from intralingual paraphrase to intermedial... (shrink)

Bandung is one of Indonesia’s most prominent metal music bases, even in Asia, with a growing variety of metal subgenres (Barendregt & Zanten, 2002; Baulch, 2003; Sen & Hill, 2000; Wallach, 2008). T...

Introduction: silence and secrecy -- Symptoms -- Cryptography -- Cryptomnesia -- Fact or fiction -- Cryptosemiotician -- Tentative conclusion -- Appendix: list of coded passages from Wittgenstein's Nachlass.

1. Setting the stage Dinda Gorlée’s seminal On Translating Signs explores translation of texts under the guise of ‘semio-translation.’ In her previous book, Semiotics and the Problem of Translation, Gorlée originally coined the term semiotranslation, which subsequently gained some notoriety in translation theory circles. She sees no need to give up the term, in fact including it in hyphenated form in the subtitle of the book under review. For, semio-translation ‘retains an ongoing excitement and creates a niche in semiotic (...) and translationtheoretical scholarship’. The author perpetuates its use with the hope that ‘it will remain a vital and fruitful challenge to future researchers everywhere, especially those who pay no mind to the noise of passing scholarly genres and fashions’. Thus OTS can be effectively read as a continuation of SPT. (shrink)

A Semiotic Theory of Translation, de Kobus Marais, 2019, é o mais importante livro publicado sobre a relação entre os Estudos da Tradução e a Semiótica pragmatista de C.S.Peirce, desde Semio-translation, de Dinda Gorlée, de 2004. Pode-se afirmar que a obra de Gorlée representou uma etapa inicial de ajustes na agenda dos Estudos de Tradução, inspirada na filosofia de Peirce. É um trabalho preliminar, cujo maior mérito foi estabelecer uma vinculação mais sistêmica entre as “áreas”. O livro de Kobus (...) Marais é a mais audaciosa tentativa de desenvolver este projeto. Ele explora diversas consequências da aplicação de muitas entidades e termos teóricos da filosofia de Peirce, especialmente em sua fase madura. Ao fazer isso, Marais abre uma frente inédita de investigação cuja importância não deve ser subestimada. Ele associa muitos aparatos, que incluem rudimentos de uma filosofia de processo de inspiração pragmatista, com forte propensão pluralista; classificações sígnicas desenvolvidas por Peirce, após 1903, período que se estabeleceu como “teoria madura do signo”, inexplorada nos estudos sobre tradução, e ainda pouco explorada pelo próprio scholarship Peirceano; e uma versão emergentista associada a um tratamento baseado na teoria de sistemas complexos. Sobre este último tópico, especialmente influenciado por Terrence Deacon e Floyd Merrell, Marais extrai muitas implicações, relacionadas a uma definição de tradução como negentropia, em sistemas complexos, e generaliza o fenômeno para casos de emergência de fenômenos sócio-culturais. Dividi esta resenha em asserções. Elas se referem às teses que considero mais importantes do livro de Kobus Marais. Embora outras tantas possam ser formuladas, considero aquelas que podem ter maiores implicações. (shrink)

Bible translation over the past half century has increasingly supplemented its traditional philological-linguistic approach with a wide variety of disciplines ranging from archaeology to cultural studies. This turn toward an interdisciplinary approach is especially true of new media Bible translation with its theory and practice now engaging virtually every digital and screen medium. Not surprisingly, (new media) Bible translation has discovered the field of semiotics, thanks in large measure to the work of translation scholars such as Dinda L. Gorlée (...) and Ubaldo Stecconi, whose pioneering research into Charles Sanders Peirce has unearthed a gold mine of conceptual and even practical applications of semiotics to translation research, training, evaluation, and production. In this essay, we set out some of the foundational elements of Peircean semiotics in its application to Bible translation, including new media Bible translation. In particular, the insights of semiotics into the process of sign production and meaning making will add exponentially to the resources for Bible translators. (shrink)