[automatically translated] In this contribution surplus the hypothesis that the translation is a true anthropological process that is used to stretch a look at the subject, the method used, the reference culture. Central to this process is the reflection on the text (and its boundaries) and the neighboring of synthesis, design, practical. Translation, like a synthesis, is a practical and at the same time a project that is based on a process of inclusion and exclusion. As a practice, the translation is subject to the evolution of the individual who translates according to their own insights and match the present guidelines; as a project, it is a configuration principles that order and set a program the translator want to follow. A project is changed in time and variability of culture; a practice inevitably feed back on the project and turns it. To better define the issue, I have made use of the famous dichotomy of language and speech formulated by Saussure: a translator is inevitably forced to adjust to a langue, a system of relations that precedes it and in which, often unconsciously, wet; At the same time, a translator can (and should) make choices that individually define his poetry and his style. This dual perspective on the translation fixes, within an anthropology of cultures and texts, the age-old problem of the origin and original. It also provides a useful springboard for discussion meta-linguistic theory of the figures referred to by other theorists: the translator as a reader, writer, recipient, analyst, comparatist, interpreter, dialogue, etc. In the second part of the contribution, use these figures and parallel to critically open the way to an epistemology of theories and translation processes based semio-anthropological. In this regard, I read the hexa-functional model of Jakobson communication in key epistemological and affirm that the different theories are positioned, from time to time, depending on the issuer (theories that enhance the concept of origin), the consignee (theories that concern the reception), text (structuralist theories), context (theories that focus on process and pragmatic aspects), the contact (?) of the code (theories that favor the metalanguage). A theory of translation is the result of a selection of categories of the contents of the plan, and a placement of one (or more) of the poles of the communication model. In this perspective, I support the '' translation even before a result is a 'translate' (a intersemiotic process) that acts on us (and others) in the continuous passage that requires experience to the texts.
|Title of host publication||Atti del convegno. Giornate internazionali di studio sulla traduzione|
|Number of pages||13|
|Publication status||Published - 2009|