a meta-look at current translation studies trends in iran: insights from translation studies ma...

British Journal of Social Sciences URL: http://www.bjss.baar.org.uk /current-issue.html

ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 94 – 116, October 2012

A META-LOOK AT CURRENT TRANSLATION STUDIES TRENDS IN IRAN: INSIGHTS FROM TRANSLATION STUDIES M.A THESES

Peyman Nouraey

Department of Translation Studies, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Fars, Iran

Cell phone: 0098 917 307 9755 E-Mail: [email protected]

Amin Karimnia

Department of English Language, Fasa Branch, Islamic Azad University, Iran

E-Mail: [email protected]

ABSTRACT he present meta-study aimed at investigating the orientations of M.A students of translation at different universities in Iran. To begin with, one-hundred and twenty theses out of six universities were

chosen through the process of cluster sampling. Then, each and every sample was placed in the related branch of Holmes’ (1988) map of Translation Studies (henceforth TS). At the end, a Chi-square test was carried out in order to see whether there exists a significant difference between the branches and sub-branches of TS chosen by students or not. The results indicated that there was a statistically significant difference between the frequencies of the twenty-one branches of the map. The results also pointed out that the most frequent branches of TS worked on by Iranian students between 2007 and 2012 were “descriptive” TS with the sub-branches of “process-oriented” and “product-oriented” along with “Evaluation of Translations” with the frequency of 48, 44 and 12 respectively.

Keywords: meta-study, Translation Studies trends, descriptive Translation Studies, Holmes’ (1988) map of TS

T


ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 94 – 116, October 2012

Translation Studies

pure

theoretical

general partial

medium restricted

area restricted

rank restricted

text-type restricted

time restricted

problem restricted

descriptive

product-oriented

process-oriented

function-oriented

applied

translator training

translation aids

translation criticism

Introduction

It is for less than a century that translation has been treated as a nascent academic discipline. Among the scholars working in the field, Holmes, 1988, Snell-Hornby, 1995 and Nida, 1964 were the first theorists to have such orientation toward the “science” of translation.

1.2. Classifying the Discipline In his original paper, Holmes (1988) draws attention to the limitations imposed at the time by the fact that

translation research was dispersed across older disciplines and also stresses the need to forge “other communication channels, cutting across the traditional disciplines to reach all scholars working in the field, from whatever background” (as cited in Munday, 2008, p.10). Holmes puts forward a general overview of what the term “Translation Studies” (henceforth TS) covers, which was subsequently presented by the leading translation scholar Toury in 1995 as following:

Figure 1. Holmes’ “Map” of Translation Studies. This Figure Illustrates Main Classifications in Translation Studies ( Toury, 1995, p.10).


ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 94 – 116, October 2012

This classification finally put an end to all the ambiguities in the realm of TS. As Toury (1995) believes, the main merit of the divisions is that “they allow a clarification and a division of labour between the various areas of Translation Studies, which, in the past, have often been confused” (p.5). The “Applied” branch has some divisions in itself, which would look something like Figure 2:

Figure 2. The Applied Branch of Translation Studies. This Figure Shows Sub-Branches in Applied Translation StudiesIncluding “Translator Training”, “Translation Aids” and “Translation Criticism” (from Munday, 2008, p.13).

According to Holmes (1988), the objectives of the “pure” area are (as cited in Munday, 2008, pp.10-3):

1. “The description of the phenomena of translation (descriptive translation theory). 2. The establishment of general principles to explain and predict such phenomena (translation theory)”. The theoretical branch is divided into general and partial theories. By general, Holmes refers to those writings

that seek to describe or account for every type of translation. However, the partial branch is restricted according to the parameters below:

a. Medium-restricted theories: whether the translation is being done by humans or machines, or if by machine, whether it is working alone or as an aid to the humans as translators and also, whether the human translation is written or spoken.

b. Area-restricted theories: are restricted to specific languages or groups of languages and/or cultures.


ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 94 – 116, October 2012

c. Rank-restricted theories: are linguistic theories that have been restricted to a specific level of (normally) the word and sentence.

d. Text-type restricted theories: look at specific discourse types or genres; e.g., literary, business and technical translation.

e. Time-restricted theories: refers to theories and translations limited according to specific time frames and periods. The history of translation falls into this category.

f. Problem-restricted theories: can refer to specific problems such as equivalence -a key issue of the 1960s and 1970s- or to a wider question of whether universals of translated language exist. The other branch of “pure” research in Holmes’s map is descriptive. Descriptive Translation Studies

(henceforth DTS) has three possible focuses which include examination of (1) the product, (2) the function, and (3) the process:

1. Product-oriented DTS: examines existing translations. According to Holmes (1988/2000, p177), “one of the eventual goals of product-oriented DTS might possibly be a general history of translation.”

2. Function-oriented DTS: is the study of context rather than the text. It examines which books were translated when and where, and what influences they exerted.

3. Process oriented DTS: is concerned with the psychology of translation, i.e. to find out what happens in the mind of a translator.

Having a general overview about Holmes’ map of translation, a distinction can be made concerning the orientations of the studies done about the field in question;whether the trend is going toward the “pure” or “applied” branch of TS and then narrowing down into specific sub-branches of aforementioned areas.

1.3. Statement of the Problem By the time Holmes publishes his “map” of translation studies in 1988 (the original paper was prepared in

1972, but not widely published until this time) a new paradigm manifests itself in the realm of TS. The map has for sure been commented on by several scholars working in the field. Toury (1995, p.9) problematizes the apparent autonomy of Holmes’ major division of descriptive research into different orientations of process, product and function and also the relation between “theoretical” and “descriptive” studies. Zwart & Naaijkens (1991, p.37) argued that the map should have given more of its weight to contextual and pragmatic factors. Pym (1998, p.25) points to the absence of historical research on the map and so on and so forth.

The main problem here is not to argue what the pitfalls of the aforementioned map presented by Holmes are. The main topic in question, however relates to the relation of recent TS and their trends under the classification of the so-called map.

1.4. Significance of the Study In the opening chapter of his book, Hatim points out the question that “if we had paid more attention to the

pragmatic concerns and not focused almost exclusively on abstract models of translation, would the conceptual map of Translation Studies look different?” (2001, p.xv). Conducting this type of research can be a great help to translation professors, supervisors and students for their decision-makings in terms of conducting different programs.


ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 94 – 116, October 2012

1.5. Objectives As it was mentioned before, different scholars (e.g., Zwart & Naaijkens, 1991, Toury, 1995, etc.) have

pointed out current trends in TS in their work. Accordingly, through conducting this type of research, we might come to a general overview about the recent, or let us say, current trends of TS in Iran and see whether we are in line with universal current trends in this field of study or not.

1.6. Research Questions In line with the aforementioned discussions, the research questions were formed as followings: 1. Do Iranian M.A students of Translation tend to conduct researches on “pure” branch of TS, rather than

the “applied” branch in their thesis writings? 2. If “pure”, then do their orientations lie behind the “descriptive” sub-branch rather than the “theoretical”

one? 3. If “descriptive”, then are they “process”, “product” or “function” oriented more? 4. If “applied”, then are they “translator training”, “translation aids” or “translation criticism” oriented

more? Accordingly, the following hypotheses were formulated:

H1: Iranian M.A students of Translation conduct researches on “pure” branch of TS, rather than the applied branch in their thesis writings.

H2: Their orientations lie behind the “descriptive” sub-branch of translation studies, rather than the “applied” one.

H3: There is a significant difference between being “product-oriented” rather than “process” and “function-oriented” in their thesis writings.

H4: There is a significant difference between being “translation criticism-oriented” rather than “translator training” and “translation aids-oriented” in their thesis writings.

Literature Review

Translation studies has emerged over the past fifty years as a new interdisciplinary academic field. In the time period between the fifties and seventies, TS formed an integral part of applied linguistics. As it was mentioned before, Holmes (1988) was the first scholar to provide a framework for this discipline by dividing this field of science in two principal areas, translation theory as well as the descriptive science of translation on one hand and the applied TS on the other.

Although the map was invented in 1972 for the first time, after many years of development in science, it has not lost its validity at all. This comparison is based on today’s scholars’ ideas. For instance, where Van Leuven-Zwart (1992) groups together theoretical and descriptive TS and differentiates between two broad approaches of the scientific study of translation; theory producing study (p.60).

Recent key publications on research methods and trends in TS include “Unity in diversity” edited by Bowker, Cronin, Kenny and Pearson (1998), and also “The map” by Williams and Chesterman (2002). While the former publication questions the claim of interdisciplinary characteristics as the essence of TS in view of its theoretical diversity and also disputes the existence of a general theory of translation, the latter one focuses on


ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 94 – 116, October 2012

description of research and research methods in TS. In fact, the latter one lists twelve key areas of translation and suggests possible research directions for each area, roughly corresponding to Holmes’(1988) map of TS.

One of the most important issues in the field goes back to the tendency the trend has faced chronologically. In this regard, to know what scholars believe is in fact of utmost importance. According to Chesterman (personal communication, August 1, 2012) the trend has been towards DTS up to this day, in the general sense that most scholars have stopped assuming that their role is to give advice to translators and propose prescriptive principles. Rather, scholars aim to describe what translators do, what translations are like, and to explain why they are like that. He (ibid.) then continues that in near future more attention will be paid to the translator as an agent, to the people involved in the translation event, not just the texts; more attention to the interface between translators and computers, use of translation memory, use of machine translation as an aid in human translation.

Shifting from Europe to America, Larson believes that the trend has been towards DTS up to this day, too (personal communication, August 3, 2012). In fact, she (ibid.) points out that in the 1990s most scholars were interested in the practical orientations (i.e. the product and process).

As Schaeffner (personal communication, August 16, 2012) believes, Translation Studies research has expanded enormously. As she (ibid.) points out, there are many issues which are being researched now including not only product and process-oriented ones, but also research into institutional contexts, agency, translation policy, professional aspects, translation industry, technology and many more.

In Munday’s (personal communication, August 16, 2012) opinion, there are certainly a lot of product-oriented studies, but recent trends are towards process studies and towards sociological studies of translation. He (ibid.) believes that the global trend is going towards multimodality, machine translation and experimental methodologies. Also, by contrast, more sophisticated cultural and sociological studies are yet to be carried out.

Method One of the main concerns of the M.A students in Translation is choosing the suitable topic for their thesis

writings. To begin with, there are a number of issues which must be taken into consideration before conducting a research. For instance, the topic should not be repeatedly conducted by other researchers in the same field and/or with the same significance. The topic should be meaningful and justifiable with an orientation toward a special problem in knowledge. Manageability is another important item in conducting a research and so on and so forth. With all these parameters a student should bear in mind, he or she takes a topic to work on.

Coming back to translation, the question still remains as to where to choose a topic in order to work on the thesis. Does a significant branch or sub-branch of TS exist more or less untouched to work in? What is that branch? Why has this branch remained so up to this day? These are the types of questions answered in the present research.

3.1. Materials The materials needed for conducting this study included the abstracts of M.A theses in Translation Studies,

as the main aim of this research was to see into the orientations of the students in conducting researches with the intention of thesis writing; whether the students tend to conduct researches in a specific branch of TS (e.g., applied, pure, etc.) or not. In this regard, one-hundred and twenty theses abstracts defended in the current year and also the


ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 94 – 116, October 2012

past four years chosen randomly made up the materials needed for this study. These abstracts were chosen among the theses defended at different branches of universities in Iran including state universities and Islamic Azad universities (henceforth IAUs).

3.2. Data Collection Procedures This step was done through the procedure of “personal visit” (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, p.117), as M.A

theses are kept inside the universities. In some cases, however, the abstracts and other information needed were available on the university website or on different reliable journals relating to TS. Some theses abstracts out of each intake were chosen through the process of “cluster sampling”, as no other sampling strategies are useful to generalize the result to a higher number of total population (p.110).

To begin with, six out of eleven universities holding M.A of Translation Studies were chosen through the process of simple random sampling. These universities included “Isfahan University”, “Tarbiat-e-Moalem University”, “IAU, Bandar Abbas Branch”, “IAU, Science and Research Branch”, “IAU, Fars Science and Research Branch” and “IAU, South Tehran Branch”. Then, twenty theses were again chosen from each university through the process of simple random sampling with an overview of the year they were defended. To start the process of data analysis, the one-hundred and twenty theses were studied carefully in search for their orientations and tendencies towards different branches of TS.

As the titles are usually far away from the body of research, and also having a revision through the body of the theses will take a long time, the best procedure here would be to read the abstracts of each and every thesis, and then, having an overview about what the research is conducted for, a classification was made under each and every determined branch and sub-branches of TS based on Holmes’ map of TS (1988). However, the bodies of the theses were of a great help where the abstracts were not clear in determining so. The following table shows the data collection procedures in a detailed way:


ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 94 – 116, October 2012

Table 1.

Demographic Table of the Data Collection Procedures

3.3. Data Analysis

After gathering the sufficient data and taking notes about what the abstracts actually try to modify, each and every thesis were given a defined branch of 1) pure vs. applied, 2) theoretical vs. descriptive, 3)product-oriented vs. process-oriented vs. function-oriented and 4) translation training vs. translation aids vs. translation criticism along with their sub-branches.

Having the exact number of the collected data that each goes to a specified branch or sub-branches of TS in accordance to Holmes’ map (1988), the desired statistical calculations of each branch was measured. Then, Chi-Square procedure was performed to see if there was any significant difference in M.A Translation students’ orientations or not. In addition, a qualitative approach was applied in search for the frequency and the relative frequency of the gathered data. These procedures were applied through SPSS.

Name of University

Status of the

University Number of Theses

Studied State IAU

Isfahan University ⇃ 20

Tarbiat-e-Moalem ⇃ 20

Bandar Abbas Branch ⇃ 20

Science and Research

Branch ⇃ 20

Fars Science and

Research Branch ⇃ 20

South Tehran Branch ⇃ 20

Total ⇃ ⇃ 120


ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 94 – 116, October 2012

Findings and Results

4.1. Overview

To begin the statistical descriptions, the raw data was inserted and categorized to each branch and sub-branch of TS. This table shows the number of determined theses in each branch and sub-branch of Holmes’ (1988) map of TS. The following table, however, shows the number, mean, standard deviation, maximum and minimum of the branches respectively. With an insight to the minimum and the maximum shown here, it is obvious that the difference between the branches is meaningful.

Table 2. Descriptive Statistics of the Branches in the Map of TS

N Mean

Std. Deviation Minimum Maximum

number 120 11.6000 3.96497 0 48

Accordingly, the frequency, percentage and the cumulative percentages are shown as followings. As the maximum number of the specified theses to each branch is forty-eight, the numbers in each branch were analyzed based on groups of twenties.

Table 3. Statistics of the Branches and Sub-Branches of TS Map

Frequency in Each Branch

Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent

0 12 57.1 57.1

1-20 7 33.5 90.6

21-40 0 0 90.6

41-60 2 9.4 100

Total 21 100.0


ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 94 – 116, October 2012

Figure 3. Frequency of Branches and Sub-branches in TS Map

The first and second columns of Table 4.2 show the observed and the expected frequency respectively. By expected frequency, it is meant that if there were no significant difference between the different branches, one would then expect that the frequency of each branch would be 13.3. The last column shows the difference between these two numbers. Based on these differentiations, we expect the test to be significant. The reason goes back to the fact that the frequency of the branches and their expected frequency are largely different. This hypothesis was then tested through Chi-square test with the data shown in the following table. The branches containing no theses were automatically omitted by SPSS.

0 0-20 21-40 41-60Frequency Percentage of the

Theses 57.1 33.5 0 9.4

0

10

20

30

40

50

60Pe

rcen

t


ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 94 – 116, October 2012

Table 4. Chi-square Data Inserts of the Branches in TS

Branch Observed N Expected N Residual

Problem-restricted 1 13.3 -12.3

Product-oriented 44 13.3 30.7

Process-oriented 48 13.3 34.7

Function-oriented 3 13.3 -10.3

Teaching Evaluation Methods

1 13.3 -12.3

Translation Software 6 13.3 -7.3

Use of Internet 1 13.3 -12.3

revisions 4 13.3 -9.3

Evaluation of Translations

12 13.3 -1.3

Total 120

Based on the statistics of the Chi-square test and also the significance level (Asymp. Sig.), which is less than 0.05, the test is meaningful and thus, there exists a significant difference between different branches and sub-branches of TS based on Holmes’ (1988) map. According to the mean of the frequencies presented in table 4.1 ( =11.6), it should be mentioned that this number has the highest rank in the “process oriented”, “product-oriented” and “Evaluation of Translations” with the frequency of 48, 44 and 12 respectively.


ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 94 – 116, October 2012

Table 5. Chi-square Test Statistics Between Branches and Sub-branches of TS

Test Statistics

number

Chi-Square 2.136E2

df 8

Asymp. Sig. .000

The figure presented in appendix 2 shows, however, the previously mentioned discussion in a detailed way. In this figure, each and every branch is given a specific bar.

4.2. Discussions In order to test the hypotheses formulated (see chapter one) a step-by-step discussion is presented

concerning each and every hypothesis in a detailed way presented as followings:

4.2.1. Pure vs. applied TS. After analyzing the data, it was interesting to see that there was a large amount of difference between the

frequencies of the theses conducted in these two main branches of TS. The following tables show the results based on this perspective:

Table 6.1. Descriptive statistics for pure vs. applied TS.

N Mean

Std. Deviation

Minimum Maximum

number 120 1.8000 .40168 1.00 2.00

Table 6.2. A comparison between the frequencies of pure vs. applied TS.

Observed N Expected N Residual

1 24 60.0 -36.0 2 96 60.0 36.0

Total 120


ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 94 – 116, October 2012

Table 6.3. Chi-square test statistics for pure vs. applied TS.

number

Chi-Square 43.200a df 1 Asymp. Sig. .000

As the results show, there is a statistically high difference between “pure” and “applied” TS. Thus, the first hypothesis is supported. That is illustrated in the following figure:

Figure 4. Pure vs. Applied TS

4.2.2. Theoretical vs. descriptive TS. There is also a significant difference between the “theoretical” and “descriptive” TS, too. Thus, the second

hypothesis is also supported.

Pure TS80%

Applied TS20%


ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 94 – 116, October 2012

Table 7.1. Descriptive statistics for theoretical vs. descriptive TS.

N Mean Std.

Deviation Minimum Maximum

number 96 1.0104 .10206 1.00 2.00 Table 7.2. Frequencies of theoretical vs. descriptive TS.


1 95 48.0 47.0 2 1 48.0 -47.0

Total 96

Table 7.3. Chi-square test statistics for theoretical vs. descriptive TS.

number

Chi-Square 92.042a df 1

Asymp. Sig. .000


ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 94 – 116, October 2012

Figure 5. Theoretical vs. Descriptive TS

4.2.3. Product and process-oriented vs. function-oriented.

The turn now goes to the third hypothesis relating to different branches of “descriptive” TS. This branch consists of three sub-branches including “product”, “process” and “function” oriented TS. The results are shown as followings:

Table 8.1. Descriptive statistics for sub-branches of descriptive TS.

N Mean Std.


number 95 2.4737

.56195 1.00 3.00

Theoretical TS1%

Descriptive TS99%


ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 94 – 116, October 2012

Table 8.2. Frequencies of sub-branches of descriptive TS.


1 3 31.7 -28.7 2 44 31.7 12.3 3 48 31.7 16.3

Total 95

Table 8.3. Chi-square test statistics for function, product and process-oriented DTS.

number


Asymp. Sig. .000

As the Chi-square test results show, there is a statistically significant difference between the frequencies of the aforementioned sub-branches of DTS. The second hypothesis is then supported.

The following figure illustrates the frequencies of these sub-branches:

Product-oriented DTS46%Process-oriented

DTS51%

Function-oriented DTS3%


ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 94 – 116, October 2012

Figure 6. Sub-branches of Descriptive TS

The third hypothesis is then supported.

4.2.4. Translation criticism vs. translator training and translation aids. Finally, the three branches of “applied” TS are tested. These include “translation criticism”, “translator

training” and “translation aids”. As the final hypothesis stated, there is a statistically significant difference between being “translation criticism-oriented” rather than “translator training” and “translation aids-oriented”. This final hypothesis was supported, too. The results are shown as followings:

Table 9.1. Descriptive statistics for sub-branches of applied TS.

N Mean Std.


number 24 1.3750 .57578 1.00 3.00

Table 9.2. Frequencies of sub-branches of applied TS (translation criticism, translator training and translation aids).


1 16 8.0 8.0 2 7 8.0 -1.0 3 1 8.0 -7.0

Total 24

Table 9.3. Chi-square test statistics for sub-branches of applied TS.

number


Asymp. Sig. .001


ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 94 – 116, October 2012

Figure 7. Sub-branches of Applied TS

To summarize, the following table modifies the number of theses in each branch, the frequency of the branches containing those numbers, the percentages and the cumulative percentages of the data gathered:

Table 10. Related Frequencies of the Branches and Su-branches in TS Map

Number of Theses Available in Each Branch

Frequency of Branches Containing a Specific Number of Theses

Percentage of the Branches Containing a Specific Number of Theses

Cumulative Percentage of the Branches Containing a Specific Number of Theses

0 12 57.1 57.1

1 3 14.3 71.4

3 1 4.8 76.2

4 1 4.8 81.0

6 1 4.8 85.7

12 1 4.8 90.5

44 1 4.8 95.2

48 1 4.8 100.0

Total 21 100.0

Translator training4%

Translation Aids29%

Translation Criticism

67%


ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 94 – 116, October 2012

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

0 0 0 0 0 0 1

44

48

31 0 0

6

0 1 0 0

4

12

0

Frequency

All in all, a more tangible and systematic view can be obtained from the following figure. In fact, this figure is a tool to understanding the gap existing between the branches and sub-branches of TS chosen by Iranian M.A students of TS between 2007 and 2012:

Figure 8. The Gap Existing Between the Frequencies of TS Branches and Sub-branches Selected by Iranian M.A Students of TS Between 2007 and 2012 (N=120)


ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 94 – 116, October 2012

Conclusion and Implications

5.1. Conclusion As it was mentioned before, most of TS scholars were in agreement that the global trend in the

aforementioned field of science has been towards the DTS up to this day. The results of the present study support this fact. The following figure illustrates the orientations of Iranian M.A students of TS between 2007 and 2012:

Figure 9. The Research Trends of Iranian M.A Students of TS Studying at Both State Universities and IAU

Branches Between 2007 and 2012 (N=120)

Translation Studies(120)

Pure(96)

theoretical(1)

general(0)

partial(1)

medium restricted

(0)

area restricted(0)

rank restricted(0)

text-type restricted

(0)

time restricted(0)

problem restricted

(1)

descriptive(95)

product-oriented(44)

process-oriented(48)

function-oriented(3)

Applied(24)

translator training

(1)

translation aids(7)

translation criticism

(16)


ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 94 – 116, October 2012

What is interesting to note goes back to the future trends in TS and the change the discipline is facing gradually. Machine translation, computer-aided translation and these types of translations are the dominating ones in near future (Chesterman, personal communication, August 1, 2012).

As the result, it will be a need for Iranian students of Translation to conduct other types of researches including the “applied” TS along with its sub-branches in near future. The following figure shows the aforementioned students’ trends in applied branch of TS:

Figure 10. M.A Students of TS Trends in Applied Branch Between 2007 and 2012 (N=24)


ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 94 – 116, October 2012

5.2. Implications As the results of the present meta-study indicated, there are significant differences between the frequencies

of the branches and sub-branches of TS selected by M.A students of the so-called field of science for the purpose of thesis writing. A more tangible and systematic view can be obtained from figure 4.6. Thus, it is suggested that Iranian students and researchers working in the field try to conduct other types of researches with an insight from the results of the present meta-study.


ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 94 – 116, October 2012

References

Bowker, L., Cronin, M., Kenny, D., & Pearson, J. (1998). Unity in diversity?: current trends in translation studies. Manchester: St. Jerome.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis.

Hatim, B. (2001). Translating and researching translation. London & New York: Longman.

Holmes, J. S. (1988). The name and nature of translation studies, in L. Venuti (Ed.) (2000)

Munday, J. (2008). Introducing translation studies: Theories and applications (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.

Nida, E. A., & Taber, C. R. (1969). The theory and practice of translation. Leiden: E. J. Brill.

Pym, A. (1998). Method in translation history. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.

Snell-Hornby, M. (1995). Translation studies: An integrated approach (Rev. ed.). Amsterdam: J. Benjamins Pub..

Toury, G. (1995). Descriptive translation studies- and beyond, Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.

Williams, J., & Chesterman, A. (2002). The map: A beginner's guide to doing research in translation studies. Manchester, U.K.: St. Jerome Pub..

Zwart, K. M., & Naaijkens, A. B. (1991). Translation studies: The state of the art : proceedings of the First James S Holmes Symposium on Translation Studies. Amsterdam/New York, NY: Rodopi.

Zwart, K. M. (1992). Vertaalwetenschap: ontwikkelingen en perspectieven. Muiderberg: D. Coutinho.in A.Chesterman (Ed.) (2001)


ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 94 – 116, October 2012

Appendix 1 An Overview on Holmes’ (1988) Map of TS and the Frequency of the Theses

Pure Applied

Theoretical Descriptive Translator Training Translation Aids Translation

Criticism

General Partial

Product-

oriented

Process-

oriented

Function-

oriented

Teaching Evaluation M

ethods

Testing Techniques

Curriculum

Design

IT Applications

Dictionaries

Gram

mars

Revisions

Evaluation of Translations

Reviews

0

Mediu

m-

restricted

Area-restricted

Rank-restricted

Text-type

restricted

Time-

restricted

Problem

-restricted

44 48 3 1 0 0

Translation Software

Online Databases

Use of Internet

0 0 4 12 0

0 0 0 0 0 1

a meta-look at current translation studies trends in iran: insights from translation studies ma...

Documents