lnu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
On a Peircean Semiotic Turn of Semiotranslation
Federal University of Juiz de Fora, Brazil.
Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Film and Literature.
2018 (English)In: Punctum. International Journal of Semiotics, ISSN 2459-2943, Vol. 4, no 1, p. 210-217Article, book review (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The influence exerted by Peirce’s semeiotic on Translation Studies ‘has been close to nil’. Nothing has yet happened that looks like a ‘semiotic turn in translation studies’. This is surprising. Peirce’s pragmatic model of meaning as the ‘action of signs’ (semiosis) has had a deep impact on philosophy, psychology, theoretical biology, linguistics, and cognitive sciences, besides all branches of semiotics. Why is such an influence not observed in a field of studies so strongly impregnated by semiotic notions, like translation studies? How could such an influence be exerted? Douglas Robinson’s book is about these questions. His book is not a review or analysis of the reasons why a ‘semiotic turn in translation studies’ has never happened. In fact, it is mainly about Dinda Gorlée’s works. Gorlée has forged the most systematic inter-theoretical relationship between Peirce’s semeiotic and Translation Studies. Her papers and books tentatively build an initial step of a Peircean transformation in Translation Studies’ research agenda. In our opinion, if this project has not succeeded yet, Robinson’s book will not accomplish it either. Why? Because it does not explore the implications resulting from a rigorous mapping between fundamental premises, problems, methods and models delineating the research domains. Even so, Douglas Robinson’s book is an important and necessary work to understand the difficulties involved in this project. His main ideas regarding the possibility of an inter-theoretical relationship are found in chapters 1 and 4 (other chapters are presented as case studies and empirical descriptions.) In these chapters, we find (non-systematically) many of Peirce’s ideas on semiosis, phenomenological categories, abductive inference, etc. It is a good supposition that the exploration of these ideas should produce a remarkable set of unprecedented consequences (otherwise it is a useless academic cost).

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Thessaloniki: Aristotle University of Thessaloniki , 2018. Vol. 4, no 1, p. 210-217
National Category
Specific Literatures
Research subject
Humanities, Comparative literature
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-79174DOI: 10.18680/hss.2018.0014OAI: oai:DiVA.org:lnu-79174DiVA, id: diva2:1270361
Available from: 2018-12-13 Created: 2018-12-13 Last updated: 2019-04-05Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textFulltext

Authority records BETA

Atã, Pedro

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Atã, Pedro
By organisation
Department of Film and Literature
Specific Literatures

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 34 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf