Agency in Structure: An Inquiry into Gideon Toury’s Target-Oriented Perspective

Öz

The present paper aims to present a rereading of Gideon Toury’s formulation of the target-oriented theory in his seminal work Descriptive Translation Studies — and Beyond in the hope of making a contribution to the discussion on Toury’s emphasis on structures and regularities, whether or the extent to which this underemphasizes translators’ agency in the theoretical framework, and the research program he has set out for translation studies. In the present re-evaluation of this widely discussed issue, some influential criticisms of Toury’s target-oriented theory over the issue of agency are briefly laid out, and a rereading of Descriptive Translation Studies — and Beyond in the light of the issue of translators’ agency is presented. Through a close scrutiny of this work, the extent to which target-oriented theory incorporates individual action and decision-making will be discussed mainly with a focus on the relationship between norms and agents of translation, what the interdependence of product, process, and function (as position-in-the-culture) in Toury’s target-oriented theory reveals with respect to the way agency is incorporated in the theory, and the methodological relevance of the concept of contextualization to research into the relationship between individual translators and observation of regularities. This rereading attempts to provide inquiries into how the theory incorporates norms and agency, what the interdependence of product, process, and function (as position-in-the-culture) implicates on the role assigned to agency in the target-oriented theory, Toury’s concept of ‘contextualization’ and its role in painting a broader descriptive picture incorporating agency, and the methodological issues regarding the structure vs. agency debate.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• agency
• target-oriented theory
• descriptive translation studies
• norms
• contextualization

Kaynakça

1. Agorni, Mirella. 2007. “Locating Systems and Individuals in Translation Studies.” In Constructing a Sociology of Translation, edited by Michaela Wolf and Alexandra Fukari, 123–134. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
2. Brownlie, Siobhan. 2003. “Berman and Toury: The Translating and Translatability of Research Frameworks.” TTR: traduction, terminologie, rédaction 16 (1): 93–120. doi:10.7202/008558ar.
3. Chesterman, Andrew. 2017. “The Name and Nature of Translator Studies.” In Reflections on Translation Theory: Selected Papers 1993–2014, 323–330. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
4. Feyerabend, Paul Karl. 1981. “An Attempt at a Realistic Interpretation of Experience.” Chap. 2 in Realism, Rationalism, and Scientific Method: Philosophical Papers Volume 1, 17–36. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5. Gouanvic, Jean-Marc. 2005. “A Bourdieusian Theory of Translation, or the Coincidence of Practical Instances.” The Translator 11 (2): 147–166. doi:10.1080/13556509.2005.10799196.
6. Hanson, Norwood Russell. 1958. Patterns of Discovery: An Inquiry into the Conceptual Foundations of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Hempel, Carl Gustav. 1952. Fundamentals of Concept Formation in Empirical Sciences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
8. Hermans, Theo. 1999. Translation in Systems: Descriptive and Systemic Approaches Explained. Manchester: St Jerome.

9. Inghilleri, Moira. 2005. “The Sociology of Bourdieu and the Construction of the ‘Object’ in Translation and Interpreting Studies.” The Translator 11 (2): 125–145.
10. Kinnunen, Tuija, and Kaisa Koskinen, eds. 2010. Translators’ Agency. Tampere: Tampere University Press.
11. Kuhn, Thomas S. 1970. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
12. Lakatos, Imre. 1970. “Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes.” In Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge: Proceedings of the International Colloquium in the Philosophy of Science, London, 1965, Volume 4, edited by Imre Lakatos and Alan Musgrave, 91–196. London: Cambridge University Press.
13. Merkle, Denise. 2008. “Translation Constraints and the ‘Sociological Turn’ in Literary Translation Studies.” In Beyond Descriptive Translation Studies: Investigations in Homage to Gideon Toury, edited by Anthony Pym, Miriam Shlesinger, and Daniel Simeoni, 175–186. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
14. Meylaerts, Reine. 2008. “Translators and (Their) Norms: Towards a Sociological Construction of the Individual.” In Beyond Descriptive Translation Studies: Investigations in Homage to Gideon Toury, edited by Anthony Pym, Miriam Shlesinger, and Daniel Simeoni, 91–102. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
15. Popper, Karl R. 1959. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. New York: Basic Books.
16. Pym, Anthony. 1998. “Okay, So How Are Translation Norms Negotiated? A Question for Gideon Toury and Theo Hermans.” Current Issues in Language and Society 5 (1–2): 107–113. doi:10.1080/13520529809615507.
17. Simeoni, Daniel. 1998. “The Pivotal Status of the Translator’s Habitus.” Target 10 (1): 1–39. doi:10.1075/target.10.1.02sim.
18. Toury, Gideon. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies — and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
19. Toury, Gideon. 1998. “A Handful of Paragraphs on ‘Translation’ and ‘Norms.’” Current Issues in Language and Society 5 (1–2): 10–32. doi:10.1080/13520529809615501.
20. Wolf, Michaela. 2007. “Introduction: The Emergence of a Sociology of Translation.” In Constructing a Sociology of Translation, edited by Michaela Wolf and Alexandra Fukari, 1–36. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.