Translation: Art, science, or craft

Translation, as a branch of humanities,

is closely related to human
development, but as most humanity
branches, it still has ambiguities and
controversies. One of these is if
translation can be considered as an art,
science, or craft. Without trying to be exhaustive or influential, here
some important aspects are stated in relation to this topic in order to
provide some hints so you can take a position toward this so you can take
it to your translating practice.
Here, translation is considered as a communication means which is an
essential tool, by which people from different cultural and linguistic
background, interact for a social, cultural or communicative act. As a
tool, it offers a range of renderings and use which the translator needs to
be aware of to properly produce a suitable message.
Having a clear definition about what translation is helps the translator to
follow certain processes, apply determined procedures, and establish
specific objectives to fulfill such a task. Most definitions use the terms
rendering, replacement, reproduction, process, transference,
reproduction, and act to refer to the activity or action of translating a
message. At the same time, the object to these verbs is referred as a
textual material or text, message, knowledge, thoughts, ideas,
equivalent, and learning to materialize what is transferred from one
language (Source language) into another language (target language)
(Catford 1965: 20, Levy 1967:148, Reiss, 1971:161, Pinhhuck 1977: 38,
ilss 1982: 3, Nida 1984:83, Spivak 1992: 398, Hatim and Mason
1997:1,and Sa'edi, 2004:242 in Ordudary 2008). All these terms imply
the same idea from one definition to the following, being complemented
with some other terms depending on the author’s background, the
moment the definition is stated, and the purpose why that definition is
stated.
The different terms used to define ‘translation’ may serve as a key to
tentatively deduce the perspective of the translator or scholar.
Nonetheless, the definition and the terms used in it, use terms which are
not exclusively from one position, so, the translator may only get a slight
idea if for that author, translation is an art, science or craft. However, if
the whole translation is analyzed based on subjectivity or objectivity used
to define it, then, the translator can get a better idea what ‘translation’ is
for that author.
Some scholars have openly accepted that translation is an art which deals
with human creation and, as a consequence, requires human creativity to
produce an acceptable output. Formulas and rules cannot be followed to
render an accurate product. At the same time, the lack of objective
terminology leave translation in a kind of limbo where any translator or
scholar may decide, based on personal taste, if it is an art, a science or a
craft (Savory 1957:49, Chukovskii 1984:93, in Ordudary, M. (2008);
Foster (2001).
Scholars and translators consider translation as a science when they state
that there is correspondence among languages and word for word
rendering is possible. Furthermore, when translation is considered based
on language theories, a process, an operation where tools, procedures
and techniques are applied definitely ‘translation’ is considered a science.
The fact that it can be acquired and studied as a system of knowledge by
following process and rules also describe an aspect of a science (Toury
1982:7, Norton 1984:59, Berkeley 1991:83, Zaixi 1997:339, Baker
(1998:4, Rabassa (n.d.) in Ordudary 2008);
If translation is considered as a common activity, as a secondary branch
of a more important discipline, or as a second hand-art, then it is
considered a craft which requires training. On the other hand, scholars
and translators have never agreed on what translation is, nor in an
unambiguous terminology to define it, so it may not be at the level of a
science (Savory 1957:49, Cicero's 9106-43 B.C, Newmark 1988a:1,
Newmar 1988b:70, Long 1996:10, Translation, 2005: 2 in Ordudary
2008; Foster 2001).
There is a group of scholars and translators that come up with a Solomon’s
solution, and accept translation as an art, a science, and a craft because
it implies, in a way or another, creativity, subjectivity, and common sense
to produce a suitable rendering of a message. It also implies the
application of procedures, processes, and techniques. At the same time,
as any craft or science, it relies in a theoretical corpus and provide
information to formulate new constructs to support this corpus.
Moreover, as a science or craft it can be learned and taught (Miremadi
1991:39, Gabr (2001:2 in Ordudary, M. 2008; Onehourtranslation 2014;
Transubstantiation May, 18, 2009; Foster, E. (2001).
As a sum, translation is more widely categorized as a cognitive discipline
which tends to reach a position as a science. Nonetheless, the subjectivity
of its object of study and the disagreement among scholars and
translators on the terminology used to define it which is a drawback to
fulfilling in widely considering it as a science. As a translator, interested
more on the rendering of a message rather than on studying the principle
involved in such a process, we must be aware that depending a
multifactorial aspects of our translating activity we may take one position
or another in relation to how we perceive ‘translation’.
Referencias:
Ordudary, M. (2008). Good translation: Art, craft or science? Journal
Translation. Vol. 12 No. 1. Disponible en
http://translationjournal.net/journal/43theory.htm
Onehourtranslation. (2014). Translation: Art or science? Disponible en
http://www.onehourtranslation.com/translation/blog/translation-art-or-
science
Transubstantiation. (May 18, 2009). The science of translation? Blog.
Disponible en http://transubstantiation.wordpress.com/2009/05/18/the-
science-of-translation/
Foster, E. (2001). The art and craft of translation. John Hopkins Magazine.
Disponible en http://www.ut.ngb.army.mil/clp/news/craft.htm