Due to its unique prestige, classical Chinese poetry written during the Tang dynasty is often anthologised. These anthologies serve various purposes (e.g. recreational, educational, or both), but they are generally expected to feature works high in aesthetic value, and represent the culture wherein they are produced. While the functions of anthologies are seldom contested, representations of Tang poetry in anthologies have many different manifestations. Using China’s most famous anthology, Tangshi sanbaishou 唐詩三百首, as an opening case study, research shows that within its home culture, the anthologising of Tang poetry has a long history by itself, and anthologists negotiate between ideological agendas, aesthetic judgments, and cultural norms to form representations which suit their purposes best. Complex as the anthologising behaviour in the source culture is, the considerations involved in anthologising translated Tang poetry in the Anglo-American culture are even more complicated, since target-cultural concerns/demands (such as translatability, aesthetic predilection of the target readership, social norms, etc.) are introduced. This study attempts to delineate the differences in various source and target cultural representations of Tang poetry, and explicate the contributing causes engendering such differences. A survey of anthologies of translated classical Chinese literature/poetry reveals that key factors governing anthologising decisions include: the target cultural condition, the intended service to a mostly uninformed, non-native readership, the anthologist-translators’ personal preferences and missions, among others. The canonical landscape of Tang poetry changes often in the West even though the principle of representativeness demands a degree of conformity to the source tradition. The complexity of anthologising is further amplified when the activity of translation takes place. Translation may enhance or discount the aesthetic appeal of poets and poems, thus implicating their claim for canonicity. Besides, questions of form and prosody also shape the target-culture product, and hence the readership’s perception. The representations of Tang poetry and Chinese culture in anthologies are often taken for granted due to the sense of authority attached to anthologies. It is therefore important to take note of and examine how anthologist-translators have shaped literary perceptions by negotiating between source and target cultures.

两次鸦片战争期间（1840-1842,1856-1860），中英两国正式开启了官方交涉活动与外交谈判。在这些交涉活动中，双方口译者均发挥了重要作用，展现了特有的主体性和能动性。本文拟对当时较具代表性的三位口译者进行个案研究，他们分别是中国译者鲍鹏、黄仲畬和英国译者马儒翰。笔者通过挖掘相关的一手、二手资料，并对它们进行缜密的文本分析，试图对三位译者在各自的外交口译中所体现的主体性和能动性作出详尽的考证和论述。本文得出的结论是：在两次鸦片战争的特殊情境中，口译者往往背离“忠实性”原则:有的受到自身生活或工作经历之影响，在口译活动中常带入自己的主观想法，独立做出决定，此可谓口译者主体性的表现形式；有的采取跨界策略，在交涉双方不同立场和态度之间游移，以达到斡旋和协调的目的，充分体现了口译者的能动性。

This thesis will focus on Ezra Pound’s poem, Histrion, its associations with Stanislavskian method acting and their interface with translation studies. The title of “Histrion” is derived from the Latin word for an actor and Pound clearly wishes to suggest strong parallels between the voice of the poet and the voice of the actor. The work evokes a clairvoyant state of heightened consciousness achieved by the poet, in which he melds the subjectivities of the modern writer and the “souls of all men great” (earlier poets such as Dante and Villon) in a translucent flame of fused form. The thesis will explore the phenomenological implications of merging two identities and then apply the seemingly far-fetched concept of metempsychosis suggested in Pound’s poem to translation studies with reference to contemporaneous (to Pound) Stanislavskian acting approaches. For Pound as creative re-writer, as for the creative method actor, all demarcation between the two subjects dissolves. Likewise, in literary translation, as much of Pound’s work exemplifies, the melding and mingling of the author’s and the translator’s subjectivities can be a viable methodology. Such histrionic translation attempts to enact and even resurrect the persona of the source text in the target version. Thus I propose to meld Stanislavskian acting theories with Pound’s sense of metempsychosis and metamorphosis with application to the study of literary translation.

Expositores plenarios: Robert Martínez Carrasco (Universitat Jaume I), Mariana Favila Alcala (México) / Ponentes: Piero Ruiz (UPC), Andrea Chang (UPC), Manuela Avendaño Rincón (UdeA), Sulay Paiva (UPC), Victoria de los Santos (UPC), Manuela Hernández Sánchez (UdeA), Ángela Gómez Zuluaga (UdeA), Juan Carlos Quiñones Portocarrero (UPC), Diego Cabada Llacsahuanga (UPC), Juliana Echeverri Valencia (UdeA), Carolina Henao Ortiz (UdA), María Camila Rodríguez Delgado (UdeA) / En el marco de la alianza entre los programas de traducción de la Universidad de Antioquia (UdeA) y de la UPC, se organizó el evento académico con el fin de visibilar el trabajo de investigación de estudiantes de pregrado. El evento contó también con conferencias plenarias a cargo de expertos académicos.

Expositores plenarios: Robert Martínez Carrasco (Universitat Jaume I), Mariana Favila Alcala (México) / Ponentes: Piero Ruiz (UPC), Andrea Chang (UPC), Manuela Avendaño Rincón (UdeA), Sulay Paiva (UPC), Victoria de los Santos (UPC), Manuela Hernández Sánchez (UdeA), Ángela Gómez Zuluaga (UdeA), Juan Carlos Quiñones Portocarrero (UPC), Diego Cabada Llacsahuanga (UPC), Juliana Echeverri Valencia (UdeA), Carolina Henao Ortiz (UdA), María Camila Rodríguez Delgado (UdeA) / En el marco de la alianza entre los programas de traducción de la Universidad de Antioquia (UdeA) y de la UPC, se organizó el evento académico con el fin de visibilar el trabajo de investigación de estudiantes de pregrado. El evento contó también con conferencias plenarias a cargo de expertos académicos.

The aim of this study is to explore the stylistic identity of four translators of modern Greek poetry into English and to outline each translator’s distinct stylistic profile. In line with views on the subject expressed by Malmkjær (1996) and Baker (2000) a translator’s profile is seen as being composed by consistent patterns that can be identified throughout their work and which leave their personal mark on the text. A corpus-based methodology is used for the identification and exploration of these patterns, through a Specialized Corpus of English Translations of Modern Greek Poetry (SCETOMGP). This corpus contains translations by Rae Dalven, Kimon Friar, Edmund Keeley & Phillip Sherrard (working in collaboration) and David Connolly. The source-texts are taken from C.P. Cavafy, George Seferis, Yiannis Ritsos and Odysseus Elytis, who were extensively translated during the second half of the 20th century. The main purpose of the corpus is to facilitate direct comparison between the retranslations of the same poem. Such direct comparisons form the core of this study and have the advantage of making the issue of source-text influence on each translator directly observable, alongside their other stylistic traits. A detailed account of the theoretical views or reflections each translator has put forth is also presented. Following Holmes (1994) the translator of poetry is seen here as a meta-poet who requires skills similar to those of a critic and an original poet, and certain skills that are specific only to the translator. Consequently, the translators’ views on issues of language, literature, style and translation not only provide the backdrop for exploring any stylistic patterns found in the texts, but are seen as part of their stylistic profile. The distinguishing stylistic features for each translator are explored in both quantitative and qualitative terms. Overall word frequencies for each translator are examined, the stylistic features that are prominent in each case are identified, and their impact is considered. Special attention is also paid to the way those stylistic features that Boase-Beier (2005) calls ‘universal aspects of literature’ are treated by each translator. The next stage of the study involves the identification and sorting out of the patterns of stylistic features that consistently manifest in a translator’s work and examining how these patterns relate to their theoretical views and reflections. In the final stage, the stylistic profile of each translator is compiled by complementing the textual and contextual data together with each translator’s use of paratexts and extra-textual material.

A great expansion is underway in the Saudi higher education system as it moves from an elite to a mass form of higher education. The number of universities, for example, has jumped from eight universities in 2000 to more than 24 in 2011. Given the scale of investment called for, questions are being increasingly asked about the effectiveness of the higher education system. As a contribution to those processes of greater scrutiny, the present study explores the perceptions of Saudi students of learning and teaching in translation studies. The broad aim of the study is to throw some light on how students learn and regulate their learning in translation studies, and how they are influenced by the course design. While the strongest emphasis of this study was on students’ self-regulation of their learning, this is presented as one aspect of their approaches to learning, and in order to illuminate these self-regulated approaches to learning, students’ perceptions of the teaching and learning environments (TLEs), and their orientations to learning were examined as well. Three contrasting undergraduate courses were examined using a mixed method approach combining Likert-style questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. A total of 352 students were surveyed using an adapted version of Vermunt’s Inventory of Learning Styles (ILS). This was complemented by interviews with 34 students. Six case studies were drawn out from the interview data for indepth analysis of students’ experience of studying in this particular context. In order to capture the richness and distinctiveness of the learning in translation studies, it was necessary to distinguish two contrasting approaches; one of them is a deep self-regulated approach, and the other is a surface unregulated approach to studying. Each of these approaches is contextualised within the learning in translation studies. There were some important environmental influences on these approaches including: course characteristics, classroom teaching, and feedback and assessment. In addition to this, four types of orientations were discerned among those group of students; academic, personal, vocational, and social. All of these types have intrinsic and extrinsic forms except the personal and the social which had intrinsic forms only. The study concludes with conceptual, methodological, and practical implications drawn from the findings. Perhaps the most important implication is the need to improve students’ skills in self-regulation over the course of their studies. This research provides insights into the experience of learning of this group of students, at the same time it emphasises the need for more studies on this under-researched group of students.

Die Translationswissenschaft befindet sich gegenwärtig in einem Stadium, in dem sie sich von der reinen Untersuchung des Übersetzungsprozesses wegbewegt und stärker die hierbei beteiligten Vermittlungsprozesse behandelt (Kaindl 2009: 164). Neben der Beschäftigung mit den kulturellen Bedingungen von Translation, wie sie seit den neunziger Jahren des letzten Jahrhunderts erfolgte (Prunč 2007: 279), begannen zu Beginn dieses Jahrhunderts Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler zu fragen, was die Konsequenzen seien, wenn Translation allgemein als ein Bereich sozialer Betätigung betrachtet würde. Hierbei wurden insbesondere die Theorien Pierre Bourdieus und Niklas Luhmanns herangezogen (Kaindl 2009: 160). Die Beschäftigung mit dem Thema ist inzwischen so weit fortgeschritten, dass bereits die Möglichkeit eines „sociological turn“ in der Translationswissenschaft diskutiert wird (Wolf 2006, 2009). Mit der Theorie Niklas Luhmanns haben sich bisher vor allem Theo Hermans (insb. 1999, 2007), Hans J. Vermeer (2006a, 2006b, 2008) und Sergey Tyulenev (2009a, 2009b, 2010) beschäftigt. Andreas Poltermann kommt wohl das Verdienst zu, die Thematik als Erster im deutschsprachigen Raum behandelt zu haben (Poltermann, Andreas (1992) \\\\\\\"Normen des literarischen Übersetzens im System der Literatur\\\\\\\". In Harald Kittel, (Hrsg.) Geschichte, System, Literarische Übersetzung. Histories, Systems, Literary Translations. Berlin: Erich Schmidt, 5-31.) Wenn Tyulenev inzwischen eine gewisse Stagnation in der Rezeption systemtheoretischen Gedankenguts in der Translationswissenschaft konstatiert (Tyulenev 2010: 347), so scheint es gerade deshalb angezeigt, das bisher Erreichte zu sichten und zu fragen, inwieweit sich eine weitere Beschäftigung mit dem Thema lohnen könnte. Dies umso mehr, als die Theorie Luhmanns in besonderer Weise geeignet sein könnte, Translation zu beschreiben. Denn Translation beruht in besonderer Weise auf Kommunikation und Luhmanns zentrale These ist, dass Kommunikation das Grundelement allen sozialen Handelns sei (Luhmann 1995b: 114). Gegenstand dieser Untersuchung ist daher die Rezeption der luhmannschen Theorie durch die Translationswissenschaft. Gefragt wird dabei, wie die Theorie Luhmanns rezipiert wurde und ob aufgrund dieser oder anderer Überlegungen von Translation als sozialem System im luhmannschen Sinne gesprochen werden könnte. Nach dem einleitenden Teil wird in Kapitel zwei dieser Arbeit die Systemtheorie von Niklas Luhmann dargestellt. Hierzu wird ein Überblick über diese Theorie, ihren Anspruch und ihren Aufbau gegeben, woraufhin einzelne Begriffe der Theorie vorgestellt werden. Die Auswahl der Begriffe erfolgte nach ihrer Relevanz für ein Grundverständnis der Theorie einerseits und für die folgenden Teile andererseits. Jene Teile der luhmannschen Theorie, die nur in bestimmten Fällen und nur für diese von Belang sind, werden an der jeweiligen Stelle behandelt. Im dritten Kapitel werden die Arbeiten derjenigen Autoren vorgestellt, die sich bisher über die Behandlung reiner Teilaspekte hinaus mit der Anwendung der luhmannschen Theorie auf Translation und mit der Systemhaftigkeit von Translation befasst haben. In Kapitel vier wird die Frage diskutiert, ob die Voraussetzungen vorliegen, unter denen von Translation als System gesprochen werden kann, bevor im fünften Kapitel die Ergebnisse der Arbeit kurz zusammengefasst und mögliche Themen für weitere Forschungen genannt werden, soweit sie sich aus der Arbeit ergeben.

Guided by the hypothesis that translation is a language contact situation that can influence language change, this study investigates a frequency shift from hypotactic to paratactic constructions in concessive and causal clauses in German management and business writing. The influence of the English SVO word order is assumed to cause language users of German to prefer verb-second, paratactic constructions to verb-final, hypotactic ones. The hypothesis is tested using a 1 million word diachronic corpus containing German translations and their source texts as well as a corpus of German non-translations. The texts date from 1982–3 and 2008, which allows a diachronic analysis of changes in the way English causal and concessive structures have been translated. The analysis shows that in the translations, parataxis is indeed becoming more frequent at the expense of hypotaxis, a phenomenon that, to some extent, also occurs in the non-translations. Based on a corpus of unedited draft translations, it can be shown that translators rather than editors are responsible for this shift. Most of the evidence, however, suggests that the shift towards parataxis is not predominantly caused by language contact with English. Instead, there seems to be a development towards syntactically simpler constructions in this genre, which is most evident in the strong tendency towards sentence-splitting and an increased use of sentence-initial conjunctions in translations and non-translations. This simplification seems to be compensated for, to some extent, by the establishment of pragmatic distinctions between specific causal and concessive conjunctions.

中國現代作家沈從文 (1902-1988) 的著作，自一九四九年開始在中國大陸 和台灣被禁，長達三十年。這期間，沈從文的文學成就被主流文學史忽略，甚 至否定。可以說，沈從文在中國的文學評論界，以至中國文學史“缺席”逾三 十年。八十年代初，中國大陸的政治環境改變，西方學者的影響增加，中國學 術界開始重新肯定沈從文的文學成就，沈從文的名字乃得以在中國現代文學史 的論述中重現。反之，在西方學術界，沈從文研究從沒有中斷。 選集，無論是個別作家的專集，還是不同作家的合集，是作家風格、面貌 的縮影，而中國現代作家的英譯選集，更是英語讀者認識中國作家最便捷的途 徑。翻譯、編選是“重寫”(rewriting) 活動，而“重寫”往往隱含選取、評價 等判別標準，操縱着譯者、編者對作品、作家的認識與接受程度，對文學作品 能否成為經典作品和成為甚麼樣的經典，有一定的影響。本論文借用勒菲弗爾 (André Lefevere) 的“重寫”概念，先從宏觀角度探討沈從文作品英譯選集的編 者在編選過程中，如何“重寫”沈從文的形象；然後從微觀角度分析譯者在翻 譯的過程中，如何“重寫”沈從文的作品及其形象；而在兩種“重寫”的操縱 下，各英譯選集又如何折射沈從文的形象。