Translation Theory

Acknowledgements
• This lecture is based to a large extent on:
• MUNDAY, Jeremy. 2001. Introducing
Translation Studies – Theories and Applications.
London and New York: Routledge
• VENUTI, Lawrence. (Ed.) 2000. The Translation
Studies Reader. London and New York:
Routledge.
 A few general distinctions
• Translating v.  interpreting
• Source language/text – SL / ST
• Target  language/text  - TL / TT
• Intralingual v. interlingual v. intersemiotic
translation
• Translation as language learning
• Contrastive linguistics
• Comparative literature
 “Translation Studies”
– self-perception
• Many people today think that Translation
Studies is mainly:
– Literary theory
– Cultural studies
• And, possibly:
– Communication studies
– Stylistics & Genre analysis
 Translation Theory - TT
– perspective from Philosophy
• Linguistic philosophy - attempts to discover WHAT language
means:
– the ideal language(s) of logic etc.
– 'ordinary language' philosophy
• Philosophy of language – attempts to find out HOW language
means:
– certain general features of language such as meaning,
reference, truth, verification, speech acts and logical necessity
• Philosophy of linguistics - the study of language through
linguistics
 TT – perspective from
Philosophy of Linguistics
• Structuralism - language reflects structure of thought,
culture and society
• Transformational-Generative grammar - underlying
universal language
• Functionalism - Language and its social functions
• Cognitivism - Language as it reflects our cognitive
appraisal of the world, categorization of experience and
use of metaphor
 TT – perspective from
Linguistics
• Linguists perceive it as related to:
– Contrastive linguistics
– Pragmatics
– Discourse Analysis
– Stylistics
• Once dismissed as useless to TT– all of
these areas have been re-animated by
corpora linguistics
 TT – perspective from
Information Technology
• IT specialists are increasingly fascinated by
human language and:
– Machine assisted translation
– Machine Translation
– Knowledge Engineering
– Information Retrieval
– Artificial Intelligence
TT - the professional perspective
• Translator training
• Interpreter training
• Translation aids
• Translation criticism
• Translation quality
• Translation policy
• Professional translation standards
 Translation Theories
• The objectives of this seminar are:
– To give a general outline of translation theories
in this century
– To show how these theories apply to non
literary texts
– To demonstrate that translation practice can
benefit from theory
 Translation theories
• Most TT is:
– Product-orientated – focuses the translation
– Function-orientated – examines the context and
purpose of the translation
– Process-orientated – analyses the psychology of
translation and process
• But usually has elements of all three
 Partial theories of translation
• Medium restricted – man or machine?
• Area restricted – specific languages/cultures
• Rank-restricted – word/sentence/text
• Text-type restricted –different genres
• Time-restricted – historical view
• Problem-restricted – specific problems, e.g
equivalence
 Problems
• Position of Translation Studies in academia
• Split between theory and practice
• Translation teachers' fear of theory
• Researchers still encouraged to focus on
literature
• Therefore teacher/researcher faced with
dilemma
 Early distinctions
• People have been arguing for centuries about
– literal v. free v. faithful translation
– word-for-word v. sense-for-sense 
• For example:
• Cicero, St Jerome, St Augustine, Martin Luther,
Étienne Dolet, Alexander Tytler, Johann
Wolfgang von Goethe, Friedrich Schleiermacher,
Wilhelm von Humboldt, Arthur Schopenhauer
• See Robinson (1997/2002)
 Bible translation
• Bassnett (1991: 45-50) - "The history of Bible
translation is accordingly a history of western
culture in microcosm".
– St. Jerome's translation into Latin in 384 A.D.
– John Wycliffe  (1330-84)and the 'Lollards'
– William Tyndale (1494-1536) – burnt at stake
– Martin Luther – New Testament 1522, Old Testament
1534
• Try Biblegateway:
http://www.biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible
 The Qur’an
• See University of Southern California:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/
• Warning: "Note that any translation of the Qur'an
immediately ceases to be the literal word of Allah,
and hence cannot be equated with the Qur'an in its
original Arabic form. In fact, each of the
translations on this site is actually an
interpretation which has been translated."
 Science in Translation
a historical view
• Scott L. Montgomery. 2000. Science in
Translation. Movements of Knowledge through
Cultures and Time. University of Chicago Press.
• Describes how scientific texts have been
translated, ‘adapted’, ‘revised’ and added to
down the centuries e.g.
– Western Astronomy
– Greek and Arabic Science
– Japanese Science
 Further reading
• HERMANS, Theo & Ubaldo Stecconi.
2002. 'Translators as Hostages to
History'.
• From the European Commission’s 'Theory
meets Practice' Seminars – at:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/translation/theory
/lectures/2001_01_18_history.pdf 
 ‘Linguistic’
theories of translation
• Language Universals v. Linguistic Relativism
• Science of translation
• Equivalence
• Semantic and communicative translation
• Korrespondenz and Äquivalenz
• Translation ‘shifts’
• Discourse and register analysis
 Language Universals v.
Linguistic Relativism
• Language Universals – presuppose that
languages and/or our capacity for language
are universal and/or innate
– long history leading to Chomsky and beyond
• Language Relativism – different languages
show us different ways of viewing the world
– Sapir-Whorf theory and most translation theory
 Science of translation
• Nida (1964)
– Linguistic meaning
– Referential or denotative meaning
– Emotive or connotative meaning
– Hierarchical structuring
– Componential analysis
– Semantic structure analysis
– Formal and dynamic equivalence
– Applications to Bible translation
 Chomsky and TT
From Nida & Taber (1969:33)
From Nida (1964: 185-7)
From Munday (2001: 50)
 Equivalence
• Roman Jacobson (1959/2000) > “Equivalence in
difference is the cardinal problem of language and
the pivotal concern of linguistics’

• Discusses equivalence at level of obligatory

grammar and lexicon, for example:
– gender
– aspect
– semantic fields
 Equivalence at word level
Baker (1992) – Chapter 2
• Morphology – lexical and syntactic
• Lexical Meaning
• Propositional v. Expressive meaning
• Presupposed meaning
• Evoked meaning
– dialect – geographical, temporal, social
– Register – field/tenor/mode of discourse

• Semantic fields and lexical sets

 Equivalence above word level
Baker (1992) – Chapter 3

• Collocation
– Collocational range and markedness
– Collocation and register
– Collocational meaning
• Idioms and Fixed Expressions
 Grammatical equivalence
Baker (1992) – Chapter 4
• Grammatical vs. Lexical categories
• The Diversity of Grammatical Categories:
– Number
– Gender
– Person
– Tense and Aspect
– Voice
– Word Order
 Newmark (1981)
• Semantic / communicative translation at level of:
– Transmitter/addressee focus
– Culture
– Time and origin
– Relation to ST
– Use of form of SL
– Form of TL
– Appropriateness
– Criterion for evaluation
 Koller (1976/89)
Korrespondenz and Äquivalenz
• Denotative equivalence
• Connotative equivalence
• Text-normative equivalence
• Pragmatic equivalence
• Formal equivalence
Vinay & Darbelnet (1977/2000)
Translation ‘shifts’
– Direct translation:
• Borrowing
• Calque
• Literal translation
– Oblique translation
• Transposition
• Modulation 
• Equivalence
• Adaptation
– Function at the level of the lexicon, syntax and message
 Translation ‘shifts’
Catford (1965/2000)
1. level shifts
2. category shifts:
• structural
• class 
• unit or rank 
• intra-system 

Van Leuven-Zwart (1989/90)

– 8 categories and 37 sub-categories!
 Linguistic theories and
translation
• Most of these theories are considered
‘linguistic’ and are useful for teaching
translation
• Most translation occurs at the linguistic
level at some stage of the process
• However, too much stress on linguistic
levels can have negative effect at the text
level
 Halliday
Functional-Systemic linguistics
 Textual equivalence
Baker (1992) Chapter 5
• Thematic and Information Structures
– Theme and Rheme
– Sentence analysis – S Od Oi Cs Co Cp Adj
Conj Disj
• Information Structure: Given and New
• Word Order and Communicative Function
 Textual equivalence
Baker (1992) Chapter 6
• Cohesion
– Reference
– Substitution and Ellipsis
– Conjunction
– Lexical Cohesion
Translation Quality Assessment
House (1997)
Focus on the function of the text
• Baker (1992) Chapter 7 - Pragmatic
equivalence
• Reiss (1970s) – Functional approach
• Holz-Mäntarri (1984) – Translational action
• Vermeer (1970s) and Reiss & Vermeer
(1984) – ‘Skopos’ theory
• Nord (1988/91) – Text Analysis in
Translation
 Pragmatic equivalence
Baker (1992) Chapter 7
• Coherence
• Presupposition
• Implicature
– Grice's maxims of 
• Quantity
• Quality
• Relevance
• Manner
– Politeness
 Reiss (1970s)
Functional approach
• Classification of texts as:
– 'informative‘
– 'expressive‘
– 'operative‘
– 'audiomedial'
Reiss (1971)
Text types
Reiss > Chesterman (1989)
Text types and varieties
 Holz-Mäntarri (1984)
Translational action
• A communicative process involving:
– The initiator
– The commissioner
– The ST producer
– The TT producer
– The TT user
– The TT receiver
 Reiss & Vermeer (1984) –
‘Skopos’ theory
• Focuses purpose or skopos of translation
• Rules
1. A TT is determined by its skopos
2. A TT is message in a target culture/TL
concerning a message in a source culture/SL
3. A TT is not clearly reversible
4. A TT must be internally coherent
5. A TT must be coherent with the ST
 Nord (1988/91)
Text Analysis
Functional approach
1. The importance of the translation
commission
2. The role of ST analysis
3. The functional hierarchy of translation
problems
 Polysystem Theory
Focus - social and cultural norms
• Even-Zohar (1978/2000)
• Toury (1995)
• Chesterman (1997)
• Lambert, Van Gorp, Hermans and the
Manipulation school (1985 & 1999)
 Even-Zohar (1978/2000)
• Even-Zohar considers translated literature to
include:
– children's literature
– thrillers
– other popular works of fiction,
– (auto-)biography
• CONSIDER: informative writing of all kinds –
e.g. travel, art and sport, journalism, university
textbooks. 
 Toury (1995) Descriptive
Translation Studies
• Important point in Translation Studies
• It encouraged the description of all kinds of
translation and provided a wide basis on which to
conduct research.
• The tertium comparationis = attempt to postulate
'neutral translation' v. culturally and socially
'loaded' real translations
• BUT proved unsatisfactory and abandoned
 Toury’s norms
• initial norm
– ST norms = adequate translation
– TT norms = acceptable translation
• preliminary norms
– translation policy – selection of texts
– directness of translation – is ST an original?
• operational norms
– matricial norms or completeness of the TT
– textual-linguistic norms.  
 Toury’s ‘laws’
• The law of growing standardization -
suggests that the TT standards override
those of the original text.  This will happen
when the TL culture is more powerful.
• The law of interference - suggests that the
ST interferes in the TT by default. This will
happen when the SL culture is more
powerful.
 Chesterman’s norms (1997)
• Expectancy norms – expectations of readers
– Allow evaluative judgements
– Validated by a norm-authority
• Professional norms
– Accountability norm – ethical norm
– Communication norm – social norm
– ‘Relation’ norm – linguistic norm (between SL
and TL)
 Polysystem theory and the
NON Literary text
• Even-Zohar, Toury, Chesteman, and others
see ST and TT as part of a much wider
social and cultural context
• Although they may consider literary text
primary, their theories and suggestions are
applicable to all texts
 Cultural Studies
• Bassnett & Lefevere (1991) dismissed
‘linguistic theories’ as having ‘moved from
word to text as a unit, but not beyond’ and
talked of ‘painstaking comparisons between
orginals and translations’ which do not
consider the text in its cultural environment.
(Munday, 2001: 127)
 Lefevere (1992)
Power and patronage
• Professionals within the literary system
• Patronage outside the literary system
– The ideological component
– The economic component
– The status component
• The dominant poetics
– Literary devices
– The concept of the role of literature
 Examples
• Edward Fitzgerald's 'improvement' of work
by Omar Khayyam
• An 18th century translator's ‘improvement’
of Camões' Os Lusiadas
• Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland -
'softened' for children
• Censorship of ‘bad’ language
• Can you think of examples?
 Simon (1996)
Translation and Gender
• ‘Masculine language of translation theorists
• Overt attempts to promote a feminist  stance through
translation practice
• Contribution women have made by translating works
of literature over the centuries
• Relationship of women and culture as seen through
translation
– the translator is 'self-effacing'
– creates a 'new' work with a feminine point of view
• Link between feminist and postcolonial studies
 Postcolonial Translation Theory
• Spivak (1993/2000) and Niranjana (1992)
• Cultural implications - translating between:
– Colonized and colonizing
– Politically powerful and weaker  languages and
cultures
• Power relations
• Translational and transnational factors
 Example
• Spivak (2000) translates out of Bengali into
English
• Try to imagine how an educated bi-lingual
(English/Bengali) woman with international
feminist connections might try to translate poetry
by Mahasweta Devi – a poet in an Indian village.  
• http://www.emory.edu/ENGLISH/Bahri/Contents.
html#Authors 
 Other Situations
• Brazilian cannibalism (1960-1999)
– Colonized devours colonizer and is enriched
• Cronin (1996)
– The Irish language and English imperialism
over the centuries
 Cultural Studies ETC
• My suggestion - surf the Internet with:
– cultural studies
– communication studies
– comparative literature
– literary studies
– translation studies
 Cultural Studies and
the NON Literary text
• Cultural Studies theorists:
– Rarely refer to NON Literary text
– Then tend to claim any ‘interesting’ text as
‘literary’!
• YET Cultural Studies should – by its very
nature – go beyond literature – or at least
Literature.
 Reaction against
TL orientated texts

• What can be done to avoid too much

standardization?
• How can one avoid social or cultural bias?
• How can one truly represent the original?
 Antoine Berman (1984)
‘the Experience of the Foreign’
• Berman’s ‘negative analytic’ of translation
focuses the following:
– Rationalization
– Clarification
– Expansion
– Ennoblement
– Qualitative impoverishment
– Quantitative impoverishment
 Antoine Berman (1984)
‘the Experience of the Foreign’
– The destruction of rhythms
– The destruction of underlying networks of
signification
– The destruction of linguistic patternings
– The destruction of vernacular networks or their
exoticization
– The destruction of expressions and idioms
– The effacement of the superimposition of
languages
 Venuti (1995)
The Translator’s Invisibility
• Criticizes those, like Toury, who aim to produce
value-free norms and laws of translation. 
• Interpretes Lefevere's notions of patronage and its
influence in the context of Anglo-American
publishing
• Uses 'Invisibility' to describe the translator's
situation and activity in contemporary Anglo-
American culture
 QUESTIONS
• Can the Translator be ‘Invisible’?
• Should the Translator be ‘Invisible’?
• If, so – when? Give examples
• Can the Translator be ‘invisible’ and
creative?
• If, so – when? Give examples
 Pride, Prejudice ......
and Power
• Consider:
• How literary translators’ describe their
work – Pride
• How reviewers and the public receive
translations - Prejudice
• The publishing industry and the effect of
globalization – Power
 Philosophy and translation
• Philosophers often find translation
fascinating - a few examples:
• Walter Benjamin (1923/2000)
• Ezra Pound (1929/2000)
• Steiner (1975/92/98)
• Derrida & Deconstruction (1960 >)
 Walter Benjamin (1923/2000)
• Benjamin's metaphor - liberation of the original
text through translation.
• Believed in interlinear translation > reveals the
original in all its complexity
• TL is 'powerfully affected by the foreign tongue‘
• An extreme example of foreignization
• Believed this would allow 'pure language' to
emerge from the harmonization of the two
languages. 
 Ezra Pound (1929/2000) – and
his followers
• Ezra Pound influenced much literary translation
• Idea that one does not need to know the SL well –
it is enough to feel the ‘spirit’
• Belief in archaizing and foreignizing to effect
• Led to ‘literary translation workshops’ -
inspiration
• Leads to very good translation – OR pretentious
and impenetrable texts!
 Steiner (1975/92/98)
Beyond Babel
• Hermeneutic motion
1. Initiative trust
2. Aggression
3. Incorporation
4. Compensation
• Imbalance between ST and TT
• Resistant difference of the text
• Elective affinity of the translator
 Derrida & Deconstruction
(1960 >)
• Objective of Derrida - and Deconstruction - to
demonstrate the instability of language in general and
the relationship between signified and signifier in
particular. 
• 'Deconstruction' can and has been used to 'deconstruct'
much more than 'traditional literature‘ . E.g.
– Political discourse
– Philosophy
– Psychology & Sociology
– Science
 Philosophy
and the NON Literary text
• At first sight, these theories would seem to
be furthest from the NON Literary text
• BUT – consider implications for:
– Knowledge engineering
– Ontologies
– Semantic frameworks
– Descriptive terminology
 Interdisciplinary
Translation Studies
• In practice - Literary translation is confined
to Modern Languages departments
• NON Literary translation is essentially
interdisciplinary in:
– Use of language
– Use of text
– Use of technology
• Snell Hornby (1995) - Text types
 Technology and Translation
• Desktop Publishing
• Translation memories
• Terminology databases
• Translator’s Workbench
• Machine translation
• Information resources
 Other aspects
• Bert Esselink –Localizaton
• Yves Gambier –MultMedia Translation,
Conference Interpreting, Translation in Context
• Daniel Gouadec –Terminology and Translator
Training
• Don Kiraly- A Social Constructivist Approach to
Translator Education – Empowerment from
Theory to Practice.
 Anthony Pym

• Perhaps one of the best examples of multi-

disciplinary work and interests
• Have a look at his homepage
• http://www.fut.es/~apym/
 Bibliography
• BAKER, M. (ed) 1977. The Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. Part II: History and Traditions.
London and New York: Routledge.
• BAKER, M. (ed) 1977. The Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation.
• BASSNETT, Susan. 1991. Translation Studies. Revised Edition. London and New York: Routledge.
• TR. BASSNETT, S & A. Lefevere (eds.) 1990. Translation, History and Culture, London and New York:
Pinter.
• TR. BASSNETT, S & H. Trivedi (eds.) 1999. Post-Colonial Translation: Theory and Practics, London and
New York: Longman.
• BENJAMIN; W. 1923/2000 The task of the Translator, translated bz H. Zohn (1969) in L. Venuti(ed.) 2000,
pp. 15-25.
• BERMAN, A. 1985/2000. Translation and the Trials of the foreign, in L. Venuti(ed.) 2000, pp. 284-97.
• CAMPOS, H. de. 1992. Metalinguagem e outras metas: Ensaios de teoria e crítica literária, S. Paulo:
Perspectiva.
• CATFORD, J.C. (1965) A Linguistic Theory of Translation, London: Academic Press.
• CHESTERMAN, Andrew. 1997. Memes of Translation. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Pub. Co.

•
CHESTERMAN, A. 1989. Readings in Translation Theory. Helsinki: Finn Lectura.
• CRONIN, M. 1996. Translating Ireland: Translation, Languages and Culture, Cork: Cork University
Press.
• DERRIDA, J. 1985. 'Des tours de Babel', in J.F. Graham (ed.) pp. 209-48.
• ESSELINK, B. 2000. A Practical Guide to Localization. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Pub.

Co.
• EVEN-ZOHAR, I. 1978/2000. 'The position of translated literature within the literary polysystem', in in
L. Venuti(ed.) 2000, pp. 192-7.
• FAWCETT, P 1995. Translation and Language: Linguistics Approaches Explained, Manchester: St.
Jerome.
• GENTZLER, Edwin. 2001. Contemporary Translation Theories. 2nd Edition. Clevedon: Multilingual
Matters Ltd. 
• GRAHAM, J.F.(ed) 1985. Difference in Translation, Ithaca, NY: Cornell UniversityPress.
• HALLIDAY, M.A.K. 1978. Language as Social Semiotic, London and New York: Arnold.
• HATIM, Basil. 1997. Communication across Cultures - Translation Theory and Contrastive Text
Linguistics.  Exeter: University of Exeter Press.
• HATIM, Basil & MASON, Ian.  (1990) Discourse and the Translator.  Harlow:  Longman.
• HERMANS, T. (ed.) 1985. The Manipulation of Literature: Studies in Literary Translation, Beckenham:
Croom Helm.
• HERMANS, T. 1999. Translation in Systems, Manchester: St.Jerome.
• HOLMES, James S. (1988) Translated! Amsterdam : Editions Rodopi.
• HOLZ-MÄNTARRI; J. 1984. 'Translatorisches Handeln - theoretsche fundierte Berufsprofile' in M.
Snell-Hornby (ed.) Übersertzungwissenschaft: Eine neuorienterung, Tübingen: Franke, pp 348-74.
• HOUSE, J. 1997. Translation Quality: A Model Revisited, Tubingen: Gunter Narr.
• JAKOBSON; R. 1959/2000. 'On linguistic aspects of translation', in L. Venuti(ed.) 2000, pp.113-18.
• KIRALY, Don. 2000. A Social Constructivist Approach to Translator Education – Empowerment
from Theory to Practice. Manchester/ Northampton: St. Jerome Publishing.
• KOLLER, W. 1979. 'equivalence in translation theory', in A. Chesterman (ed.) pp. 99-104.
• LAMBERT, J-R. & H. van GORP 19865. 'On describing translation`', in T. Hermans (ed.) 1985, pp
42-53.
• LEFEVERE, André.  (1992) Translation / History / Culture - a sourcebook.  London and New York. 
Routledge.  
• LEFEVERE, André. (1992)  Translation, Rewriting & the Manipulation of Literary Fame. London and
New York.  Routledge. 
• Leuven- Zwart, Kitty & Ton Naajikens 1991 (eds.) Translation Studies: the State of the Art.
Amsterdam/Atlanta: Rodopi.  
• MUNDAY, Jeremy. 2001. Introducing Translation Studies – Theories and Applications. London and
New York: Routledge.
• NEWMARK, Peter. (1988) A Textbook of Translation. New York. Prentice-Hall.
• NIDA, E. 1964. Towards a Science of Translating, Leiden: E.J. Brill.
• NIDA, Eugene A. & TABER, Charles R. (1969) The Theory and Practice of Translation, Leiden:
E.J.Brill.
• NIRANJANA; T. 1992. Siting Translation: History, Post-Structuralism, and the Colonial Context,
Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
• NORD, Christiane. 1997, Translating as a Purposeful Activity. Manchester: St. Jerome Pub.Co.
• PYM, A. 1998. Method in Translation History, Manchester: St. Jerome Pub.Co.
• REISS, Katharina. 2000. Translation Criticism – The Potentials & Limitations. Manchester: St.
Jerome Pub.Co.
• REISS, K. 1977/89 'Text types and translation assessment' in A. Chesterman (ed) pp 160-71.
• REISS, K. & H.J. Vermeer 1984 Grundleging einer allgemeinen Translationstheorie, Tübingen: Niemeyer.
• ROBINSON, Douglas. 1997. Becoming a Translator: An Accelerated Course. London and New York:
Routledge. 
• ROBINSON, Douglas. 1997/2002. Western Translation Theory - from Herodotus to Nietzsche.
Manchester/Northampton: St. Jerome Publishing. 
• SCHULTE, Rainer & BIGUENET, John. (Eds.) (1992)  Theories of Translation - An Anthology of Essays
from Dryden to Derrida.  Chicago and Longon : Univ. of Chicago Press. 
• SNELL-HORNBY, Mary. (1988) Translation Studies - An Integrated Approach. Amsterdam/
Philadelphia.  John Benjamins.
• SIMON, S. 1996 Gender in Translation: Cultural Identity and the Politics of Transmission, Londond and
New York: Routledge.
• SPIVAK, G. 1993/2000 'The Politics of translation', in L. Venuti(ed.) 2000, pp. 397-416.
• STEINER, George. 1992 After Babel. (New Edition). Oxford University Press.
• TOURY, Gideon. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies - and Beyond. Amsterdam : John Benjamin Pub.
Co.
• VENUTI, Lawrence. (1995) The Translator's Invisibility. London and New York : Routledge.
• VENUTI, L. 1998. The Scandals of Translation, Towards an Ethics of Difference, London & New York:

Routledge.
• VENUTI, Lawrence. (Ed.) 2000. The Translation Studies Reader. London and New York: Routledge.
• VINAY J.P. & DARBELNET, J (1958) Stylistique Comparée do Français et de L'Ánglais, Paris: Didier.

A classic text which compares English and French language structures.

 Links
• Anthony Pym’s homepage http://www.fut.es/~apym/
• The virtual symposium  "INNOVATION IN
TRANSLATOR AND INTERPRETER TRAINING
(ITIT) " at - http://www.fut.es/~apym/tti.htm.  
• Post-Colonial Studies at Emory Web site
http://www.emory.edu/ENGLISH/Bahri/Contents.html#Au
thors  
• Biblegateway:
• http://www.biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible
• University of Southern California:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/  
• European Commission’s translators’ workshop /seminar
/interesting articles:
• http://europa.eu.int/comm/translation/theory/index_en.htm
• http://europa.eu.int/comm/translation/theory/workshops_e
n.htm
• http://europa.eu.int/comm/translation/theory/seminars_en.
htm
• http://europa.eu.int/comm/translation/reading/articles/theor
y_and_practice_en.htm