Genealogical Review of How Travelling Theory Develops to Transknowletology

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2022.03.009

Abstract

Abstract:

Responding to a question of how translation theories travel across disciplinary boundaries, this article addresses the notion of “ideas traveling”, making critical reviews of Said’s Travelling Theories and Lydia Liu’s Translingual Practices. Besides, attention is given to some research conducted within sociobiological field. This article argues that ideas can never travel without media. Central to it is translation and persons who act as connectors. Another two factors involved are the attractiveness of the ideas per se and their transmission environment. As a conclusion, the monograph of Translation Memes is criticized for its ignorance of the important role played by media in circulating ideas. Centering on the proposal of transknowletology by Chinese scholar Yang Feng, who advocates the process of transferring local knowledge to the world, this article concludes that further efforts can be devoted to the study in terms of ontology, methodology and ethics so as to consolidate transknowletology.

Key words: ideas travelling, travelling theories, translingual practices, Translation Memes, Transknowletology

CLC Number:

H319

GENG Qiang. Genealogical Review of How Travelling Theory Develops to Transknowletology[J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2022, 22(3): 74-83.

References 22

[1]	Bassnett S. 1993. Comparative Literature: A Critical Introduction[M]. Oxford & Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers.
[2]	Chesterman A. 2016. Memes of Translation: The Spread of Ideas in Translation Theory[M]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
[3]	D’hulst L. & Y. Gambier. 2018. Introduction[A]. In L. D’hulst & Y. Gambier (eds.). A History of Modern Translation Knowledge: Sources, Concepts, Effects[C]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 1-14.
[4]	Dawkins R. 2016. The Selfish Gene (40^th Anniversary Edition)[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[5]	Flotow L. V. 1991. Feminist translation: Contexts, practices and theories[J]. Traduire la théorie 4 (2): 69-84.
[6]	Gladwell M. 2000. The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference[M]. Boston, New York & London: Little, Brown and Company.
[7]	Manning P. 2018. Introduction[A]. In P. Manning & A. Owen(eds.). Knowledge in Translation: Global Patterns of Scientific Exchange, 1000-1800 CE[C]. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. 1-16.
[8]	Niranjana T. 1992. Siting Translation: History, Post-structuralism, and the Colonial Context[M]. Berkeley, Los Angeles & Oxford: University of California Press.
[9]	Spivak G. C. 1993. The politics of translation[A]. In G. C. Spivak. Outside in the Teaching Machine[M]. London & New York: Routledge. 179-200.
[10]	Tymoczko M. 1999. Translation in a Postcolonial Context: Early Irish Literature in English Translation[M]. London & New York: Routledge.
[11]	Venuti L. 1992. Rethinking Translation: Discourse, Subjectivity, Ideology[C]. London & New York: Routledge.
[12]	费小平. 2005. 翻译的政治:翻译研究与文化研究[M]. 北京: 中国社会科学出版社.
[13]	刘禾. 2014. 跨语际实践:文学、民族文化和被译介的现代性(中国,1900-1937)(修订译本)[M]. 北京: 生活·读书·新知三联书店.
[14]	萨义德. 2009. 旅行中的理论[A]. 萨义德. 世界·文本·批评家 (李自修译)[M]. 北京: 生活·读书·新知三联书店.
[15]	王彬彬. 2007. 以伪乱真和化真为伪--刘禾《语际书写》、《跨语际实践》中的问题意识[J]. 文艺研究(4):150-157.
[16]	王克非、傅敬民. 2020. 总序[A]. 翻译研究经典著述汉译丛书[C]. 上海: 上海外语教育出版社.
[17]	王宁. 2012. 翻译研究的文化转向[M]. 北京: 清华大学出版社.
[18]	谢天振. 2008. 论比较文学的翻译转向[J]. 北京大学学报(哲学社会科学版)(3): 43-50.
[19]	许宝强、袁伟. 2001. 语言与翻译的政治[C]. 北京: 中央编译出版社.
[20]	杨枫. 2021. 卷首语:知识翻译学宣言[J]. 当代外语研究(5): 2,27.
[21]	赵稀方. 2003. 翻译与新时期话语实践[M]. 北京: 中国社会科学出版社.
[22]	赵稀方. 2018. 翻译与现代中国[M]. 上海: 复旦大学出版社.