Steiner proposes the “The Hermeneutic Motion,” a fourfold process for the transfer of meaning that differs from the typical methods of translation: literalism, paraphrase, and free imitation. The last part of Steiner’s model is referred to as restitution. In this phase, translators must focus on restoring an equality that may have been disturbed during the conversion from one language into another. As Steiner explains, disequilibrium is created by “taking away,” and then, “adding” to the concepts of the original text to benefit our own understanding. Although it is understood that translation ought to be based on a principle of equality, should we, as educators and learners, not attempt to make the concept of the material as clear as possible? Or does this disregard to the original text imply disrespect and ignorance to the work of the creator? If so, Steiner rationalizes that translation should serve the purpose of a mirror for reflection of the original image from an opposite viewpoint.
My name is Kendall Hughes and I am a senior at Bucknell University. I am a Psychology and Sociology major. I have taken French courses since my freshman year of high school. I also lived abroad in Germany for two years. I am interested in translation studies because I would like to further understand culture differences and how language can contribute to a barrier of understanding among people. View all posts by Kendall Hughes