Already a subscriber? - Login here
Not yet a subscriber? - Subscribe here

Displaying: 1-10 of 81 documents


1. Sign Systems Studies: Volume > 40 > Issue: 3/4
Elin Sütiste Preface. On the paths of translation semiotics with Peeter Torop
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
semiotics of translation
2. Sign Systems Studies: Volume > 40 > Issue: 3/4
Winfried Nöth Translation and semiotic mediation
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Translation, according to Charles S. Peirce, is semiotic mediation. In sign processes in general, the sign mediates between the object, which it represents, and its interpretant, the idea it evokes, the interpretation it creates, or the action it causes. To what extent does the way a translator mediates correspond to what a sign does in semiosis? The paper inquires into the parallels between the agency of the sign in semiosis and the agency of the interpreter (and translator) in translation. It argues that some of the limits and limitations of translatability are also the limits of the sign in semiosis. Since genuine icons and genuine indices do not convey meaning they are strictly speaking also untranslatable. Nevertheless, icons and indices also serve as mediators in learning how to translate.
3. Sign Systems Studies: Volume > 40 > Issue: 3/4
Winfried Nöth Перевод и семиотическое посредничество. Резюме
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
4. Sign Systems Studies: Volume > 40 > Issue: 3/4
Winfried Nöth Tõlkimine ja semiootiline vahendamine. Kokkuvõte
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
5. Sign Systems Studies: Volume > 40 > Issue: 3/4
Ritva Hartama-Heinonen Semiotico-translation-theoretical reverberations revisited
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
This article examines translating and translations primarily from a sem(e)iotic viewpoint. The focus is, on the one hand, on a semiotic re-reading of certain translation-theoretical suggestions (such as the idea of translation being an inherently semiotic category), and on the other hand, on a translation-theoretical re-reading of certain semiotic suggestions (such as what signs can be used for representing). Other proposals that receive a revisiting discussion include, for instance, Roman Jakobson’s translation typology and Umberto Eco’s notion of semiotics as a theory of the lie. The approach adopted in the present article advocates a serious re-reading and attitude, but even more, a literal reading and sometimes, a less serious attitude as well.
6. Sign Systems Studies: Volume > 40 > Issue: 3/4
Ritva Hartama-Heinonen Новый взгляд на переводо-семио-теоретические отголоски. Резюме
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
7. Sign Systems Studies: Volume > 40 > Issue: 3/4
Ritva Hartama-Heinonen Uus pilguheit tõlke-semiootilis-teoreetilistele järelkajadele. Kokkuvõte
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
8. Sign Systems Studies: Volume > 40 > Issue: 3/4
Daniele Monticelli Challenging identity: Lotman’s “translation of the untranslatable” and Derrida’s différance
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
The concept of “cultural identity” has gradually replaced such discredited concepts as “race”, “ethnicity”, even “nationality” in the conservative political discourse of recent decades which conceives, represents and performs culture as a closed system with clear-cut boundaries which must be defended from contamination.The article employs the theories of Derrida and Lotman as useful tools for deconstructing this understanding of cultural identity, which has recently become anideological justification for socio-political conflicts. In fact, their theories spring from a thorough critique of the kind of internalizing self-enclosure which allowed Saussure to delimit and describe langue as the object of linguistics. The article identifies and compares the elements of this critique, focusing on Derrida’s and Lotman’s concepts of “mirror structure”, “binarism”, “numerousness”, “textuality” and “semiosphere”.An understanding of mediation emerges which is not reducible to any kind of definitive acquisition, thereby frustrating the pretences of identity, constantly dislocating and deferring any attempt at semiotic self-enclosure. My comparison suggests that Lotman’s “translation of the untranslatable” (or “dialogue”) and Derrida’s differance can be considered analogous descriptions of this problematic kind of mediation. The (de)constructive nature of culture, as described by Lotman and Derrida, challenges any attempt to view cultural formations as sources of rigid and irreducible identities or differences.
9. Sign Systems Studies: Volume > 40 > Issue: 3/4
Daniele Monticelli Вызов идентичности: лотмановский “перевод непереводимого” и différance Деррида. Резюме
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
10. Sign Systems Studies: Volume > 40 > Issue: 3/4
Daniele Monticelli Väljakutse identiteedile: Lotmani “tõlkimatuse tõlge” ja Derrida différance. Kokkuvõte
view |  rights & permissions | cited by