MuTra Advanced Training & International PhD School
at Saarland University Saarbrücken
Training for PhD Projects
3-5 October 2008
Follow-up
The Saarbrücken Seminar ‘PhD Projects’ proceeded from the
question of what would be generally useful for PhD candidates in Translation
Studies. After structural considerations and state of the art formulations had
been discussed at the July Fosano Seminar we considered that background in
research principles and methodology was of particular value both for its
generality and because it is not often discussed coherently from a translation
and interpreting perspective.
The seminar started on Friday, October 3rd,
by a brief introduction to the LAP vs. ERP controversy, drawing on the
discussions of the EST research colloquium at Paris a week earlier. Heidrun
Gerzymisch-Arbogast gave a brief framework and suggested some dimensions that
the two research trends or ‘paradigms’ might share. The discussion was
controversial and subsequently postponed to a future research colloquium with
this specific topic to allow more in-depth reflections and discussions.
The morning session ended with Jean-Marie Fèvre’s
presentation of his habilitation project on intercultural management.
The afternoon of Friday, October 3rd was filled
with Andrew Chesterman’s introduction into the world of building hypotheses and
making assumptions or claims and their differentia
specifica. PhD candidates were delighted to be offered a typology of
hypotheses and inspired by the question of whether there is a (testable) distinction
between empirical hypotheses and interpretative hypotheses.
Administrative discussions and elections at the
following DGÜD General Assembly preceded a leisurely round of beer and some
futuristic ‘Kamingespräche’ at the Stiefelbräu.
On Saturday, Oct. 4th, Gyde Hansen, one of
the few researchers on longitudinal TS studies, welcomed us with fresh energy to
triangulation and other principles of empirical research, showing which of her
one-time students had developed into successful professional translators and
revisors. Were they all ‘happy’ with their former studies and what could be
improved?
Daniel Gile finally wrapped up the theoretical
discussion by pointing to the limitations of criticism in terms of knowledge
and people being influenced by psychological, statistical and other factors. He
argued for ‘good practice’ and discipline in criticism by detaching oneself
from the personal affect of being critically assessed. His workshop ended with
a lively exercise on critical reading in which he offered a set of operational
principles.
On Sunday, Oct. 5th, lead by experienced
researcher Najwa Hamaoui, young scholars took over with their new PhD projects
on a new concept of equivalence for subtitling (Vanessa Hildner), a
knowledged-based approach to translating clichés (Anne Gorius) and a study on
the translation and interpreting dimension of bilinguals (Agnieszka Gronek).
We all look forward to seeing you in Munich on the Audio Description Seminar!
Materials:
Theoretical vs Empirical Translation Studies (Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast) 
Kinds of Hypotheses and Hypothesis Building (Andrew Chesterman)
Article: The Dialogue in Translation Process Research (Gyde Hansen)
References Gyde Hansen
Abstract Gyde Hansen
Critical Reading (Daniel Gile)
Photos
|
Program 
