Contesting Peter Newmark

When l first read Newmark, l was impressed, educated and, at the same time, somewhat uneasy. l have since read and reread everything bearing his signature to come my way and last, if he is to be believed most comprehensive and systematised articulation of his thoughts on the matter. In the following pages l shall endeavour to show that, his claims to the contrary notwithstanding, Newmark does indeed have a single, coherent theory of translation, that it is a wrong and didactically dangerous one, and that, despite ali that, he makes a substantive and most opportune and welcome contribution to the development of our discipline. l believe that both Newmark the thinker and translator are batter than his theory

Peter Newmark rides again!

pp.75-7

Elementary, My Dear Colleague! Educating Our Students' Guesses

lt is by now an axiom that translation and interpretation are forms of mediated interlingual communication, whereby both analysis of the originai and production of the target te x t are govemed by hypertextual (in tbe skopostheorie sense of tbe term) and macrotextual analyses based upon tbe relevant features of tbe situation. A crucial component of sucb analyses is tbe structure of explicatures and implicatures and, more relevantly, the way that, within the limits of bis rhetorical competence, a writer/speaker chooses his explicitations as a function of wbat be assumes is a) not necessary to make explicit, b) not advisable to make explicit - and vice versa. The author is counting on bis addressees to put the two they read/hear and tbe two they know/assume/can infer together in order to apprehend his intended sense (see Viaggio 1996)

Few Ad Libs on Communicative and Semantic Translation, Translators, Interpreters, their Teachers and their Schools

On épilogue sur la dichotomie traduction sémantique et traduction communicative. On présente des considérations générales sur les traducteurs et leur profession et on traite de l'apprentissage des langues, des systèmes et des institutions d'éducation en illustrant toujours les idées et les opinions avec des analogies

The Importance of the Metacommunicative Purposes of Communication, or Teaching Students to Listen and Speak Like Normal Human Beings

This article submits that utterances are always uttered in a specific social context and are produced and understood out of specific metacommunicative purposes. There is more to communication than the exchange of propositions. Real comprehension is always top-down and relevance-governed, and succeeds at the level of metarepresented cognitive and pragmatic meaning. If students are not taught to understand and speak meaningfully, they fall into the trap of modular comprehension, memorization and verbalization.Les énoncés s’inscrivent toujours dans un environnement social spécifique ; ils sont produits et compris en fonction de certains objectifs métacommunicatifs. La communication dépasse le simple échange d’énoncés : la vraie compréhension va au-delà des signes linguistiques, recherche la pertinence pour atteindre le sens cognitif et pragmatique latent. Si les étudiants ne sont pas sensibilisés à privilégier le sens dans la compréhension et la réexpression, ils courent le risque de comprendre, de mémoriser et de restructurer de manière parcellaire