Re-evaluation of the translation concept in the light of the principle of invisibility in translation

Abstract

From a classical point of view which was dominant in 1950s, linguistic transfer from a language into another language is simply defined as “translation”. Some scholars however think that the use of only the concept of translation in this sense is not sufficient for the exact definition. As known, in order for the (inter lingual) translation action to take place, a bilateral relationship is always established between the source and the target text. But apart from the transfer of linguistic elements in the source text to the target setting, cultural elements are also conveyed into the target language. In connection the translator may sometimes adopt strategies such as adaptation, domestication, updating, or even generalization in the translation process rather than seeking for only direct translation. As for the use of such strategies as domestication, adaptation and so forth in the translation action, some questions may arise here: Is this action through the use of these mentioned strategies by the translator a translation or is it more than a translation? Should this action be called just a translation action, or should it be named differently because what is in the source text is transferred into the target language in a different respect by adopting above mentioned strategies? For example translator may also prefer to deviate a target text production from the source text intentionally thanks to these strategies. In this study, in the context of the hypothesis and these questions, we explain the concepts of the translator’s visibility and invisibility. In the light of the invisibility principle in translation by referring to Venuti's Translator's Invisibility (1995) the concept of translation was re-discussed, the findings were supported with examples and alternative concepts were introduced to the concept of translation.