Towards a methodology for translation activity: an activity theory approach

References

• Bell, R. T. 1998. “Psycholinguistic/Cognitive Approaches.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, edited by M. Baker, 185–190. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Bühler, K. 1990. Theory of Language: The Representational Function of Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Cao, X. 1973. The Story of the Stone. Translated by David Hawkes. London: Penguin Group.
   Google Scholar
• Chesterman, A. 1997. Memes of Translation: The Spread of Ideas in Translation Theory. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Chesterman, A. 2002. “Semiotic Modalities in Translation Causality.” Across Languages and Cultures 3 (2): 145–158. https://doi.org/10.1556/Acr.3.2002.2.1.
   Google Scholar
• Engeström, Y. 1987. Learning by Expanding: An Activity-Theoretical Approach to Developmental Research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
   Google Scholar
• Fang, M. 2013. “The Characteristics, Elements and Rational of Translation Strategy.” Shanghai Journal of Translators 115 (2): 1–5.
   Google Scholar
• Gutt, E.-A. 2000. Translation and Relevance: Cognition and Context. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hofler, D. 1983. “Approach, Method, Technique: A Clarification.” Reading World 23 (1): 71–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388078309557742.
   Google Scholar
• House, J. 2015. Translation Quality Assessment: Present and Past. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hurtado Albir, A. 2001. Traducción y traductología. introducción a la traductología. Madrid: Cátedra.
   Google Scholar
• Judin, E. G. 2009. Systemansatz und tätigkeit-sprinzip. methodologische probleme der modernen wissen-schaft. Translated by Georg Rückriem. Berlin: Lehmanns Media.
   Google Scholar
• Kiraly, D. 2000. A Social Constructivist Approach to Translator Education: Empowerment from Theory to Practice. Manchester: St. Jerome.
   Google Scholar
• Krings, H. 1986. Was in den köpfen von übersetzern vorgeht: Eine empirische untersuchung zur struktur des übersetzungsprozesses an fortgeschrittenen französischlernern. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
   Google Scholar
• Kuutti, K. 1995. “Activity Theory as a Potential Framework for Human-Computer Interaction Research.” In Context and Consciousness: Activity Theory and Human-Computer Interaction, edited by B. Nardi, 17–45. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Leontyev, A. N. 1978. Activity, Consciousness and Personality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Lörscher, W. 1991. Translation Performance, Translation Process and Translation Strategies. A Psycholinguistic Investigation. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
   Google Scholar
• Luo, X. 2022. “Translation as Historical Event.” Asia Pacific Translation and Intercultural Studies 9 (1): 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/23306343.2022.2072552
   Google Scholar
• Molina, L., and A. Hurtado Albir. 2002. “Translation Techniques Revisited: A Dynamic and Functionalist Approach.” Meta 47 (4): 498–512. https://doi.org/10.7202/008033ar.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newmark, P. 1988. A Textbook of Translation. London: Prentice Hall International.
   Google Scholar
• Nida, E. 1964. Toward a Science of Translating: With Special Reference to Principles and Procedures Involved in Bible Translating. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
   Google Scholar
• Nord, C. 2006. Text Analysis in Translation: Theory, Methodology, and Didactic Application of a Model for Translation-Oriented Text Analysis. 2nd ed. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
   Google Scholar
• Qassem, M. 2021. “Translation Strategy and Procedure Analysis: A Cultural Perspective.” Asia Pacific Translation and Intercultural Studies 8 (3): 300–319. https://doi.org/10.1080/23306343.2021.2003511
   Google Scholar
• Reiss, K. 2000. Translation Criticism: The Potentials and Limitations. Manchester: St. Jerome.
   Google Scholar
• Robson, W. 1997. Strategic Management and Information Systems: An Integrated Approach. London: Pitman Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Rückriem, G. 2014. “What is ‘Cultural-Historical psychology’? Or: Activity Theory as Methodology.” Rivista internazionale di filosofia e psicologia 5 (3): 311–325.
   Google Scholar
• Sang, Z. 2011. “An Activity Theory Approach to Translation for a Pedagogical Purpose.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 19 (4): 291–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2011.590591.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sang, Z. 2018. “How Does the Context Make a Translation Happen? An Activity Theory Perspective.” Social Semiotics 28 (1): 125–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2017.1336848.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sang, Z. 2019. “An Activity Theory Approach to the Contextualization Mechanism of Language Use: Taking Translation, Pseudo-Translation and Self-Translation as Examples.” Pragmatics and Society 10 (4): 538–558. https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.16062.san.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schleiermacher, F. 1977. “On the Different Methods of Translating.” In Translating Literature: The German Tradition from Luther to Rosenzwei, edited by A. Lefevere, 67–89. Assen: Van Gorcum.
   Google Scholar
• Scott-Tennent, C., M. Gonzalez Davies, and F. Rodriguez Torras. 2000. “Translation Strategies and Translation Solutions: Design of a Teaching Prototype and Empirical Study of Its Results.” In Investigating Translation: Selected Papers from the 4th International Congress on translation, Barcelona, 1998, edited by A. Beeby, D. Ensinger, and M. Presas, 107–117. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Superceanu, R. 2004. “Translation Procedures: A Didactic Perspective.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 12 (3): 194–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2004.9961501.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toury, G. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamin.
   Google Scholar
• Toury, G. 2012. Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. revised ed. Amsterdam: John Benjamin.
   Google Scholar
• Van Dijk, T. 1979. “Relevance Assignment in Discourse Comprehension.” Discourse Processes 2 (2): 113–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638537909544458.
   Google Scholar
• Vinay, J.-P., and J. Darbelnet. 1958. Stylistique comparée du francais et de l’anglais. méthode de traduction. Paris: Didier.
   Google Scholar
• Vinay, J.-P., and J. Darbelnet. 1995. Comparative Stylistics of French and English. A Methodology for Translation. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Waley, A., ed., trans. 1960. Ballads and Stories from Tun-Huang, an Anthology. New York: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Wertsch, J. 1979. “The Concept of Activity in Soviet Psychology: An Introduction.” In The Concept of Activity in Soviet Psychology, edited by J. Wertsch, 3–36. Armonk, NY: Sharpe, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Xiong, B. 2014. “Conceptual Confusion in Translation Studies: Take Translation Strategy, Translation Method and Translation Technique as Example.” Chinese Translators Journal 35 (3): 82–88.
   Google Scholar
• Zabalbeascoa, P. 2000. “From Techniques to Types of Solutions.” In Investigating Translation: Selected Papers from the 4th International Congress on Translation, Barcelona, 1998, edited by A. Beeby, D. Ensinger, and M. Presas, 117–129. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar