Авторы: 159 А Б В Г Д Е З И Й К Л М Н О П Р С Т У Ф Х Ц Ч Ш Щ Э Ю Я

Книги:  184 А Б В Г Д Е З И Й К Л М Н О П Р С Т У Ф Х Ц Ч Ш Щ Э Ю Я

Discussion

1 This question, of course, gets at the heart of the pedagogical philosophy

undergirding this book, and as such may provide a good opportunity to get

students talking about the kind of learning experience the book is channeling

for them, and how they are responding to it. While most people would agree

that experientially based learning is more powerful and effective and realistic,

even more "natural," than abstract, systematic, or theoretical learning, the

latter is nevertheless still considered more "appropriate" for the university

classroom (or for that matter any classroom), and some students will continue

to feel uneasy about bringing an experiential component into the realm of

abstract theorizing. Most likely, however, the students who feel most uneasy

about multimodal experientially based methods in the classroom will also have

strong beliefs in the importance of experience outside the classroom, and can

be engaged in fruitful discussion of the apparent contradictions or conflicts

between these two views. Why should the classroom be different? Just because

it always has been?

2 3 These questions address two of the most potentially inflammatory statements

in the chapter; as discussion topics they provide a chance for students to air

their disagreement — and, more importantly, to explore the precise nature of

their disagreement or agreement.

Some will want to claim, for example, that translators are not fakers or

pretenders but highly trained professionals whose work involves a great deal

of imitation — which would be quite true. But precisely how do these two

ways of formulating the work of translators differ? Only in the amount of

professional self-esteem each seems to reflect or project outward to the user

community?

Similarly, some will want to insist that the translator never pretend to know

how to write in an unfamiliar register, but that s/he instead always learn first,

and then imitate. But again, are these two positions really so far apart? Isn't

the difference between them mostly one of self-presentation? Certainly for

nontranslating users — clients, especially — it may be more effective to present

oneself as an expert in a certain register. But is it really essential to maintain

that particular form of self-presentation among other translators?

The value of talking about translation as "faking," it seems to me, is that it

builds tolerance for the transitional stages in becoming a translator (and,

perhaps, a sense of humor, always a good thing!) in translators themselves —

especially student translators, who are nervous about having to be experts all

of a sudden. Nobody becomes an expert all at once; they only pretend to,

while they're learning. Making the jump from beginner to expert seem sudden

and drastic, something that happens overnight, may well have the effect of

frightening some future translators out of the field.