THE PROBLEM OF TRANSLATABILITY / UNTRANSLATABILITY OF PHILOSOPHICAL TEXTS
https://doi.org/10.18384/2224-0209-2025-2-1546
Abstract
Aim. To study the question of the language of philosophy, consequently, to consider the problem of translation of philosophical texts (the question of translatability/ untranslatability).
Methodology. The main research methodology used in the article is the method of systematic analysis of various scientific points of view of linguists and philosophers in the field of studying the language of philosophy and the question of its translation, as well as the method of comparative translation analysis of terms and concepts.
Results. It is established that philosophical text stands out among the main types since it has distinct subject matter and includes both scientific and artistic features. The study of the main directions of Western philosophy and their understanding of the problem of language reveals the contradictions of linguists/philosophers on the subject of translatability and untranslatability of philosophical texts. This area is poorly studied, which confirms the relevance of the research by the unflagging attention of linguists to the issue of translating philosophical terminology and concepts. What is new is the use of texts of philosophical works in two languages as illustrative material with an assessment of the correctness of the choice of translation methods.
Research implications. The revealed patterns in the translation of philosophical texts data are of interest for translation theory, which is substantiated by their features and terminological denomination, demonstrated by a corpus of examples. The practical value of the work lies in the possibility of applying the results of the work in the practice of teaching a number of linguistic disciplines at the bachelor's and master's levels, as well as in the creation of textbooks.
About the Author
Marina V. Senchenkova
Diplomatic Academy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Cand. Sci. (Philology), Assoc. Prof., Departament of European Languages
References
1. Avtonomova, N. S. (2011). Jacques Derida's Philosophy of Language. Moscow: ROSSPE`N Publ. (in Russ.).
2. Azarova, N. M. (2023). Non-translation and translation in Heidegger, Losev and Ortega y Gasset. In: Slovo.ru: Baltic accent, 14, 3, 12−25 (in Russ.).
3. Aleksandrova, O. V., Akhrenova, N. A., Bakhtiozarova M. G., et al. (2023). World languages and cultures as an object of philological research. Moscow: Nauka Publ. (in Russ.).
4. Bibikhin, V. V. (2001). Word and Event. Moscow: URSS Publ. (in Russ.).
5. Gadamer, H. G. (1988). Wahrheit und Methode. Grundzüge einer philosophischen Hermeneutik. Moscow: Progress Publ. (in Russ.).
6. Germanov, N. N., Grishaeva, L. I., Pishchalnikova, V. A., et al. (2023). Language norm in synchrony and diachrony: cultural heritage or encroachment on self-expression. Moscow: Moskovskij gosudarstvenny`j lingvisticheskij universitet Publ. (in Russ.).
7. Zhirova, I. G., Filippova, I. N., Epifantseva, N. G., et al. Theory and practice of translation in diachrony and modern scientific paradigm. Moscow: Gosudarstvenny`j universitet prosveshheniya Publ. (in Russ.).
8. Komissarov, V. N. (1990). Translation theory. Moscow: Vy`sshaya shkola (in Russ.).
9. Kuramina, N. V. (2023). “Untranslatability” in a philosophical text. In: Bulletin of the Russian State University for the Humanities. Series: Philosophy. Sociology. Art Criticism, 1, 161−168 (in Russ.).
10. Levchenko, M. N. (2022). The category of information content in a philosophical text. In: Bulletin of the Moscow Region State University. Series: Linguistics, 1, 14−23 (in Russ.).
11. Levchenko, M. N. (2022). Modality of the philosophical text. In: Bulletin of Moscow Region State University (e-journal), 1. URL: www.evestnik-mgou.ru (accessed: 08.12.2024) (in Russ.).
12. Levý, J. (1974). Umění překladu. Moscow: Progress Publ. (in Russ.).
13. Mishkurov, E. N. & Novikova, M. G. (2024). Translatability – untranslatability. Past and thoughts. Moscow: Flinta Publ. (in Russ.).
14. Mishkurov, E. N. & Novikova, M. G. (2020). Theory and methodology of translation in cognitive-hermeneutic education. Moscow: Flinta Publ. (in Russ.).
15. Nelyubin, L. L. & Khukhuni, G. T. (2008). The problem of translatability-untranslatability. In: Translation in the 21st century: international scientific theoretical conference, April 17th, 2008. Moscow: Moskovskij gosudarstvenny`j oblastnoj universitet Publ., pp. 5–6 (in Russ.).
16. Novikova, M. G. (2021). Measure of meaning, actual division and adequacy of translation. Moscow: Flinta Publ. (in Russ.).
17. Pechenkina, O. A. (2016). Specifics of translation of a philosophical text in the context of the receptive discursive practice of the interpreter. In: Successes of modern science, 1, 2, 48−50 (in Russ.).
18. Pogorelskaya, S. V. (2023). A Translator Reads Heidegger. In: Social and Humanitarian Sciences. Domestic and Foreign Literature. Series 3: Philosophy, 4, 171−175 (in Russ.).
19. Ter-Minasova, S. G. (2021). How can another understand you?. In: Cognitive studies of language, 2, 96–104 (in Russ.).
20. Farafonova, D. S. (2018). Valter Benyamin: from translation theory to culture theory. In: Studia Litterarum, 3, 4, 10−25 (in Russ.).
21. Fenenko, N. A. (2022). French and Russian translation terminology: comparative aspect. In: Bulletin of Voronezh State University. Series: Linguistics and intercultural communication, 2, 35−41 (in Russ.).
22. Fedorov, A. V. (2002). Fundamentals of the General Theory of Translation. Moscow: Filologiya tri Publ. (in Russ.).
23. Fokin, S. L. (2010). Towards the Philosophy of Translation: the Future of One Science. In: Bulletin of the Leningrad State University named after A. S. Pushkin, 3, 2, 234−243 (in Russ.).
24. Schleiermacher, F. (2004). Hermeneutik. St. Petersburg: Evropeiskii dom Publ. (in Russ.).
25. Holmes, J. S. (1994). The Name and Nature of Translation Studies. In: Translated Paper on Literary Translation Studies. Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 67−80.
26. Goldschmidt, G. A. (2023). Heidegger und die deutsche Sprache. Freiburg im Breisgau: ça ira-Verlag.
27. Lederer, M. (2001). Interpréter pour traduire. Paris: Didier érudition.
28. Mounin, G. (1976). Les problèmes théoriques de la traduction. Paris: Gallimard.
29. Ricoeur, P. (2004). Sur la tradiction. Paris: Bayard.
30. Skuratov, I. V. (2024). Langues romaines hier et aujourd’hui. In: Human and his language: materials of the XXI international scientific school-seminar named after professor L. M. Skrelina. Yaroslavl: Yaroslavskij gosudarstvenny`j pedagogicheskij universitet im. K. D. Ushinskogo Publ., pp. 62−70.
Supplementary files
Review
Views:
214
Email this article 