On myths about interpreting and their revelation
Abstract of the plenary lecture
Abstrakti
Myths are often used for practical purposes. Calling a certain view or understanding ‘a myth’ is often a step in the introduction of an alternative view. For instance, in the literature on interpreting there are recurrent references to ‘the myth of the invisible interpreter’ and ‘the myth of neutrality’. What purpose do alleged revelation of these ‘myths’ serve? What alternative views are introduced? In this paper, I will discuss the potential productivity – and counter productivity – of designating ‘myths’ and arguing against them, using examples drawn from recent studies of interpreting.
Tiedostolataukset
Julkaistu
2014-12-01
Numero
Osasto
Plenaariesitelmät
Lisenssi
Tämä työ on lisensoitu Creative Commons Nimeä-EiKaupallinen 4.0 Kansainvälinen Julkinen -lisenssillä.