earticle

영어

Translation Studies seems to be in the pursuit of its rightful destination. Should it be a branch of empirical human science, based upon accurate hypothesis and verification? Or rather should it be a science of philosophical, speculative and interpretative descriptions? Several attempts have been made to explicate this matter in more concrete and undeniably persuasive manners with relevant theories and procedures learned from neighboring academic disciplines. Still, however, one can rarely find the very solutions that can encompass, or rather guide all the conflicting discussions witnessed in Translation Studies into the ultimate direction. Taking this situation into account, it is worthwhile to take note of Andrew Chesterman, a scholar from Finland who takes an meta-theoretical approach in Translation Studies. This paper gives an overview of major arguments made by Chesterman, whose basic idea is that Translation Studies can establish itself as a discipline of empirical human science based upon hypothesis and explanation. It then moves on to look at their implications and limitations. Concurrently, this paper intends to look into other points hardly noticed by Chesterman. That is, how, more interpretative and non essentialist discussions can be applicable to the area of Translation Studies.