POST-TRANSLATION - Arduini e Nergaard 2011, Gentzler 2017, Cronin 2017, Robinson 2017, Bassnett and Johnson 2019, Marais 2019, Marais 2023, Bennett 2023, Bennett 2024a, Bennett 2024b

Arduini e Nerggard 2011

• Go beyond the metaphor of translation. Not distinguish from translation proper. 8
• Post-translation studies. 8
• Transdisciplinarity 9
• Brief history followed by this
• the Eighties and Nineties were characterized by an eagerness to founda new and autonomous discipline. No doubt this effort has been successful and of funda-mental importance for the recognition of what translation is, and for its role in the develop-ment and transformation of language and culture. Still, and in terms of a consciousappreciation of the important role occupied by translators and translations both throughouthistory and today, there is still much work to be done. While we encourage the continuationof this very important work in translation studies, we also see that this concentration on thedefinition of translation as an autonomous discipline represents a problem, a problem fortranslation studies itself. It is the problem of epistemological roots, or rather the lack of epis-temological roots. Translation studies, having “collected” data and knowledge from other dis-ciplines, was so eager to stand on its own feet that it neglected to develop and explain its ownoverarching epistemology and to show how it knew what it claimed to know. In our viewwhat was created as the discipline of translation studies was actually an illusion: it existed ina sort of epistemological naïvety. Pieces from other disciplines like linguistics and comparativeliterature were assembled without being really questioned. What was done was simply toopen up pathways on a terrain already covered with well-travelled pathways, and with exactlythe same epistemological map and guiding principles as those present in the disciplines fromwhich the so-called founders borrowed. What should have been done, or what was lackingin our opinion, was an epistemological and paradigmatic shift. 11
• Expandir o significado
• t is more and more difficult to define translation and to limit the situations in whichtranslation occurs. Today many of us are familiar with the idea that translation is a transfor-mative process not only of texts produced in different languages and media, but one that af-fects cultures and individuals. While some express concern about an ill-defined and delimited concept, we are of the view that such an approach is a strength and that any premature anda priori definition of the limits and borders of translation prevents us from evolving new the-ories and changing our assumptions and directions. The tendency within the discipline oftranslation studies is to continue to operate with traditional definitions and conceptualizationsof translation, and thus with the same epistemological paradigm, sometimes proposing ad-ditional definitions, but never new and alternative ones. We believe this tendency is reductiveand unhelpful for thinking about translation and suggest that it is time to open up new andin some cases startlingly new uses of the concept of translation. By accepting new ideas, bymoving the focus, and by revealing new objects, we believe it will be possible to develop andorganize the necessary theoretical consequences, to more fully understand what translationentails, to pinpoint where translation occurs today, and to formulate a perspective able to dealwith all these different translation situations. 12
• Translation in Anthropology, Economy, Philosophy and Culture 13
• What is new in this work is that translationfunctions as an interpretive and operative instrument for deeper analysis and a more pro-found comprehension of these themes. By reconceptualizing these themes in and aroundthe concept of translation, we believe new perspectives will emerge. / Translation is poised to become a powerful epistemological instrument for readingand assessing the transformation and exchange of cultures and identities. ... ranslation is moving away from being simply a concept basedin certain disciplines to being an epistemological principle applicable to the whole field ofhumanistic, social and natural sciences. 14

Blumczynski 2016

• Conhecimento enquanto trad
• Untranslated knowledge remains unaware of its biases and blind spots; translation, on the other hand, not only puts knowledge to the test but is in itself a knowledge-building process. It is only when we start translating something for someone ...  that its meaning becomes clearer to us—but also, perhaps more often than we are willing to admit, we realize with dismay how complex that thing really is and how much we do not understand, or have forgotten, or tend to take for granted x
• Ecological perspective: circulation of ideas: transfer, reapplication of insights. Reincarnation of ideas, afterlife of insights xi
• Serendipidity. Descobrir sem querer xi
• Indefinição do termo tradução em Hermans 1999, Tymoczko 2007 e Arduini e Nergaard 2011 xii
• ... also considers translation phenomena that occur but may not be defined as such”, and suggests that “such elements, often covered up, suppressed, or marginalized by that same culture, reveal just as much about translation phenomena as ‘proper’ translation” ([gentzler] 2008: 2). I could not agree more: Translational phenomena, though not always recognized as such, underpin key notions in various areas of study and reflection. xiii
• Livro vai falar de filosofia, teologia, linguística e antropologia.
• Translation is ubiquitous. Aparece em outros cantos da humanidades 1
• Limites disciplinares
•  It becomes increasingly clear how artificial some disciplinary boundaries have become; how much they stem from political, ideological, administrative, and financial tensions and divisions; how much certain epistemological positions are shared (though not always explicitly agreed on). But there is something more than an intellectual consent. One can observe visceral reactions around the room: discussants are nodding, shaking their heads, stirring on their chairs, keen to chip in, eyes glowing with excitement. Interestingly, they do not have to agree about every point, but there is a certain how-ness, a combination of commitment, understanding, and experience, that is broadly shared. Participants do not feel threatened by others using a different set of terms 3
• "They are already there" but "not necessarily the same" ... similarity not identity 4
• Tese
• My thesis is threefold: (1) that translation provides a basis for genuine, exciting, serious, innovative, and meaningful exchange between various areas of the humanities through both a concept (the what) and a method (the how); (2) that in doing so, it questions and challenges many of the traditional boundaries and offers a transdisciplinary epistemological paradigm, leading to a new understanding of quality, and thus also meaning, truth, and knowledge; and (3) that translational phenomena are discussed using various, often seemingly unrelated terms which nevertheless display a considerable degree of conceptual, qualitative proximity 4
• Sobre diluição do termo
• Ubiquity may mean different things and come in different guises, none of them truer than the others. This is yet another reminder that translation, by its very nature, creates a surplus of meaning or a series of meanings, which, even if mutually conflicted, collectively contribute to a richer and therefore truer sense. We do not have to settle the binary question of whether translation is indeed found everywhere or rather brought there on the back of the researcher 5
• WHAT-centeredness. Foco terminológico. Estático e distinto. Contudo, "words are polysemous, which means that they refer to different concepts"/"using a word as a technical term is an act of violence against language (Gadamer 2004, 415)" e a sanha terminológica reduz a complexidade da linguagem. 8-9
• Using a word as a technical term—or, to put it differently, confusing terms and concepts—is a violent reduction (not just in a descriptive but also an evaluative sense of this word): It falsifies the actual experience by suggesting a lower level of complexity. It also creates an illusion of objectivity (another epistemological commitment of the what-centered approach) by dissociating the what of the term from other contextual considerations. 
• A terminological paradigm claims to be committed to values such as rigor, precision, consistency, clarity, and the like, which regularly appear in its discourse. But it chooses to ignore or at least minimize the inconvenient fact that terminologies are surface manifestations of underlying theories, and attachment to them usually signals theoretical and epistemological sympathies. However strictly we may want to define and delimit the meaning of terms, they always rely on specific conceptualizations, which makes the problem of mapping terms across languages an act of translation, with all challenges that it brings with it. The terminological approach, in my view, is unable to respond to translational challenges because it operates on the problematic notion of sameness. Consider this criticism against the “terminological chaos” of translation studies: “[W]e are constantly referring to the same things with different terms, or mixing up terms from different systems in the same discussion” (Mayoral 2001: 66 in Marco 2009: 66). 
• I do not know how to gauge whether things or discussions are “the same”, but I know that translation, even at the simplest terminological level, does not follow the logic of sameness. 9
• ...
•  A term must mean the same thing and designate the same what (notice, once again, the emphasis on sameness), regardless of where, when, how, and by whom it is used. A terminological approach encourages what-centeredness, decontextualization, and consequently, reductionism 10
• Conceitos são complematemente o contrário. São percebidos de maneira diferente. Levam em conta o WHO, HOW, WHERE e WHEN. Permitem contradiçõe, conflitos e paradoxos sendo fluídos e flexíveis. Diz que é comum confundir termo e conceito em inglês. 10-11 Portanto não uma busca uma definição terminológica de tradução, mas sua aplicação enquanto conceito. 13 Fuzzy logic e conceptual proximity 22
• Usa abordagens linguístico cognitiva e fenomenológica (situatedness of knowledge in the humanaties 17) na elaboração teórica. 13-19
• Paradigm change between WHAT and HOW. 18
• Quality versus quantity. 20-27
• "translation is ubiquitous, found under many different guises, names, and terms". 28
• Fez um comentário sobre deixar de lado cronologia e anacronismo em favor da proximidade conceitual que me incomodou um pouco 28
• Rizomática (Deleuze e Guatarri 1987/2004, 23). Transdisciplinar (multiple HOW-ness, ao invés de Interdisciplinar, multiple WHAT-ness). 29
• rhizomatic alternative that problematizes and challenges the ideas of origin, trajectory, and location of specific concepts, including translation itself. There is no need, in my view, to replace one paradigm with the other, but rather to recognize the plurality of available epistemological models, along with their potential as well as limitations 167
• Isso aqui também incomoda um pouco
• The view of translation as a qualitative, mainly how-centered concept does not highlight borders or the movement of concepts (which to me sounds rather suspicious as reminiscent of a transferbased notion of translation). It rather argues that translation is ubiquitous, somehow “already there”, ready to be discovered at multiple entry and exit points of the epistemological map. In my model, it is not so much concepts that travel, but rather theorists and thinkers. 30
• Conclusão
• hat I am suggesting as resulting from this model is not an enthusiastically uncritical blend of various areas of study into a shapeless amalgam of the “humanities” (as currently attempted by some universities: officially in pursuit of improved cross-disciplinary integration, actually in service of the regime of business efficiency). Conceptual, methodological, and organizational centers, hubs, and clusters are important and needed, if only for practical reasons, which should not be belittled. Rather, I am proposing a dose of critical distrust towards (inter-)disciplinary classifications and an awareness of their arbitrariness. Believing with Geertz that “it is not necessary to know everything in order to understand something” (1973: 20), I wish to challenge the opinion that the most insightful discussions of philosophy should be left to philosophers, theology to theologians, history to historians, and translation to translators (or translation studies scholars). Translation has a philosophical, theological, linguistic, anthropological, political, historical, social, and ethical dimension (as well as many others); by the same token, all these (and numerous other) fields involve and vitally depend on translation, which is a matter of the how rather than just the what. This signals a range of further directions in which the translational project presented in this book may be developed. 
• If translation is both nomadic and ubiquitous, and if translational phenomena underpin various key concepts across the humanities, then translation studies scholars need to pay attention to conceptual discussions taking place in other fields. Some researchers suggest that across the humanities “an implicit focus on translation processes” has become increasingly prevalent (Bachmann-Medick 2009: 2); others go so far as to insist that “new and enriching thinking on translation must take place outside the traditional discipline of translation studies” (Arduini and Nergaard 2011: 9). Disciplinary—even interdisciplinary—thinking and what-focused approaches will no longer suffice. I have no doubt that many more interesting and true insights about all things translational are yet to be formulated or discovered in areas where they would not normally be expected. 168
• ...
• Translation is only ever important and inspiring when it is concerned with something else than itself. I have reasons to believe that if Pat Metheny theorized translation—even in a narrower, traditional, interlingual sense—he would never reduce it to textual relationships. To him, and no doubt others who subscribe to a similar how, it is obvious from the start that translation is inseparable from “all kinds of stuff about the human condition”. 169

Ver Blumczynski 2013

Gentzler 2017 - Intro

• Libertação do texto (post and pretranslation) e do binarismo. Responder why 2
• Para a tese
• The revolutionary war leaders of the Americas were not translating Locke, Rousseau, or Montaigne because they wanted scholars at Harvard to review favorably their translations in learned journals; no, they wanted to introduce new ideas regarding democratic systems and human rights into their cultures that were not free and were still governed by European powers. Many of the translators cared little what the university professors thought about their translations; they wanted common men and women—farmers, sailors, shopkeepers, and craftspeople—to read their translations and think about and incorporate into their beliefs the new ideas being introduced. The purpose was not to better represent European texts but to change the receiving culture, to alter the way people think about politics, liberty, individual freedom, and their relationship to the absent monarchy. Which comes first, the pen or the sword? In many cases, more often than not, changing peoples’ ideas about governing systems comes first, and the revolutionary fervor later. Indeed, the subsequent revolution in art, politics, literature, science, or any disciplinary analysis, may be interpreted as post-translation effects. 2
• To measure the success or failure of the ideas or the aesthetics of a translation, one has to look beyond translation and to begin to examine the cultural changes that take place after the translation, hence the move toward a post-translation analysis 3
• Rethinking translation, not as a short-term product or a process, but as a cultural condition underlying communication, or as a long-term cultural repercussion emerging after a translation, is, I admit, difficult, ... 7
• While many of these conceptual terms have been deemed marginal and exceptions to “standard” translation, I suggest that the margins may be larger than the center, that the exceptions may outnumber the norm, and that all translators transform texts to varying degrees. 7
•  translation is seen not as an uncritical form of importing a text from the outside, but rather listening to the outside and then drawing upon inward reserves and experiences from within each individual’s experiences and multicultural heritage. Translation originates from abroad, yes, but it also resonates from within. In this context, translation is viewed as part of the very living substance of both the source and target text—a living, malleable, formable matter. Instead of thinking in terms of the self and other, in which the “other” is translated into the “same,” instead of thinking in terms of the source and the receiver, instead of thinking in terms of the native and the immigrant being labeled “different” or “foreign,” I suggest that we rethink translation by getting rid of the many dichotomies and reimagining the cultural foundation in terms of all peoples being rewriters. 8
• Raiz em Simon 2006 e 2012. 5-6 Outros em 7
• Ver Derrida, Des Tours de Babel (não existe original) 1968/1955 e Baudrillard (texto circulam não são originados). Gentzler segue 10
• , I argue that both the awareness of that unlimited semiotic chain and the act of choosing certain terms and forms of expression, despite awareness of their limitations, are the characteristics of translation in the twenty-first century 11-2
• Genette any writting is rewriting 12
• Da conclusão
• A translated text enriches a reader in countless ways, to the point that it is absorbed into that person’s very being. Inasmuch, translation is one of the most revolutionary acts: bringing across an idea or form from another culture and offering the possibility to change people’s lives. Because translations themselves are metaphoric, multilingual, and multisensory, so too must translation studies include multisensory forms of analysis. I suggest the field begin viewing translation in a more postmodern vein: as a creative, experimental, and avant-garde act, at once self-reflective and self-generative. Translation studies finds itself on the cutting edge of time, with the potential to adapt, shift, grow, and expand into the future. The repercussions of translation can be seen everywhere—in print, art, signage, fashion, food, and media—and in every discipline—literature, politics, architecture, anthropology, philosophy, and religion. Translation ensures the regeneration of texts, the means through which ideas can be exchanged, and the processes by which languages evolve and grow. In a world of increased movement and migration, translation allows individuals to come to terms with themselves, understand their multilingual identities, and articulate their personal stories. Further, translation reaffirms such fundamental values as cultural diversity and individual creativity. To capture these cultural complexities, I suggest that translation studies’ definition and discourse must change. Translation studies needs to reinvent itself, coming up with more inclusive parameters, more fluid theories, and more incisive socio-psychological analysis, to better understand translation and rewriting in the post-translation age. I hope that this book has offered a step in that direction 231

Cronin 2017 - Earthlings

• Começa com Humboldt e Mudanças climáticas 1
• Eco Translatology Xu 2009 e Liu 2011 2
• Eco translation
• The approach that is adopted in this work is derived from a broad concept of political ecology understood as the study of the social, cultural, political and economic factors affecting the interaction of humans with other humans, other organisms and the physical environment (Robbins 2011). In taking the term ‘eco-translation’ first employed by Clive Scott at a lecture given in 2015 in the University of Exeter, I have extended it beyond Scott’s understanding of the term to describe the translator’s ‘psycho-physiological’ involvement with the text to be translated (Scott 2015). As used in the current work, ‘eco-translation’ covers all forms of translation thinking and practice that knowingly engage with the challenges of human-induced environmental change. One of the challenges, indeed, is how to apprehend the agents and objects of this change. 2
• Hyperobjetc 2-3
• Language as commodity, Tradosfera. Tradução no antropoceno 5-7

Robinson 2017 - Translationality

•  in the world at large the term is used for a wide variety of transformations viii
• Translationality as transformationality: the constant emergingness of everything, through embodied, situated, performative interactions x
•  interepistemic translation: translation from one “epistemic system”  to another. ... It is similar to what medieval thinkers called the translatio studii, the translation of learning, also known as the transfer or transmission of knowledge – which is never a “cloning” of knowledge, of course, but always involves what I’m calling translationality: adaptation, transformation. 200

• Interlingual fora. 201
• translationality as transformationality: the constructivist/periperformativist realization (makingreal) of our experience, which always changes things. 201
• Distinção de objetivismo e periperformativismo não é uma ataque a cc pq Robinson recusa o "mito" do objetivismo cientista.
•  This is science as what I have been calling periperformativism: the ongoing attempt to collaborate with colleagues in the creation of a plausible model of reality that is always provisional, always vulnerable to disagreement and debate, always at best subject to revision as new data are factored into the emerging model. 202
• y own faith in science is placed not in idealized myths of objectivity, but in the ongoing provisional/experimental networking of scientists like Gazzaniga, who know that they are working communally, dialogically, to develop and vet what they take to be plausible interpretations on complex sense-data. This to my mind is faith in science as translationality. It is faith in science as explanations that keep changing, because no explanation is ever the objective truth, and our attempts to reach through the conflicting evidence of our senses to “objective truth” invariably fail, to one degree or another, because the material world beyond our periperformative constructions keeps resisting us, keeps pushing back against our cultural grids and maps, thwarting our efforts to synthesize, consolidate, build elegant models of “reality” – but also providing us with our best clues as to what that world is actually like. 202-3
• To put that differently: science, like all scholarship, and like all storytelling, and indeed like all social interaction, is an unending collaborative attempt to create a coherent reality out of the astonishing resistance life puts up to our attempts to create a coherent reality. 203

Essay 2 - The translational humanities of medicine: literary history as performed transaltionality

• Explore the humanities in terms of things that keep changing 47 things can change in unexpected ways 50
• The belief on which the disciplines of classics and comparative literature were founded, that knowledge of the original languages of classical texts can grant us reliable access to the meanings of those texts, is equally unfounded. What we inevitably do with those texts, whether we read them in the original, translate them as accurately as we can, or adapt them freely, is to reconstruct and reperform them. Every new reconstruction is a new performance: this is what I am calling translationality. 48
• Shifting foundation para história [lembra Secord] 48
• dream of clone translation 51
• To put that differently: both the mystery religions’ and the medieval Catholic Church’s Ban on Clonability and the Christian Church’s and neoliberalism’s official theology of Infinite Clonability are grounded in clones and spin; my notion of translationality is grounded in an overt assertion of the ubiquity of change 58
• Mudanças na ciencia via tradução 62
• Segue descrevendo as mudanças de Hipócrates até Rabelais e além, mostrando as transformações no conhecimento médico.

Marais 2019 - Translation problematized

• Questionamento sobre a limitação da tradução à linguagem (linguistic bias). 2
• Todos os termos que rondam a tradução (adaptação, transcriação etc) são processos semióticos de tradução (relacionar sistemas de signos criando interpretantes).
• the definition allows me to look for the translational aspect of any semiotic process. This does not mean that everything is translation, far from it. It might, however, mean that rocesses or phenomena that are not called translations—or that are not immediately recognized as interlingual translations—might have translational aspects to them. It might also mean that phenomena that are not recognized by a society or culture as a translation might entail translational aspects. Thus, wherever there is semiosis, there will be some kind of translational aspect to it. My approach is advantageous in that it does not submit scholarly work to the limitations of popular perception, namely that a scholar can only study something as a translation if a particular audience regards it as such. With my approach, scholars of translation can study all semiotic process, comparing translations ranging from DNA processes through animal interaction and human politics and power, to dreams and other flights of fantasy. 4-5
• The Peircean conceptualization I present makes it possible to explain the ‘translation-ness,’ or the translationality of all of the ‘inter’ and ‘trans’ process-phenomena, and even process-phenomena indicated by other terms, thereby expanding the comparative power of translation studies. .... My approach will be neither formalist nor structuralist, but, rather, processoriented and, thus, emergent, but I do think that translation studies would, like literary studies, benefit from moving toward an interest in translationality, rather than translations or translators—although the former does not exclude the latter 7
• Change and process as aim 6
• Sobre suposta diluição da disciplina 6 Influência da visão europeia ocidental no apego a linguagem. 8
• "Well aware of the current skepticism about 'grand theory', I cannot help but wonder whether this skepticism is, in itself, not a grand theory" 9
• Teoria de tradução que encompasse todos os processos-fenômenos semióticos indo além dos linguais, literários e humanos. 120
• Linguistic bias
• Why consider the focus on language to be a bias? What is wrong with a lingual bias in translation studies? Well, I think that there is nothing wrong, per se, with studying language in translation studies, but a bias toward language presents at least five problems. First, the terms that I provided in Chapter 1 suggest that scholars from a diversity of fields of study are studying process-phenomena that are typically studied in translation studies. I do not think that it will help translation-studies scholars to bemoan this state of affairs, because they themselves are the cause of it, with their narrow interlingual conceptualization of translation. Rather, they should rectify it by expanding their definition of translation, which is what I am trying to do with this broadened conceptualization. Second, the profusion of new terms suggests that the multimodal/medial nature of communication will only grow in future, leaving a purely interlingual translation studies with less and less to study. Translation studies will also become incapable of studying interlingual translation, because almost no communication is purely linguistic. Third, both theory and data suggest that even humans do not communicate with language only, but also with a variety of other semiotic tools. Fourth, post-humanist thinking argues that humans are not at the center of the universe and that human language is, thus, not the only medium of communication that is worthy of our interest. Last, advances in ecological and environmental thinking require of human animals, including translation-studies scholars, to rethink our relationship with nonhuman animals, which cannot be done as long as human animals consider themselves and their language to be unique in absolute terms. 121
•  Estabilidade ou falta de estabilidade no significado impossibilitando tradução. 122 Resposta:
• From a semiotic perspective, translation is not a process that takes a structure (text) as its point of departure and then tries to destructure and restructure that structure into a different structure. Rather, translation is a process that creates relationships between existing meanings, thereby creating new meanings. Translation is the process by which interpretants are taken as new representamens and then related to objects and new interpretants, ad infinitum. This is why I argue that translation is the very process that drives all meaning. 123
• "What needs to be explained is how process takes form" 123 
• Parte do bio entra a partir da relação com a termodinâmica e o caminho contrário que coisas vivas fazem a partir da negentropia. Extende isso para cultura. 124-5 "Translation, thus, needs to be conceptualized in terms of change in time" 126
• Being a relationship-creating process, it is obviously not stable, not determinate, not certain. Rather, it is characterized by instability, indeterminacy, uncertainty. This is so both because it is process and because it is relational. Because it is a process, it means that it is moving all the time, changing all the time. Because it is relational, it means that its existence is always co-determined by that to which it relates. Thus, as the etymology of the word ‘relative’ indicates, everything is relative because everything exists in relationship to everything else. Reality, thus, consists of ever-moving, ever-being-created relationships 126
• Signos e significado não são coisas, mas relações entre.138
• Padrões semióticos escolhidos, media constrains e skopes definem os processos semióticos que podem continuar, ser modificados, serem abandonados e o que pode ser criado de novo. Constrains localizados não na natureza da semiose da tradução, mas das relações sociais que o limitam. Aí se acha equivalência e criatividade. 140
• Termodinâmica faz com que equivalência perca sentido uma vez que o texto não pode ser repetido. Foco muda para como e pelo que o processo é constrained. 141
• Definições
•  Translation entails negentropic semiotic work to create meaning by means of imposing constraints on the semiotic process. 4
• From a semiotic perspective, translation is not a process that takes a structure (text) as its point of departure and then tries to destructure and restructure that structure into a different structure. Rather, translation is a process that creates relationships between existing meanings, thereby creating new meanings. Translation is the process by which interpretants are taken as new representamens and then related to objects and new interpretants, ad infinitum. This is why I argue that translation is the very process that drives all meaning. 123
• Translation is the technical term for the negentropic process that drives semiosis. The nature of the stability that semiotic forms take is to be conceptualized complexly. The stability is stability at the edge of chaos. It is stability in the sense that the flow of semiosis takes patterns or habits. The meaning of a text is, thus, a materialization of semiotic patterns in relationship to one another, but it is still part of the greater process of semiosis and, thus, not stable in itself—it is just relatively stable. The moment someone reads a text, it enters the stream of semiosis again, as embodied in that particular reader. 138
• Consequently, a translation could be conceptualized as any movement or change in either space or time to the existing relationships between any representamen, object and interpretant, or the creation of any new relationships between any representamen, object and interpretant 138
• Translation is negentropic semiotic work (performed by an agent) in which any one or more of the components of a sign system or any one or more of the relationships between them are changed, or in which the relationship between the sign and its environment (time and/or space) is changed. This means that if the code is changed, a translation has taken place. If time has lapsed between two interpretants being created, a translation has taken place. If the space has changed between two interpretants, a translation has taken place. If the representamen is changed, a translation has taken place. If the object is changed, a translation has taken place. If the interpretant is changed, a translation has taken place. In the next section and the next chapter, I work out some of the implications of this definition. 141-2
• Categorias e subcategorias 142-157
• Representamente translation: intra, inter e extra-sistêmico; visual, auditivo, olfativo, tátil, e gustativo; mídia de representação.
• Object translation: imediato, dinâmico.
• Interpretante translation: dinâmico, imediato, final.

Ver van Rooyen sobre impossibilidade de determinação de vários textos fonte.

Marais 2023 - What does it mean to translate?

• explore the nature of the practices that other fields of study conceptualize as translation 1 Como o conceito de tradução é usado em outros campos? O que eles fazem que é traducional?Ir além. Considerar pesquisadores de outros campos.
• Semiotic world creates trnalsations 3
• Translation beyound language 4
• Beyond metaphor
• I have argued elsewhere (Marais 2019) that this distinction between the ‘proper’ and ‘metaphorical’ use of the term ‘translation’ cannot hold in translation studies. If one started off with a semiotic conceptualization of translation, it means, according to Peirce, that the meaning of any (system of) sign(s) is its translation into any other (system of) sign(s). ... This conceptualization assumes and makes clear that meaning is not a substance or a form or a thing. Rather, meaning emerges in processes of creating relations. Meaning ‘is’ translating. Meaning ‘is’ creating relations between signs, whether new or conventional. This would mean that ‘translation’ or ‘to translate’ is a term that applies to all processes that, in some way or another, involve meaning-making and meaning-taking. Meaning is made by translating signs into other signs. Meaning is interpreted by translating signs into signs 5
•  Translation constrains semiotic material. 7

Ver Border Crossings de Gambier e Doorslaer (2016). Ver especialmente Shamley 2023 e Sharov 2023, mas tem várisos outros.

Bassnett & Johnson 2019

• Maioria dos campos ignora tradução. Damrosch 2003 na literatura não 183-4  [HC acho que não tbm]
• This is the realm that we believe an Outward Turn should target. We are not seeking toidentify new theoretical concerns within the discipline of TS, but rather to reinforce TS both as a hub interdiscipline within the academy and as the conjoined theoretical wing of a practice that spans the key human processes of becoming and being, of change and cognition 186

Ver Brodzki 2007, precursora.

Bennett 2023 - Approaches to knowledge translation

• translatio studii 443
• Discurso da cc. Nominalizado, poucos verbos, técnico, hermético. Gramática previsível, traduzível desde que haja terminologia ou ela seja importada 445
• É por si só já uma tradução
• What makes scientific discourse so abstruse is that it is itself a kind of translation. Linguists Haliday and Martin (1993) call it a 'grammatical metaphorization', that is to say, a reconstrual from a process-based subjective mode of experience to one that is heavily nominalized and impersonal. Generated through a series of grammatical transformations that render processes static and remove the subjective observer from the picture, this discourse is no one's mother tongue but rather an artificial language forged to serva a particular pragmatic purpose, as artificial as the various 'universal languages' that were proposed in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries to fill the void left by Latin. 445
• Cutting edge translated into sci and old non contentious translated out of it in popularizations. 446
• Trad na antiguidade 446-8
• Trad na medievalidade. Translatio studii. Inventio depois do IX. Arab world translation. Translanting the book of the world 448-50
• Trad early modern. Importance of God's achievability without mediators. Nullius in verba. Latin and vernacular. Knowledge, capitalism, colonization and power. 450-452
• "Translation (including indirect translation) played an important role in mediating these encounters (Di Biase, 2006), and compilations soon began to appear which filtered and adapted the voyagers' accounts to suit particular target publics, often (at least in the first phase) with little concern for factual accuracy" 
• gradual narrowing of the field of field of translatio, a shift from a predominantly vertical to a horizontal understanding of translation (Stierle, 1996), and the replacement of the narrative of decline implicit in the translatio studii model with a new narrative of progress, effectively launching modernity. 451
• Trad science's others. Colonization of humanities by CC. Inter-epistemic translation. Historia como tradução. 452-455
• Vários debates em TS. Mas post-translation redefine tudo 456
• It is my contention that translation, broadly understood, offers a lens through which the scientist/philosopher/scholar is enabled to see beyond the current state of the art and envisage potential new terrains waiting just beyond the horizion. The very act of trying to apply what is already known to a new situation or context (which is effectively what translation is about) focuses the attention on what is possible and what isn't under those new constraints and urges the generation of creative solutions to overcome them. We have seen this happen over and over again thourghout history: the Romans and Arabs rewrote greek knowledge for their own purposes and contexts, and in doing os took it onto a ehole different leve; the scholastics tried to reconcile ti twith christianity and created a new investigative method that is still used today in some domains; the renaissance humanists, mre concerned with greek rhetoric and poetics than with their sicen, developed philological techniques that helped proper europe out ot he ttheocentric paradigm into the modern afe and today, our need to grapple with ecological prolems beqeeathed by centureis of objecitics thninkn is enabling us to envisiona ehole new form of knowled that is not predicated on human exceptionalism but takes account of all the other communication systems that exist in the natural world and beyond.
• As such, it becomes clear that translation is not so much a reproductive act as a generative one; or rather, it is the act of reproducing what is already knonwn in a fresh context that creates the condition for new knowledge to be constructed. When the rest of the world understands this, it will propel our discipline to a whole new level of relevance and visibility. 456

Bennett 2024a

• Apresentação didática de Robinson
• Defined as translation between different knowledge systems, it would focus on the transfer or transmission of knowledge between different ‘written genres (or semiotic worlds)’ in a process of narrative reframing ‘which is never a “cloning” of knowledge, of course, but always involves … “translationality”: adaptation, transformation’ (2017, p. 200). In the pages that followed, Robinson envisaged a whole series of different relations that could be studied under this rubric, ranging from the kinds of operations contemplated in translational medicine and the medical humanities, through the writing of popular science and representation of scientific issues in literary fiction to the study of how knowledges transform over time as epistemological paradigms wax and wane. 1
• Boaventura de Sousa Santos e ecologias do conhecimento. Intercultural translation contra epistemicide. 1-2
• Assim
• using concepts, methods and theories from the field of Translation Studies to investigate the semiotic processes (verbal and nonverbal) involved in the transfer of information between different ‘epistemic systems’. Its main foci are the transactions occurring between western science (the hegemonic knowledge of the globalised world) and its various Others: in particular, humanistic learning, which once ‘manage[d] the western world’ (Snow 1959/2012, p. 11), but is now decidedly the poor relation of the academy, starved of funding and status; the indigenous knowledges of the global south, which are not taken seriously as ‘knowledge’ at all and are systematically occluded in the name of ‘progress’; and the various premodern knowledges which were downgraded to myth or superstition following the Scientific Revolution of the seventeenth century. By examining the transformations that take place when information transits from one epistemic system to another, it hopes to shed light not only on the cultural framework that generates those cognitive inequalities but also on the semiotic mechanisms that enact them. 2
• CC, humanistic and indigenous as discourse, preference constructed 2
• CC depriving other knowledges of cognitive authority > epistemological monoculture 3
• Visão descontinuista da revolução cc. Transformações do discurso 3
•  as the scientists of the Royal Society and their successors struggled to forge a discourse that could serve as the vehicle for their new natural philosophy. If grammar is a ‘theory of human experience’ (Halliday, 1998, pp. 185–188), then there seems to have been a profound cognitive reorganization at this time, as the ‘Book of Nature’ – which for pre-moderns was a symbolic code of nonverbal signifiers, to be interpreted by readers skilled in perceiving similitudes (Tanzella-Nitti, 2005; Foucault, 1966/2002b, pp. 19–32) – was reconstrued as an inert universe devoid of agency or significance. The new worldview seems to have been brought into being through a series of ‘grammatical metaphorizations’ (or translations) that were deliberately implemented from the seventeenth century onwards: first the nominalization, which rendered complex processes static and thing-like (Halliday, 1993), effectively holding them still for observation and analysis; and then later, the agentless passive and other impersonal verb forms, which removed all subjectivity from the world (Atkinson, 1999; Ding, 1998). Thus, the proponents of the scientific paradigm, far from eliminating language from the picture as they claimed to do (and we should recall that the motto of the Royal Society was nullius in verba), actually constructed the world they claimed to be describing through a series of linguistic manoeuvres. 4
• Várias pessoas de campos diferentes tentando resolver isso. 4-5
• Tanto santos como viveiros de castro citam Benjamin 5
• Sumário
• In short, translation is no longer a merely interlingual process, constrained to the quest for verbal equivalents across geographies and cultures. Instead, it has become a dynamic concept with the potential to explain how things change through the modelling of the new upon the old. This is the process that Douglas Robinson calls ‘translationality’, defined as ‘transformationality: the constant emergingness of everything through embodied, situated, performative interactions’ (2017, p. x). A transdisciplinary concept, it has tremendous potential for straddling the epistemological divides that have produced such cognitive inequality in our world. 6
• Epistran. Colocar robinson em prática. Três áreas: 6-7
• Science and the humanities
• how specialist science is reformulated into popular and educational science, and literary works on scientific themes 6
• translational processes involved in educational science,5 the popularization of science,6 science journalism,7 and the creation of literary works on scientific themes. A second phase might extend this to representations by scientists of humanistic knowledge (including religion, mythology, philosophy and the arts), translational medicine and science, the medical humanities, and digital-to-analogue translation. 7
• Methodology developed by Bennett 2024b 8
• knowledges of the world;
• – how forms of inter-epistemic translation are/ can be used to transmit scientific and medical knowledge to indigenous communities in Africa and S. America, and, conversely, how indigenous knowledges from these regions are/can be translated into formats meaningful to the North; 6
• g how translational processes are or may be used to bring western science (particularly medical and technical knowledge) to indigenous peoples, and, conversely, indigenous and eastern knowledges to the attention of the west. It is being studied by a diverse team that includes anthropologists, educationalists and a sinologist, as well as translation scholars. 7
•  how knowledge is transmitted when the receiving culture has not yet developed the conceptual framework necessary to make sense of it, and in the strategies that are used, often on an ad-hoc basis, by communicators attempting to overcome these lacunas 9
• Invention of science.
• how premodern forms of knowledge were translated into the new episteme launched by the Scientific Revolution of the seventeenth century 6
• is concerned with the translational processes involved in the Early Modern transition to a scientific mode of inquiry, and as such involves mostly historians and philosophers of science. Its objects of study include not only the translation of pre-scientific knowledges (such as alchemy, astrology, Aristotelian metaphysics, logic, rhetoric) into the new rational/mechanical episteme, but also cosmology, cosmography and cartography, as well as a more detailed study of the conceptual and linguistic reconstrual necessary to actually enable the scientific worldview to come about (Halliday & Martin, 1993; Wootton, 2015) 7
• depends upon an understanding of translation as a vertical diachronic process (rather than horizontal and synchronic). On the assumption that new knowledge is always based on knowledge that has gone before (Bennett 2023), all researchers are, to some extent, involved in charting translational processes that are constitutive of modern science (broadly defined) and in observing the changes that take place as scientific and philosophical texts and ideas circulate through time and place. 10
• how translation [of science (often through popularization)] creates new discourses in the target culture 10
• Método DTS suplementado por transdisciplinaridade. It aims to produce new methodologies for use for the practice of inter-epistemic translation and in epistemic translation research, as well as making theoretical contributions to the new transdisciplinary research paradigm" 6
• Sci pop as translation 8
• Question of the source text
• Although source-text instability does not disqualify the work from being considered a translation (compilative sourcing is actually a very common phenomenon in journalistic translation, as Valdeón [2015] and Davier and van Doorslaer (2018) have pointed out), it does make it difficult for the translation scholar to build a parallel corpus or undertake any kind of ST/TT comparison. In the case of science journalism, Nelissen and McMartin (2022) used a method of citation analysis, triangulated with interviews, to track the sources of relevant news items – though they readily admitted the limitations of this approach (idem, p. 100) and did not proceed to any comparison of versions. As for the second group, we agreed that the solution might lie in the translational nature of specialised discourses, as analysed by the systemic-functional linguists of the Australian school (Halliday & Martin, 1993; Martin and Veel 1998). According to Halliday (1998; pp. 222–223) and Martin, 1998 (6–7), specialised and technical discourses are created through a series of ‘grammatical metaphorizations’, which operate on three different time scales: the logogenetic dimension, representing the unfolding of the individual text; the phylogenetic dimension, involving the development of the system as a whole, and the ontogenetic dimension, which is essentially the maturation of the individual human's linguistic competence. Thus, if specialist science discourse is effectively a translation from the ‘everyday “mother tongue” of commonsense knowledge’ (Halliday & Martin, 1993, p. 15) into an impersonal nominalised form, then all rewritings aiming at a non-specialist public  ........ 8-9
• Faz pessoas de campos distintos, mas que falam essencialmente da mesma coisa, conversarem. 11

Ver várias refs

Bennett2024b

• Se a CC discourse é uma tradução para um estilo nominalizado impessoal, então popularização é uma tradução no sentido inverso.
• Gillian Fuller usa metaforicamente. Sem translation theory. EPISTRAN quer usar especialmente do DTS. Com um texto base identificável é possível medir alterações.
• Transformações gramáticas são transposições ou shifts. De registro são explicadas pelo skopos, (tradução, paráfrase ou reedição dependo da função). Adições, omissões e reformulações são cobertas por DTS também. Compilative translation
• Mais coisa downstream da popularização. [Lavosierando cada vez mais].
• Assim ''fica claro que interepistemic translation, como sua contraparte literária, é um processo contínuo no qual o conhecimento é constantemtne reempacotado e resignificado para novos propostos e leitores. De fato, a grande diversidade de skopoi e publicos significa que agora há uma continuum de discursos scitech em inglês...'' entremeado por diferentes tipos de popularização. Wright sugere que essa adaptação pode gerar novos modos de escrita.
• 
  

Ver Gillian Fuller 1998 e Lambert e van Goorp (1985), autores de compilative trranslation. Também Martin e veel 1998

VER (SOBRE EPISTEMIC TRANSLATION)

Vannini, A. (2023). Towards Epistemic Translatability: On Epistemic Difference and Hermeneutical Injustice, Social Epistemology, 37:6, 839-851, 

Wolfenden, H., Sercombe, H., & Tucker, P. (2019). Making practice publishable: what practice academics need to do to get their work published, and what that tells us about the theory-practice gap. Social Epistemology, 33(6), 555-573.

Bennett, K. (2021). Editor’s introduction: Picturebooks and graphic narratives as a nexus for translation research. Translation Matters, 3(2), 1-9.

Anderson, V., & Johnson, H. (Eds.). (2019). Introduction Migration, Education and Translation: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives on Human Mobility and Cultural Encounters in Education Settings. Routledge. 1-9

DeRocher, P. (2018). Transnational testimonios: the politics of collective knowledge production. University of Washington Press. 

Francett-Hermes, M. (2023). What does and could decoloniality do in the context of developing Sámi teacher education in Finland?: the case of Ketterä Korkeakoulu. Dutkansearvvi dieđalaš áigečála, 7(1), 31-49.

Kaalund, N. K. L. (2023). Erasure as a tool of nineteenth-century European exploration, and the Arctic travels of Tookoolito and Ipiirvik. The Historical Journal, 66(1), 122-140.