Scott 2006

•  Literariness 106
• Floating quality to be reinvented
• Something with which the reader (translator) infuses the text or which he or she uses the text to generate
• Virtuality of the text
• It is reimagined but not recorded by the translator
• [Understanding literariness as intrinsic is a excess of the signifer over the signified that locks adresser and adresse in a speculative relation]
• [It is the task of the translator to maintain or increase the innate incomprehensibility of the ST. He or she can translate the incomprehensible. Searches for links between links between translation studies, genetic criticism and textual criticism.] 106
• Valéry
• I proceed, as is my method, from the finished poem, crystallized as it were in its fame, back to its nascent state. I agree that this is a matter o fpure imagination, but imagination tempered by reliable memories ... The work of translation, done with regard for a certain approximation of form, causes us in some way to try walking in the tracks left by the author. and not to fashion one text upon another, but from the latter to work back to the virtual moment of its formation, to the phase when the mind is in the sam state as an orchestra whose intruments begin to waken, calling to each other and seeking harmony before begining their concert. From that vividly imagined tate, one makes one's own eay down towards its resolution in a work in a different tongue. 107
•  The translator transforms the text of the ST into an avant-texte (draft), transforms the text back into a process of writing, 
•  It ‘unfinishes’ the ST, multiplies its possibilities of being, by introducing into it the passage of time; 
• reminding us that the ST is not just being recalled by | translation, but is being propelled forward through the years
• the ongoing operations of the writerly imagination are as possessed of creative primacy and literary status as the finished product
• the transformation of text into avant-texte hypothesizes literature. We tend to read avant-textes in the perspective of the definitive text, as steps in a certain teleology.
• At the time of the avant texte itself, the definitive text was not in vie and might never have emerged.  If the translator speculatively imagines the ST’s own avant-textes, then the ST is no longer predicted, no longer has its own realization particularly in view. If, alternatively, the translator treats the ST as an avant-texte, then it is by no means evident what form the target text (TT), either as a text or another avant-texte, should take. And behind every manuscript there lurks any number of other, lost manuscripts, and any number of unrecorded hours of mental activity. A text is always what it might be or what it might have been. 107-8
• translation  is not an act of preservation (of a definitive text), nor an act of recall (of a text that inevitably belongs to the past), but an act of transmission (of handing on a text in what is deemed an appropriate form) and of reimagination. 108
• Marizibill 108
• Marginalia incorporated as an important space for the avant texte, compound of words that will and wont be
• Incomprehensibility 1) We cannot predict which variations and repetitions the reader will hear. 2) translation makes the ST more incomprehensible by making it progress through time
•  the ST travels willy-nilly beyond its own comprehension of itself; it becomes constantly discrepant with itself and it is this discrepancy that the translator translates as much as the discrepancy between two languages. Beyond a certain point in time and space, authorial intention becomes an anachronism; the responsibilities of intention shift to the translator. 109-10
• 3) maximizes the shifter funcition in language, our ability to adapt all pronouns, all deictics, to our own situations. [Finding a voice] 110
• Genetic criticism 110
• The espousal of the interests of genetic criticism in the re-theorization of the literariness of literary translation takes one correspondingly towards a theory of text which promotes the bibliographical approach and a synoptic, or polytextual, editorial policy. The translator is, after all, an editor, someone who is transmitting, resocializing, re-embedding the text in what amounts to a collaborative enterprise, not someone who is merely fossilizing a text in its sacred monumentality. The textual (as opposed to the bibliographical) approach to translation tends to isolate the text in clinical, already edited conditions, so that the problems confronted by the translator are essentially linguistic ones. But the translator is also someone who is embodying the ST in a new set of material, bibliographical conditions (typefaces, format, design, illustration, paper, binding). The translator is also an editor who may dispose of or disperse the text in new ways (preface, endnotes, epigraph, commentary, citational inserts, cross-references), and, indeed, incorporate other versions of the text (published variants, drafts, adapted versions). 110
• IMPORTANTE Lista de diferenças 110-111
• Scott defende
• translation should develop its own range of forms, of expressive resources, of typographical dispositions, which may overlap with those cultivated by ‘creative’ literature, but which function in ways specific to translation. I suggested that translation might develop a new kind of lyric stage direction which would allow the translator to express textual intuitions and visualizations, his/her contacts with the drama of the text, as director, as onstage commentator, as figurant 111
• If the ST is to be treated not as a textual object so much as a medium-,a material, then the page becomes the translator’s area of operation, the translator’s canvas, the space of translational imagination; the manipulation of the text_on the page is the veru process of translation. 111
• exemplo de Marizbibill, acousticity and graphicity, mas também readbility and vocality 112
• We wish to create obstructions to _a reading conceived as a retrieval of information; we wish to make the sifting process that reading is, complex and ramifying; we wish to reinvest the written with the oral, that is to say with paralanguage and the readerly body. ancient reading habits 
• implications for the aestheticization of text and govern the nature of the cognitive processes involved, then translation should incorporate this awareness into its own poetics and promote modes of printing and layouts that diversify the difficulty of reading and constantly re-sensitize the ways in which language is apprehended. 113
• Translation and transdiction
• against the textual, the synoptic against the definitive, will tend to transform the transdicted into the transcripted, and the reader of translations, as_an active participant in an unfinished process, will seek to retrieve from the page the voice whose enunciation the page records. 113 
• EXEMPLO F(Annie) 113-4
•  Inter text 115-6
• a) translation as intertextual negotiation between ST and target culture
• b)  intertextuality denotes the textual traffic into and out of a text. The text itself is as multiplied as it multiplies. Intertextuality in this version belongs primarily to a postmodernist vision of the unowned text, of the kaleidoscopic nature of the literary, of the linguistically permutable. There is no independence for the literary text, however self-reflexive its ambitions. Intertextuality is part of the excess of the signifier, and is another point at which the author hands over authority to the reader. Translation is inevitably _intertextual by generical condition, standing as. it does at the crossroads between ptagiarism, citation, pastiche, parody, imitation, ... Intertextual presence changes with time as the corpus of possible references enlarges. This is another sense in which a translation will make an ST more incomprehensible, as its intertextuality become more opaque.
• TS 116
• Translation studies has invested heavily in a theory and analytic methodology based on the objective of a single-version translation (fair copy, corrigé). If the translator were constrained to produce, say, six versions, what theory would translation studies then entail? Would not the theory and methodology naturally gravitate towards the genetic and textual models we have been canvassing? Surprisingly, perhaps, translation would no longer be an exercise in the solution of linguistic difficulties, nor would it primarily be about interpretation. It would look to undermine the assumption that the text (ST) is universally and monoperceptually visible; it is translation’s task to question our perception of the text, to diversify the text’s perceptibility; to adapt Klee’s dictum: translation does not reproduce the visible (ST), it makes visible. The re-imagining of the ST does not involve the deformation or neglect of its linguistic givens. It involves the translation of their:mode of activity, the way in which they are perceived, as being and performing. 
• Translation itself is constantly redrawing maps, redisposing the territories of language and cultures. Translation is métissage, interbreeding, hybridization, grafting, creolization. We can concur with McGann’s underlying law: ‘The textual condition’s only immutable law is the law of change ... The law of change declares that these histories [the life histories of different texts] will exhibit a ceaseless process of textual development and mutation ...’ (1991: 1). Translation does not merely register that change, that change’s inevitability, but actively works to produce it. And this same principle holds good for the TT’s literariness. We may detect some relatively stable core in the literary — the excess of the signifier —- which may be carried over from the ST to the TI. But otherwise, TTs are constantly remaking the SI's ‘literariness, both through translation’s development of its own literature/literariness, and_ through the translator’s Own input of the literary as reader/writer. The essential connection” between translation and creative writing lies here: the literariness of the ST is not a given, is subject to history. Translation (particularly if ‘straight’) is likely to be instrumental in the erosion of the ST’s literariness, unless the translator sets out to incorporate the ST into the literature of translation and to re-imagine its literariness by his/her own agency as a reader/writer.

a signifier: the word open; a signified concept: that the shop is open for business