From the point of view of the target literature, all translation implies a certain degree of

manipulation of the source text for a certain purpose

Theo Hermans

Chapter 3: Points of Orientation

Theo Hermans presents the approach to translation studies known as Descriptive Translation
Studies, or Polysystems approach, an approach associated in particular with the names of Gideon
Toury and Itamar Even-Zohar. After exploring the question of what constitutes a new paradigm for
research and whether DTS qualifies as such (it does), Hermans presents the basic assumptions of
the approach, citing his own Introduction to The Manipulation of Literature.
In The Manipulation of Literature (1985), Hermans poses three reasons that explain why the study
of literary translation in particular had remained such a neglected field:
1) The emphasis on creativity and originality placed in the concept of literature since the Romantic
period which leads to disdain a derivative form like translation as second-hand and second-rate.
2) Linguists had dealt primarily with non-literary texts and have restricted themselves to the level of
the sentence instead of tackling larger textual and discursive entities.
3) The translators mind was seen as an inaccessible box.
In The Manipulation of Literature, Hermans summarises the new approach, elaborated by a group
of researchers who agreed on some basic assumptions, in the following statement:
What they have in common is, briefly, a view of literature as a complex and dynamic system; a
conviction that there should be a continual interplay between theoretical models and practical case
studies; an approach to literary translation which is descriptive, target-oriented, functional and
systemic; and an interest in the norms and constraints that govern the production and reception of
translations, in the relation between translation and other types of text processing, and in the place
and role of translations both within a given literature and in the interaction between literatures.
In this chapter he takes each part of this statement and comments on it.
a view of literature as a complex and dynamic system
The idea that literature can be thought of as a system, a set of interdependent elements, has a
respectable pedigree. In the context of empirical translation studies one term in particular has
gained prominence: literature as a polysystem.
The point about the system is that it invites us to think in terms of functions, connections and
interrelations.

a conviction that there should be a continual interplay between theoretical models and practical
case studies
The Russian Formalists were self-critical and methodologically rigorous as well as radical and
innovative. They emphasized the provisional nature of their theories and positions.

This willingness to revise and adjust the analytical apparatus can also be seen in the Manipulation
group, notably in Tourys abandoning the notion of the Adequate Translation when it proved
unworkable.
The importance of case studies is twofold: they illustrate the productivity of a theory and its
applicability across a range of situations, and they serve to convince other sections of the scholarly
community of the relevance of the theories and models.
an approach to literary translation which is descriptive...
The Manipulations group programme is elaborated on a purely descriptive basis. They want to
account for the occurrence and nature of translations, rather than providing value judgements or
advice or guidelines for good translating.
Today it is hard to determine whether it is possible for descriptions to be neutral, objective and
detached from the object of study.
target-oriented, functional...
This approach has an exclusively target-oriented and functional orientation (which Hermans shows
to be in part misguided, in that translations are not solely and exclusively facts of the target system).
Target-oriented stands in opposition to source-oriented; functional to essentialist. The term
target-oriented is opposed to the term source-oriented in relation to the perceived status of
translation.
The source-oriented approach measures the translation in the source text, with translation being
seen as a reproduction of the original, as a substitute which is derivative and needs to be checked
against the original for faults and shortcomings. Thus, the authority of the original is constantly
reaffirmed.
By contrast, the target-oriented approach focuses attention on translations as separate texts as a
way of claiming legitimacy for studying translation.
When translations are felt to be worthy objects of study, it is worth asking what the problem was
that a translation was intended to solve. If we do not take into account the function that the
translation is meant to serve or the problem it is trying to solve, the translators choices appear
pointless or idiosyncratic.
A target-oriented approach is a way of asking questions about translations without reducing them
to derivative objects.
According to Hermans, a target-oriented approach does not mean that translations are facts of the
target system only, as Toury has claimed. Thus, maintaining a rigid distinction between source and
target contexts may seem forced in some cases.
...and systemic
The systemic perspective of the Manipulation group has proved extremely useful in many ways.
The polysystem theory, which views literature as a network of elements that interact with each
other, has contributed greatly to the recognition of translation studies as a legitimate field of study.
It appeals lay in replacing the old unilateral relation between a translation and its original with a
multilateral matrix anchored in the translating culture.

The polysystem theory viewed literary and cultural life as the scene of a continuous struggle for
power between various interest groups. In this context, translation could be seen as one of the
instruments which people could use to consolidate or undermine positions in a given hierarchy.
According to Andr Lefevere, poetics, patronage and ideology were more important constraints on
translation than linguistic differences. He also pointed out that manipulations do not occur only in
translation. They may also occur in the reeditions of a particular work. He also points out that
editing and redrafting texts, like translating them, means working with and under certain constraints
(economic, ideological or aesthetic).
Translation can no longer be regarded in isolation. It should be analysed as part of a whole system
of texts and the people who produce, support, propagate, oppose and censor them.
...and an interest in the norms and constraints that govern the production and reception of
translations, in the relation between translation and other types of text processing, and in the
place and role of translations both within a given literature and in the interaction between
literatures.
The orientation on the receptor pole, on the impact of translation and on its constraining factors
explains the interest that much descriptive work had in translations norms.
Questions surrounding the production, reception and historical impact on translation have occupied
a prominent place in the descriptive approach.
Historical case studies cover not only individual translations, but also the historical discourse on
translation.
The history of a societys thinking about translation informs us about that societys changing values
and beliefs regarding language, identity and otherness.
This historicizing of translation and of translation concepts is paramount because it shows us how
translation is differently shaped over time.
Descriptive, target-oriented, functional and systemic prescriptive, source-text oriented, linguistic
and atomistic.
The central issue: the function of the translation in the target culture linguistic features of the ST.