[Book Review] Sobre a (Bio)semiotic theory of translation
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2021 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Cognitio (São Paulo. Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofia/article/view/55177 |
Resumo: | The (Bio)Semiotic Theory of Translation, by Kobus Marais, 2019, is the most important book published on the relationship between Translation Studies and CSPeirce's pragmatist Semiotics, since Dinda Gorlée's Semio-translation, 2004. It can be said that Gorlée's work represented an initial stage of adjustments in the Translation Studies agenda, inspired by Peirce's philosophy. It is a preliminary work, whose greatest merit was to establish a more systemic link between the “areas”. Kobus Marais' book is the most important attempt to develop this project. It explores various consequences of the application of many entities and theoretical terms in Peirce's philosophy, especially in its mature phase (post-1903). In doing so, Marais opens up an unprecedented front of investigation whose importance should not be underestimated. He combines many apparatuses, which include (i) rudiments of a pragmatist-inspired process philosophy, with a strong pluralist bent; (ii) sign classifications developed by Peirce after 1903, a period that established itself as a “mature theory of the sign”, unexplored in translation studies, and still little explored by the Peircean scholarship itself; (iii) and an emergentist version associated with a treatment based on complex systems theory. On this last topic, especially influenced by Terrence Deacon and Floyd Merrell, Marais draws many implications, related to a definition of translation as negentropy, in complex systems, and generalizes the phenomenon to cases of emergence of socio-cultural phenomena. I have divided this review into assertions. They refer to the theses that I consider the most important in Kobus Marais' book. Although so many others can be formulated, I consider those that may have the greatest implications. |
id |
PUC_SP-15_b2b0340f3dc01f1788def2e605aaf407 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/55177 |
network_acronym_str |
PUC_SP-15 |
network_name_str |
Cognitio (São Paulo. Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
[Book Review] Sobre a (Bio)semiotic theory of translation[Resenha] Sobre a (Bio)semiotic theory of translationThe (Bio)Semiotic Theory of Translation, by Kobus Marais, 2019, is the most important book published on the relationship between Translation Studies and CSPeirce's pragmatist Semiotics, since Dinda Gorlée's Semio-translation, 2004. It can be said that Gorlée's work represented an initial stage of adjustments in the Translation Studies agenda, inspired by Peirce's philosophy. It is a preliminary work, whose greatest merit was to establish a more systemic link between the “areas”. Kobus Marais' book is the most important attempt to develop this project. It explores various consequences of the application of many entities and theoretical terms in Peirce's philosophy, especially in its mature phase (post-1903). In doing so, Marais opens up an unprecedented front of investigation whose importance should not be underestimated. He combines many apparatuses, which include (i) rudiments of a pragmatist-inspired process philosophy, with a strong pluralist bent; (ii) sign classifications developed by Peirce after 1903, a period that established itself as a “mature theory of the sign”, unexplored in translation studies, and still little explored by the Peircean scholarship itself; (iii) and an emergentist version associated with a treatment based on complex systems theory. On this last topic, especially influenced by Terrence Deacon and Floyd Merrell, Marais draws many implications, related to a definition of translation as negentropy, in complex systems, and generalizes the phenomenon to cases of emergence of socio-cultural phenomena. I have divided this review into assertions. They refer to the theses that I consider the most important in Kobus Marais' book. Although so many others can be formulated, I consider those that may have the greatest implications.A (Bio)Semiotic Theory of Translation, de Kobus Marais, 2019, é o mais importante livro publicado sobre a relação entre os Estudos da Tradução e a Semiótica pragmatista de C.S.Peirce, desde Semio-translation, de Dinda Gorlée, de 2004. Pode-se afirmar que a obra de Gorlée representou uma etapa inicial de ajustes na agenda dos Estudos de Tradução, inspirada na filosofia de Peirce. É um trabalho preliminar, cujo maior mérito foi estabelecer uma vinculação mais sistêmica entre as “áreas”. O livro de Kobus Marais é a mais audaciosa tentativa de desenvolver este projeto. Ele explora diversas consequências da aplicação de muitas entidades e termos teóricos da filosofia de Peirce, especialmente em sua fase madura (pós-1903). Ao fazer isso, Marais abre uma frente inédita de investigação cuja importância não deve ser subestimada. Ele associa muitos aparatos, que incluem (i) rudimentos de uma filosofia de processo de inspiração pragmatista, com forte propensão pluralista; (ii) classificações sígnicas desenvolvidas por Peirce, após 1903, período que se estabeleceu como “teoria madura do signo”, inexplorada nos estudos sobre tradução, e ainda pouco explorada pelo próprio scholarship Peirceano; (iii) e uma versão emergentista associada a um tratamento baseado na teoria de sistemas complexos. Sobre este último tópico, especialmente influenciado por Terrence Deacon e Floyd Merrell, Marais extrai muitas implicações, relacionadas a uma definição de tradução como negentropia, em sistemas complexos, e generaliza o fenômeno para casos de emergência de fenômenos sócio-culturais. Dividi esta resenha em asserções. Elas se referem às teses que considero mais importantes do livro de Kobus Marais. Embora outras tantas possam ser formuladas, considero aquelas que podem ter maiores implicações. Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo2021-12-31info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofia/article/view/5517710.23925/2316-5278.2021v22i1:e55177Cognitio: Revista de Filosofia; Vol. 22 No. 1 (2021): Cognitio: Revista de Filosofia; e55177Cognitio: Revista de Filosofia; v. 22 n. 1 (2021): Cognitio: Revista de Filosofia; e551772316-52781518-7187reponame:Cognitio (São Paulo. Online)instname:Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP)instacron:PUC_SPenghttps://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofia/article/view/55177/38759Copyright (c) 2021 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessQueiroz, Joao2021-12-31T22:19:17Zoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/55177Revistahttps://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofiaPRIhttps://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofia/oairevcognitio@gmail.com2316-52781518-7187opendoar:2021-12-31T22:19:17Cognitio (São Paulo. Online) - Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
[Book Review] Sobre a (Bio)semiotic theory of translation [Resenha] Sobre a (Bio)semiotic theory of translation |
title |
[Book Review] Sobre a (Bio)semiotic theory of translation |
spellingShingle |
[Book Review] Sobre a (Bio)semiotic theory of translation Queiroz, Joao |
title_short |
[Book Review] Sobre a (Bio)semiotic theory of translation |
title_full |
[Book Review] Sobre a (Bio)semiotic theory of translation |
title_fullStr |
[Book Review] Sobre a (Bio)semiotic theory of translation |
title_full_unstemmed |
[Book Review] Sobre a (Bio)semiotic theory of translation |
title_sort |
[Book Review] Sobre a (Bio)semiotic theory of translation |
author |
Queiroz, Joao |
author_facet |
Queiroz, Joao |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Queiroz, Joao |
description |
The (Bio)Semiotic Theory of Translation, by Kobus Marais, 2019, is the most important book published on the relationship between Translation Studies and CSPeirce's pragmatist Semiotics, since Dinda Gorlée's Semio-translation, 2004. It can be said that Gorlée's work represented an initial stage of adjustments in the Translation Studies agenda, inspired by Peirce's philosophy. It is a preliminary work, whose greatest merit was to establish a more systemic link between the “areas”. Kobus Marais' book is the most important attempt to develop this project. It explores various consequences of the application of many entities and theoretical terms in Peirce's philosophy, especially in its mature phase (post-1903). In doing so, Marais opens up an unprecedented front of investigation whose importance should not be underestimated. He combines many apparatuses, which include (i) rudiments of a pragmatist-inspired process philosophy, with a strong pluralist bent; (ii) sign classifications developed by Peirce after 1903, a period that established itself as a “mature theory of the sign”, unexplored in translation studies, and still little explored by the Peircean scholarship itself; (iii) and an emergentist version associated with a treatment based on complex systems theory. On this last topic, especially influenced by Terrence Deacon and Floyd Merrell, Marais draws many implications, related to a definition of translation as negentropy, in complex systems, and generalizes the phenomenon to cases of emergence of socio-cultural phenomena. I have divided this review into assertions. They refer to the theses that I consider the most important in Kobus Marais' book. Although so many others can be formulated, I consider those that may have the greatest implications. |
publishDate |
2021 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2021-12-31 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofia/article/view/55177 10.23925/2316-5278.2021v22i1:e55177 |
url |
https://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofia/article/view/55177 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.23925/2316-5278.2021v22i1:e55177 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofia/article/view/55177/38759 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2021 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2021 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Cognitio: Revista de Filosofia; Vol. 22 No. 1 (2021): Cognitio: Revista de Filosofia; e55177 Cognitio: Revista de Filosofia; v. 22 n. 1 (2021): Cognitio: Revista de Filosofia; e55177 2316-5278 1518-7187 reponame:Cognitio (São Paulo. Online) instname:Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP) instacron:PUC_SP |
instname_str |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP) |
instacron_str |
PUC_SP |
institution |
PUC_SP |
reponame_str |
Cognitio (São Paulo. Online) |
collection |
Cognitio (São Paulo. Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Cognitio (São Paulo. Online) - Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
revcognitio@gmail.com |
_version_ |
1803387422346575872 |