Zusammenfassung
Although translating involves significant creativity and subjectivity, the
currently dominant translation form does not oblige translators to take responsibility
for their words in the same way as authors can. If one adopts the perspective of formal
pragmatics (Habermas, Goffman), several kinds of empirical testing demonstrate how
this mode of non-authorship operates within the current form: 1) when translating,
translators adopt the alien I (the pronoun “I” refers to someone else); 2) translators are
not commonly required to make validity claims about the content of their productions,
as is attested through the existence and social function of pseudotranslations; and 3)
translators are not usually required to swear commitment to what their words say, as
can be tested on the limits of translated Auschwitzlüge. Tentative data from process
studies further support the claim that translating a text tends to be psychologically
different from authoring a text, especially with regard the conceptual space available
for thought about responsibility. A critical attitude is thus necessary with respect to the
current translation form.
Nutzer