|
Abstract
|
The indirect translation is heavily loaded with negative connotations (Ringmar 2012) and it is often considered as a poor copy of a copy, which necessarily entails a loss of detail with each successive passage through the process (as in the Xerox effect, Landers, 2001). A telling example of this attitude is the recommendation by UNESCO (1976), which suggests that indirect translation should be used “only where absolutely necessary”.
In fact, not much research has been done about indirect translation, and many scholars in the field of translation studies do not agree with the term because they believe that indirect translation is not done according to the source text and some others assume that indirect translation simplifies the source text. This research is going to analyze this case according to Venuti’s foreignization and domestication strategies by exploring the differences between directly translated and indirectly translated versions of Milton’s Paradise Lost.
|