| | SLO | ENG | Cookies and privacy

Bigger font | Smaller font

Show document Help

Title:Je Quineov problem nedoločenosti prevoda in reference relevanten za lingvistične in prevodoslovne teorije?
Authors:ID Todorović, Tadej (Author)
Files:.pdf RAZ_Todorovic_Tadej_2024.pdf (385,34 KB)
MD5: E05A6F00E0C4313529C34B16975382C8
 
URL https://journals.um.si/index.php/analiza/article/view/4898/3230
 
Language:Slovenian
Work type:Scientific work
Typology:1.01 - Original Scientific Article
Organization:FF - Faculty of Arts
UZUM - University of Maribor Press
Abstract:V pričujočem članku zasleduje avtor dva cilja –najprej podati delovno definicijo terorizma, nato pa kritično ovrednotiti argumentacijske strategije, ki vodijo do njegove skoraj soglasne moralne obsodbe. V zvezi s prvim zagovarja potrebam moralnega ovrednotenja prikrojeno definicijo terorizma kot ne-razlikovalne uporabe nasilja – ali resno mišljene grožnje z njim – z namenom/ciljem (od oblasti) izsiliti bolj ali manj korenite politične oz. družbene spremembe. V zvezi z drugim priznava, da si teroristi z načrtnim fizičnim in psihičnim nasiljem nad civilisti naprtijo težko moralno breme, a dokazuje, da terorizem v tem ni pomembno drugačen od drugih, praviloma toleriranih in neredko celo slavljenih in občudovanih vrst politično motiviranega nasilja, od oboroženih uporov in revolucij do državljanskih in meddržavnih vojn. Ali se bo terorizem pod navedenim moralnim bremenom nazadnje zlomil ali ne, bo v prvi vrsti odvisno od konkretne utemeljitve, tolmačenja in uporabe načela imunosti civilistov – ta naloga pa se popremisleku izkaže za precej trši oreh, kot dajeta slutiti njegova samoumevnost in vsesplošna popularnost. In končno, za enačenje terorizma in ekstremizma ni prepričljivih razlogov, sploh če pomislimo, koliko strpnejši smo do drugih pojavnih oblik politično motiviranega nasilja, ki so terorizmu v najboljšem primeru moralno enakovredne ali pa še to ne.
Keywords:filozofija jezika, ekvivalenca, Quine, nedoločenost prevoda, nedoločenost reference
Publication status:Published
Publication version:Version of Record
Publication date:30.12.2024
Publisher:Univerza v Mariboru, Univerzitetna založba
Year of publishing:2024
Number of pages:20
Numbering:Letn. 28, št. 1
PID:20.500.12556/DKUM-97168 New window
UDC:165:81'25
ISSN on article:2712-4916
COBISS.SI-ID:228321283 New window
DOI:10.18690/analiza.28.1.103-122.2024 New window
Publication date in DKUM:20.02.2026
Views:220
Downloads:5
Metadata:XML DC-XML DC-RDF
Categories:Misc.
:
Copy citation
  
Average score:(0 votes)
Your score:Voting is allowed only for logged in users.
Share:Bookmark and Share



Hover the mouse pointer over a document title to show the abstract or click on the title to get all document metadata.

Record is a part of a journal

Title:Analiza : časopis za kritično misel
Shortened title:Analiza
Publisher:Društvo za analitično filozofijo in filozofijo znanosti, Društvo za analitično filozofijo in filozofijo znanosti, Univerza v Mariboru, Univerzitetna založba
ISSN:1408-2969
COBISS.SI-ID:67716608 New window

Licences

License:CC BY 4.0, Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
Link:http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Description:This is the standard Creative Commons license that gives others maximum freedom to do what they want with the work as long as they credit the author.

Secondary language

Language:English
Title:Is Quine’s problem of indeterminacy of translation and reference relevant for linguistic and translation theories?
Abstract:The paper examines the concept of equivalence in translation theory, exploring its various interpretations and criticisms. It analyses different approaches to equivalence in the literature, including Catford's notion of equivalence, Nida and Taber's formal and dynamic equivalence, and Koller's five types of equivalence. The paper then considers critiques of equivalence, focusing on the critiques based on the influence of Quine's indeterminacy of translation and reference. It argues that while Quine's problem challenges the notion of meaning-based equivalence, other forms of equivalence remain viable, although accepting Quine's position necessitates the elimination of meaning itself. Finally, the paper weighs the implications of these different perspectives on translation theory. While accepting Quine's view challenges some forms of equivalence, it does not completely invalidate the concept. Other types of equivalence, such as those focused on function or effect, remain valid. However, accepting Quine's view requires eliminating the concept of meaning, which has profound implications for the field of translation studies and linguistics in general.
Keywords:language, equivalence, Quine, indeterminacy of translation, indeterminacy of reference


Collection

This document is a part of these collections:
  1. Analiza

Comments

Leave comment

You must log in to leave a comment.

Comments (0)
0 - 0 / 0
 
There are no comments!

Back
Logos of partners University of Maribor University of Ljubljana University of Primorska University of Nova Gorica