Hist Trans EN 19

Introduction

There are debates on the history of translation, though it is commonly believed that religious scripture like Bible is the first book that was translated into different languages (Lebert, 2016). The debate continues as scholars have different opinions of the roots, meaning, and needs of translation. Before going too deep, first, it is important to understand the definition of translation. With all the views, we can define translation as the communication of the meaning of a source-language text by means of an equivalent target-language text (Bhatia, 1992). Translator Norman R. Shapiro has a different view on translation as he says, "a good translation is like a pane of glass. You only notice that it's there when there are little imperfections scratches, bubbles. Ideally, there shouldn't be any." Translation might not clearly represent the text language but it obviously gives the audience a closer meaning to the text language.

The translation is as old as human language itself. The oldest mention to transitional activity in the west dates back to the third millennium BC. The act of translating has been classified under a number of headings, including "art," "craft," and "science." In the west, the earliest reference to the transitional activities goes back to as early as the third millennium BC: “The Babylon of Hammurabi’s day (2100 B.C.) was a polyglot city, and much of the official business of the empire was made possible by corps of scribes who translated edicts into various languages.” (Nida 11). However, the position of a translator has been defined in a variety of ways, such as a 'traitor,' 'predator,' or 'cannibal,' as well as a 'transformer,' 'bridge,' or 'deliverer'.

It's worth noting that the act of translation has never previously in history been accorded the credit and legitimacy it has received in the final and first decades of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, respectively. The study of translation has been recognized as an accepted field of research and “books, journals, and doctoral dissertations appear faster than one can read them all, and at the heart of most of the exciting new research are broad questions about ideology, ethics, and culture.” (Kuhiwczak and Littau 14).

History of translation: The early age

The word "translation" derives from a Latin verb that means "to convey across or bring across." Another important term is 'metaphrasis,' which means "to speak across" in Ancient Greek. From this, the term 'metaphrasis,' which means "word-for-word translation," was developed. These concepts have been at the center of translation ideas throughout history, and they have provided insight into when and where translation has been applied. (Kasparek, 1983) Translation has been significant in overcoming the language and cultural boundaries that have existed between countries for a long time. According to the history of translation, translation was used to promote trade between nations and to transmit messages about religious beliefs and concepts created by early philosophers, scholars, and intellectuals (Kasparek, 1983).

Anthropologists have been unable to pinpoint the precise time when people began converting one language into another. The Septuagint, The Epic of Gilgamesh in 2100 BC, and the bible translated by St. Jerome are the two earliest literary works discovered while investigating the history of translation that is thought to have been the first to be translated. When Buddhist monks translated sutras into Chinese languages, Asia translation played a crucial part in the history of translation studies. According to conclusions from a brief history of translation, the major purpose of early translation appears to be disseminating religious views far and wide (Cohen, 1986).

The translation effort of Arabic scholars is said to have aided the development and understanding of Greek academics' knowledge and results. When the Greeks were captured, Arabic intellectuals took their writings and translated them into their own versions of scientific, entertaining, and philosophical concepts. During the Middle Ages, these Arabic translations were translated into Latin, especially in Spain, and the resulting writings supplied the groundwork for Renaissance academics. (Wakim, 1994)

Religious Translation and Texts

With the emergence of religious writings and spiritual philosophies, the demand for translation became even more. As religion evolved, the need to spread the message and foster faith necessitated the availability of religious writings in different languages. The Old Testament, which was translated into Greek in the 3rd century BC, is thought to have been one of the first religious works to be translated. This is a reference to the 'Septuagint,' which was a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible. Septuagint comes from the Latin term 'Septuaginta,' which means seventy. As a result, this work is frequently referred to as the 'Greek Old Testament.' This translation was carried out by no fewer than 70 academics without the use of contemporary procedures and technologies, who painstakingly turned the text into Greek, which provided the basis for future bible translations in numerous languages (Tobler, Stefan; Sabău, Antoaneta, 2018)

Religion was so important in the development of translation that the church designated Saint Jerome as the patron saint of translators. In the fourth century AD, Saint Jerome compiled a Latin Bible. The Roman Catholic Church adopted this bible as its primary text. The necessity to translate the bible and other religious books into European languages increased with the spread of Protestantism. During the Protestant Reformation, the Bible was rapidly translated and distributed, and Christianity was divided into two distinct paths: Roman Catholicism and Protestantism. The variance in texts and the discrepancies between essential terms and chapters of the bible was one of the most obvious contrasts between these two kinds of religion.

Modern translation

Writings written in an older form of the language—original texts or ancient translations—may become difficult to comprehend for current readers as the language progresses. As a result, such a material can be translated into a more modern language, resulting in a "modern translation" (Jennifer, 2016).

Such modern renderings are applied to literature from classical languages such as Latin or Greek, most notably the Bible (see "Modern English Bible translations"), or to literature from a previous stage of the same language, such as William Shakespeare's works (which are largely understandable by a modern audience, though with some difficulty) or Geoffrey Chaucer's Middle-English Canterbury Tales (which is understandable to most modern readers only through heavy dependence on footnotes). The Oregon Shakespeare Festival commissioned a professional translation of the whole Shakespeare canon into modern colloquial English in 2015, including contested works like Edward III, and the canon was debuted in a month-long series of staged readings off-off-Broadway in 2019.

Any language with a significant literary past can benefit from a modern translation. The 11th-century Tale of Genji, for example, is commonly read in current Japanese translation. Because there is rarely a single canonical source, modern translation typically entails literary research and textual correction. This is especially true in the case of the Bible and Shakespeare, where current study can lead to significant alterations in the text. Traditionalists are against modern translation. In English, some readers prefer the Authorized King James Version of the Bible to current translations, as well as Shakespeare's original work from around 1600 to modern versions (North,2017).

Machine Learning

Machine translation (MT) is a technique in which a computer program analyzes a source text and, in theory, generates a destination text without the need for human interaction. Machine translation, on the other hand, almost always requires human participation in the form of pre-editing and post-editing. Commercial machine-translation tools can produce useful results with proper terminology work, pre-editing of the source text for machine translation, and post-editing of the machine translation by a human translator, especially if the machine-translation system is integrated with a translation memory or translation management system.

Google Translate, Babel Fish (now defunct), Babylon, DeepL Translator, and StarDict are just a few examples of publicly available machine translation technologies. These result in rough translations that "convey the gist" of the source text in the best of situations. With the Internet, translation software may assist non-native English speakers in comprehending web pages written in other languages. Whole-page translation tools, on the other hand, are of limited use since they provide only a limited knowledge of the original author's meaning and context; translated pages are more erroneously hilarious and confused than informative (Vashee, 2007).

Pop-up windows with interactive translations are becoming increasingly common. For each word or phrase, these tools display one or more probable counterparts. As the mouse glides over the foreign-language text, human operators must simply choose the most likely counterpart. Pronounced analogs might be grouped together. Ectaco, for example, makes pocket gadgets that deliver machine translations. However, relying only on unfiltered machine translation ignores the reality that human language communication is context-sensitive, and it needs a person to understand the context of the original text with a decent degree of certainty. Even solely human-generated translations are prone to mistake; consequently, to guarantee that a machine-generated translation is helpful to a human and is of publishable quality, such translations must be checked and revised by a person. [k] According to Claude Piron, machine translation, at its best, automates the easier part of a translator's job; the more difficult and time-consuming part usually involves conducting extensive research to resolve ambiguities in the source text that must be resolved due to the target language's grammatical and lexical constraints. Such study is required as a prerequisite to the pre-editing required to produce input for machine-translation software that is not nonsensical (Cohen, 1986).

Pure machine translation, without the benefit of human knowledge, has the same flaws as artificial intelligence. As of 2018, professional translator Mark Polizzotti said thatmachine translation, such as that provided by Google Translate and others, was unlikely to pose a serious threat to human translators in the near future since computers would never understand subtlety and meaning. "Perhaps there is a limit to what a computer can achieve without realizing it is manipulating faulty representations of an external reality," writes Paul Taylor.

The Four Phrases of the History of Translation

Scholars such as George Steiner have created time divides. The history of translation, according to Steiner, is split into four phases. The first period runs from the Roman translator’s Cicero and Horace to Alexander Fraser Tytler; the second period runs up to Valery; the third period runs from Valery to the 1960s, and the fourth era runs from the 1960s onwards. From 3000 B.C. forward, the history of translation is emphasized. The Rosetta Stone, which dates from the second century B.C., is considered the oldest work of translation. In 240 B.C., Livius Andronicus translated Homer's Odyssey, Odusia, into Latin. All that remains are fragments of 46 lines from 17 of the Greek epic's 24 books. He interprets literally in some sentences and more loosely in others. He employed archaizing forms, for example, to make his language more serious and profound. His contributions to Latin poetry will be significant. In the parts we have, it is evident that Livius wanted to be true to the original while still being clear, despite the fact that he had to change untranslatable terms and concepts. For example, the word "equal to the gods," which Romans would have found offensive, was replaced with "summus adprimus," which means "greatest and first in rank." Pathos, expressive intensity, and dramatic tension were also used in early Roman poetry, therefore Livius reads Homer with these notions in mind. In general, Livius did not modify the text arbitrarily; rather, he tried to stay true to Homer and the Latin language (Christopher, 2015).

Quintilian, Cicero, Horace, Catallus, and Younger Pliny then attempted to theorize and perform translation. Cicero and Horace belonged to a later group of translators who distinguished between word-for-word and sense-for-sense translations. The Bible translations marked a watershed moment in the history of translation. Over two millennia have passed since the Bible was translated from its original languages into over 2,000 others. Parts of the Bible have been translated into English languages from the end of the seventh century, including translations into Old English and Middle English. Nearly the years, over 450 different variants have been made. Although John Wycliffe is typically credited as being the first to translate the Bible into English, huge portions of the Bible had been translated for centuries before to Wycliffe's work. . The Bible is still the most widely translated book on the planet. The same numbers, which are approximate, indicate this phenomenon. According to SIL (Summer Institute of Linguistics), at least one book of the Bible has been translated into 2,400 of the 6,900 languages mentioned, including 680 languages in Africa, 590 in Asia, 420 in Oceania, 420 in Latin America and the Caribbean, 210 in Europe, and 75 in North America. Over 600 Bible translation projects are now being supported by the United Bible Societies. Approximately 98 percent of the world's population has access to the Bible in whole or in part in a language in which they are conversant. According to the United Bible Society, the Bible was available in 438 languages as of December 31, 2007, with 123 of them including the deuterocanonical material as well as the Tanakh and New Testament. A total of 2,454 languages were available, with the Tanakh or the New Testament alone being available in 1168 languages and sections of the Bible being available in another 848 languages. Vision 2025 was proclaimed by Wycliffe Bible translators in 1999.

All of these figures demonstrate the Bible's significance and role in translation history. It should include a section on the history of English Bible translation. The intriguing tale of how the Bible came to be translated into English in its current form begins thousands of years ago. The Venerable Bede, however, began a translation of scripture into Old English—Anglo-Saxon at the end of the seventh century. Aldhelm (c. 639-709) translated the whole Book of Psalms into Old English, as well as major chunks of other texts. The Lindisfarne Gospels, published in the ninth century, are an Old English translation of the Gospels, with a word-for-word gloss written between the lines of the Latin text by Aldred, provost of Chester-le-Stree. This is the oldest existing English-language translation of the Gospels. The Wessex Gospels, also known as the West-Saxon Gospels, are a complete translation of the four gospels into a West Saxon dialect of Old English, completed around 990. They are the earliest English translation of the four gospels without the Latin text. Abbot Aelfric translated most of the Old Testament into Old English in the 11th century. A small group of monks and intellectuals first translated the English Bible from the Latin Vulgate into Old English. These translations took the form of prose or interlinear glosses, which were literal translations placed above the text. There were very few comprehensive translations available at the time. Rather, most of the Bible's books existed independently and were regarded as separate writings. As a result, the common understanding of the Bible as history did not exist at the time. Instead, a more metaphorical interpretation of the Bible was more widespread, and Bible translations frequently incorporated the author's personal commentary on sections alongside the literal translation. The formula is written in 12th-century Middle English. It has relatively little Biblical text and relies more on personal commentary, similar to its old English forerunner from Aelfric, an Abbot of Eynsham. Many of the initial English translators followed this technique. (Ruthven, 2017)

Famous translators throughout time

St. Jerome one of the famous translators in the history of translation who lived from 347-420 AD He was a Christian scholar who as a language translator was able to translate the Bible into Greek and Latin from Hebrew. His translation, which was named the Vulgate, was the official Catholic Bible translation. It was subsequently used as its translation for thousands of years. St Jerome hasn’t lost his impact today as he is the patron saint of translators and this day is celebrated by translators on 30th September every year. Another famous language translator in the history of translation is Sir Richard Burton who lived from 1821-1890. He was the 1st person who translated the “Kama Sutra” into the English language. He also produced an uncensored translation of “The Book of the Thousand Nights and a Night.” (Kasparek, 86).

Other well-known translations in the history of translation are the Priapiea and “The Perfumed Garden of the Cheikh Nefzaoui: A Manual of Arabian Erotology.” Jorge Luis Borges who lived between 1899 and 1986 translated “The Happy Prince” written by Oscar Wilde into Spanish for a Buenos Aires newspaper at the age of just 9 years old. He translated the works of Rudyard Kipling, Virginia Woolf, William Faulkner, Hermann Hesse, André Gide, Franz Kafka, Edgar Allan Poe, and Walt Whitman into Spanish as well. He did not translate the Bible.

Western History of Translation

The Roman Translations

The Romans are credited as being the first to participate in the process of translation in the Western world. Almost all of the Greek socio-cultural and socio-political legacy, from philosophical to scientific and historical to spiritual writings, have been translated to the point that it is impossible to tell which is Greek and which is Roman. Later on, the Bible translations that were attempted had their roots in Greco-Roman translation theory's translation procedures. As a result, the early translators of well-known Greek writings, such as Cicero and Thoraces, are also among the earliest translation theorists. Cicero's attention to translation is what gave rise to words like "word for word" translation and "sense for sense" translation. Cicero was the first to mention the methodical process of translation used by his predecessors in the western world. He argued for striking a delicate balance between the "original text" and the "target text." He alluded to the disadvantages of just carrying along with the original text's 'word.' Cicero, on the other hand, believed that a literal translation would be insufficient. He promoted the notion of incorporating new terms from the original source material into the target text and language with appropriate explication. Later on, Horace, too, emphasized the translation process, admitting that striking a balance between the source and target text is difficult. He was well aware of the difficulties that a translator has when translating. As a result, he counseled future translators to avoid becoming slaves to the original text, albeit he did support the usage of the new term. As one of their goals of translation was to strengthen their own literary legacy, the Romans welcomed the usage of new terms, expressions, and so on to be carried forward into the target language. As a result, they appear to be amenable to 'word for word' or 'expression for expression' translation from Greek tradition into Roman in order to improve their language and culture, which they did rather well. Thus, the Romans did not place a strong emphasis on the sense for sense' translation, but they did distinguish between the 'word for word' and sense for sense' translations.

The Bible Translations

The Bible translation resulted in widespread approval of the use of vernacular expressions for translation in most regions of Europe, and the notion of 'equivalence' in translation began to emerge, albeit in a rudimentary form. As a result of the Bible translations, the vernacular form of writing developed, enriching all European languages. The translations were also employed as a defense against the church's unrefined and vulgar dogmatic ideas of the time. The availability of vernacular translations of the scriptures in the rise of new national governments made clerical malfeasance difficult, if not impossible. The first translator of the Bible, John Wycliffe, stressed the need of comparing the grammatical structure and complex meaning of words in the source and target texts as two essential elements in the translation process. Translators in other languages have also embraced this comparative analysis as a basic guideline for translating any material. Some translators also argued that the language learning text should have an approachable and visually pleasing style. . Two key goals of the Bible translations might be stated to be acceptable intelligibility and a loving style.

The Renaissance Translations

As is well known, the Renaissance gave birth to humanism, and for the first time in the history of European culture, particularly socio-religious culture, 'God' replaced the 'church,' and 'I' became the center of 'my' world. As a result, there is a creative appropriation of the source material in the Renaissance style of translation. The target text and the target readers were given far more attention than they had previously received. A number of examples of appropriation by English translations and translators are shown in Mathieson's (1931) research. In his translations of Petrarch's sonnets, Earl of Survey demonstrates a remarkable lot of ingenuity. He went beyond a line-by-line or even word-by-word translation. He improved the sense of 'I' in his translations so that they have an instant impression on modern readers. As a result, throughout the Renaissance, translators tended to focus on the target text and reader-oriented translation rather than the source text-oriented translation.

Translations in Seventeenth Century

From the 14th century through the mid-seventeenth century, Europe was dominated by the Renaissance, which was zealous and creative. A sense of adventure and astonishment for novelty was a defining feature of the Renaissance. The spirit of adventure drove European explorers to journey beyond their regional and continental borders, while the spirit of amazement for novelty drove them to appreciate and assimilate the finest that the undiscovered world had to offer. One of the most important sources of reception, application, and assimilation has been translation. Rationalism and inductive reasoning began to dominate English literature and literary criticism from the mid-seventeenth century forward. The ancient writings of Greco-Roman eras served as examples for the development of rules and norms for literary creation and dramaturgy. The concepts of mimicry and decorum were taken to the next level, and a systematic translation procedure was tried. Ovid's Epistles were translated into English by John Dryden. Dryden established a rudimentary philosophy of translation in the prologue to Epistles (1680). He recognized three translation methods: (1)Metaphrase (2)Imitation and (3)Paraphrase

Dryden recommended 'Para' as the best method for translation and degraded both 'Meta' and 'Imitation.' According to Dryden,'meta' refers to a line-by-line and word-by-word translation of a work from one language to another. 'Imitation,' on the other hand, refers to a free translation in which the translator goes beyond the translation preview. As a result, Dryden was critical of Ben Jonson's literal translation in the art of poetry, which according to Dryden's definition may be classified as 'Meta.' Cowley's translation of Pindar (1656) was dubbed 'Imitations' because he engaged in unfettered word fantasy when interpreting the 'Pindarique Odes.' Imitation, according to Dryden, is referred to as 'transmigration.' He desired that the essence of the original text be preserved in the translation. He also placed a premium on textual stylistics.

Translations in the 18th century

The methods of translation established by Dryden and Pope were also used in the 18th century. In his Life of Pope (1779-80), Dr. Samuel Johnson argued that a translator has the right to be read in his own words. As a result, Dr. Johnson defends Pope's translations by claiming that they are tailored to his own time and nation. As a result, Dr. Johnson added one additional question for the translator to consider as part of the translation process: 'for whom to translate?' In addition to 'what to translate?' and 'why to translate?' a translator should now consider 'for whom to translate?' Large-scale translations of previously translated books were accessible around this period, in order to bring them up to date in terms of taste and language. As a result, the 18th century added a new dimension to translation theory: target readership-oriented translation and language appropriation based on taste and contemporary language.

Alexander Fraser Tyler published The Principles of Translation (1791) near the end of the eighteenth century, which was the first study of its sort in the English language. Tyler identified three essential principles of translation, along with numerous smaller approaches and methods: (a) the translation must retain the complete idea of the original work, (b) the style and manner of writing should be of the same type as the original and (c) the translation should have the ease of the source language text. Tyler did not support Dryden's concept of 'Para' since it, too, led to sloppy translations, according to him. In order to explain ambiguity, he suggested 'omissions' and'additions' in the translation.

Translations in Romantic Age

The Romantic Age translators were able to offer the art of translation a new direction in the early nineteenth century. They were opposed to the Restoration Age's rationalism in the 17th century. Rather, they highlighted the importance of imagination. Coleridge contrasted between 'Fancy' and 'Imagination' in his Biographia Literaria. 'Imagination,' he believed, was the path to creation.

Thus, translation too was viewed in terms of imagination i.e. as a higher creative activity. Webb (1976) showed from Shelley’s writing that he appreciated translation for their ideas and other literary feature. The translators of the Romantic Age created language text an element of ‘Strangeness’. Shelley aptly summarizes the Romantic predicament in The Defence of Poetry.

"It was as wise to cast a violet into a crucible that you might discover the formal principle of its colour and odour, as to seek to transfuse from one language into another creation of poet. The plant must spring again from its seed, or it will bear no flowerer and this is the burthen of the cure of Babel." (Shelly, 33)

The Victorian Translations

The Victorian translations were also anxious to receive the expressions of the remoteness of time and place of the original text. In fact, they added a new dimension to the art of translation i.e. of archaism this added an element of obscurity to literary translations. Matthew Arnold had delivered a series of lectures entitled On Translating Homer (1862). For him, the true judge of the translated texts are the scholars and it is only they who can judge whether a translation has more or less the same effect as the original. His advice the critic of translation was this: “Let him ask how his work affects those who both know Greek (the language of the original text) and can appreciate poetry.”(Arnold, 99). Thus, according to Arnold, a translator must have to dissolve the original text in order to bring the target text reader to the source language text through the transition. This view appeared to be close to the new classical perspective though unlike them the Victorian did not see translations as a means of enriching their own culture.

Henry Wordsworth Longfellow around the same time proliferated a literal perspective of translation while discussing his own translation of Dante’s divine comedy. The long fellow gave more emphasis to rhyme while translating poetry. Thus, according to Longfellow, stylistic features were distinctive from the spirit of the work which should also be considered, especially while translating poetry. Contrary to the view of Longfellow, Edward Fitzgerald believed that the spirit of the source text can be carried forwarded to the target language text. In his Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam (1858), Fitzgerald demonstrated that it was possible to bring a version of, if not the entire spirit of the source text, into the culture and language of the target text as a living entity. He used the analogy of ‘a live sparrow than a stuffed eagle’ to advocate his preference to the target text as a live and appealing work. Thus, it can be seen that by the end of the 19th century, translation theory has started evaluating the translated text as an independent text and not just a parasite representing and advocating the source text only.

Twentieth Century Translations

The 20th century marks the rise of linguistic theory in general and in appreciating a work of art in particular. The impact of these linguistic and literary theirs can be seen on the twentieth-century translation as well. It is interesting to note that most of these linguistic theories were developed in isolation from the main traditions of the literary stream. There can be seen a great deal of the impact of these theories on the interaction with literary text and creative thinking. Later, there can be seen the impact of various theories such as American structuralism and transformational theory based on the precept of Noam Chomsky among others on the world of literary translation. It was in the 1980s that some attempts were made to combine both linguistic and literary theories of translation act. Language and literary texts are now seen to be rooted in the cultural matrices of a speech community. Thus the view is gaining ground that, “Each society will interpret a message in terms of its own culture: The receptor audience will decode the translation in terms of its own culture and experience, hot in terms of the author and audience of the original documents.” (Larson, 436-37)

Thus, till the first half of the 20th century, the translator either preferred literal translations or the translation with some or maximum latitude. The translators taking liberty while translating was still considered to be ‘Free’ or ‘inferior’ translation. However, by the second half of the 20th century, the speculation started shifting from a literal or a free translation to the consensus and the commonsense approach as a middle course. This approach has started disregarding not only the sense but also the form of the original text.

Conclusion

The act of translation had been the source of enrichment of the language and also of the culture as in the Roman translation; it has for enlightenment and outreach of religions to the masses as in the Bible translations; it has been for refining and uplifting literary style and manner as in the Restoration age translation of French drama into English; it has been for the spiritual enlightenment from some foreign spiritual perception as ‘transcendentalism’ in 18th century England; it has also been for relishing the best of the work of art in the other language and to undertake comparative studies as in 19th and 20th century. Therefore, it can be said that translation is an integral part of language and literature studies around the world.

References

Bhatia, N. (1992). The Oxford Companion to the English Language (1992nd ed.).

Irmscher, M. W. (2012, 10 01). The Translator's Invisibility: A History of Translation by Lawrence Venuti. Translation Review, 50(1), 49 - 53. http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/07374836.1996.10524 056

Lebert, M. (2016, November 2). A short history of translation and translators |. Marie Lebert. Retrieved December 21, 2021, from https://marielebert.wordpress.com/2016/11/02/translation/

Christopher Kasparek, "The Translator's Endless Toil", The Polish Review, vol. XXVIII, no. 2, 1983, pp. 84-87.

J.M. Cohen, "Translation", Encyclopedia Americana, 1986, vol. 27, p. 12. Wakim, K.G. 1944. Arabic Medicine in Literature. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association 32 (1), January: 96-104.

Tobler, Stefan; Sabău, Antoaneta (1 April 2018). "Translating Confession, Editorial RES 1/2018". Review of Ecumenical Studies Sibiu. 10 (1): 5–9. doi:10.2478/ress-2018-0001. S2CID 188019915.

Schuessler, Jennifer (30 September 2016). "Translating Shakespeare? 36 Playwrights Taketh the Big Risk". The New York Times. Retrieved 11 August 2019. North, Anna (20 November 2017). "Historically, men translated the Odyssey. Here's what happened when a woman took the job". Vox. Retrieved 9 September 2020.

Vashee, Kirti (2007). "Statistical machine translation and translation memory: An integration made in heaven!". ClientSide News Magazine. 7 (6): 18–20. Archived from the original on 28 September 2007.

J.M. Cohen, "Translation", Encyclopedia Americana, 1986, vol. 27, p. 14

Christopher de Bellaigue, "Dreams of Islamic Liberalism" (review of Marwa Elshakry, Reading Darwin in Arabic, 1860–1950, University of Chicago Press), The New York Review of Books, vol. LXII, no. 10 (June 4, 2015), p. 77.

Malise Ruthven, "The Islamic Road to the Modern World" (review of Christopher de Bellaigue, The Islamic Enlightenment: The Struggle between Faith and Reason, 1798 to Modern Times, Liveright; and Wael Abu-'Uksa, Freedom in the Arab World: Concepts and Ideologies in Arabic Thought in the Nineteenth Century, Cambridge University Press), The New York Review of Books, vol. LXIV, no. 11 (22 June 2017), p. 22.