IMC 2013: Sessions

Regarding the officially translated correspondence of the (Western as well as Byzantine) (imperial) courts the session focusses on these translators and their work from a sociolinguistic point of view: On the one hand the officeholder are exemplarily analysed by their ability as well as accuracy of handling the language of the addressee (abroad), i.e. how important the chancellery regarded an adequate rendering of its correspondence and which mode of translating had more weight: ad litteram or ad sensum. This topic raises the question whether the basic text itself to an addressee abroad is formulated in a higher (rhetorical) stylistic level, therefore for a non-native speaker a priori difficult, if not incomprehensible (at least in a literary translation), or if the addresser wants to make advances to the addressee by using a lower style, respecting also the difficulty of his translator to handle the text in an adequate way. In this sense the discourse element of the correspondence is analysed from its direct contact between addresser and addressee via the translation. On the other hand, the sociolinguistic aspects is presented with regard to the distinction of the basic (original) text (the text studied for historical analyses of relationship) and the translated or even interpreted text which the addressee really (understands and) reads and normally is the textual basis a correspondent is referring to (with all the accompanying problems e.g. In theological discussions of translated bible or patristic passages).