Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
This paper proposes that Meschonnic's writing, and particularly his writing on translation, does not do justice to the richly suggestive conceptual framework he constructs around the notion of ‘discourse’. It is perhaps peculiarly translation, at least in the version canvassed here, that reveals what is insufficiently developed and too defensively protected in Meschonnic's thinking about discourse, rhythm and related concepts. This is, then, an attempt to better understand, within a critique of Meschonnic's albeit wonderfully enriching vision of translation, not only what distinguishes rhythm as it acts in discourse, from rhythm as it acts in translation, but also what rhythm's relation with orality and vocal values is, and how translation might translate across those values.
Comparative Critical Studies – Edinburgh University Press
Published: Oct 1, 2018
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.