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.
Sylvia Sö Derl in D i Th s paper attempts to change the “versus” in the title of the seminar in which this article originated, “World Literature versus Comparative Literature,” into some- thing less confrontational, ree fl cting on how the two e fi lds can become mutually helpful. e Th fundamental, historical die ff rence between them hinges on the status of translation, which has indeed become a bone of contention in what is oe ft n seen as a struggle for disciplinary supremacy. It is not surprising, of course, that trans- lation has gained a prominent place in any study of cultural expression in an in- creasingly globalized world. e Th re are few comparatists left in the world, I would wager, that still hold to the old idea of purity, according to which any student of lit- erature must acquire u fl ency in any language into which she may want to venture. We cannot all pretend to live in Istanbul with Auerbach and Spitzer in the 0s, 391 and the increasing Anglicization of the Western world hardly encourages the study of languages of smaller diffusion, even as they become more and more audible in the
The Comparatist – University of North Carolina Press
Published: Jun 24, 2010
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.