From a target population to representative samples of translations and translators

References

• Angelelli, C. V., ed. 2014. The Sociological Turn in Translation and Interpreting Studies. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Baker, M. 1993. “Corpus Linguistics and Translation Studies: Implications and Applications.” In Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair, edited by M. Baker, G. Francis, and E. Tognini-Bonelli, 233–250. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Baker, M. 2000. “Towards a Methodology for Investigating the Style of a Literary Translator.” Target 12 (2): 241–266. doi:https://doi.org/10.1075/target.
   Google Scholar
• Biber, D. 1993. “Representativeness in Corpus Design.” Literary and Linguistic Computing 8 (4): 243–257. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/8.4.243.
   Google Scholar
• Bourdieu, P. 1995. The Rules of Art: Genesis and Structure of the Literary Field. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bryman, A. 2012. Social Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Buzelin, H., and C. Baraldi. 2016. “Sociology and Translation Studies: Two Disciplines Meeting.” In Border Crossings: Translation Studies and Other Disciplines, edited by Y. Gambier and L. van Doorslaer, 117–139. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• “Catalogues and Databases of the National Library of the Czech Republic.” Accessed December 2017. https://aleph.nkp.cz/F/9RSKGN819VR2EP6NG91UDB5S12I4M41UF3DLEE6PCYGSITJ9SC-01249?func=file&file_name=base-list&CON_LNG=ENG
   Google Scholar
• Chesterman, A. 2006. “Questions in the Sociology of Translation.” In Translation Studies at the Interface of Disciplines, edited by J. F. Duarte, A. A. Rosa, and T. Seruya, 9–27. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Chesterman, A. 2016. Memes of Translation: The Spread of Ideas in Translation Theory. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Databáze knih [Database of books]. Accessed December 2017. https://www.databazeknih.cz/
   Google Scholar
• Glaser, B., and A. Strauss. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine.
   Google Scholar
• Gouanvic, J.-M. 1997. “Translation and the Shape of Things to Come: The Emergence of American Science Fiction in Post-War France.” The Translator 3 (2): 125–152. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.1997.10798995.
   Google Scholar
• Halverson, S. 1998. “Translation Studies and Representative Corpora: Establishing Links between Translation Corpora, Theoretical/Descriptive Categories and a Conception of the Object of Study.” Meta 43 (4): 494–514. doi:https://doi.org/10.7202/003000ar.
   Google Scholar
• Heilbron, J. 1999. “Towards a Sociology of Translation: Book Translations as a Cultural World-System.” European Journal of Social Theory 2 (4): 429–444.
   Google Scholar
• Heilbron, J., and G. Sapiro. 2007. “Outline for a Sociology of Translation: Current Issues and Future Prospects.” In Constructing a Sociology of Translation, edited by M. Wolf and A. Fukari, 93–108. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Katriak, M. 1968. Metodologické zásady sociologického výskumu [Methodological Principles of Sociological Research]. Bratislava: Vydavatelství Slovenské akademie věd.
   Google Scholar
• Laviosa, S. 1998. “The Corpus-based Approach: A New Paradigm in Translation Studies.” Meta 43 (4): 474–479. doi:https://doi.org/10.7202/003424ar.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leech, G. 2007. “New Resources, or Just Better Old Ones? the Holy Grail of Representativeness.” In Corpus Linguistics and the Web, edited by M. Hundt, N. Nesselhauf, and C. Biewer, 133–149. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi.
   Google Scholar
• Defeng, L. 2017. “Translator Style: A Corpus-assisted Approach.” In Corpus Methodologies Explained: An Empirical Approach to Translation Studies, edited by J. Meng, M. Oakes, L. Defeng, and L. Hareide, 103–136. Abingdon/New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Loučková, I. 2010. Integrovaný přístup v sociálně vědním výzkumu [An Integrated Approach in Sociological Research]. Praha: Sociologické nakladatelství.
   Google Scholar
• Mellinger, C. D., and T. A. Hanson. 2017. Quantitative Research Methods in Translation and Interpreting Studies. Abingdon/New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Munday, J. 2016. Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and Applications. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Pym, A. 2006. “On the Social and the Cultural in Translation Studies.” In Sociocultural Aspects of Translating and Interpreting, edited by A. Pym, M. Shlesinger, and Z. Jettmarová, 1–6. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Pym, A., M. Shlesinger, and Z. Jettmarová, eds. 2006. Sociocultural Aspects of Translating and Interpreting. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Pym, A., M. Shlesinger, and D. Simeoni, eds. 2008. Beyond Descriptive Translation Studies: Investigations in Homage to Gideon Toury. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Saldanha, G. 2011. “Translator Style: Methodological Considerations.” The Translator 17 (1): 25–50. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2011.10799478.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saldanha, G., and S. O’Brien. 2014. Research Methodologies in Translation Studies. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Schäffner, C. 1999. “The First Debate.” In Translation and Norms, edited by C. Schäffner, 47–49. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Silverman, D. 2013. Doing Qualitative Research. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Simeoni, D. 1995. “Translating and Studying Translation: The View from the Agent.” Meta 40 (3): 445–460. doi:https://doi.org/10.7202/004146ar.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simeoni, D. 1998. “The Pivotal Status of the Translator’s Habitus.” Target 10 (1): 1–39. doi:https://doi.org/10.1075/target.
   Google Scholar
• Strauss, A., and J. M. Corbin. 1998. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Teddlie, C., and Y. Fen. 2007. “Mixed Methods Sampling: A Typology with Examples.” Journal of Mixed Methods Research 1 (1): 77–100. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689806292430.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toury, G. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies — And Beyond. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Toury, G. 1999. “A Handful of Paragraphs on ‘translation’ and ‘norms’.” In Translation and Norms, edited by C. Schäffner, 9–31. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Tyulenev, S. 2014. Translation and Society: An Introduction. London/New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Vorderobermeier, G. M., ed. 2014. Remapping Habitus in Translation Studies. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi/Brill.
   Google Scholar
• Wolf, M. 2007. “Introduction: The Emergence of a Sociology of Translation.” In Constructing a Sociology of Translation, edited by M. Wolf and A. Fukari, 1–36. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Wolf, M., and A. Fukari, eds. 2007. Constructing a Sociology of Translation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Zanettin, F. 2013. “Corpus Methods for Descriptive Translation Studies.” Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 95: 20–32. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.618.
   Google Scholar