Home Linguistics & Semiotics Paper 27. Proposal for a Hieronymic Oath
Chapter
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Paper 27. Proposal for a Hieronymic Oath

  • Andrew Chesterman
View more publications by John Benjamins Publishing Company
To Publisher Page
Reflections on Translation Theory
This chapter is in the book Reflections on Translation Theory

Abstract

Four current models of translation ethics are described, based on the ideas of representation, service, communication, and norms. There are problems with all these models: they are in several respects incompatible, and have different ranges of application. An alternative approach is therefore offered based on Alasdair MacIntyre’s ideas about virtues and the deontic force of excellence in a social practice. This leads to a fifth possible model, an ethics of professional commitment: cf. Maria Tymoczko’s suggestion that translation is a commissive act. At the centre of such a model there might be an official oath, comparable e.g. to the Hippocratic Oath for the medical profession. I end with a proposal for a Hieronymic Oath for translators.

Abstract

Four current models of translation ethics are described, based on the ideas of representation, service, communication, and norms. There are problems with all these models: they are in several respects incompatible, and have different ranges of application. An alternative approach is therefore offered based on Alasdair MacIntyre’s ideas about virtues and the deontic force of excellence in a social practice. This leads to a fifth possible model, an ethics of professional commitment: cf. Maria Tymoczko’s suggestion that translation is a commissive act. At the centre of such a model there might be an official oath, comparable e.g. to the Hippocratic Oath for the medical profession. I end with a proposal for a Hieronymic Oath for translators.

Chapters in this book

  1. Prelim pages i
  2. Table of contents v
  3. Preface ix
  4. Section I. Some general issues
  5. Paper 1. On the idea of a theory 3
  6. Paper 2. Shared ground in Translation Studies 17
  7. Paper 3. What constitutes “progress” in Translation Studies? 25
  8. Paper 4. Towards consilience? 35
  9. Section II. Descriptive and prescriptive
  10. Paper 5. The empirical status of prescriptivism 45
  11. Paper 6. Skopos theory 55
  12. Paper 7. Catford revisited 71
  13. Paper 8. The descriptive paradox, or how theory can affect practice 81
  14. Section III. Causality and explanation
  15. Paper 9. Causes, translations, effects 97
  16. Paper 10. A causal model for Translation Studies 123
  17. Paper 11. Semiotic modalities in translation causality 137
  18. Paper 12. On explanation 147
  19. Section IV. Norms
  20. Paper 13. From ‘is’ to ‘ought’ 167
  21. Paper 14. A note on norms and evidence 185
  22. Section V. Similarities and differences
  23. Paper 15. On similarity 195
  24. Paper 16. Problems with strategies 201
  25. Paper 17. The unbearable lightness of English words 213
  26. Section VI. Hypotheses
  27. Paper 18. The status of interpretive hypotheses 225
  28. Paper 19. Reflections on the literal translation hypothesis 237
  29. Section VII. “Universals”
  30. Paper 20. Beyond the particular 253
  31. Paper 21. What is a unique item? 269
  32. Paper 22. Kundera’s sentence 281
  33. Paper 23. Universalism in Translation Studies 295
  34. Section VIII. The sociological turn
  35. Paper 24. Questions in the sociology of translation 307
  36. Paper 25. The name and nature of Translator Studies 323
  37. Paper 26. Models of what processes? 331
  38. Section IX. Translation ethics
  39. Paper 27. Proposal for a Hieronymic Oath 347
  40. Paper 28. An ethical decision 363
  41. References 369
  42. Name index 391
  43. Subject index 395
https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.132.c27

Chapters in this book

  1. Prelim pages i
  2. Table of contents v
  3. Preface ix
  4. Section I. Some general issues
  5. Paper 1. On the idea of a theory 3
  6. Paper 2. Shared ground in Translation Studies 17
  7. Paper 3. What constitutes “progress” in Translation Studies? 25
  8. Paper 4. Towards consilience? 35
  9. Section II. Descriptive and prescriptive
  10. Paper 5. The empirical status of prescriptivism 45
  11. Paper 6. Skopos theory 55
  12. Paper 7. Catford revisited 71
  13. Paper 8. The descriptive paradox, or how theory can affect practice 81
  14. Section III. Causality and explanation
  15. Paper 9. Causes, translations, effects 97
  16. Paper 10. A causal model for Translation Studies 123
  17. Paper 11. Semiotic modalities in translation causality 137
  18. Paper 12. On explanation 147
  19. Section IV. Norms
  20. Paper 13. From ‘is’ to ‘ought’ 167
  21. Paper 14. A note on norms and evidence 185
  22. Section V. Similarities and differences
  23. Paper 15. On similarity 195
  24. Paper 16. Problems with strategies 201
  25. Paper 17. The unbearable lightness of English words 213
  26. Section VI. Hypotheses
  27. Paper 18. The status of interpretive hypotheses 225
  28. Paper 19. Reflections on the literal translation hypothesis 237
  29. Section VII. “Universals”
  30. Paper 20. Beyond the particular 253
  31. Paper 21. What is a unique item? 269
  32. Paper 22. Kundera’s sentence 281
  33. Paper 23. Universalism in Translation Studies 295
  34. Section VIII. The sociological turn
  35. Paper 24. Questions in the sociology of translation 307
  36. Paper 25. The name and nature of Translator Studies 323
  37. Paper 26. Models of what processes? 331
  38. Section IX. Translation ethics
  39. Paper 27. Proposal for a Hieronymic Oath 347
  40. Paper 28. An ethical decision 363
  41. References 369
  42. Name index 391
  43. Subject index 395
Sign up now to receive a 20% welcome discount
Institutional Access
How does access work?
Have an idea on how to improve our website?
Please write us.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Downloaded on 29.12.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1075/btl.132.c27/html
Scroll to top button