IS TRANSLATION A MEANS OF CROSS-CULTURAL COMMUNICATION?

The paper disputes the concept of "translation as cross-cultural communication". Anthropological turn in Translation Studies resulted in the emergence of the communicative-functional approach to translation which dictates the need to reconsider this most popular concept. Examples of translation events are considered from the perspective of this approach to prove that the actors (source text sender, target text recipient and translator) rarely communicate directly or indirectly. The only objective reality accessible to them is the texts in two languages; these texts serve as instruments of substantive activity performed by each of the actors. In many cases the purpose of translation differs from the purpose of the Source Text (ST) Sender, which makes communication between the ST Sender and the Target Text (TT) Recipient impossible. The translator's principal task is to create a text in the target language that would be useful for the TT Recipients activity. The principal purpose of the TT Recipient is to receive information which could be used successfully in his or her substantive activity. Actors in a translation event deal only with texts, not with each other (except in situations of oral communication in which interpretation is performed). Thus, "translation as cross-cultural communication" is a metaphor used to substitute the wish for the reality. The concept does not fit the mere definition of communication seen as giving information or exchange of information.