Everything in a literary text is created, invoked, and constructed by language. Therefore, any choice of the writer pertaining to the linguistic level naturally will greatly affect all other textual levels, such as characters, plot, segmentation, or meaning. This does not mean that the linguistic level-comprising a variety of registers, dialects, slang, scales of decorum (e.g., bookishness or literariness)-will necessarily occupy the central place in any textual hierarchy. Its status within a text, or rather within a certain model, is a descriptive question of literary repertoires. It does, however, play a central role in the process of translation, which exposes and lays bare the linguistic choices of the text-at least for the translators, because they must consciously identify problems in the text in order to supply solutions in their own product, the translation. However, none of the choices made by the translator or, for that matter, the author, are manifestations of individual whims or inspiration, but are made within the (poly-)system in which they operate. Therefore, exploring points of contact between literatures, such as
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Basmat Even-Zohar (1992) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: