Microsoft Word Revised Syllabus Ver doc

Education and the Vernacular 
In the Ninth century King Alfred (reign 871-99), who had translated (or caused to be 
translated) a number of Latin texts, declared that the purpose of translating was to help the 
English people to recover from the devastation of the Danish invasions that had laid waste,
the old monastic centers of learning and had demoralized and divided the kingdom. In his 
Preface to his translation into the vernacular, and at the same time he asserts the claims of 
English as a literary language in his own right. Alfred also claims to have followed the 
teachings of his bishop and priests to have rendered the text ‘hwilum word be worde, hwilum 
andgiet of andgiete’ (sometimes word by word, sometimes sense by sense), an interesting 
point in that it implies that the function of the finished product was the determining factor in 
the translation process rather than any established canon of procedure. Translation is 
perceived as having a moral and didactic purpose with a clear political role to play, far 
removed from its purely instrumental role in the study of rhetoric that coexisted at the same 
time. 
In his useful article on vulgarization and translation, Gianfranco Folena suggests that 
medieval translation might be described either as vertical, by which he intends translation 
into the vernacular from a SL that has a special prestige or value (e.g. Latin), or as horizontal, 
where both SL and TL have a similar value (e.g. Provencal into Italian, Norman-French into 
English). Folena’s distinction, however, is not new: Roger Bacon (c.1214-92) was well aware 
of the differences between translating from ancient languages into Latin and translating 
contemporary texts into the vernacular, as was Dante (1265-1321), and both talk about 
translation in relation to the moral and aesthetic criteria of works of art and scholarship. 
The distinction between horizontal and vertical translation is helpful in that it shows 
how translation could be linked to two coexistent but different literary systems. Whilst the 

---

21 
vertical approach splits into two distinct types, the interlinear gloss, or word-for-word 
technique, as opposed to the Ciceronian sense-for-sense method, elaborated by Quintilian’s 
concept of paraphrase, the horizontal approach involves complex questions of imitation and 
borrowing. The high status of imitation in the medieval canon meant that originality of 
material was not greatly prized and an author’s skill consisted in the reworking of established 
themes and ideas. 
Translation, whether vertical or horizontal, is viewed as a skill, inextricably bound up 
with modes of reading and interpreting the original text, which is proper source material for 
the writer to draw upon as the thinks fit.