Rejoinder: About a (wrong) case study [Reply and disclaimer]

Abstract

This article is confrontational with the theses presented in the paper: O pewnym (chybionym) studium przypadku [About a (wrong) case study ] (Chybińska 2017), which is the answer to the issues presented in the article: Etyka w przekładzie specjalistycznym a kompetencje tłumacza tekstów specjalistycznych — studium przypadku [Ethics in specialized translation and competence of specialist translator: case study] (Boroch 2017). In this article (Boroch 2017), the methodological principles in the specialist translation and the substantive and ethical consequences of their violation have been presented. Exemplary material was the Polish translation of Henryk Hiż's article: Peirce's Influence on Logic in Poland (Hiż 1997, 264–270) published in ”Studia z Filozofii Polskiej” in 2015 (Hiż 2015, 21–29) along with a biographical section (Chybińska 2015, 29–33) which both constitute a coherent publication. The article has raised the following issues: (1) the lack of justification of the basis of translation, i.e. the primacy of the manuscript over the printed version, that is the last one controlled by the author; (2) inconsistency with regard to termination of translation; (3) unauthorized introduction of a Polish neologism “dylematyczny” derived from the (non-existent) English lexical unit “dylemmatic” (Sic!); (4) proposal of the notation of Peirce's law: (p, q, r ) (Sic!).