^{page 425 note 1} It was read at a conference arranged by the Institute for the Study of Religion and Theology in Britain and Ireland.

^{page 425 note 2} Ludskanov, A., ‘A Semiotic Approach to the Theory of Translation’, Language Sciences, xxxv (1975).Google Scholar

^{page 426 note 1} Cornford, F. M., The Republic of Plato (Oxford: University Press, 1955), pp. v f.Google Scholar

^{page 426 note 2} Ed. Jordan, J. E. (Indianapolis: Bobbs–Merrill, 1965), pp. 33 f.Google Scholar

^{page 426 note 3} Day, C., These Were the Days (London: Reprint Society, 1946), pp. 78 f.Google Scholar

^{page 428 note 1} Quoted from Hoijer, H. (ed.), ‘The Sapir/Whorf Hypothesis’, in Language in Culture (Chicago: University Press, 1959), p. 92.Google Scholar

^{page 428 note 2} Whorf, B. L., Language, Thought and Reality (Cambridge, Mass.: M. I. T. Press, 1969), p. 213.Google Scholar

^{page 429 note 1} Quine, W. V., Ontological Relativity and Other Essays (Columbia, 1969), p. 2.Google Scholar

^{page 429 note 2} Op. cit. p. 2.Google Scholar

^{page 430 note 1} Ibid. p. 2.

^{page 430 note 2} Ibid. pp. 11, 25.

^{page 430 note 3} (London: Cassell, 1927), pp. 121, 41.

^{page 431 note 1} Oettinger, A., ‘The state of the art of automatic language translation: an appraisal’, in Marchl, H. (ed.), Beitrage zur Sprachkunde and Informations Verarbeitung, I (Munich: Oldenbourg, 1963), p. 18.Google Scholar It should perhaps be pointed out, to avoid confusion, that the term ‘machine translation’ is used in another, entirely different sense, also known as ‘compilation’. For a source programme written in a higher level language such as Fortran or Cobol, the language which is intelligible to the programmer has to be translated for the computer into the machine language of binary digits which it can, so to speak, understand and execute. The process of translating from a higher-level language to machine language is what is known as ‘compilation’, but it is sometimes referred to as ‘machine translation’. In that sense machine translation is obviously and by definition feasible.

^{page 431 note 2} Maud, R., Entrances to Dylan Thomas’ Poetry (Pittsburgh: Scorpion Press, 1963), p. 21.Google Scholar I am grateful to John Taylor for drawing my attention to this reference.

^{page 432 note 1} Genesis xv. 6.Google Scholar

^{page 433 note 1} Jakobson, R., ‘Linguistics and Poetics’, in R. and de George, F. (eds), The Structuralists from Marx to Lévi–Strauss (New York: Anchor Books, 1972), p. 91.Google Scholar

^{page 433 note 2} Amos, vii. 14.Google Scholar

^{page 434 note 1} Lord, A. B., The Singer of Tales (Cambridge, Mass.: University Press, 1964), pp. 124, 129.Google Scholar

^{page 434 note 2} Ong, W. J., The Presence of the Word (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1967), p. 117.Google Scholar

^{page 434 note 3} Op. cit.Google Scholar; the reference to Carothers is to his article ‘Culture, psychiatry and the written word’, Psychiatry, XXII (1959), 307–20 (p. 311).Google Scholar

^{page 435 note 1} For this episode see Bate, W. J., John Keats (Oxford: University Press, 1967), pp. 84–9.Google Scholar

^{page 436 note 1} Quine, , Ontological Relativity, p. 88Google Scholar, quoting Hanson, N. R., ‘Observation and Interpretation’, in Morgenbesser, S. (ed.), Philosophy of Science Today (New York, 1966).Google Scholar

^{page 437 note 1} Tucker, S. I., ‘Biblical Translation in the Eighteenth Century’, in Dorsch, T. S. (ed.), Essays and Studies, 1972, in Honour of Beatrice White (London: Murray, 1972), p. 109.Google Scholar

^{page 437 note 2} ‘Intercession in the Qur'an and the Jewish Tradition’, Journal of Semitic Studies, XI (1966), 69–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar