a how-not-to guide wherein, for instance, they proscribed the intuitive word-for-word translation which negates the systematic notion of translating unit, i.e. groups of syntagmata the translation of which is carried out in blocks because they constitute real units of meaning).
During the same period also, the emergence of international organizations gave birth to interpreter and translator schools. Translators began to describe and classify types of translations. Mignard-B'elorucev noted the differences between translating and interpreting (already analyzed by Jean Herbert). They dichotomized between consecutive interpretation and simultaneous interpretation. Andrei V. Fedorov (in Vvedenie v teoriju perevoda, 1954) and Edmond Cary (in La traduction dans le monde moderne, 1956) were concerned with practical fields of translation, viz. diplomatic or parliamentary, legal, administrative, scientific and technical, journalistic, literary, poetical, theatrical, religious, cinematographic ( with various techniques of dubbing), and juvenile literature.
In 1967, John C. Catford synthesized then current knowledge in his A Linguistic Theory of Translation: An Essay in Applied Linguistics (2nd ed.). Although he brought little innovative thinking to his work, Catford presented the reader with a systematic picture of linguistically acquired facts in translation. He stressed the fact that textual equivalence was hardly ever achieved through formal correspondence - whether word-for-word or structure-for-structure. The differences in reality representation vary from language to language - whether lexically or syntactically. For example, the formal and semantic relationships between book and books is not the same in English as between kitab (singular), katib (plural), and kitabin (duel) in Arabic. It is not easy to translate the second person singular of the Latin languages or the "polite" personal forms of Japanese or Bahasa (Indonesia) ...