Full Idea
The concern of some philosophers has been expressed by saying that whereas Tarski took translation for granted, and sought to understand truth, Davidson takes truth for granted, and seeks to understand translation.
Gist of Idea
Should we assume translation to define truth, or the other way around?
Source
comment on Donald Davidson (Truth and Meaning [1967]) by Simon Blackburn - Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy p.82
Book Reference
Blackburn,Simon: 'Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy' [OUP 1996], p.82
A Reaction
We can just say that the two concepts are interdependent, but my personal intuitions side with Davidson. If you are going to take something as fundamental and axiomatic, truth looks a better bet than translation.