The Cultural Turn in Translation Studies Deborah Shadd Nida Institute October 2014

Contextualizing the Cultural Turn “Traditional and Critical Theory” (Horkheimer 1937) Traditional theory – “a set of propositions whose legitimacy lies in their correspondence to an object already formed prior to the act of its representation” Critical theory – “assumes that both science and the reality it studies are a product of social praxis, which means that the subject and the object of cognition are socially preformed”

Contextualizing the Cultural Turn The ‘Crisis of Representation’ Refers to “the uncertainty within the human sciences about adequate means of describing social reality. This crisis arises from the (noncontroversial) claim that no interpretive account can ever directly or completely capture lived experience” (SAGE Dictionary of Qualitative Inquiry 2007) Representation is never simple or direct, but always mediated by a subjective perspective.

Contextualizing the Cultural Turn The ‘Crisis of Representation’ “Anthropological representations bear as much on the representer’s world as on who or what is represented. […] Meanings are represented in codes and symbols linked to the translator’s and the ethnographer’s subjectivity and background.” (Wolf 2002: 184-185) “The cultural Other is not verbalized directly but only indirectly and filtered and arranged through the ethnographer’s or the translator’s consciousness.” (Ibid.: 181)

Contextualizing the Cultural Turn Other contributing factors… Philosophy Comparative Literature Intertextuality Etc.

The Cultural Turn The cultural turn is… Described as “the abandoning of the ‘scientistic’ linguistic approach as based on the concept of the tertium comparationis or ‘equivalence’ and moving from ‘text’ to ‘culture’” (Snell-Hornby 2006: 50)

The Cultural Turn The cultural turn is… Recognition that “translation is primarily contextual. It is a fact of history and a product of the target culture, and as such it cannot be explained through the mapping of linguistic correspondence between languages, or judged with respect to universal standards of quality and accuracy” (Marinetti 2011: 26)

Descriptive Translation Studies (DTS) Three purposes of DTS: Describe existing translations via comparative analyses or corpus studies (product-oriented) Describe the function of translations in the recipient socio-cultural situation (function-oriented) Investigate what happens during the process or act of translation itself (process-oriented) (Holmes 1972)

Descriptive Translation Studies (DTS) The Manipulation School Born with the publication of the 1985 book The Manipulation of Literature “From the point of view of the target literature, all translation implies a certain degree of manipulation of the source text for a certain purpose.” (11)

The Manipulation School Shared assumptions / starting points: “What they have in common is, briefly, a view of literature as a complex and dynamic system; a conviction that there should be a continual interplay between theoretical models and practical case studies; an approach to literary translation which is descriptive, target-oriented, functional and systemic; and an interest in the norms and constraints that govern the production and reception of translations, in the relation between translation and other types of text processing, and in the place and role of translations both within a given literature and in the interaction between literatures.” (10-11)

The Manipulation School Shared assumptions / starting points: “What they have in common is, briefly, a view of literature as a complex and dynamic system; a conviction that there should be a continual interplay between theoretical models and practical case studies; an approach to literary translation which is descriptive, target-oriented, functional and systemic; and an interest in the norms and constraints that govern the production and reception of translations, in the relation between translation and other types of text processing, and in the place and role of translations both within a given literature and in the interaction between literatures.” (10-11)

The Manipulation School Potential manipulations in translation might include: Deliberate manipulations to advance a particular ideology Mimicry of dominant discourses to guarantee acceptance in the target culture Construction of ethnic or national identity Construction of ‘images’ of foreign authors, texts or entire cultures

The Manipulation School Rewriting: “Translation is, of course, a rewriting of an original text. All rewritings, whatever their intention, reflect a certain ideology and a poetics and as such manipulate literature to function in a given society in a given way. Rewriting is manipulation, undertaken in the service of power, and in its positive aspect can help in the evolution of a literature and a society. Rewritings can introduce new concepts, new genres, new devices and the history of translation is the history also of literary innovation, of the shaping power of one culture upon another…

The Manipulation School …But rewriting can also repress innovation, distort and contain, and in an age of ever increasing manipulation of all kinds, the study of the manipulative processes of literature as exemplified by translation can help us towards a greater awareness of the world in which we live.” (Bassnett & Lefevere 1990: ix)

The Manipulation School Control factors: Factors which underlie the manipulation of literature, both driving it and setting boundaries for it External: patronage “any power (person, institution) that can further or hinder the processes of reading, writing and rewriting” (Lefevere 1992: 15) Operating on three levels: ideology, economics and status Internal: society of professionals (translators, writers, educators and critics)

Selected Bibliography Bassnett, Susan, & André Lefevere (Eds.), Translation, History, Culture (pp. 1-13). London: Pinter. Castro-Gómez, Santiago (2001). “Traditional vs. Critical Cultural Theory.” (F. González and A. Moskowitz, Trans.) In Cultural Critique, 49, 139-154. Hermans, Theo, Ed. (1985). The Manipulation of Literature. London and Sydney: Croom Helm. Holmes, James S. (2004). “The Name and Nature of Translation Studies.” In Lawrence Venuti (Ed.), The Translation Studies Reader (pp. 180-192). London & New York: Routledge. Lefevere, Andre. (1992). Translation, Rewriting, and the Manipulation of Literary Fame. London & New York: Routledge. Marinetti, Christina. (2011). “Cultural Approaches.” In Yves Gambier & Luc van Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook of Translation Studies, Vol. 2.   (pp. 26–30). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Snell-Hornby, Mary. (2006). The Turns in Translation Studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. Wolf, Michaela. (2002). “Culture as Translation – and Beyond: Ethnographic Models of Representation in Translation Studies.” In Theo Hermans (Ed.), Crosscultural Transgressions: Research Models in Translation Studies II (pp. 180-192). Manchester: St. Jerome.