Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Perspectives
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t794297831
REVIEWS
Vladimir Khairoulline a
a
Bashkir State University, Ufa, Russia
This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
58
REVIEWS
Alcaraz Varo, Enrique & Brian Hughes. 2002. Legal Translation Explained. Manchester, UK
& Northampton, MA: St. Jerome. 204 pp. ISBN 1-900650-46-0 (pb). Price: £ 15; $ 26.
The aim of this book is to identify “the common problems faced by translators
of English legal texts” (3), as well to assist future interpreters in their production of
translations of the ‘domesticating’ kind, so that they sound as natural as possible (3).
The book is organised as follows: Chapter 1: Some Pointers to the Linguistics of Legal
English (1-22); Chapter 2: Equivalence and Interpretation (23-46); Chapter 3: Some
Pointers to the English Legal System (47-76); Chapter 4: Civil and Criminal Proceedings.
Administrative Tribunals (77-100); Chapter 5: Genres in the Translation of Legal English
(I) (101-124); Chapter 6: Genres in the Translation of Legal English (II) (125-152); Chapter
7: Practical Problems in Translation Explained (I) (53-177); Chapter 8: Practical Problems
in Translation Explained (II) (178-194); references (195-196); and, finally, an index (197-
204).
Although the editor of ‘Translation Practices Explained’, Anthony Pym, insists that
the books in the series are designed to help “particularly self-learners” of translation,
I would say that Enrique Alcaraz Varo and Brian Hughes’ coursebook provides fairly
advanced insights and information that is far from elementary knowledge. The book
Downloaded At: 23:49 18 February 2009
Work cited:
Komissarov, Vilen N. 1990. Teoria perevoda [= A Theory of Translation]. Moscow: Vysshaja
Shkola.
Vladimir Khairoulline,
Downloaded At: 23:49 18 February 2009
**********
Beeby, Allison & Doris Ensinger & Marisa Presas (eds.). 2000. Investigating Translation.
1998. (Benjamins Translation Library 32). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 296
p. ISBN 90 272 1637 1 (Europe); 1-55619-791-8 (US). Price: € 110; US $ 132.
He discusses the reasons for this state of affairs, suggests areas of investigation, and
stresses the need for sound methodological bases. Wilhelm Neunzig explores the
potential for using computers for conducting experiments that accurately record the
translation process and may serve as alternatives to – or support the results from – think-
aloud protocols. A research group at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (PACTE),
Spain, reports on an ambitious research project, the purpose of which is to describe
how, using data from experimental psychology and highlighting difficulties confronting
empirical research, it is possible to teach students components and subcomponents of
translation competence. Working along similar empirical-experimental lines, another
research group at the Universitat Rovira i Virgili (Tarragona, Spain) has conducted
a series of experiments that prove that systematic training in translation problems,
strategies and solutions leads to an increase in the quality of the products of Spanish
trainee translators. However, the group makes no mention of the concrete strategies that
the students learn.
The concepts of strategy - technique - method - solution are crucial for the description
of the translation process and in translator training, so it is no wonder that they are
approached rigorously in two other contributions. Patrick Zabalbeascoa reviews
the confused ways in which they are defined and makes a case for terminological
consistency. He suggests that a single list of (constraining) strategies should be replaced
with several lists of solution-types that might provide translators with more flexibility
than those anticipated in the classroom. Ricardo Muñoz Martín’s pedagogical proposal is
based on an analysis of source texts. The analysis is used in order to identify translation
problems, to develop potentially optimal solutions, and to establish a hierarchal order
between these elements. Martín does so by se�ing up a binary decision tree in which
the choice of strategies and the ensuing solutions depend on the type of translation
problems identified in the source text.
In the third section, which deals with the links between ideology and translation, the
target cultures are Catalan, Spanish, and Brazilian, but many of the authors’ conclusions
may be relevant in other cultures. Joaquim Mallafrè examines the extent to which literary
canons and linguistic models had an impact on translations of works of literature into
Catalan in the 1980s, drawing on two collections of literary translation and on his own
experience as a respected professional translator. Natàlia Izard analyses the dubbing of
a French sitcom series that was shown on Catalan television 1994-1996. She detects an
overall orientation towards acceptability through strategies of adaptation, which she
explains in terms of a general need for credibility. This orientation may also have much
to do with the necessity for reinforcing Catalan language and culture in the confrontation
with other cultural and linguistic models. Víctor M. González Ruiz examines self-
censorship in the translation of film titles during Franco’s dictatorship in Spain. Again
we see translation ‘strategies’ are affected by socio-historical and cultural contexts and
Reviews 61
the underlying ideology. Ruiz stresses the close links that existed at the time between the
Roman Catholic Church and the political regime, both of which discouraged everything
that was found offensive to Christian morality. Self-censorship was thus practised as
a result of the translators’ (inner) religious convictions and was, at the same time, in
perfect harmony with the (external) censorship exercised by the state. John Milton’s
main interest is in the translation of fiction for the masses, as opposed to “highbrow”
literature. He examines the Clube do Livro, a book club that was very active during the
military dictatorship in Brazil (1964-89) and which published “factory translations”
from high-status foreign cultures. Milton shows how commercial considerations -
abridged forms, emphasis on emotions, many illustrations, etc. - were combined with
ideological ones, which required the elimination of sexual and scatological passages,
as well as offensive references to the Roman Catholic Church and downright le�-
wing stances. All this led to low-quality translations, which, nevertheless, enhanced
the taste for reading among uneducated people and popularised world-famous texts.
Ana Maria Clark Peres discusses forty translations of Li�le Red Riding Hood published
in Brazil since 1953; she denounces the general tendency among translators for their
oversimplification, excessive sentimentality, and idealisation of the universe of the child.
Besides questioning the adequacy of the translations in relation to the stories in French
(Charles Perrault) or German (Grimm Brothers), Clark Peres wonders whether such an
overprotective a�itude towards children is in keeping with the needs of present-day
generations of young readers, who still enjoy reading fairy tales but are equally exposed
to the computer world, to technological development and problems of globalisation.
Section four, Investigating Translation, focuses, in an explicit and systematic
manner, on the audience of translations. From a functionalist stance, Christiane Nord
distinguishes between receiver and addressee, the la�er being “the type - or prototype
Downloaded At: 23:49 18 February 2009
Rodica Dimitriu,
“Al. I. Cuza” University of Iaşi,
Romania
********
Chan, Leo Tak-hung. (ed.). 2003. One into Many: Translation and the Dissemination of
Classical Chinese Literature. Amsterdam & New York: Rodopi (Approaches to Translation
Studies 18). 339 pp. ISBN: 90-420-0815-6 (pb). Price: € 70.00; $ 80.00.
The diversity of classical Chinese literature hardly can be matched anywhere else in
the world. It is therefore legitimate to examine how Chinese classics are perceived and
received when they travel to other cultures and how traditional Chinese texts appear in
translations in a multitude of languages over the centuries. What do the various a�er-
lives of one and the same Chinese text reveal about the original?
Availing themselves of two comparatively recent approaches, reception theory and
deconstruction, the contributors to this volume address these questions by investigating
the reception of classical Chinese literature in a number of foreign languages and cul-
tures, thus furnishing us with critical thinking about key issues in translation theory and
shedding light on how to view translation in today’s increasingly globalised context.
There are three sections. In the section entitled “Beginnings”, three articles trace the
Downloaded At: 23:49 18 February 2009
origin of European translation and reading of Chinese literature. The first two articles
focus on Haoqiu zhuan, the first Chinese novel translated into a European language, and
the third article highlights the 1592 Spanish translation of Precious Mirror for Enlightening
the Mind, the first translation of any Chinese text into a Western language. In this article,
Hing-ho Chan not only charts the movement of Precious Mirror into Spanish by Juan
Cobo, a Dominican priest, but also a�empts to conduct a preliminary analysis of the suc-
cessful transliteration of the Southern Min dialect through careful comparison.
André Lévy opens the second section with a chronological account of the dissemina-
tion in France of two influential Chinese masterpieces, Liaozhai zhiyi and Honglou meng,
and he points out that the material calls for an in-depth discussion of the finer points of
various French translations of the la�er work.
Laurence Wong focuses on English, French, German, and Italian translations of
idiolects in Honglou meng. Specifically, Wong scrutinises the lexical, phonological, and
grammatical aspects of idiolect translation in the hope of gaining a be�er understanding
of the nature of translation of literary language.
Paula Varsano discusses Françoise Cheng’s significant contribution in the field of
Chinese poetry translation, with special reference to Cheng’s L’ècriture poétique chinoise
(1977), an acclaimed anthology of French translations of Chinese verse. Varsano claims
that the hybrid nature of Cheng’s work is a direct result of the “crossing of poet and
translator-scholar” (120). In his analysis of Cheng’s interpretive essay and translations,
Varsano is mainly concerned with the intersection and divergence between the poet’s
and the scholar’s vision and with areas where Chinese and French aesthetics overlap
or deviate. In so doing, Varsano touches upon an issue in today’s Translation Studies:
hybridisation.
In her analysis of seven translations and retranslations of Yingying zhuan, Birgit
Linder seeks to show that translations, as well as the original, are signed, and that mean-
ing is constructed on specific cultural signification. Linder, therefore, is interested in the
cultural significance of a translation and how each translation contributes to meaning-
construction, rather than the accuracy of a given translation. She argues that various
interpretations of the original couched in the multiple translations and retranslations of
Yingying zhuan constitute a hermeneutical circle.
“Traditions”, the third section, opens with Young Kyun Oh’s historical account of
the translation of Chinese philosophical literature in Korea. Although classical Chinese
literature has had an enormous influence in Korea for over five centuries, Oh’s article
charts a decline in this tradition, and ascribes it to the rise of the vernacular in the twen-
tieth century. Oh argues that a “next-generation” of Korean translations of Chinese clas-
sics emerged, which differs from the preceding dogmatic translations, because of the
“more thorough grammatical strategy and careful vernacularization” (192). Since this
new paradigm is not yet firmly established, Oh suggests that it is high time for Korea to
Reviews 63
vernacularise its past.
Evangeline Almberg’s article documents the evolution of the reception of Chinese po-
etry in Sweden from 1894 to 1994. In the beginning, translators had to apologize for their
pioneering efforts. But this “apologetic” (207) relay translation tradition is later replaced
by direct translation from Chinese, and the once biased audience is now ready to recog-
nise and even appreciate the Chinese “Other”.
W. L. Idema’s article highlights the importance of relay translation in the Dutch un-
derstanding of China. Despite the long-standing cultural bond between China and the
Netherlands, direct translations from Chinese were very rare indeed until the 1970s.
Relay translations from other major European languages such as French, English, and
German into Dutch dominated until the 1980s. Direct translation is the order of the day,
except for in the field of “Oriental wisdom”, in which relay translations continue to
dominate.
Focusing on the history of German translations and relay translations of Chinese
works and the chronological development of German sinology, Birgit Linder seeks to
explore the interrelationship between cultural predispositions, philosophical move-
ments, and academic developments in the German quest for knowledge about China
over a span of three centuries, and she discusses how these three factors come to bear on
translation principles and practice of Chinese texts into German.
Sketching the history of the translation of Tang poetry into Bohemian and Slovak-ian,
Marián Gálik points out that the driving force behind the endeavour was to acquaint
Czech readers with the “fontes of classical Chinese literature” (286). Though it is a far
cry from what happened in France, Germany, and England, hundreds of Tang poems
and nearly twenty anthologies were introduced to Czech and Slovak readers and they
provide spiritual encouragement and joy for these audiences.
Downloaded At: 23:49 18 February 2009
In the same way, Irene Eber provides a critical survey of relay and direct translations
from Chinese into Hebrew, highlighting the changing interests of Hebrew readers and
the commercialisation of translating.
Covering several language-pairs in discussions of translation products and devot-ing
a great deal of a�ention to the perception and reception of Chinese classics in a host
of foreign languages, this volume not only embodies target-oriented Translation Stud-
ies, but also provides interesting insights into many critical issues that are relev-ant to
today’s Translation Studies’ community in this increasingly globalised world, such as
direct translation vs. relay translation, full translation vs. abridged translation, transla-
tion vs. rewriting, etc. This testifies to the fact that the study of the reception of classical
Chinese literature overseas is by no means unknown in academic inquiries in Chinese
scholarship. It has a�racted much academic a�ention in China since the 1980s. The main
objective of the endeavour seems to measure the impact of Chinese culture on foreign
cultures and to boost national pride in the splendid tradition of China’s past. However,
Chan cautions that such an idea of transmi�ing China “invites charges of hegemonic
pretensions” (341). It is for this very reason that Chan calls for reevaluation of how texts
travel, and how cultures transmit literature from one country to another. This is also why
Chan and other outstanding sinologists focus on how “one” is translated into “many”
- into a multiplicity of foreign languages in which Chinese classics live many and varied
a�erlives. This constitutes one of the many merits of this volume: it offers a multiplicity
of angles through which translation scholars can be�er understand the reception of Chi-
nese literature and culture in a multi-lingual and multi-cultural context.
At the same time that I was fascinated with the wide array of perspectives on and
perceptions of classical Chinese literature, I could not help but noting that, in some cases,
the reception history is reduced to a cut-and-dried chronological account, e.g., that of
the Liaozhai zhiyi in French (83-90). This, I guess, is partly due to the difference between
the historian’s and the linguist’s perspectives. While the historian is keen on fact-finding
and documenting chronological development at the macro-level, the linguist pays more
a�ention to in-depth comparative reading at the micro-level. Therefore, I believe that we
would have been be�er served if we had been presented with a comparative reading of
two or more French versions, than with the chronology of Liaozhai zhiyi’s movement into
French.
Despite this minor drawback, this book will appeal to several audiences: translation
scholars, sinologists, culturists, comparativists, and students of classical Chinese litera-
ture, to name only a few.
Wang Shaoxiang,
Foreign Languages Institute,
Fujian Teachers University, Fuzhou 350007, China.
64 2005. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology. Volume 13: 1
**********
This book, authored by the late Ghelly Vassilievich Chernov (1929-2000), is an ex-
cellent illustration of the theoretical axioms of Russian Translation Studies research. It
discusses its foundation, how it should be described, and the degree of consistency it is
a�empting to a�ain. Chernov’s study aims to show that the basic mechanism that makes
simultaneous interpreting possible is the probability anticipation of development of the
message (91). This hypothesis is articulately announced in the very title of the mono-
graph.
No research is conducted in isolation from other scholarly investigations. This is true
in this case as well, and more than in most others. It is based on and intertwined with
other fields, and thus is truly interdisciplinary. Underlying Chernov’s work are linguis-
tics, psychology, and neurophysiology, and they are amply referred to in the book. This
foundation provides the monograph with a solid and massive theoretical basis indeed:
this is the impression I have always had whenever I have had the privilege of reading
Chernov’s papers or listening to his lectures in courses on General Theory, History, and
Critique, at the Translation Department of Moscow State Linguistic University, where he
had the chair as professor. There was a feeling of scholarly solidness and logical thinking
from the beginning, which, in this book, is found in the initial pages when the author
defines translation as mediated bilingual communicative activity (2), and subsequently
identifies “simultaneous interpretation as a complex type of bilingual verbal communi-
Downloaded At: 23:49 18 February 2009
cative activity, performed concurrently with audio perception of an oral discourse of-
fered once only, under conditions imposing limits on available processing time and strict
limits on the amount of information which can be processed, its object and product to
be observed in the semantic (meaning and sense) structure of the verbal communication
processed.” (6) The core of his theory is embedded in the “mechanism of verbal, syntac-
tic and semantic probability anticipation of message development in the perception and
comprehension of the source language discourse, and anticipatory synthesis in message
reproduction in the target language (or generation of the target language message)”
(10). To support this position, Chernov does not confine himself to the research of other
well-known Russians and foreign theorists. Instead, he also provides highly pertinent
empirical data based on analyses of samples of simultaneous interpreting for the United
Nations, where he served for a number of years (e.g. 88-89, 109-113, and 223-239). One
cannot help admiring the author’s diligence and meticulous analysis of material from a
wide range of tongues: English, French, Russian, and Spanish, with an occasional refer-
ence to one of his favourite examples, Lewis Carroll’s Alice in Wonderland (107).
The book reaches far beyond the framework of pure Translation Studies, since it
scrupulously tackles problems that are of central interest for specialists in cognition,
sociolinguistics, and culture. The following topics are particularly relevant: the theme-
rheme (or topic-comment) distinction (42-46), the semantic structure of discourse (46-55),
implicitation (57-60), and pragmatic inference (71-72). Although, in my view, some of
the author’s assumptions go too far back, such as when referring to P. K. Anokhin, he
argues: “As life evolved on earth, [there appeared] an organ specialised for accelerated
reaction to outside changes: the nervous system and human brain …” (92) It may be that
such assumptions are relevant from the author’s point of view. As mentioned, the study
comprises a number of disciplines, among others neurophysiology. Chernov emphasises
that “the basic idea is that in the process of aural perception of speech, the simultaneous
interpreter’s brain generates hypotheses in anticipation of certain verbal and semantic
developments of the discourse.” (93) One of the key notions in the anticipation theory is
‘redundancy’, which appears to be very prevalent in coherent discourse. For example, in
business correspondence texts, it is estimated to be 83.4-90.1% for Russian, 82.9-92.1% for
English, and 83.9-90.4% for French (according to Yaglom and Yaglom (1973) as quoted
in Chernov (94)). The author maintains that redundancy plays a prominent role in si-
multaneous interpreting: “simultaneous interpretation of poetry is impossible because
of the very low level of objective redundancy in poetic language. Even simultaneous in-
terpretation of prose is barely possible if the style is literary. As for movies, it is common
knowledge that simultaneous interpretation is generally only feasible a�er appropriate
preparation by the interpreter.” (95) Chernov also provides a detailed consideration of
the opposite notion, namely ‘compression’, which makes messages denser in terms of
information. He terms it “a labour-saving device” for simultaneous interpreters (120).
Reviews 65
Chernov convincingly argues that humans perceive information by means of its critical
points (121), or what may otherwise be called semantic landmarks. This neurophysi-
ological mechanism is active in simultaneous interpreting, since “the objective of the
simultaneous interpreter is not to render the sense of the individual u�erance, but to
carry over the semantic structure of the whole discourse from source language to target
language.” (122)
The impressive theoretical foundation and the reliable empirical data allow Chernov
to confidently state that the probability anticipation of the development of the message
is a major mechanism in the complex bilingual verbal communication activity of simul-
taneous interpreting. This mechanism operates according to a hierarchy of speech levels,
and the operation is possible thanks to redundancy, as well as the inferencing ability of
the simultaneous interpreter (173).
I have tried to convey how the book impresses me, indeed, all readers, favourably.
There are minor cavils, of course, such as a straightforward comparison between human
vision and the eye of a frog! (“Human vision is also primarily oriented to the perception
of motion, while the eye of a frog does not perceive motionless objects at all.” (121)) It
would also be preferable if the author had kept consistently to the ‘simultaneous inter-
preting’, the very term used in the title, rather than ’simultaneous interpretation’, which
is used extensively throughout the book. I share the view of the specialists who argue
that “interpreting” means oral transfer activity, while “interpretation” refers to the in-
tellectual comprehension of a message or text (Dollerup 2004: 2), or approach, or treat-
ment, as in terms like ’interpretation of the law’. The moment the term “interpreting” is
consistently used, we avoid much needless confusion. Another point is that I find some
considerations a bit too long (e.g., 152-153).
But having noted this, it should be stressed that in sum, Ghelly V. Chernov’s study
Downloaded At: 23:49 18 February 2009
Work cited:
Dollerup, Cay. 2002. Theory and Principles of Translation. A Course of Lectures. New
York University. Session 3: Modes of Translation in the Modern World.
Vladimir Khairoulline,
Bashkir State University,
Ufa, Russia
**********
Eco, Umberto. 2003. Mouse or Rat? Translation as Negotiation. Weidenfeld & Nicolson:
London. 200 pp. ISBN 0 297 83001 5. € 12.03.
These essays conflate lectures given in Toronto in 19981 and Oxford in 2002, and for
those who have read Alastair McEwen’s translation of Experiences in Translation (2001),
much of the material will be a reprise. Presumably, Eco wrote or conflated this collection
directly in English.
A�er some amusing experiments with ‘Babelfish’, the translation-machine program
available free of charge on the Internet, Eco relies on back-translation as a control when
he examines translations of his own work, his translations of Gerard de Nerval (Syl-
vie) and Raymond Queneau (Exercices de style), and the Italian translation of Finnegans
Wake.2
What is notable and reassuring about this new collection is its context: Eco begins
by harmonising analytic philosophy and continental philosophy via structural semiot-
ics. Thus, he states (and demonstrates by example) how Quine and Hjelmslev are in
harmony with Sapir and Whorf. His examples show that common sense prevails. The
logical impossibility of comprehensive accuracy in the translation of natural language
A into natural language B and the incommensurability of language structures, not to
mention the distinctive world views of each natural language, have never seriously in-
terfered with translation. Throughout history, common sense has proved that translation
performs surprisingly well, albeit with negotiation.
“Translation”, Eco states for the record, “is a process that takes place between two
texts produced at a given historical moment in a given cultural milieu” (25-26).
His own experience as a novelist has helped him deal with translation. “Hypotypo-
66 2005. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology. Volume 13: 1
sis”, the rhetorical term for “rendering a visual scene”, is part of his own technique as a
novelist. Thus, he looks at the picture created by its representation in another language.
He proceeds then to “ekphrasis”, that is, when the visual scene rendered in words is in
fact a painting, and this is how he ensures that his translators recognise this painting.
Finally, as readers of his novels are well aware, he uses the technique of intertextuality
in his fiction, which means that he must make sure that his translators recognise in his
novels the other works of literature to which his text alludes. Throughout, we would
interpolate that, like James Joyce, Umberto Eco has deliberately blurred cues in the text.
This has meant that translators, including the peerless William Weaver, have had to ne-
gotiate interlinguistically when extracting substance and, to an amazing degree, form
out of Italian and embed it in other languages.
Eco’s loyalty to Peirce can be detected throughout the book. First, Eco is the interpre-
tant of the substance or ma�er that is to be rendered by a verbal sign; subsequently, the
translator must be the interpretant who deals not only with the verbal sign and whatever
it is expressing but also with another linguistic sign system.
Eco concludes with a flourish: “Faithfulness . . . is the decision to believe that transla-
tion is possible; it is our engagement in isolating what is for us the deep sense of a text,
and it is the goodwill that prods us to negotiate the best solution for every line. Among
the synonyms of faithfulness the word exactitude does not exist.” Let us interject that Eco
demonstrates that negotiation can achieve equivalence: Eco’s final sentence runs: “Instead
there is loyalty, devotion, allegiance, piety.” (192)
Notes
1. A proofreader missed the error in the first line of the book stating that it was 1988.
2. This last is quite disappointing. He was not current with Joyce scholarship in Experi-
Downloaded At: 23:49 18 February 2009
ences in Translation, and he did not qualify his remarks for this publication.
**********
Hann, Michael. 2004. A Basis for Scientific and Engineering Translation: German-English-
German. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. xxvii + 250 pp. ISBN 90 272 2609
1 (Europe);1 58811 484 8 (US) (pb). Price: € 65. US $ 77.95.
Valentin Shevchuk,
Moscow State Linguistic University,
Russia
**********
Herbrechter, Stefan (ed.). 2002. Cultural Studies: Interdisciplinarity and Translation. Am-
sterdam & New York: Rodopi. 335 pp. ISBN: 90-420-0893-8 (hb). Price: € 80, US $ 100.
articles that depart from theoretical analyses of interdisciplinarity and argue for changes
in the practice of cultural studies. Michael Hayes proposes that the object of investiga-
tion for cultural studies should be “the ground between stability and evolution, whose
dynamic contains the roots of growth and decline” (19). He also suggests a methodology
based on a linguistic model – a combination of Saussure’s structuralism that illustrates
the relative positioning of all the cultural events that constitute a culture and Bakhtin’s
dialogics, which uncover the dynamic processes that inform culture.
Karl Maton’s article examines the structuring of cultural studies as “knowledge for-
mation” (34) and its present paradoxical position in the academy. Non-disciplinarity is
regarded as the central theme of legitimisation in cultural studies, and in order to safe-
guard its identity, the emphasis should be on people, not procedures. Mason terms this
a “knower mode” of legitimisation.
Paul Bowman elaborates on the question of propriety of cultural studies from the
deconstructive perspective of some central Derridean texts. In Bowman’s view, the
interdisciplinarity of cultural studies threatens the academic establishment with a de-
constructive interrogation. From an antipodal position, Simon O’Sullivan argues for the
reinvention of cultural studies as a “strategic mapping of connections between different
objects and practices, events and assemblages” (81). The project should not rely on disci-
plinary notions of knowledge, but on experimentation and dynamism.
Michael Quinn is equally censorious of institutionalised forms of cultural studies.
According to him, the methodologies of cultural studies confine academics’ freedom to
define and redefine their discipline at will.
The contributions in section B, “Anti-Disciplinary Objects and Practices”, tackle non-
disciplinary concepts, such as space, music, bibliography, and art, and their interaction
or translation in cultural studies. Necdet Teymur charts the route of discipline formation
in terms of inclusion and exclusion processes and the creation of territories. Andrew
Carlin explores bibliographies, footnotes, and textbooks as disciplinary boundaries, that
is, as texts encoding scholars’ interpretive practices.
Duncan Campbell argues in “Reading Phonography” that interdisciplinarity derives
from pre-existing disciplines and occupies a borderline; therefore, interdisciplinary
thought should work on gaps and spaces. The inscription of music produces such inter-
disciplinarity as it rejects the established codes of musicology used to explain music
within the academy.
Jen Webb’s contribution functions as a conclusion to the precedent articles organised
around the advantages and disadvantages of interdisciplinary work. These are discussed
in the divergence of cultural studies from aesthetics. He argues that “drawing on both
cultural studies and aesthetics, with their shared antecedents we can critique and de-
familiarise the art world while restoring the notion of pleasure and the sensate to the
experience of art” (157).
68 2005. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology. Volume 13: 1
Whereas Sections A and B focus on interdisciplinarity, the following two sections ad-
dress translation. It is argued that apart from interdisciplinarity, translation is a major
challenge for cultural studies at present. Russel West’s article dissects the origins of
cultural studies (and indeed other disciplines) in translation and in the transfer of ideas.
He mentions the translative turn in cultural studies and proposes a further area of study,
“inter/cultural studies”, which works on the assumption that “national cultures, in a
postmodern and global era increasingly constitute each other in the process of recipro-
cal if not symmetrical translation” (165). In West’s opinion, translation is an operation
that provides continuity in a space of discontinuity and makes the heterogeneous intel-
lectually productive. Furthermore, translation is always at work both in the hybridity of
culture as process and in the identity of cultural studies thanks to reconfigurations of our
ways of knowing.
David Katan’s article centres on translators and their role in shaping the ideas they
communicate to society. He explores the perlocutionary effects that translators engender
and proposes that they should take more responsibility for these effects by assuming a
position in which they “disassociate from the dynamic of movement-to-movement crea-
tion of meaning, between source text and reader, but watch the interaction with keen
interest” (183).
Eduardo J Vior’s “Visions of the Americas and Policies of Translation” focuses on
translation practices in the United States and Latin America, with special reference to
technical and economic texts circulating between them.
Section D, “Translating Cultural Studies”, comprises articles presenting national re-
ception and institutionalisation of cultural studies in different parts of the world. Stephen
C. K. Chan uses the case of contemporary Hong Kong as an example of critical cultural
studies. Sebastian Berg offers an account of three varieties of British cultural studies and
Downloaded At: 23:49 18 February 2009
their application in Germany. Lawrence Raw looks at the translation of cultural studies
into the Turkish economic, social, and historical context in terms of the import and devel-
opment of the discipline as such. Mandy Oakham’s article provides an amusing analysis
of the ba�le between cultural studies and media-journalism departments in the Austral-
ian academy and draws parallels between these and the ‘Star Wars’ films. Finally, Karima
Laachir explores post-colonial France and the issue of tolerance to conclude that cultural
studies, aiming at being “politically effective and intellectually useful for the analysis of
social, political and economic tensions” (294), if translated into the French intellectual
scene, might provide the openness needed for social solidarity and egalitarianism.
In Section E, Holger Rossow widens the role of cultural studies in the international
translated form to include an investigation of contemporary international politics.
Zygmunt Bauman deals with cultural variety and cultural specifics in the postscript.
He argues that it is time to abandon the term “culture” because the meanings it was
coined to convey (a hierarchy of values and the agency to promote them) have disap-
peared. Culture has become the carrier of political meanings.
In conclusion, this book offers a variety of perspectives on cultural studies and
presents the most important modern challenges for the field - interdisciplinarity and
translation. It therefore makes for fascinating insight into the problematic nature of crea-
tion and reinvention of identity, which are found at the core of both cultural studies and
translation.
Oana-Elena Andone,
Universitatea “Al. I Cuza”, Iaşi,
Romania.
**********
Kothari, Rita. 2003. Translating India. Manchester: St. Jerome. V + 138 pp. ISBN 1-900650-
62-2. Price: £ 19.50.
scribes Gujarati teachers and intellectuals, focusing on the shi�s from the general to the
specifics, and it considers both processes in the exploration of the production of a specific
‘regional’ literature in English translation. The appendices contain (a) the questionnaire
given to publishers before the actual interviews, and (b) full transcripts of the interviews
with publishers such as Sahitya Akademi, Macmillan, Katha, Oxford University Press,
and others. The book stresses the production of ‘Indian Literature in English Transla-
tion’, and examines various aspects, such as consensus and interconnections.
I am surprised with the rise of English translation in India, because English is a ‘new’
language in India. As a substantial and distinct body, the existence of ‘Indian Literature
in English Translation’ is a recent phenomenon because it has long been subsumed under
‘Indian Writing in English’. Translating into English only goes back to the nineteenth
century - and even then, there were only a small handful of translations. The status
of English became controversial a�er India’s independence from the British in 1947.
In 1965, the ‘Sahitya Akademi award’ was bestowed on P. K. Narayan, the first Indian
gesture of patronage toward Creative Writing in English. Now there are several transla-
tion awards in India, and courses on Translation Studies and Indian literature in English
translation are taught at about twenty universities. Since this rise of English translation
from marginality to dominance is most unexpected, it is a daunting challenge to explore
this shi�.
I am impressed with the efforts of Indian translators to carry out resistant and assimi-
lative dialogues with the West through translation even today. Since they find it impos-
sible to stem the tide of English, they just try to resist or assimilate it and successfully
make English one of India’s languages. As the English of India becomes Indo-English,
it is more of a proper medium for the dissemination of Indian culture throughout the
world. The translators’ approach demonstrates not only India’s independence from Brit-
ain, but also a real awareness of India’s cultural identity. The translators are aware of the
necessity of preserving their cultural and national identity in the era of globalisation, and
of uniting the world by allowing for diversities, thus making our world more colourful.
Rita Kothari’s vigorous approach makes for sound scholarship. The contents and
convincing arguments of her study are based not only on wri�en documents, but also on
oral interviews. Kothari explores the themes in the book from Indian and international
perspectives and tries to combine Indian translation theories (such as Sujit Mukherjee
and G. N. Devy’s para-literary forces of translation theory) with theory from other
countries (Jean Delisle and Judith Woodsworth’s historical approach and Itamar Zohar
and Gideon Toury’s polysystem view of translation) and with Indian realities. She also
addresses important themes using an interdisciplinary approach (involving historical,
political, economic and sociological perspectives), which makes her findings carry con-
viction.
Rita Kothari is well qualified for writing this book thanks to her background as a
70 2005. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology. Volume 13: 1
practitioner, a college teacher of English, a researcher at a Translation Studies centre, and
her familiarity with the nature of translation. Her book is also telling evidence of equality
between men and women, notably in Translation Studies.
In sum, covering a largely unknown field, this book is informative, indeed useful
for translation scholars and practitioners, teachers and students, and those interested in
translation or Translation Studies in general, by adding new facets to Translation Stud-
ies. It is therefore a great contribution to international Translation Studies.
Xu Jianzhong,
Tianjin University of Technology,
Tianjin 300190, China
**********
Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, Barbara & Marcel Thelen (eds.). 2002. Translation and Mean-
ing. Maastricht: Hogeschool Zuyd, Maastricht School of Translation and Interpretation.
ISBN 90-801039-5-0 (pb). Price € 50.00.
This volume is the proceedings of the Łodz session of the Third International
Masstricht-Łodz Duo Colloquium on “Translation and Meaning” in 2000. The contribu-
tions discuss ‘meaning’ in translation with a special emphasis on the theory of transla-
tion: the problems of translating and interpreting meaning are seen from the perspectives
of, for instance, the cognitive sciences, lexicology, and philosophy. The volume is divided
into ten sections, such as, “se�ing the scene for translation research and practice”, “proc-
ess and theory”, and “cognitive linguistics and translation”. The articles in the present
Downloaded At: 23:49 18 February 2009
discourse. Agnieszka Lukaszewicz explores the use of jargon in official texts. Kazimierz
Michalewski exemplifies the use of functional equivalents in translations of advertise-
ments, while Monika Okulska focuses on similar acts in intercultural communication.
And Ty�i Suojanen deals with the utilisation of research results among Finnish technical
communicators.
Miroslaw Trybisz emphasises the significance of familiarity with the relevant disci-
plines in the translation of specialised texts. Zenon Weigt raises a similar issue by pro-
posing that familiarity with a given register will facilitate the interpretation of source
texts and lead to the selection of appropriate translation strategies. Iwona Witczak-
Plisiecka also discusses specialised texts and describes certificates as a type of legal text.
Aleksandra Czechowska-Blachiewicz discusses factors that affect the quality of consecu-
tive and simultaneous interpreting from Polish into German, in particular, articulation
and intonation mistakes. Malgorzata Tryuk analyses the function of aptitude tests that
are used in the training of conference interpreters. Anna Krawczyk-Laskarzewska fo-
cuses on the degree of “domesticating” a text, using the Polish translation of William
Gibson’s cyberpunk works as an example. Anna Kucharska’s article deals with the
translation of essayistic texts and John Milton’s article handles “foreignisation”. Adam
Sumera analyses translation strategies of rendering literary allusions, whereas Dorota
Urbanek looks at the phenomenon of “translation series”. Michael Oakes and Barbara
Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk present the extension of the Gale and Church algorithm to
enable trilingual alignment of English, French, and Polish texts. Stella Tagnin underlines
the importance of language corpora for beginning translators. Yasuhito Tanaka proposes
how domain-specific databases can be incorporated in machine translation systems.
The issue of interpreting strategies and parallel corpora is examined by Kim Wallmach.
Jadwiga Izabela Gawlowska discusses methods for translator training that prepare the
ground for working with a text. Magdalena Szeflinska-Karkowska, Lukasz Bogucki, and
Mariusz Milczarek present the curricula of translation and interpreting programmes.
Jolanta Kozak a�empts to develop an original theory of translation analysis and assess-
ment that is equally applicable to literary and non-literary texts.
The volume thus examines numerous problems in the field of Translation Studies.
It is, perhaps, a weakness that the number of binary pairs explored is - considering the
number of articles - relatively small. On the other hand, the volume provides a wide va-
riety of approaches and valid insights into a great number of problems and areas within
the language pairs discussed. Further, it is a great advantage that this volume provides a
wealth of examples for readers to consider and relate to studies between other language
pairs. Readers thus can assess whether the findings are applicable to other language
combinations and therefore may be investigated in yet more language pairs to assess
whether they are generally applicable or limited to one or two specific binary language
pairs.
72 2005. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology. Volume 13: 1
Adil Al-Kufaishi,
University of Copenhagen,
Denmark.
**********
for training interpreters. Its main focus is on interpreting between Chinese and foreign
languages, so it pays li�le a�ention to interpreting between Chinese citizens that may
speak minority languages or mutually unintelligible dialects.
The book discusses not only Chinese interpreters but also interpreters from other
countries. Shi Zhe (1905-?) is the most important interpreter in the history of the Chinese
Communist Party. The books Red Star Over China (1937, 1938) by the American journalist
Edgar Parks Snow (1905-1972) were the first works to introduce the Chinese Communist
party to the West; Snow used a brilliant interpreter, Wu Liangping (1908-?) for his
interviews with the Chinese Communist leaders .
In China, it has been common practice to employ foreigners as interpreters in many
historical periods. Among these interpreters, I shall just mention the Belgian Ferdinand
Verbiest (1623-1688), the Frenchman Nicolas Jaseph Raux (1754-1801), the British Samuel
Halliday Macartney (1833-1906), the German O�o Franke (1862-1946), the Norwegian
Frederick Schiøth (1846-1935), all of them in the diplomatic services. But there were
also foreigners in commerce, in military, and in scientific affairs. Foreigners were o�en
employed as interpreters because formerly the Chinese usually considered their country
the most powerful in the world and that therefore there was no need for them to learn
foreign languages.
Not all foreign interpreters served their Chinese employers equally well, so almost
all Chinese rulers established interpreter and translator training schools in order to
train Chinese interpreters and translators. The first formal school was 回回国子学,
Huihui Interpreter and Translator School, which was established in 1289. Other famous
language schools are 四夷馆, Foreign Languages School, established in 1407, and 同文馆,
Tongwen Foreign Languages School, established in 1862. These schools employed not only
Chinese but also foreign instructors such as the Englishman W. A. P. Martin (1864), the
Frenchman A. E. Smorrenberg (1862), and the Russian N. A. Konvaloff (1898).
Interpreting was o�en based on a co-operation which involved a foreigner and a
Chinese or two Chinese, so that one undertook the actual rendition into the target
language while the other took notes. In the late 19th century and early 20th century, the
Chinese realized that they were not as sophisticated as the West and that they could
benefit from learning advanced science and technology from foreign countries. In
translation it was o�en foreigners who knew Chinese as well as Western science who
would translate orally while Chinese scholars who took notes and then polished the
linguistic output. Although this is only on margins of ‘interpreting’, it can be mentioned
that the Italian missionary Mathieu Ricci (1552-1610) translated some western scientific
works in cooperation with the Chinese scholar Xu Guangqi (1562-1633).
Towards the end of the book, it focuses more on the ‘Westener speaks-Chinese
writes’ in the translation of works of literature, singling out for particular treatment the
important figure of Li Shu (1852-1924). Li Shu is the only great translator in Chinese
Reviews 73
translation history who did not know any foreign languages at all. However, thanks to
interpreted renditions, he translated more than 180 works of literature during his life:
Wei Yi was Li Shu’s most important partner for the translation of English novels, and
Wang Ziren for translating French novels.
The author has exerted considerable efforts in compiling this history, but in his
preface, he readily concedes that it may not be complete because he could not access all
relevant material.
To sum up, the book under review is extremely useful. It may serves as a reference
book for researchers, teachers, and professionals in Translation Studies.
Xu Jianzhong,
Tianjin University of Technology,
Tianjin 300191,China
**********
Oi�inen, Rii�a. 2000. Translating for Children. New York: Garland. 169 pp. ISBN 0-8153-
3335-8 (hb). Price: £ 50.
In her book Translating for Children, Rii�a Oi�inen employs a translator-centred ap-
proach to the study of translation. As an experienced translator and illustrator, she
provides a refreshing alternative to older, more traditional approaches. Rii�a Oi�inen
rejects the abstract structures of ‘equivalence’ and ‘fidelity’ in the sense of ‘sameness’,
and concentrates instead on the real-life situation and purpose of translation.
Oi�inen’s point of departure is philosophical as well, as she is deeply influenced
by the Russian philosopher and literary theorist Mikhail Bakhtin. Oi�inen applies his
Downloaded At: 23:49 18 February 2009
**********
Pedersen, Viggo Hjørnager. 2005. Ugly Ducklings: Studies in the English Translations of
Hans Christian Andersen’s Tales and Stories (Studies in Scandinavian Languages and Lit-
eratures 64). Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark. 389 pp. ISBN 87-7838-856-
2. Price: DKK 300.
This book is the commercial edition of Pedersen’s dissertation presented to the Uni-
versity of Southern Denmark and published in Odense, the emblematic city of Hans
Christian Andersen (1805-1875), where in 2005, the 200th anniversary of Anderson’s birth
Downloaded At: 23:49 18 February 2009
will be celebrated with festivities. Hjørnager Pedersen’s work concentrates on the Eng-
lish translations and re-translations of Andersen’s artistic fairytales. Most children know
the stories through the power of memory and via oral tradition. Adults read either the
original Eventyr or the many versions translated into hundreds of tongues. We all know
“The Tinder Box”, “The Li�le Mermaid”, “The Princess on the Pea”, and “The Emperor’s
New Clothes” by heart, and live by or against their moral (and amoral) lessons. Fairy-
tales, our home territory and domesticity, express doubts about the traditional boy and
girl, about male and female. Andersen’s tales are not nursery tales: they reflect reality
and claim a strong presence in the lives of children and adults.
Hjørnager Pedersen’s book focuses on the 19th Century English translations marked
by Victorian times (there is also some reference to translations from the 20th Century).
The book refers to the psycholinguistic a�itudes adopted by the translators in compos-
ing the English translations and re-translations of the eternally popular Andersen. In the
Preface (9-11), Hjørnager Pedersen announces that he will concentrate on translations
made by “Howi�, Boner, and Peachy, all in 1846, the last being that by Brækstad in 1900”
(9). He focuses on these translations in the beginning and at the end of his translational
chronology. Other translations are explored as well, such as Robert Nisbet Bain’s 1893
art-deco version with illustrations by John Reinhard Weguelin in pre-Raphaelite wa-
tercolour style and his scholarly commentary on the “previously faulty” translations
(Nisbet Bain’s Introduction of The Mermaid and Other Stories. London: Lawrence and Bul-
len (1893: xix-xxiii)). Nisbet Bain’s version is the first essay to offer to the reader a short
comparative argument on several existing English translations, representing therefore a
pioneering work at such an early date on this still embryonic aspect. This translation, the
criticism, and the illustrations deserve further exploration. Surprisingly, Hjørnager Ped-
ersen, himself a translator (11), states that he does not believe in a theoretical discussion
on literary translation; in his view, one may have opinions on the translation of a single
literary genre, such as the fairytales by Andersen (8-11).
Chapter 1 Introductory (13-75) describes the first translations, into German in 1839,
which is followed by “a selective survey” (21) of English translations. Providing a gen-
eral catalogue seems an impossible task, considering the world-wide popularity of trans-
lations from the Danish into other languages. Hjørnager Pedersen introduces the general
“translatology” (21-42) underlying Andersen’s translated tales. This brief pseudo-history
of translation (as opposed to Hjørnager Pedersen’s own view) touches on the a�itudes
adopted by translators such as Jerome, Dolet, Tytler, Luther, Mounin, Nida, Catford, and
modern critics of translations. The chronological outline of general Translation Studies
suggests that the intended readership of this book is not translators or translation-theo-
reticians, but a different audience, one not familiar with the history of translation. This
is unclear. Observations on the German origin of Andersen’s literature are missing. The
stories by Andersen, who re-invented this literary genre, are second only to the folktales
Reviews 75
by the Grimms. Folkish and creative fairytales stem from folk beliefs. An earlier book
on the translation of the German popular tales, Cay Dollerup’s Tales and Translation: The
Grimm Tales from Pan-Germanic Narratives to Shared International Fairytales (Amsterdam &
Philadelphia: John Benjamins (1999), discussed by this reviewer in 2000 in Perspectives 8:
67-69), has thrown a bright light on the historical development of the topic of translated
fairytales (see the extensive discussion and lists in Dollerup’s book: 260-286). Surpris-
ingly, the same topic is almost neglected or dismissed by Hjørnager Pedersen, for reasons
unknown.
Chapter II Andersen’s Translations 1846-1907: Howi� to Brækstad (77-262) is a largely
chronological account of the 19th century translators: Mary Howi� (79-89), Charles
Boner (90-97), Caroline Peachy (98-115), Meta Taylor (116-118), Clara de Chatelain (122-
138), and others, plus some 20th Century translators (263-295). Interpretation, including
translation, is determined by its historical moment and reflects that all acts of translated
discourse are acts of emotional and intellectual force. Culture signifies more than critical
and rhetorical studies. Morphologically, the English translations are derived from the
Danish “archetypal” tales, but they are considered a chain of variants. Three factors are
prominent in Andersen’s translations and re-translations: (1) some translators had epis-
tolary or personal contact with Andersen, others worked independently of him, (2) some
earlier translators worked from German translations - ‘relay’ translations - , whereas
later translators knew the Danish language and culture and did direct translations, us-
ing previous English translations for the purpose of comparison, and (3) the problem
of focus: the translations were intended as children’s literature and children-and-adult
literature.
In the final Chapter, General Translation Problems: Pragmatics, Syntax, Vocabulary and
Phraseology (297-350), Hjørnager Pedersen examines the general linguistic problems
Downloaded At: 23:49 18 February 2009
Dinda L. Gorlée,
The Hague,
The Netherlands
Downloaded At: 23:49 18 February 2009