New interpretation and techniques of transcreation
Chen Du | Xi’an Beilin Haidai Translation Center
This article points out some “loopholes” in the traditional Chinese-English translation theories, and proposes
several transcreation theories to countermeasure the “loopholes”, illustrating non-equivalences. In particular, the article
proposes a novel translation/transcreation theory that incorporates the writing field, in both the source and target languages,
into the traditional translation field. This is for the purpose of cultural transmission and integration. In addition, the article
illustrates the relationship between translation and writing by dissecting the translation/transcreation process into two
processes: understanding and writing. Moreover, it suggests that the transcreation field develop some criteria, such as: fidelity,
flexibility and creativity, and that all the science, social science and humanities subareas in the transcreation field are
categorized according to these criteria. In order to support the transcreation theories and multidisciplinary translation theories
proposed in this article, some typical examples and transcreation techniques that push the envelope of existing transcreation
theories are provided. This article may shed new light on the limitations of, and possible solutions to, machine translation. It
may also answer questions like: “Is understanding unimportant to machine translation?”
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.A new interpretation of the translation/transcreation process
- 3.Transcreation examples
- 3.1Correction methods
- 3.1.1Example of English-to-Chinese transcreation
- 3.1.2Example of Chinese-to-English transcreation
- 3.2Coinage methods
- 3.2.1Example of English-to-Chinese transcreation
- 3.2.2Example of Chinese-to-English transcreation
- 3.3Supplementary methods
- 3.3.1Example of English-to-Chinese transcreation
- 3.3.2Example of Chinese-to-English transcreation
- 3.4Derivative methods
- 3.4.1Example of English-to-Chinese transcreation
- 3.4.2Example of Chinese-to-English transcreation
- 3.5Trans-writing
- 4.Conclusion
-
References
References (5)
References
Baker, Mona. 2018. In other words: A coursebook on translation, 3rd edition. London: Routledge.
Benetello, Claudia. 2018. “When translation is not enough: Transcreation as a convention-defying practice. A practitioner’s perspective”. The Journal of Specialised Translation 291: 28–43.
Polak, Elliot; and Cuttita, Frank. 2006. “Global marketing disasters and recoveries”. Admap 4701: 36–38.
Raymond, Jane E.; Fenske, Mark J.; and Tavassoli, Nader T. 2003. “Selective attention determines emotional responses to novel visual stimuli”. Psychological Science 141: 537–542.
Spinzi, Cinzia; Rizzo, Alessandra; and Zummo, Marianna Lya. 2018. Translation or transcreation? discourses, texts and visuals. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
Zhu, Minghai & Grant Rich
2023.
Sustainability of translator training in higher education.
PLOS ONE 18:5
► pp. e0283522 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.