Cover not available
Article published In:
FORUM
Vol. 16:2 (2018) ► pp.324–340

Translators’ image in Iranian feature films

A sociological perspective

| Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
| Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
| Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

Drawing on the significant influence of audiovisual media on people’s conceptions of any given phenomenon, the current qualitative study was an attempt to identify the social dimensions of the Iranian translator, represented in feature films in Iran. Specifically, the study aimed to explore the identity, socioeconomic status and lifestyle of the translator characters depicted in Iranian feature films. Therefore, 16 Iranian films, involving interlingual translation, were selected. The thematic analysis revealed five sociological aspects of the Iranian translator reflected in Iranian films: identity of the translator, socioeconomic status of the translator, lifestyle and attitude of the translator, attitudes of other characters towards the translator, and the role of translation in the turn of events. The results indicated that translators are generally shown as self-disciplined and dissociable individuals who are devoted to their work. The translator characters mostly had minor roles in the plot and turn of events.

Keywords: Iranian translators, sociology of translation, translator identity, feature film
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Literature review
    • 2.1Translation as a profession
    • 2.2Translator status
    • 2.3Representation of translators in the film medium
  • 3.Method
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Identity of the translator characters
    • 4.2Socioeconomic status
    • 4.3Lifestyle and attitude
    • 4.4The attitudes of other characters towards translators
    • 4.5The role of translation in the selected films
  • 5.Discussion and conclusions
  • References
Published online: 26 November 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/forum.16031.kho
References
Bagozzi, R. P.
1994 Advanced methods of marketing research. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Business.Google Scholar
Baker, E. H.
2014 “Socioeconomic status, definition”. In W. Cockerham, R. Dingwall, and S. R. Quah (eds) The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Health, Illness, Behavior and Society (pp. 2210–2214). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, P.
1984 Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Translated by R. Nice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Chesterman, A.
2009 “The name and nature of translator studies”. Hermes (42): 13–22.Google Scholar
Choi, J., and Lim, H. O.
2002 “The status of translators and interpreters in Korea”. Meta: Journal des traducteursMeta:/Translators’ Journal (47)41: 627–635. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cronin, M.
2009 Translation goes to the movies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dam, H. V., and Zethsen, K. K.
2008 “Translator status: A study of Danish company translators”. The Translator (14)11: 71–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gentile, P.
2013 “The status of conference interpreters: A global survey into the profession”. Rivista Internazionale Di Tecnica Della Traduzione (15): 63–82.Google Scholar
Gentzler, E.
2001 Contemporary Translation Theories. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Gil, J. R. B., and Pym, A.
2006 “Technology and translation (a pedagogical overview)”. In A. Pym, A. Perekrestenko, and B. Starink (eds) Translation Technology and its Teaching (pp. 5–19). Taraggona: Universistat Rovira I Virgili and Intercultural Studies Group.Google Scholar
Hermans, J., and Lambert, J.
1998 “From translation markets to language management: The implications of translation services”. Target (10)11: 113–132. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hlavac, J.
2012 “Sociolinguistic profiles of users and providers of lay and professional interpreting services: the experiences of a recently-arrived Iraqi language community in Melbourne”. Translation & Interpreting (3)21: 1–32.Google Scholar
Hosseini, B. K., and Karimnia, A.
2012 “A critical study of Iranian translators’ job status”. Journal of Translation Studies (41): 85–103.Google Scholar
Howard, J. A.
2000 “Social psychology of identities”. Annual Review of Sociology (26): 367–393. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Inghillery, M.
2009 Sociological approaches. In M. Baker and G. Saldanha (eds) Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies (2nd ed., pp. 279–281). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jenkins, R.
1996 Social Identity. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kafi, M., Khoshsaligheh, M., and Hashemi, M. R.
2015 “Typology of capitals expected and received by Iranian translators”. SKASE Journal of Translation and Interpretation (9)11: 26–43.Google Scholar
Kafi, M., Khoshsaligheh, M., & Hashemi, M. R.
2017 “Translation profession in Iran: current challenges and future prospects”. The Translator, (24)1: 89–103. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaindl, K.
2012 “Representation of translators and interpreters”. In Y. Gambier and L. V. Doorslaer (eds) Handbook of Translation Studies (Vol. 31, pp. 145–150). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015 “Fictional representations of translators and interpreters”. In C. V. Angelelli and B. J. Baer (eds) Researching Translation and Interpreting (pp. 71–82). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lefevere, A., and Bassnett, S.
1990 “Introduction: Proust’s grandmother and the thousand and one nights: The cultural turn”. In S. Bassnett and A. Lefevere (eds) Translation, History and Culture (pp. 1–13). London: Pinter.Google Scholar
McKay, C.
2006 How to Succeed as a Freelance Translator. Morrisville, NC: Lulu.Google Scholar
Mueller, C. W., and Parcel, T. L.
1981 “Measures of socioeconomic status: alternatives and recommendations”. Child Development (52)11: 13–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muzii, L.
2006 “Quality assessment and economic sustainability of translation”. Rivista Internazionale di Tecnica Della Traduzione (9)11: 15–38.Google Scholar
Myoung, S. K., and Shunmugam, K.
2014 “The translation profession in Malaysia: the translator’s status and self-perception”. GEMA: Online Journal of Language Studies (14)31: 191–205. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pym, A.
2005 “Training translators – ten recurrent naiveties”. Translating Today (2)11: 3–6.Google Scholar
Pym, A., F. Grin, C. Sfreddo, and A. L. Chan
2013 The status of the translation profession in the European Union. London: Anthem Press.Google Scholar
Schick, B.
2007 EIPA Guidelines of Professional Conduct for educational interpreters. Retrieved from [URL]
Sela-Sheffy, R.
2010 “ ‘Stars’ or ‘professionals’: the imagined vocation and exclusive knowledge of translators in Israel”. MonTI. Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación (2): 131–152. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015 “Profession, identity, and status”. In C. V. Angelelli, and B. J. Baer (eds) Researching Translation and Interpreting (pp. 131–145). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Simeoni, D.
1998 “The pivotal status of the translator’s habitus”. Target (10)11: 1–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Strümper-Krobb, S.
2009 Zwischen den Welten: die Sichtbarkeit des Übersetzers in der Literatur. Weidler.Google Scholar
Twigg, J.
2009 “Clothing, identity and the embodiment of age”. In J. Powell and T. Gilbert (eds) Aging and Identity: A Postmodern Dialogue (pp. 1–19). New York, NY: Nova Science.Google Scholar
Veal, A.
1993 “The concept of lifestyle: A review article”. Leisure Studies (12)41: 233–252. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wadensjo, C., B. E. Dimitrova, and A. L. Nilsson
(eds) 2007 The Critical Link 4: The Professionalization of Interpreting in the Community. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wolf, M.
2010 “Sociology of translation”. In Y. Gambier & L. V. Doorslaer (eds) Handbook of Translation Studies (Vol. 11, pp. 337–343). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zwischenberger, C.
2009 “Conference interpreters and their self-representation A worldwide web-based survey”. Translation and interpreting studies (4)21: 239–253. DOI logoGoogle Scholar