Foreignizing the domestic
Two cases from Persian translations
Characterizing Venuti’s foreignizing and domesticating strategies as historically dependent, this article
attempts to shed some new light on how such translations – especially the foreignizing ones – emerge in any language. After
discussing the roots of Venuti’s thinking in the American context and redefining foreignization as a strategy that draws on
domestic, yet marginalized, elements, we delve into the theory and practice of two Persian translators, Ahmad Shamlu and Mir
Shamseddin Adib-Soltani. Although their translation practices are ostensibly domesticating, they possess underlying foreignizing
qualities. The implications and intellectual origins of their practices are discussed in the Iranian context, giving rise to a
theoretical perspective that allows for foreignizing in non-Anglophone cultures.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.A brief history of foreignizing/domesticating translation
- 2.1New Criticism vs. New Historicism
- 2.2Translating from the perspective of New Historicism and Cultural Materialism
- 2.3Venuti’s foreignizing/domesticating translation through cultural theory
- 2.4Foreignization/domestication: Misconceptions resolved?
- 3.Foreignizing in Iran
- 4.Adib-Soltani
- 5.Ahmad Shamlu
- 6.Nativization of theory
- 6.1Can and should Iranian translations foreignize?
- 7.Conclusion
- Notes
-
References