Article published in:
Target
Vol. 13:2 (2001) ► pp. 317–332

Polysystem theory

Its prospect as a framework for translation research

| Lingnan University, Hong Kong
This article deals with three interrelated issues: first the ‘cultural turn’ of Itamar Even-Zohar in contrast to the ‘cultural turn’ in Translation Studies, then the application of an augmented version of Polysystem theory in a short case study, and finally the question of objectivity and neutrality in descriptive polysystem studies. It is argued that Polysystem theory and other cultural theories of translation, be they descriptive or politically committed, can be mutually enriching rather than incompatible, and that, with some augmentation and further development, it may serve as an adequate framework for research into the ‘external politics’ of translation.
Keywords: polysystem, polysystem theory, norm, translation studies, cultural turn, ideology, politics, descriptivism
Published online: 13 June 2002
https://doi.org/10.1075/target.13.2.07cha
References

[ p. 331 ]References

Bassnett, Susan
1998 “The translation turn in cultural studies”. Susan Bassnett and André Lefevere, eds. Constructing cultures: Essays on literary translation. Clevedon: Multilingual matters 1998 123–140.Google Scholar
Chang Nam Fung
1997 Yes prime manipulator: A descriptive study of a Chinese translation of British political humour. University of Warwick. [Unpublished PhD thesis.]Google Scholar
1998 “An applied discipline obsessed with loyalty: On the Chinese tradition of Translation Studies”. Journal of Translation Studies (Hong Kong) 2. 29–41. [in Chinese.]Google Scholar
2000 “Towards a Macro-polysystem hypothesis”. Perspectives: Studies in translatology 8:2. 109–123.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chong Yau-yuk
2000 “The limitations of Polysystem theory for the study of ideology in translation”. Translation quarterly (Hong Kong) 16–17. 125–139. [in Chinese.]Google Scholar
Even-Zohar, Itamar
1979 “Polysystem theory”. Poetics today 1:1–2. 287–310.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1990 Polysystem studies. [= Poetics today 11:1.]Google Scholar
1997a “Polysystem theory” (revised version). Web: http://​www​.tau​.ac​.il​/~itamarez.Google Scholar
1997b “Factors and dependencies in culture: A revised outline for polysystem culture research”. Canadian review of comparative literature 24:3. 15–34.Google Scholar
Hermans, Theo
1994 “Translation between poetics and ideology”. Translation and literature 3. 138–145.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1996 “Norms and the determination of translation: A theoretical framework”. Roman Álvarez and M. Carmen-África Vidal, eds. Translation, power, subversion. Clevedon: Multilingual matters 1996 25–51.Google Scholar
1998 “Translation and normativity”. Schäffner 1998:51–72.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1999 Translation in systems: Descriptive and system-oriented approaches explained. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Lodge, David
1985 Small world. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
1996 Xiao shijie [Small world], tr.Luo Yirong, vetted by Wang Fengzhen, 2nd edn. Chongqing: Chongqing chubanshe.Google Scholar
1998 Xiao shijie [Small world], tr.Zhao Guangyu, vetted byLuo Yirong. Beijing: Zuojia chubanshe.Google Scholar
Schäffner, Christina
ed. 1998 Translation and norms. [= Current issues in language & society 5:1–2.]Google Scholar
① ②
Toury, Gideon
1995 Descriptive Translation Studies and beyond. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1998 “A handful of paragraphs on ‘translation’ and ‘norms’”. Schäffner 1998: 10–12.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Venuti, Lawrence
1995 The translator’s invisibility: A history of translation. London and New York: Routledge.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1997 “Unequal developments: Current trends in Translation Studies”. Comparative literature 49:4. 360–368.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1998 The scandals of translation: Towards an ethics of difference. London and New York: Routledge.   CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 332 ]
2000 “Will translation theory be of use to translators?”, tr. Au Kim-lung Kenneth. Translation quarterly (Hong Kong) 16–17. 111–124. [in Chinese.]Google Scholar
Wang Xiaoyuan
2000 “Intervention in literary translation”. Translation quarterly (Hong Kong) 16–17. 25–40. [in Chinese.]Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 9 other publications

Chang, Nam Fung
2010.  In Handbook of Translation Studies [Handbook of Translation Studies, 1], ► pp. 257 ff. Crossref logo
Chang, Nam Fung
2011. In defence of polysystem theory. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 23:2 ► pp. 311 ff. Crossref logo
Chang, Nam Fung
2015. Does ‘translation’ reflect a narrower concept than ‘fanyi’?. Translation and Interpreting Studies 10:2 ► pp. 223 ff. Crossref logo
Cheung, Martha P.Y.
2011. The (un)importance of flagging Chineseness. Translation Studies 4:1 ► pp. 41 ff. Crossref logo
Fung Chang, Nam
2009. Repertoire Transfer and Resistance. The Translator 15:2 ► pp. 305 ff. Crossref logo
Kershaw, Angela
2010. Sociology of literature, sociology of translation: The reception of Irène Némirovsky'sSuite françaisein France and Britain. Translation Studies 3:1 ► pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Raine, Roberta
2014. Translation and Appropriation of the World’s Longest Epic. FORUM. Revue internationale d’interprétation et de traduction / International Journal of Interpretation and Translation 12:2 ► pp. 65 ff. Crossref logo
Zhu, Lin
2018. Rewritings in translation as clues of cultural mediation and ideological manipulation: a case study of Lin Shu’s translation of David Copperfield . Neohelicon 45:1 ► pp. 351 ff. Crossref logo
마승혜
2017. A Polysystem Revisited in Korea and a Discussion for a System Evolution. The Journal of Translation Studies 18:1 ► pp. 41 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 april 2021. 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.