Cover not available
Article published In:
Target
Vol. 32:1 (2020) ► pp.83–121

How are translation norms negotiated?

A case study of risk management in Chinese institutional translation

ORCID logo | University of Melbourne

Translation norms are conventionally viewed as forces that regulate translatorial behavior. Yet little is known about how norms are validated, challenged or broken by human agents. This quasi-experimental study of Chinese institutional translation proposes a risk-management model that explains how norms are jointly negotiated among the agents embedded in different institutional milieus. It is argued that norms are validated by the translators who strategically manage and weigh various translation risks pertaining to both the start and target cultures.

Keywords: norm theory, institutional translation, risk management, Chinese political discourse
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Norm theory revisited
    • 2.1Descriptive and explanatory
    • 2.2Target-oriented focus
    • 2.3So where do ‘people’ come in?
  • 3.This study
    • 3.1Study background
    • 3.2Methods
    • 3.3Instrument
    • 3.4Participants
  • 4.Quantitative results
  • 5.Qualitative results
    • 5.1Question: “Have you ever received any clear guidance as to how to translate official documents?”
      • 5.1.1Answer: “It’s my strategy. But not a written rule”
      • 5.1.2Answer: “As a staff translator, I prefer a faithful translation”
      • 5.1.3Answer: “It depends on what kind of faithfulness you want to pursue”
      • 5.1.4Answer: “The translation should sound ‘formal’”
      • 5.1.5Answer: “Different foreign-affairs offices do things differently”
    • 5.2Question: “Have you considered who will read this?”
      • 5.2.1Answer: “It depends on where you want to use the translation”
      • 5.2.2Answer: “There are two sorts [of readers]”
      • 5.2.3Answer: “It doesn’t matter whether the reader is male or female”
      • 5.2.4Answer: “It depends on who I am going to work for”
      • 5.2.5Answer: “‘Sounding local’ is not always positive”
      • 5.2.6Answer: “Nobody would read it”
      • 5.2.7Answer: “Interpreting is different”
    • 5.3Question: “Do you tend to rewrite the start text? If not, why not?”
      • 5.3.1Answer: “Trust me, there are many worse start texts than this”
      • 5.3.2Answer: “The premier just wanted to amuse his audience”
      • 5.3.3Answer: “I was asked to translate the title as ‘Governor’ rather than ‘Secretary of the Provincial Party Committee’”
      • 5.3.4Answer: “I definitely won’t rewrite the text”
      • 5.3.5Answer: “Literalism is a safer choice for staff translators”
  • 6.Discussion
  • 7.In conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Note
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 6 February 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/target.19050.hu
References
Anderson, R. Bruce W.
(1976) 2002 “Perspectives on the Role of Interpreter.” In The Interpreting Studies Reader, edited by Franz Pöchhacker and Miriam Shlesinger, 209–217. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bell, Allan
1984 “Language Style as Audience Design.” Language in Society 13 (2): 145–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ben-Ari, Nitsa
1992 “Didactic and Pedagogic Tendencies in the Norms Dictating the Translation of Children’s Literature: The Case of Postwar German-Hebrew Translations.” Poetics Today 13 (1): 198–221. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bolden, B. Galina
2000 “Toward Understanding Practices of Medical Interpreting: Interpreters’ Involvement in History Taking.” Discourse Studies 2 (4): 387–419. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre
1977 Outline of a Theory of Practice. Translated by Richard Nice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brems, Elke, and Sara Ramos Pinto
2013 “Reception and Translation.” In Handbook of Translation Studies Vol. 41, edited by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer, 142–147. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chesterman, Andrew
1993 “From ‘Is’ to ‘Ought’: Laws, Norms and Strategies in Translation Studies.” Target 5 (1): 1–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 Memes of Translation: The Spread of Ideas in Translation Theory (Benjamins Translation Library 123). Revised edition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1999 “The Empirical Status of Prescriptivism.” Folia Translatologica 61: 9–19.Google Scholar
2001 “Proposal for a Hieronymic Oath.” The Translator 7 (2): 139–154. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2002 “Semiotic Modalities in Translation Causality.” Across Languages and Cultures 3 (2): 145–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006a “A Note on Norms and Evidence.” In Translation and Interpreting – Training and Research, edited by Jorma Tommola and Yves Gambier, 13–19. Turku: University of Turku.Google Scholar
2006b “Questions in the Sociology of Translation.” In Translation Studies at the Interface of Disciplines (Benjamins Translation Library 68), edited by João F. Duarte, Alexandra A. Rosa, and Teresa Seruya, 9–27. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007a “On the Idea of a Theory.” Across Languages and Cultures 8 (1): 1–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007b “The Unbearable Lightness of English Words.” In Text, Processes, and Corpora: Research Inspired by Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit, edited by Riitta Jääskeläinen, Tiina Puurtinen, and Hilkka Stotesbury, 231–241. Joensuu: Joensuun yliopistopaino.Google Scholar
2008 “On Explanation.” In Pym, Shlesinger, and Simeoni 2008, 363–379.Google Scholar
2009 The Name and Nature of Translator Studies.” Hermes: Journal of Linguistics 421: 13–22.Google Scholar
2018 “Translation Ethics.” In A History of Modern Translation Knowledge: Sources, Concepts, Effects (Benjamins Translation Library 142), edited by Lieven D’hulst and Yves Gambier, 443–448. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chesterman, Andrew, and Rosemary Arrojo
2000 “Shared Ground in Translation Studies.” Target 12 (1): 151–160. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chesterman, Andrew, and Mona Baker
2008 “Ethics of Renarration: An Interview with Mona Baker.” Cultus 1 (1): 10–33.Google Scholar
China Academy of Translation
n.d. “Database of the Standardized Translations of Chinese Key Foreign-Affairs Terms [中国重要政治词汇对外翻译标准化专题库 zhong guo zhong yao zheng zhi ci hui dui wai fan yi biao zhun hua zhuan ti ku ]”. Accessed January 3, 2020. [URL]
Dam, Helle V., and Karen Korning Zethsen
eds. 2009 Translation Studies: Focus on the Translator. Thematic section of Hermes: Journal of Language and Communication Studies 421: 7–166.Google Scholar
Delabastita, Dirk, Christopher Taylor, David Katan, Peter Fawcett, Ian Mason, and Jorge Díaz Cintas
2003 “Book Reviews.” The Translator 9 (2): 333–366. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Di Giovanni, Elena, and Yves Gambier
eds. 2018 Reception Studies and Audiovisual Translation (Benjamins Translation Library 141). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duflou, Veerle
2016 Be(com)ing a Conference Interpreter: An Ethnography of EU Interpreters as a Professional Community (Benjamins Translation Library 124). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gile, Daniel
1992 “Basic Theoretical Components in Interpreter and Translator Training.” In Teaching Translation and Interpreting: Training Talent and Experience. Papers from the First Language International Conference, Elsinore, Denmark, 1991, edited by Cay Dollerup and Anne Loddegaard, 185–194. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009 Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training (Benjamins Translation Library 8). Revised edition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gouanvic, Jean-Marc
1997 “Translation and the Shape of Things to Come.” The Translator 3 (2): 125–152. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harris, Brian
1990 “Norms in Interpretation.” Target 2 (1): 115–119. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hermans, Theo
1991 “Translational Norms and Correct Translations.” In Translation Studies: The State of the Art, edited by Ton Naaijkens and Kitty M. van Leuven-Zwart, 155–169. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
1998 “Some Concluding Comments on the Debates and the Responses.” Current Issues in Language and Society 5 (1–2): 135–142. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1999 Translation in Systems: Descriptive and System-Oriented Approaches Explained. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
House, Juliane
1981 A Model for Translation Quality Assessment. Second edition. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Inghilleri, Moira
2003 “Habitus, Field and Discourse: Interpreting as a Socially Situated Activity.” Target 15 (2): 243–268. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Karamitroglou, Fotios
2000 Towards a Methodology for the Investigation of Norms in Audiovisual Translation: The Choice between Subtitling and Revoicing in Greece. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Kolb, Waltraud, and Franz Pöchhacker
2008 “Interpreting in Asylum Appeal Hearings: Roles and Norms Revisited.” In Interpreting in Legal Settings, edited by Debra Russell and Sandra Hale, 26–50. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Koskinen, Kaisa
2000 “Institutional Illusions: Translating in the EU Commission.” The Translator 6 (1): 49–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 Translating Institutions. An Ethnographic Study of EU Translation. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Kruger, Haidee
2012 Postcolonial Polysystems: The Production and Reception of Translated Children’s Literature in South Africa (Benjamins Translation Library 105). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laviosa, Sara
2008 “Description in the Translation Classroom: Universals as a Case in Point.” In Pym, Shlesinger, and Simeoni 2008, 119–132.Google Scholar
Lefevere, André
ed. 1992a Translation, History, Culture: A Sourcebook. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
1992b Translation, Rewriting and the Manipulation of Literary Fame. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mason, Ian
2000 “Audience Design in Translating.” The Translator 6 (1): 1–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mauranen, Anna, and Pekka Kujamäki
eds. 2004 Translation Universals: Do They Exist? (Benjamins Translation Library 48). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meylaerts, Reine
2008 “Translators and (Their) Norms: Towards a Sociological Construction of the Individual.” In Pym, Shlesinger, and Simeoni 2008, 91–102.Google Scholar
Newmark, Peter
1988 A Textbook of Translation. Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Pöchhacker, Franz
1995 “Simultaneous Interpreting: A Functionalist Perspective.” Hermes: Journal of Linguistics 141: 31–53.Google Scholar
2016 Introducing Interpreting Studies. Second edition. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pöllabauer, Sonja
2004 “Interpreting in Asylum Hearings: Issues of Role, Responsibility and Power.” Interpreting 6 (2): 143–180. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pym, Anthony
1998 “Okay, So How Are Translation Norms Negotiated? A Question for Gideon Toury and Theo Hermans.” Current Issues in Language and Society 5 (1–2): 107–113. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008a “On Toury’s Laws of How Translators Translate.” In Pym, Shlesinger, and Simeoni 2008, 311–328.Google Scholar
2008b “On Omission in Simultaneous Interpreting: Risk Analysis of a Hidden Effort.” In Efforts and Models in Interpreting and Translation Research: A Tribute to Daniel Gile (Benjamins Translation Library 80), edited by Gyde Hansen, Andrew Chesterman, and Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast, 83–105. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
2015 “Translating as Risk Management.” Journal of Pragmatics 851: 67–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pym, Anthony, Miriam Shlesinger, and Daniel Simeoni
eds. 2008 Beyond Descriptive Translation Studies: Investigations in Homage to Gideon Toury (Benjamins Translation Library 75). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
QSR International Pty Ltd
(2018) NVivo (qualitative data analysis software) version 12. [URL]
Schäffner, Christina
1998 “The Concept of Norms in Translation Studies.” Current Issues in Language and Society 5 (1–2): 2–9.Google Scholar
Schäffner, Christina
2010 “Norms of Translation.” In Handbook of Translation Studies Vol. 11, edited by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer, 235–244. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schäffner, Christina, Luciana Sabina Tcaciuc, and Wine Tesseur
2014 “Translation Practices in Political Institutions: A Comparison of National, Supranational, and Non-governmental Organizations.” Perspectives 22 (4): 493–510. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shlesinger, Miriam
1989 “Extending the Theory of Translation to Interpretation: Norms as a Case in Point.” Target 1 (1): 111–116. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Simeoni, Daniel
1998 “The Pivotal Status of the Translator’s Habitus.” Target 10 (1): 1–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
TAC (Translators Association of China)
2018 2018 China’s Language Service Industry Development Report. Beijing: TAC.Google Scholar
Toury, Gideon
1980 In Search of a Theory of Translation. Tel Aviv: Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics.Google Scholar
1998 “A Handful of Paragraphs on ‘Translation’ and ‘Norms’.” Current Issues in Language and Society 5 (1–2): 10–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 Descriptive Translation Studies – and Beyond (Benjamins Translation Library 100). Revised edition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Xu, Mingqiang
2014 “Waixuan fanyi de fannao [The difficulties of translating Chinese political discourse].” Chinese Translators Journal 31: 11–12.Google Scholar
Walker, Callum
2018 “A Cognitive Perspective on Equivalent Effect: Using Eye Tracking to Measure Equivalence in Source Text and Target Text Cognitive Effects on Readers.” Perspectives 27 (1): 124–143. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Kotze, Haidee, Berit Janssen, Corina Koolen, Luka van der Plas & Gys-Walt van Egdom
2021. Norms, affect and evaluation in the reception of literary translations in multilingual online reading communities. Translation, Cognition & Behavior DOI logo
Valdez, Susana
2021. Literalization in the self-revision process of novice and experienced biomedical translators. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 8:2 ► pp. 356 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 7 february 2022. 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.