Cover not available
Article published In:
Translation and the cultural Cold War
Edited by Esmaeil Haddadian-Moghaddam and Giles Scott-Smith
[Translation and Interpreting Studies 15:3] 2020
► pp. 419–440

Interpreting during the Cold War era in Turkey

An exercise in gatekeeping

ORCID logo | Istanbul Atlas University
This article examines the way the Cold War shaped the field of interpreting in Turkey. Turkey became part of the anti-communist bloc, and one outcome of this Turkish-American partnership was the influence that a constellation of American and Turkish organizations exerted on the nascent field of interpreting. Through open-ended interviews with selected interpreters, the article seeks to shed light on the way the Cold War impacted the practice of interpreting. By drawing on Lewin’s (1947) concept of gatekeeping, it is suggested that the US-led anti-communist campaign of the Cold War affected the topics that were interpreted, the common language pairs, and interpreters’ lexical choices. The Cold War, thus, became a “gate” through which the interpreted topics, languages, lexical choices, and even the interpreters – all of which were instruments of the regime – had to pass through.
Keywords: Cold War, interpreting, conference interpreting, ideology, simultaneous interpreting, gatekeeping
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Turkey and the Cold War: An overview
  • Emergence and evolution of SI in Turkey: An overview
  • Methodology
  • SI in Turkey: An exercise of gatekeeping
    • Languages
    • Subject matters
    • Lexical choices
  • Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 19 October 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.20084.arz
References (70)
References
Primary resources
Harvey P. Hail and Eugene P. Northrop. 1963. “The Ford Foundation in Turkey: 1952–1962.” February. Ankara: Ford Foundation Report.Google Scholar
The Ford Foundation Annual Report 1956, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969.Google Scholar
The Ford Foundation in Turkey. 1963. Ankara.Google Scholar
Recorded interviews
Belgin Dölay. personal communication, 25.06.2018.Google Scholar
Belkış Çorakçıoğlu-Dışbudak. personal communication, 13.08.2018.Google Scholar
Fatma Artunkal. personal communication, 12.06.2018. Google Scholar
Leyla Ayaş. personal communication, 03.07.2018.Google Scholar
Nur Deriş Ottoman. personal communication, 21.06.2018.Google Scholar
Okşan Atasoy. personal communication, 02.08.2018.Google Scholar
Zeynep Bekdik. personal communication, 27.06.2018.Google Scholar
Secondary sources
Ahmad, Feroz. 1993. The Making of Modern Turkey. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Aldrich, Richard. 2003. “Putting culture into the Cold War: The Cultural Relations Department (CRD) and British covert information warfare.” Intelligence and National Security 18 (2): 109–133. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arslan Özcan, Lale. 2017. “The birth and development of conference interpreting in Turkey.” RIELMA: International Review of Studies in Applied Modern Languages (special issue Interpreting through History): 61–76.Google Scholar
Arzık Erzurumlu, Özüm. 2019. “Sözlü çevirinin öncüsü üç kadın çevirmen: Belgin Dölay, Fatma Artunkal, Zeynep Bekdik [Three women pioneers of interpreting: Belgin Dölay, Fatma Artunkal, Zeynep Bekdik].” In Kelimelerin Kıyısında Türkiye’de Kadın Çevirmenler [On the Brink of the Words: Women Interpreters], ed. by Şehnaz Tahir Gürçağlar, 347–370. İstanbul: Ithaki.Google Scholar
Aytürk, İlker. 2014. “Nationalism and Islam in Cold War Turkey 1944–69.” Middle Eastern Studies 50 (5): 693–719. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017. “The flagship institution of Cold War Turcology.” European Journal of Turkish Studies 241. DOI logo
Barnhisel, Greg. 2015. Cold War Modernists: Art, Literature and American Cultural Diplomacy. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Baumgarten, Stefan. 2010. “Ideology and translation.” In Handbook of Translation Studies, Vol. 31, ed. by Yves Gambier and Luc Van Doorslaer, 60–65. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bezci, Egemen. 2016. “Turkey’s intelligence diplomacy during the Second World War.” Journal of Intelligence History 15 (2): 80–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Criss, Nur B. 2007. “Turkish perceptions of the United States.” In What They Think of Us? International Perceptions of the United States since 9/11, ed. by David Farber, 49–74. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Davidson, Brad. 2000. “The interpreter as institutional gatekeeper: The social-linguistic role of interpreters in Spanish-English medical discourse.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 4 (3): 379–405. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deriş Ottoman, Nur. 2004. “From dragomans to interpreters: A brief overview of the profession in Turkey.” aiic.net [URL]. Last accessed 25 May 2018.
Diriker, Ebru. 2015. “On the evolution of the interpreting profession in Turkey from dragomans to the 21st century.” In Tradition, Tension and Translation in Turkey, ed. by Şehnaz Tahir Gürçağlar, Saliha Paker, and John Milton, 89–107. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dlutowski, Christopher J. 1990. “Turkey, the Truman Doctrine, and the Cold War.” Cambridge Review of International Affairs 4 (1): 49–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Erken, Ali. 2016. “Negotiating politics, informal networks and the Ford Foundation Projects in Turkey during the Cold War.” International Journal of Turcologia 11 (21): 5–22.Google Scholar
Erozan, Boğaç. 2009. “Turkey and the West: A history of ambivalence.” Orient 50 (3): 4–16.Google Scholar
Flynn, Peter. 2007. “Exploring literary translation practice: A focus on ethos.” Target 19 (1): 21–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haddadian-Moghaddam, Esmaeil. 2016. “The cultural Cold War and the circulation of world literature: Insights from Franklin Book Programs in Tehran.” Journal of World Literature 1 (3): 371–390. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hammack, David C. and Steven R. Smith. 2018. “Foundations in the United States: Dimensions for international comparison.” American Behavioral Scientist 62 (12): 1603–1638. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Katan, David and Fransesco Straniero-Sergio. 2003. “Submerged ideologies in media interpreting.” In Apropos of Ideology, ed. by María Calzada Pérez, 131–144. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Kayaoğlu, Barın. 2009. “Cold War in the Aegean strategic imperatives, democratic rhetoric: The United States and Turkey 1945–52.” Cold War History 9 (3): 321–345. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Khurana, Rakesh, et al.. 2011. “How foundations think: The Ford Foundation as a dominating institution in the field of American business schools.” Harvard Business School Working Paper 11-070. [URL]. Last accessed 30 August 2020.
Laugesen, Amanda. 2010. “The Franklin Book Programs, translation, and the creation of a modern global publishing culture, 1952–1968.” The Princeton University Library Chronicle 71 (2): 168–186. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lewin, Kurt. 1947. “Frontiers in group dynamics: II. Channels of group life; Social planning and action research.” Human Relations 1 (2): 143–153. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lucas, Scott. 1996. “Campaigns of truth: The Psychological Strategy Board and American ideology, 1951–1953.” The International History Review 18 (2): 279–302. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lucas, W. Scott. 2002. “Mobilizing culture: The state-private network and CIA in the early Cold War. In War and Cold War in American Foreign Policy 1942–62, ed. by Dale Carter, and Robin Clifton, 83–108. New York: Palgrave. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2003. “Beyond freedom, beyond control, beyond the Cold War: Approaches to American culture and the state-private network.” Intelligence and National Security 18 (2): 53–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maguire, Thomas J. 2015. “Counter-subversion in early Cold War Britain: The Official Committee on Communism (Home), the Information Research Department, and ‘state-private networks.’” Intelligence and National Security 30 (5): 637–666. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Needell, Allan A. 1993. “Truth is our weapon:” Project TROY, political warfare, and government-academic relations in the national security state.” Diplomatic History 17 (3): 399–420. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oran, Baskın. ed. 2009. Türk Dış Politikası Kurtuluş Savaşından Bugüne Olgular, Belgeler, Yorumlar Cilt 1: 1919–1989 [Turkish Foreign Policy Facts, Documents and Comments from the War of Independence onwards Volume 1: 1919–1989]. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.Google Scholar
Örnek, Cangül and Çağdaş Üngör. eds. 2013. Turkey and the Cold War Ideology and Culture. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Örnek, Cangül. 2013. “The populist effect: Promotion and reception of American literature in the 1950s.” In Turkey and the Cold War Ideology and Culture, ed. by Cangül Örnek, and Çağdaş Üngör, 130–158. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paker, Saliha. 2009. “Turkish tradition.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, ed. by Mona Baker and Gabriela Saldanha, 550–560. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Pakin, Esra. 2008. “American Studies in Turkey during the “cultural” Cold War.” Turkish Studies 9 (3): 507–524. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Parmar, Inderjeet. 2015. “The “Big 3” Foundations and American global power.” American Journal of Economics and Sociology 74 (4): 676–703. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Popescu, Monica. 2007. “Cold War and hot translation.” Safund: The Journal of South African and American Studies 8 (1): 83–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pöllabauer, Sonja. 2012. “Gatekeeping practices in interpreted social media encounters.” Meta 57 (1): 213–234. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Robbins, Louise S. 2007. “Publishing American values: The Franklin Book Programs as Cold War cultural diplomacy.” Library Trends 55 (3): 638–650. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rose, Kenneth W. and Murat Erdem. 2000. “American philanthropy in republican Turkey: The Rockefeller and Ford Foundations.” The Turkish Yearbook of International Relations (Special Issue on 200 Years of Turkish-American Relations) 31 (2): 131–157.Google Scholar
Rose, Kenneth W. 2008. “The Rockefeller Foundation’s fellowship program in Turkey, 1925–1983.” [URL]. Last accessed 30 August 2020.
Sander, Oral. 1979. Türk-Amerikan İlişkileri [Turkish-American Relations]. Ankara: Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi.Google Scholar
Saunders, Frances Stonor. 2013. The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters. New York: The New Press.Google Scholar
Scott-Smith, Giles and Charlotte A. Lerg. 2017. “Introduction: Journals of freedom.” In Campaigning Culture and the Global Cold War, ed. by Giles Scott-Smith and Charlotte A. Lerg, 1–27. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shoemaker, Pamela J. and Tim P. Vos. 2009. Gatekeeping Theory. New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Singy, Pascal and Patrice Guex. 2015. “Gender.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed. by Franz Pöchhacker. 169–171. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Spolsky, Bernard. 2004. Language Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ülman, Haluk. 1968. “Türk dış politikasına yön veren etkenler, 1923–1968” [The Elements Guiding Turkish Foreign Policy]. Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi 23 (3): 241–273.Google Scholar
Üsdiken, Behlül. 2004. “The French, the German and the American: Higher education for business in Turkey, 1883–2003.” New Perspectives on Turkey (311): 5–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. “Transferring American models for education in business and public administration to Turkey, 1950–1970.” In American Turkish Encounters: Politics and Culture, 1830–1989, ed. by Bilge Nur Criss, Selcuk Esenbel, Tony Greenwood, and Louis Mazzari, 316–330. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Tahir Gürçağlar, Şehnaz. 2008. The Politics and Poetics of Translation in Turkey 1923–1960. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Truman, Henry. 1947. “Special message to the Congress on Greece and Turkey.” The American Presidency Project. 12 March. [URL] Accessed 30 August 2020.
Vardar, Somnur. 2019. Bu Kulaklar Neler Duydu: Türkiye’de Konferans Çevirmenliğinin 50 Yılı [The Things I Have Heard: 50 Years of Conference Interpreting in Turkey]. Istanbul: h20 Kitap.Google Scholar
Vuorinen, Erkka. 1997. “News translation as gatekeeping.” Translation as Intercultural Communication, 161–172. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wadensjö, Cecilia. 1998. Interpreting as Interaction. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Westley, Bruce H. and Malcolm S. MacLean. 1955. “A conceptual model for communications research.” Audio Visual Communication Review 3 (1): 3–12. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Internet resources
Eczacıbaşı Holding A.Ş. [URL]
Turkish Translations in Franklin Archives as of Februray 1, 1967. [URL]
Birinci Beş Yıllık Kalkınma Planı. 1963–1967. [URL]
İkinci Beş Yıllık Kalkınma Planı. 1968–1972. [URL]
TESEV: The Economic and Social Studies Conference Committee. [URL]
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Huo, Yujia & Yang Li
2024. Missionary as gatekeeper in translation: exploring motivations based on the cases of two missionaries in the late Chinese Ming dynasty (1580s-1640s). The Translator 30:3 ► pp. 371 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 september 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.