Book review
Kristiina Taivalkoski-Shilov, Liisa Tiitula & Maarit Koponen, eds. Communities in Translation and Interpreting
(Vita Traductiva). Montréal: Éditions québécoises de l’œuvre, 2017. 280 pp.

Reviewed by Lucile Davier
Publication history
Table of contents

The metaphor of the ‘lone wolf’ (cited and criticized by Hanne Jansen’s contribution to this volume) may still be part of the public image of translators and interpreters, but this edited collection of essays sets out to demonstrate the opposite: translators and interpreters are members of various intersecting communities. As Kristiina Taivalkoski-Shilov points out in the introduction (“Introducing communities in translation and interpreting”), this observation not only applies to recent developments in online collaborative translation, but also reflects an “age-old phenomenon” (6) as documented in translation studies history (e.g., Montgomery 2000). She opens a dialogue between references from social theory and translation studies to justify the importance of communities in translation and interpreting from ancient Bible translations to fansubbing. She provides a sound discussion of the concept of community, and more specifically of “communities of practice” (Wenger 1998), which she interestingly links to Even-Zohar’s polysystem theory (1978) through the concept of ‘repertoire.’

Full-text access is restricted to subscribers. Log in to obtain additional credentials. For subscription information see Subscription & Price. Direct PDF access to this article can be purchased through our e-platform.


Alvstad, Cecilia
2013 “Voices in Translation.” In Handbook of Translation Studies 4, edited by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer, 207–210. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Delanty, Gerard
2010Community. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Even-Zohar, Itamar
1978 “The Position of Translated Literature within the Literary Polysystem.” In Literature and Translation: New Perspectives in Literary Studies, edited by James S. Holmes, José Lambert, and Raymond van den Broeck, 117–127. Leuven: Acco.Google Scholar
Holz-Mänttäri, Justa
1984Translatorisches Handeln: Theorie und Methode [Translational Action: Theory and Method]. Helsinki: Suomalainen tiedeakatemia.Google Scholar
Jansen, Hanne, and Anna Wegener
2013 “Multiple Translatorship.” In Authorial and Editorial Voices in Translation 1: Collaborative Relationships between Authors, Translators, and Performers, edited by Hanne Jansen and Anna Wegener, 1–39. Montréal: Éditions québécoises de l’œuvre.Google Scholar
McMillan, David W., and David M. Chavis
1986 “Sense of Community: A Definition and Theory.” Journal of Community Psychology 14 (1): 6–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Montgomery, Scott L.
2000Science in Translation: Movements of Knowledge through Cultures and Time. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Putnam, Robert
2000Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simone and Schuster. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scollon, Ron, and Suzie Wong Scollon
2004Nexus Analysis: Discourse and the Emerging Internet. New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taivalkoski-Shilov, Kristiina
2013 “Voice in the Field of Translation Studies.” In Intertextual Voices in Translation, edited by Kristiina Taivalkoski-Shilov and Myriam Suchet, 1–9. Montréal: Éditions québécoises de l’œuvre.Google Scholar
Wenger, Etienne
1998Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar