Exploring literary translation practice: A focus on ethos

Peter Flynn
Lessius Hogeschool, Antwerp
Abstract

This article discusses findings from an ethnographic study of literary translation practice in the Netherlands and Belgium. The article focuses on one aspect of translation practice, namely translatorial ethos. It is argued that the forms of translatorial ethos visible in the data are complex in that they have a bearing both on textual and institutional practice and relations at one and the same time. More specifically, it is also argued that these complex professional stances and positionings need to be taken into account if we are to gain a better understanding of translational norms (Toury 1995, 2000 and Chesterman 1993) or translational habitus (Simeoni 1998). Furthermore, it is argued in a more general sense that linguistic ethnography can provide clear indications of patterns of translational practice and therefore forms a useful means of inquiry in the context of translation studies.

Keywords:
Table of contents

The findings discussed in this article were taken from a doctoral dissertation on translation practice entitled a linguistic ethnography of literary translation: Irish poems and Dutch-speaking translators (Flynn 2006). The purpose of the dissertation was to demonstrate the situated nature of translation practice and how it impacts on translation products. It involved conducting an ethnographic inquiry among Dutch-speaking literary translators in Belgium and the Netherlands, particularly those who have translated Irish literature, which formed part of the research focus. In approaching literary translation, the writer was aware of the highly pertinent distinctions Toury makes in his discussion of the difference between ‘Translation of Literary Texts’ and ‘Literary Translation’ (Toury 1995: 166–180). It is stressed [ p. 22 ]here that literary translation is understood as a process and the object is to explore further certain elements highlighted by Toury when he states that

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.

References

Bassnett Susan and Harish Trivedi
eds. 1999 Postcolonial translation: Theory and practice. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre
1980 Le sens pratique. Paris: Les éditions de minuit.Google Scholar
Chesterman Andrew
1993 “From ’is’ to ’ought’: Translation laws, norms and strategies”. Target 5:1. 1–20.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cronin Michael
2002 “Babel’s standing stones: Language, translation and the exsomatic”. Crossings: An electronic journal of art and technology 2:1 ISSN 1649-0460. Available at: http://​crossings​.tcd​.ie​/issues​/2​.1​/Cronin/
Even-Zohar, Itamar
1979 “Polysystem theory”. Poetics today 1:1–2 (Autumn). 287–310.[ p. 43 ]   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Even-Zohar, Itamar and Gideon Toury
eds. 1981 Translation theory and intercultural relations. Poetics today 2:4 (Summer-Autumn).Google Scholar
Even-Zohar, Itamar
1990 Polysystem studies. [= Poetics today 11:1]. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
1997 “The making of culture repertoire and the role of transfer”. Target 9:2. 355–363.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2000 “The position of translated literature within the literary polysystem”. Venuti 200 : 192–197.Google Scholar
2005 Papers in culture research. Electronic Book, available from Even-Zohar’s Website at http://​www​.tau​.ac​.il​/~itamarez​/works​/papers​/papers​/ps​-revised​.pdf
Flynn, Peter
2004 “Skopos theory: An ethnographic enquiry”. Perspectives: Studies in translatology 2004:4. 270–285.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006 A linguistic ethnography of literary translation: Irish poems and Dutch-speaking translators. Ghent University: unpublished doctoral dissertation.Google Scholar
Goodwin, Charles
1994 “Professional vision”. American anthropologist 96:3. 606–633.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hanks, William F.
1987 “Discourse genres in a theory of practice”. American ethnologist 14. 668–692.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1996 Language and communicative practice. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Hawkins, Joyce M. and Robert Allen
eds. 1991 The Oxford encyclopedic English dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Holt, Elizabeth and Paul Drew
2005 “Figurative pivots: The use of Figurative expressions in pivotal topic transitions”. Research on language and social interaction 38. 35–61.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson
1980 Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lévi-Strauss, Claude
1975 The raw and the cooked. New York: Harper&Row Publishers.Google Scholar
Mertz, Elizabeth and Jonathan Yovel
2000 “Metalinguistic awareness”. Jef Verschueren, Jan-Ola Östman, Jan Blommaert and Chris Bulcaen. eds. Handbook of pragmatics 200. Amsterdam&Philadelphia: John Benjamins 2000 1–26Google Scholar
Nord, Christiane
1997 Translating as a purposeful activity: Functionalist approaches explained. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Pym, Anthony
1998 Method in translation history. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Schieffelin, Bambi, Paul V. Kroskrity and Katryn A. Woolard
1998 Language ideologies: Practice and theory. Oxford&New York: Oxford University Press. [Oxford Studies in Anthropological Linguistics.]Google Scholar
Simeoni, Daniel
1998 “The pivotal status of the translator’s habitus”. Target 10:1. 1–39.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
The Collins Cobuild English dictionary
London: Harper Collins.
The new Oxford dictionary of English
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Toury, Gideon
1981 “Translated literature—System, norm, performance: Towards a TT-approach to literary translation”. Even-Zohar and Toury 1981 : 9–27.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1995 Descriptive Translation Studies and beyond. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2000 “The nature and role of norms in translation”. Venuti 2000 : 198–212Google Scholar
Tymoczko, Maria
1999 Translation in a postcolonial context: Early Irish literature in English translation. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Venuti, Lawrence
1998 The scandals of translation: Towards an ethics of difference. London&New York: Routledge.[ p. 44 ]   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
ed. 2000 The Translation Studies reader. London&New York: Routledge.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vieira, Else Ribeiro Pires
1994 “A postmodern translation esthetics in Brazil”. Mary Snell-Hornby, Franz Pöchhacker and Klaus Kaindl. eds. Translation Studies: An interdiscipline. Amsterdam: John Benjamins 1994 65–72.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar

Electronic sources