A missing link in Itamar Even-Zohar’s theoretical thinking
Nam Fung Chang
Lingnan University, Hong Kong
According to Itamar Even-Zohar, for a large social entity to be maintained, a culture repertoire must be invented to create internal cohesion and external differentiation, and from this repertoire certain items are chosen to build a collective identity. In contrast, imported items, if regarded as threats to this identity, may meet with resistance. This theory may shed light on Even-Zohar’s hypotheses that the “normal” position assumed by translated literature in the literary polysystem tends to be a peripheral one, and that translation tends towards acceptability when it is at the periphery.
In his seminal paper “The position of translated literature within the literary polysystem”, first published in 1978 (Even-Zohar 1990a), Itamar Even-Zohar puts forward two interrelated hypotheses: first, that the position assumed by translated literature tends to be a peripheral one except in three special situations—when the literary polysystem is young, weak, or in a crisis; and second, that translation tends towards acceptability when it is at the periphery, and towards adequacy when it is at the centre. He has not explained in detail the basis of these hypotheses, and has turned to culture research since the 1990s.
Bassnett, Susan and Harish Trivedi
1999 “Introduction: Of colonies, cannibals and vernaculars”. Susan Bassnett and Harish Trivedi, eds. Post-colonial translation: Theory and practice. London and New York: Routledge 1999 1–18.
1997 “The making of culture repertoire and the role of transfer”. Target 9: 2. 355–363.
1997a “Factors and dependencies in culture: A revised outline for polysystem research”. Canadian review of comparative literature 3. 15–34.
2000 “Culture repertoire and the wealth of collective entities”. Dirk De Geest et al., eds. Under construction: Links for the site of literary theory. Essays in honour of Hendrik Van Gorp. Leuven: Leuven University Press 2000 389–403.
2002 “Culture planning and cultural resistance in the making and maintaining of entities”. Sun Yat-Sen journal of humanities 14. 45–52.
2002a “Literature as goods, literature as tools”. Neohelicon XXIX: 1. 75–83.
1984 (first published in 1919). “Yi shu gan” yan [Reflections on the translating of books]. Translator’s notes itoria lDepartment, ed. Fanyi yanjiu lunwenji (1894–1948) [Selected papers in Translation Studies (1894–1948)]. Beijing: Waiyu jiaoxue yu yanjiu chubanshe 1984 59–63.
Gao Chang Fan
1989 “Cultural barriers in translation”. New comparison 8. 3–12.
ed.2002Zhongguo xiandai wenxue shi [History of modern Chinese literature]. Beijing: Kexue chubanshe.
1957 “The influence of Confucian ethics on the Chinese translations of Buddhist Sutras”. Kshitis Roy, ed. Liebenthal Festschrift: Sino-Indian studies v, Parts 3 & 4. Santiniketan: Visvabharati University 1957 156–170.
2004 “Zhongyang gaodu guanzhu Gang zhengzhi fazhan: Tang Jiaxuan chi Li Zhuming ‘bai yang miao’” [Central government deeply concerned about HK’s constitutional reform: Tang Jiaxuan Blasts Martin Lee for “Worshipping at a foreign temple”]. March 5: A08.
1991 “The national and the universal: Can there be such a thing as world culture?”. Antony D. King, ed. Culture, globalization and the world-system: Contemporary conditions for the representation of identity. Basingstoke: Macmillan 1991 91–105.
2003 “Tan Zhongguo xuepai de fanyi lilun—Zhongguo fanyixue luohou yu xifang ma?” [On the translation theory of the Chinese school—Is Chinese translatology behind West translatology?]. Foreign languages and their teaching 1. 52–54.