Discussion
In defence of polysystem theory

Nam Fung Chang

Abstract

This article revisits Itamar Even-Zohar’s polysystem theory, including its hypotheses on the position of translated literature and its relation with translation norms, and some of its basic assumptions and principles, such as the heterogeneity, dynamics and overlapping of systems, the quest for probabilistic laws, and objectivity and neutrality. Through reading Even-Zohar’s texts closely and tracing the later developments of the theory, it attempts to explore the complexities of the theory, and clear up some misunderstandings, citing examples from polysystem-inspired case studies. It also discusses the complications caused by the expansion made by Gideon Toury on the concept of “adequacy” and “acceptability”, presents a revised version of Even-Zohar’s hypothesis on the situations in which translated literature is likely to occupy a central position, and suggests ways in which polysystem theory can or should be rendered more intricate. It argues that polysystem theory and other cultural theories can be complementary and mutually enriching.

Keywords
Table of contents

Polysystem theory was developed by Itamar Even-Zohar in the 1970s for the study of language, literature and translation, and expanded into a general theory of culture in the 1990s. In the first twenty years since its birth, it had a great impact on translation studies and was well received by theorists. Gentzler (1993) made a very positive assessment of the theory. Although he questioned some of its basic tenets, he regarded the problems as “minor” (Gentzler 2001: 120). Hermans (1999) cast more serious doubts on some important assumptions of the theory in a systematic and substantial critique, but still endorsed systems thinking. With the rise to power of morally/politically committed approaches and the emergence of other cultural-sociological approaches in the twenty-first century, more and more [ p. 312 ]scholars find polysystem theory unable to handle the complexities and versatility of translation phenomena, and systems thinking in general seems to be on the verge of being abandoned. Meanwhile, Even-Zohar’s later writings, as well as some endeavours to augment polysystem theory (such as Chang 2000, 2001), have attracted little attention.

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

Agorni, Mirella
2007 “Locating Systems and Individuals in Translation Studies”. Michaela Wolf and Alexandra Fukari, eds. Constructing a Sociology of Translation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 1–36.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Bassnett, Susan
1998 “The Translation Turn in Cultural Studies”. Susan Bassnett André Lefevere. Constructing Cultures: Essays on Literary Translation. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. 123–140.Google Scholar
Chang Nam Fung
1998 “Politics and Poetics in Translation: Accounting for a Chinese Version of ‘Yes Prime Minister‘”. The Translator 4:2. 249–272.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
1998a “An Applied Discipline Obsessed with Loyalty—On the Chinese Tradition of Translation Studies” [in Chinese]. Journal of Translation Studies 2. 29–41.Google Scholar
2000 “Towards a Macro-polysystem Hypothesis”. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 8:2. 109–123.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
2001 “Polysystem Theory: Its Prospect As a Framework for Translation Research”. Target 13: 2. 317–332. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
2004Zhongxi yixue piping (Criticism of Chinese and Western Translation Theories). Beijing: Tsinghua University Press.Google Scholar
2005Yes Prime Manipulator: How a Chinese Translation of British Political Humour Came into Being. Hong Kong: Chinese University Press.Google Scholar
2008 “The Concept of Norms in Polysystem Theory” [in Chinese]. Journal of Foreign Languages 5. 64–71.Google Scholar
2009 “Repertoire Transfer and Resistance: The Westernization of Translation Studies in China”. The Translator 15:2. 305–325.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
2010 “Translation Studies, Academic Norms and Cultural Traditions” [in Chinese]. Chinese Translators Journal 2. 73–80.Google Scholar
Chen Fukang
1992Zhongguo yixue lilun shi gao (History of Chinese Translation Theory). Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.Google Scholar
Chong Yau Yuk
2000A Study of the Phenomenon of Authoritativeness in the Chinese Translations of the Protestant Bible [in Chinese]. Hong Kong: International Bible Society.Google Scholar
Codde, Philippe
2003 “Polysystem Theory Revisited”. Poetics Today 24:1. 91–126.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Even-Zohar, Itamar
1975 “Decisions in Translating Poetry” [in Hebrew]. Ha-sifrut/Literature 21. 32–45.Google Scholar
1978Papers in Historical Poetics. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University.Google Scholar
1979 “Polysystem Theory”. Poetics Today 1:1–2. 287–310.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
1990 “Polysystem Theory”. Poetics Today 11:1. 9–26.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
[ p. 346 ]
1990a “The Position of Translated Literature within the Literary Polysystem”. Poetics Today 11:1. 45–51.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
1990b “The ‘Literary System’”. Poetics Today 11:1. 27–44.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
1990c “Interference in Dependent Literary Polysystems”. Polysystem Studies, Poetics Today 11:1. 79–83.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
1990d “System, Dynamics, and Interference in Culture: A Synoptic View”. Poetics Today 11:1. 85–95.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
1997 “The Making of Culture Repertoire and the Role of Transfer”. Target 9:2. 355–363.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
1997a “Factors and Dependencies in Culture: A Revised Outline for Poly-system Culture Research”. Canadian Review of Comparative Literature 24:3. 15–34.Google Scholar
2002 “Literature as goods, Literature as Tools”. Neohelicon 1 (XXIX). 75–83.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Feidman, Yael S.
1985 “Poetics and Politics: Israeli Literary Criticism between East and West.” Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research vol. LII. 9–35.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Gentzler, Edwin
1993Contemporary Translation Theories. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
2001Contemporary Translation Theories (Revised 2nd Edition). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
2008Translation and Identity in the Americas: New Directions in Translation Theory. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gouanvic, Jean-Marc
2007 “Objectivation, réflexivité et traduction. Pour une re-lecture bourdieuscienne de la traduction. Michaela Wolf and Alexandra Fukari, eds. Constructing a Sociology of Translation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 79–92.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Hermans, Theo
1994 “Translation between Poetics and Ideology”. Translation and Literature 3. 138–145.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
1996 “Norms and the Determination of Translation: A Theoretical Framework”. Roman Álvarez and M. Carmen-África Vidal, eds. Translation, Power, Subversion. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. 25–51.Google Scholar
1999Translation in Systems: Descriptive and System-oriented Approaches Explained. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Huang Dexian
2006 “Duoyuanxitonglun shiyi: Zuohaer fangtan lu” (Clarifications on Polysystem Theory: Interview with Even-Zohar). Chinese Translators Journal 3. 57–60.Google Scholar
Lefevere, André
1988–1989 “Systems Thinking and Cultural Relativism”. Jadavpur Journal of Comparative Literature 26–27. 55–68.Google Scholar
1992Translation, Rewriting, & the Manipulation of Literary Fame. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lu Xun
1931/1984Lu Xun he Qu Qiubai guanyu fanyi de tongxin: Lu Xun de fuxin”. (Correspondence between Lu Xun and Qu Qiubai on Translation: Reply of Lu Xun). Luo Xinzhang, Ed. Fanyi lun ji (Essays on Translation). Beijing: Commercial Press. 273–279.Google Scholar
Meylaerts, Reine
2006 “Heterolingualism in/and Translation: How Legitimate Are the Other and His/Her Language? An Introduction”. Target 13: 2. 317–332Google Scholar
Said, Edward
1996Representations of the Intellectual. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
Simeoni, Daniel
1998 “The Pivotal Status of the Translator’s Habitus”. Target 10:1. 1–39.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Simon, Robert L.
1994Neutrality and the Academic Ethic. Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
So Sin Nga
2002 “A Critical Study of Inclusive Language in Protestant Chinese Bibles” [in Chinese]. MPhil. thesis, Lingnan University, Hong Kong.Google Scholar
Su Manshu
(trans) 1903/1991 “Beican shijie” (A Miserable World) Su Manshu wenji (The Works of Su Manshu). 2 vols. Guangzhou: Flower City Publishing House. II. 671–753.Google Scholar
[ p. 347 ]
Toury, Gideon
1980In Search of a Theory of Translation. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University.Google Scholar
1995Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
1998 “A Handful of Paragraphs on ‘Translation’ and ‘Norms’”. Current Issues in Language & Society 1–2. 10–32.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Tymoczko, Maria
1990 “Translation in Oral Tradition as a Touchstone for Translation Theory and Practice”. Susan Bassnett and André Lefevere, eds. Translation, History and Culture. London: Pinter (reprinted London: Cassell 1995). 46–55.Google Scholar
2000 “Translation and Political Engagement: Activism, Social Change and the Role of Translation in Geopolitical Shifts”. The Translator 6–1. 23–47.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Venuti, Lawrence
1998The Scandals of Translation: Towards an Ehtics of Difference. London: Routledge.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
2008The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation (2nd Edition). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wang Dongfeng
2000 “Cultural Position of Translated Literature and Translator’s Cultural Attitude” [in Chinese]. Chinese Translators Journal 4. 2–8.Google Scholar
2008 “When a Turning Occurs: Counter-evidence to Polysystem Hypothesis”. Wang Ning and Sun Yifeng, eds. Translation, Globalisation and Localisation: A Chinese Perspective. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. 140–154. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Wang Xiaoyuan
2006 “Translation, Ideology and Discourse: Literary Translation in China 1895–1911” [in Chinese]. PhD thesis, Lingnan University, Hong Kong.Google Scholar
Wolf, Michaela
2007 “Introduction: The Emergence of a Sociology of Translation”. Michaela Wolf and Alexandra Fukari, eds. Constructing a Sociology of Translation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 1–36.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
2007a “The Location of the ‘Translation Field’: Negotiating Borderlines between Pierre Bourdieu and Homi Bhabha”. Michaela Wolf and Alexandra Fukari, eds. Constructing a Sociology of Translation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 109–119.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Xu Jun
(ed.) 1996 Wenzi,wenxue,wenhua: Hong Yu Hei Han yi yanjiu (Language, Literature and culture: A Study of the Chinese Translations of Le rouge et le noir). Nanjjing: Nanjing University Press.Google Scholar
Yahalom, Shelly
1979 “Het gedrag van een literair polysysteem in een crisissituatie: Intersystemische contacten en soorten vertalingen”. André Lefevere and Ria Vanderauwera, eds. Vert aalwetenschap. Literatuur, wetenschap, vertaling en vertalen. Leuven: Acco. 64–85.Google Scholar
Zhang Qiyan
2005 “On the Non-adequacy of Polysystem Theory in Explaining Literary Translation” [in Chinese]. Journal of Sichuan International Studies University 1. 100–103.Google Scholar
Zhu Yige
2003 “Cong Pangde he Lin Shu fanyi ge’an fanguan duoyuanxitong lilun (Looking back at Polysystem Theory from a Case Study of the Translation of Ezra Pound and Lin Shu). Foreign Language Teaching Abroad 4. 25–28.Google Scholar