research about literary translation

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Literary translation and communication.

• Department of English, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, University of Macau, Macao, Macau SAR, China

The translator's main role is that of a communicator—and a cross-cultural one at that. Literary translation communicates more than semantic meaning. A range of literary features is also expected to be reproduced. Reconstructing the literary value and aesthetic experience of the source text is significantly hampered by literary untranslatability. The fundamental purpose of translation is communication, but because it is subject to a multitude of constraints that seriously limit communicative possibilities, literary untranslatability constantly threatens to hinder successful communication. Since translation is often said to transfer the original message to the target reader, communication breaks down when this attempt fails—which occurs more often than not. Literary translation purports to capture, convey and communicate multi-layered and interconnected information and feelings about another situation and community. Any monolithic perception of this inherent irreducibility of all-round functionality is at odds with the nature of literary translation. From a communicative perspective, literary translation aims at developing sophisticated forms to better convey and communicate ideas and feelings, as well as to provide situational cues to elicit appropriate responses from the target reader in tandem with that of the source reader. In light of this, cross-cultural adjustment predicted by contextual conditioning is constantly required to competently communicate the transcultural dimension that is intrinsic to literary translation. Translation is often referred to as a means of cross-cultural or intercultural communication, but how exactly translational communication operates still warrants further investigation. This article aims to examine this relationship from several interrelated aspects and, in this respect, to make a distinction between communication and convey, the latter being a commonly used verb in translation studies.

Introduction

Translation involves two languages to communicate with two different audiences. The two languages may be similar or dissimilar, and in the latter case, communication problems abound. Literary translation serves as a network and nexus to make connections between languages and cultures by introducing the foreign to the target reader. Literary translation is often motivated and designed to serve one or more purposes. Since literary translation is never an innocent activity, the translator's purpose may well be different from that of the original author. Cross-cultural communication is a fraught endeavor that requires mediation, appropriation, and negotiation. Because a literary text is processed and consumed by the target reader with a different background of literary tradition and from a different perspective of culture, ideology, and aesthetics, the translated text is interpreted and thus experienced differently, all of which contribute to the functioning of communication. An overarching awareness of the essential role of interactive communication underscores the interconnectedness of cross-cultural communication in literary translation. Acceptability has always been closely linked to literary translation. It is not only a matter of commercial considerations but also of the prospective literary status of the translated text in the target system. Literary translation is much more than semantic, and due consideration must be given to the reproduction of literariness that determines and informs the ultimate reception of the translated text. Another challenge that needs to be addressed in terms of adequate and reliable communication is the lack of substitutability in literary translation. With this in mind, some basic questions need to be addressed, such as what and how to communicate in terms of literary translation. In answering these questions, literary translation must first and foremost involve contextualization and recontextualization. Intercultural mediation works in tandem with literary translation, without which it would be impossible to communicate literary meaning. The necessity of retranslation(s) is in a sense justified by the concatenation of literary irreducibility and communicative referentiality, both of which are considered essential attributes of literary translation.

What and how to communicate?

Translation is concerned with situations of protracted displacement in which meaning becomes brittle and susceptible. Literary translation conveys the experiences of those who reside in different cultures yet reading literature from other cultures may cause meaning to become unclear and communication to disintegrate. First and foremost, communication connotes accessibility, which prefigures acceptability to a considerable extent. The question of what is communicated and how is of pertinent importance. It seems that, as dictated by common sense, the translator must find out the authorial intention so as to know for sure what is to be communicated. However, even if the translator strives to reflect the authorial intention, it is far from certain that this intent can even be ascertained. This complicates the entire process of communication. What does the translator communicate? Dixon and Bortolussi (1996 , p. 406) contend that “... it is often unreasonable to ascribe a single, coherent intention to the author of a literary work”. The fact is that it is often not only unreasonable but impossible to ascertain with reasonable certainty the exact intention of the author. The widespread but misguided assumption of authorial intention is at odds with the communicative reality of literature, which is defined by dialogic and polyphonic narrative discourse. What needs to be questioned is whether there is an intentional interpretation of the intended message.

At any rate, communication requires mediation: it is impossible to communicate well without paying due attention to reception. This is particularly the case when it comes to the need to cross both linguistic and cultural boundaries. Simply put, communication cannot be taken for granted if the transmission of only a partial view of the original is to be avoided. While clarity is an important aspect of communication, it is not in the least the only one in literary translation. Evidently, the literary translator grapples with not only semantic information but also poetic features. If stylistic peculiarities in the original are to be reproduced in translation, a communication infrastructure must be established to represent the relative fullness of meaning. Viewed in this light, the primary concern of communication remains semantic intelligibility but for literary translation, both cultural and literary irreducibility is invoked in challenging the hypothesis of homogeneity. The intelligibility and irreducibility of cultural meaning pose a precarious situation to the translator, who strives to reconcile and balance these competing demands. In practical terms, however, an either-or dichotomy can be thus created. Out of necessity, communication sometimes favors reductionism “for the sake of pragmatic effect” ( Newmark, 1982 , p. 18). In fact, this dichotomy is a false one. A combined semantic and communicative translation is remedial to oversimplification in translation. A host of factors may be attributed to the complexity of literary translation with regard to communication. Newmark speaks of a “balancing act” by the translator that takes into account factors such as the author, the reader, the norms and culture of the target language, and, in the case of literary translation, literary traditions ( Newmark, 1982 , p. 18). The performative act of literary translation is an integral part of cross-cultural communication, the success of which depends on a balanced scheme that brings out all facets of cultural meaning.

Translation is meant to serve a purpose or purposes, overt or covert. Thus, the functions of translation are prioritized according to the needs of the translator. In late Qing-period China, the famous reformist Liang Qichao (1873–1929) was particularly committed to the translation of political fiction ( Luo, 2005 ). He gave priority to politics over art, claiming, “Politics is the first priority, art the second” ( Liang, 2001 , p. 147). In order to promote the effectiveness of the political reforms, he altered or abridged the source text. This is an exemplary case of the decided shift from source-orientedness to target-orientedness, which signifies that the emphasis is placed on the effect or impact of communication. “Communicative translation is on the whole responsible for importing many ideas and discoveries into a culture...” ( Newmark, 1982 , p. 19). Literary translation can be a powerful political or ideological weapon with which the translator communicates certain beliefs and values by selecting the appropriate source texts, which are variously manipulated in the process of translation. In this regard, “Who is the translator?” question is of great relevance to what functions a translation is aimed at serving.

How translation communicates is related to the attitude and feelings of the translator. There is little doubt that translation is subject to interpretation and manipulation. According to Nida, in the context of translation, communication entails encoding and decoding ( Nida, 1972 , p. 310). In order to decode what is encoded, the reader must be active. Translation problematizes the “facility” with which people communicate because the “codes of two languages are never the same” ( Nida, 1972 , p. 310). In this sense, the codes in translation must be formulated in such a way that the target reader can decode the meaning conveyed. While encoding requires interpretation, the act of re-encoding in the target language is influenced by the attitude of the translator, whose way of doing so contributes significantly to the shaping of the target text and its effect on the target reader. The feelings of the translator may enter into the process of re-encoding. As for the translator's attitude, it makes a significant difference to reception whether it is a case of detachment or involvement. Resonant empathy and subsequent interaction are unmistakable indicators of successful cross-cultural communication. Translation is the result of asynchronous re-encoding, and the temporal distance allows a host of factors, including affective ones, to play various roles in shaping the final product of translation. Given a given semantic range, the interpreted signifieds are re-encoded in linguistic and cultural signifiers and representations, the selection of which reveals the preferences and performing decisions of the translator. The signifieds represented in the source text require interpretive effort and communicative competence because the chosen signifiers are capable of representing what the signifiers are intended or presumed to be intended by the author or the translator.

The workings of literary translation can be better understood by considering how literary communication functions. Literary translation is by no means limited to semantic representations. The heuristic nature of literary translation means that focusing exclusively on conveying semantic information risks losing the aesthetic appeal of the source text. For literary translation, semantic elusiveness is no less a problem than aesthetic elusiveness. Often, the proper rendering of the stylistic features of the original is undervalued in favor of semantic accuracy. However, literary translation cannot be separated from literary irreducibility, which implies the fullness of meaning, including cultural and aesthetic meaning. The aesthetic dimension, including its norms, values, qualities, and implications, is also expected to be communicated to the target reader. To be sure, literary irreducibility must be paramount in order for literary translation to stand out from other types of translation. Seen in this light, the connotations of words with associative meaning in the original feed into the very essence of literary communication and must be carefully reproduced in translation so as not to diminish or detract from the aesthetic pleasure of reading the translated text. A proper understanding of the distinctiveness of literary communication enables the translator to find a way to enliven translation, which can then be considered both aesthetically and culturally acceptable.

Context of situation

Cross-cultural dialogue cannot exist without context, and the act of literary translation is shaped and constrained by contextual factors. Further research is required on the underlying function or role of cross-cultural context in literary translation. Translation invariably entails contextual changes or adjustments, and although rendering the commonly assumed textual transfer is problematic, when it comes to context, the situation is somewhat different. The existence of context helps to specify or clarify meaning, but since translation is involved in two sets of contexts, the intersection of which destabilizes the production of meaning in the target text, possibly leading to confusion or unintelligibility, or misunderstanding. The two sets of contexts, which may or may not be similar or comparable and which may or may not belong to the same historical periods, are capable of generating different meanings. This is due to the fact that translation is produced in a different language, in a different context, and for a different audience, resulting in a transformation that is defined by a different meaning, thus adding a great deal of complexity to the whole practice of cross-cultural communication. In the absence of the awareness of cultural displacement and cultural interface, literary translation can barely function. Literal translation accentuates cultural meaning transfer since textual reproduction is cross-culturally conditioned and aesthetically dependent in this situation. Meanwhile, in conjunction with this new context, a different perspective is brought to bear on cross-cultural adjustment to avoid dichotomizing the two sets of contexts created by translation.

To be more precise, translation is not just about one context, but about multiple contexts, some of which may be invisible or seemingly unworthy of attention. However, they are all conducive to the reproduction of a given literary text that is being translated. An overarching translational context consists of an array of related or interrelated contexts. First and foremost, there is a historical context. A source text belongs to the past, and possibly a distant one, as in the case of William Shakespeare. When translating such texts into the target language, the existence of a historical context cannot be denied and must be taken into account by the translator. Derrida argues:

And it is already clear that, even in French, things change from one context to another. More so in the German, English, and especially American contexts, where the same word is already attached to very different connotations, inflections, and emotional or affective values ( Derrida, 1988 , p. 1).

Different cultural locations and contexts give meaning to different interpretations. Contextual changes generate interpretative possibilities and also subtly or not so subtly change various aspects of meaning and how they relate to the changed contexts. Different meaning construction and reconstruction processes provide for the shaping of the translated text.

It is probably very difficult to repudiate the emphasis on extra-literary context, as the New Critics are wont to do. The translator's effort is placed in jeopardy if the related historical context is disregarded. Moreover, New Criticism holds that close reading provides the context for its own interpretation of the text being read, and the text in question is responsible for creating its own context, which gives rise to the translator's context of interpretation: this is significant in terms of the motive or conditions in which meaning is processed and interpreted. Equally relevant and important is a wider social context that governs and constitutes the reality of translation. The translator examines and evaluates their “text-transformation strategies within the opportunities and constraints of interpersonal contacts and the wider social context” ( Jones, 2004 , p. 722). In summary, a multiplicity of functions is ascribed to literary translation determined by contexts. The wider social context of communicative activities can be analyzed in relation to the contextual parameters of the linguistic and extra-linguistic context of literary translation.

The reception of literary translations is of importance to patrons, publishers, and translators alike. The context that influences reception encompasses a variety of agencies that mediate the reception of literature. A plurality of perspectives from these agencies on various facets of translation activity underpins consideration of the extraliterary factors that dictate the reception of translated literature. In general, it may be asserted that poor translations impair reception and imperil the literary status of the translated text. In his dissertation on the reception of Latin American literature in the United States, James Remington Krause points out that a “failed translation” induced by a distorted, i.e., unreliable version “hinders” reception by the American reader ( Krause, 2010 , p. 2). While not always the case, this is true in many instances. A distorted and unreliable translation of the original can be quite successful commercially because it accommodates local preferences. And also because it saves the target reader from having to sift through a labyrinth of cultural allusions and references, an abridged translation can sometimes be very enticing and worth reading. In this view, a lack of readability rather than a lack of accuracy perfectly encapsulates poor translations, which represent poorly communicated cultural content and values.

The situation of reception of translated literary texts is assigned a specific context. The needs and expectations of the target reader are decisive factors. A certain degree of mutability is required to make adjustments and adaptations to a new context:

Translation recreates past texts and becomes an autonomous act creating solely sustainable texts for the present and the future. In the same vein, adaptation treats intertextuality as a kind of versatile creativity that generates multiple forms to meet the changing requirements of new readers and contexts ( Tsui, 2012 , p. 58).

The shift of focus from source-orientedness to target-orientedness in modern translation studies shows the importance of responding to the new context in which the needs and expectations of the target reader are to be met. Of course, all source and target texts are written and rewritten in different contexts and are also consumed in different contexts. Moreover, the target reader, with their cross-cultural knowledge and communal frames for reading must be appropriately contextualized and situated in a particular sociocultural setting in order to enhance reception.

Another crucial point is that literary translation must pay attention to the efficacy of communication in terms of cohesion, as is shown in the following excerpt from The Deer and the Cauldron , a martial arts novel by Louis Cha, also known as Jin Yong ( Minford, 1993 , p. 87):

韦小宝 …. 问道: “这小子是什么来头? 瞧你吓得这个样子。茅十八道: “什么小子不小子的? 你嘴里放干净些。” This is rendered by the translator as:

“Who is this man?” he (Trinket) asked. “He seemed to put you in a dreadful funk all of a sudden.”

“Mind your language!” retorted Whiskers.

The back translation of “这小子是什么来头?” is “Who is this guy?” and is translated literally without considering the context, whereas 什么小子不小子的 does not allow for back translation because it makes no sense in its literal meaning. Thus, it is simply reduced to the verb “retorted”. Obviously, the word 小子 is context-dependent, the repeated use of which is significant here. For this reason, the word must be contextualized to account for Whiskers' hostile reaction.

The translator lacks circumspection in rendering the Chinese word 小子, although it can indeed mean “man” or “boy” and is often used as a term of endearment, as in “my dear mate” When contextualized, this situation inevitably sounds disrespectful or abusive, without which “mind your language” would be completely out of place, and the target reader is puzzled by Whiskers' brusque retort, which seems unwarranted.

Word choice is crucial in this situation. The original function of 小子 must be correlated with its offensive character. The choice, therefore, falls on the word “sod”:

“Who is this sod?” he asked. “You look scared out of your wits.”

“Don't you sod me and stop your insolence!” said Whiskers.

In the second line, “sod” is used as a verb to counteract the grossly simplified “retort.” The irreducibility of “Don't you sod me” should not be replaced by “retort” marked by explicitness. Adequacy and irreducibility are intertwined, and both are overshadowed by an overt emphasis on effective communication.

Intercultural mediation

It is generally known that there is no such thing as an unmediated literary translation. Literary translation is so entrenched in any attempt to convey cultural information that no literary translation can function without it. Therefore, it must be said that the act of translating literary texts must necessarily engage with the cultural dimension of literary texts. The target readers' insufficient knowledge of the source culture must be acknowledged, and it would be irresponsible to pretend that missing linkages and gaps do not exist. According to Hatim, “cross-cultural misunderstandings” are often ascribed to “a breakdown in communication” ( Hatim, 1997 , p. 157). There is no denying that breakdowns in communication are due to cultural differences and implications. Unless cultural meaning is more or less immediately understood by the target reader, the reading of a literary translation is seriously affected. The contextually embedded meaning-making in various cross-cultural encounters is fundamental to the way cultural meaning is reproduced in translation. In the context of literary translation, cultures are necessarily mediated, leading to the operationalization of appropriation and ultimately acculturation and assimilation.

The intervention and manipulation that constitute this process of cross-cultural rewriting are tempered by re-adjustments and realignments that represent the translator's perceptions of cultural differences that can subsequently be integrated into the target culture. All this suggests that the translator's task is that of a cross-cultural communicator and that mediation and appropriation are an essential part of literary translation in order to improve communication. According to Anthony J. Liddicoata:

The mediational role of the translator “(…) goes beyond the expression of meaning through language to encapsulate the need to communicate the meanings that are present in text but which are expressed implicitly, through context” ( Liddicoata, 2015 , p. 355).

In other words, interpretation is required on the part of the translator to express clearly in the target text what is implicitly expressed in the original. Mediation is administered through a given cross-cultural context in which communication is open and subject to manipulative interpretation and performance. Literary translation vacillates between implicitness and explicitness and also between inclusion and exclusion.

Translation is a rewriting process but also a recontextualizing process. Rewriting and recontextualizing are conjoined together. Translation inevitably leads to some form of recontextualization. To recontextualize foreign ideas and practices means to interpret them in a different cultural context. Cross-cultural dialogue and engagement take place in the setting of reception. Venuti outlines the various functions of recontextualization in relation to the recontextualizing process, which is.

[...] the creation of another network of intertwining relations by and within the translation, a receiving intertext [...] [as well as] another context of reception whereby the translation is mediated by promotion and marketing strategies' ( Venuti, 2007 , p. 30).

The relocation of the setting of reception suggests that certain changes are inevitable. Essentially, recontextualization is motivated by the perception of situations for various communicative functions. The resulting different context of reception requires translation to be mediated in view of the market.

Usually, the target reader is not the intended audience of the original work, and there may be some problems in conveying to them the originally intended function, although it is not so difficult to communicate to them the function intended by the translator. When a translation is consumed in the indigenous context, the target reader is provided with an opportunity for interpretation and understanding of the source material. Liddicoat points out that “mediation is fundamentally an interpretive act” ( Liddicoata, 2015 , p. 354). Perhaps it is more accurate to say mediation is based on and underpinned by interpretation. The mediating role of the translator.

The translator as mediator stands between the reader and writer and rewrites the text for an audience that is not the audience imagined by the writer and does not share the language, knowledge, assumptions, etc. that the writer has assumed of the imagined audience for the text ( Liddicoata, 2015 , p. 356).

This suggests that rewriting is culturally ingrained with mediation, which at least partially initiates rewriting. It is the unsharable or less sharable parts of the original text that require cross-cultural processing. A new cultural context thus created is a direct outcome of literary translation, generating an interpretive framework for retargeting a different group of readers. Translation produces a text that has been rewritten to contextually address the target audience.

Decontextualization pertains to the necessity to disregard the previous context associated with the source text. This is sometimes done to circumvent the constraints the translator faces when trying to “transfer” cultural material from the original. When the translation process becomes too alienated, which can hinder communication, the need for recontextualization arises, signifying that the context of the original author is replaced by the context provided by the translator, which is no longer the immediate context of the original text, but a recreated one for the target text. Once this immediacy is lost, “… a far more recurrent designation to describe this notion is ‘oblique translation”' ( Vinay and Darbelnet, 1995 , p. 1). Recontextualization, however, does not imply a complete substitution, i.e., the replacement of the original context with the target context; rather, a derivative context may appear as a result of recontextualization. Given that the unfamiliar may represent the unperceivable, the existing habits and norms associated with the familiar in the target language and culture require and influence recontextualization. This can lead to a recontextualization of the original in a native cultural milieu and ethos. Another related consideration is that the original context may well be multifaceted and situation-dependent, the cultural-political conditions and practices of the target system may simplify or override the original functionality, which likely determines and establishes a specific semantic range within which interpretation can take place and be reasonably deciphered. Simply put, the production of the source text and the reproduction of the target text are contextualized somewhat differently. However, even though strict semantic equivalence is difficult to achieve, dynamic equivalence in a holistic sense is a powerful way of communicating.

Referential communication

Literary translation is marked by cultural references and allusions that can bring translation to the brink of untranslatability and cast a shadow over intercultural communication. On the surface, these references and allusions exhibit a tendency to make understanding difficult. If the literary translator, however, decides to communicate meaning only by disregarding all the seemingly non-essential material, the outcome will be disastrous. References and allusions are by no means superfluous, and effective literary communication depends on them. The source and target readers have ways of decoding, which complicates the task of communication for the target reader in a translation situation. The referential function is often different in a different linguistic and cultural context. Yet while adhering to the referential integrity of the original constrains translation, the translator still needs to find a way to reproduce the referential multiplicity one way or another. Referential transfer can be problematic. When emphasized, it indicates a source-oriented tendency; when not, it indicates a target-oriented inclination. However, even if target-orientedness is the chosen option, referential processing cannot be precluded. It goes without saying that translation cannot communicate everything and inclusiveness including referential connectedness is impossible. In sum, when literal transfer of references or allusions does not work, the translator's search for functional equivalence seems to be a conciliatory alternative. Based on constructing the dynamic functioning of communication, literary translation can employ a range of related strategies to reproduce the effect of the original on the target reader.

The question is: does the translator communicate with an original author, living or dead, one way or another, or simply get on with what they have interpreted from their reading of the source text? In reality, certain cultural references or allusions appear to be non-essential and are therefore considered unimportant or less relevant. The referentiality of cross-cultural communication resists simple treatment. As for translating or writing in the original, the question remains: what is to be communicated? What about culture-specific lexis or cultural referents? It is common knowledge that literary translation is referentially difficult. If the translator plays it safe, the end result may well be bland and aesthetically unappealing. A successful literary translation is predicated on the idea of imaginative boldness and adventure. At the same time, referential versatility is vitally required for identifying and distinguishing between dead or hackneyed metaphors and vibrant or compelling metaphors. On the other hand, an interpreted treatment of a reference or allusion is also required when references or allusions are recognized as being of little aesthetic value or significance. It is often observed that when a metaphor is translated idiomatically, it is naturally adjusted, modified, adulterated, or even substituted. In this process of supposed replication, various forms of transformation are often manifested as a result of the demand for a certain degree of flexibility and adaptability for the sake of readability, pointing to the creative dimension of literary translation.

Another important indication of cross-cultural communication lies in the relationship between signification and intertextuality in literary translation, where meaning refers to other texts in the source culture. After references and allusions, intertextuality poses a greater challenge to translation in conveying what is intended in the source text. Given cultural and historical differences, the precariousness of intertextuality in relation to reading is exacerbated by the act of translation and also not less importantly, by the rewriting process in which other texts are read by the author who then rewrites them by interweaving them into the source text, which is the result of rewriting intertexts. According to Venuti, intertextuality is the key to the production and reception of translations. Yet it is almost impossible to translate most foreign intertexts completely or accurately. “As a result, they are usually replaced by analogous but ultimately different intertextual relations in the receiving language” ( Venuti, 2009 , p. 157). This is undoubtedly an inevitable but benign reconfiguration to ensure communicative access. The translator is dealing with signifiers that refer only to other signifiers in a multidimensional space. At times the other signifiers represent other texts, and it is the translator's task to help the target reader recognize the intertextuality in translation.

The establishment of “analogous … intertextual relations” in the target text is by no means easy, for the loss and dysfunction of intertextuality are difficult to avoid. Venuti proposes a “solution” but immediately refutes it:

To compensate for the loss of intertextuality, the translator might rely on paratextual devices, such as an introductory essay or annotations, which can be useful in restoring the foreign cultural context and in articulating the cultural significance of an intertextual relation as well as its linguistic basis. Yet in making such additions the translator's work ceases to be translating and becomes commentary ( Venuti, 2009 , p. 159).

Paratextual devices are obviously a less-than-ideal way of addressing the issue of intertextual relations in the source text. Venuti's concern is well-grounded, and this would call into question the identity of translation. But if additions are used sparingly and judiciously, and only in a paraphrasing way, the translated text does not necessarily become a commentary. Perhaps what is in the source text is not fully conveyed, but the important dimensions are communicated to the target reader.

A related consideration in terms of translating references, allusions and intertexts is for the translation scholar to decide which of the two words “convey” and “communicate” to choose to describe how the translation is presented and received. It is observed that in translation studies, the two verbs are sometimes used when referring to the transmission of information across linguistic and cultural boundaries. However, there seem to be some subtle differences between them. When we look at translation as a form of communication, it is necessary to address these differences. For instance, translation is said to convey the same meaning as the original ( Gutt, 1990 ; Menacere, 1992 ; Gonzales and Zantjer, 2015 ). The implicit emphasis is on source-orientedness, which refers to carrying the message, including its referential and pragmatic effects, from the source language to the target language. In this sense, it is akin to transfer or delivery. Communicating, on the other hand, suggests imparting or transmitting and is less straightforward and involves a more conscious effort. Therefore, it suggests a certain form or degree of mediation, the overarching purpose of which is to ostensibly make provision for reception. It is comparatively more purposeful, seeking to ensure the message is delivered to the target reader in a certain way, with greater emphasis on target-orientedness. It is possible for something to be conveyed, but it does not necessarily mean that it is communicated with an emphasis on the effectiveness of transmitting information, which contributes to intelligibility. This is reflected in Newmark's statement that communicative translation can be overly differently motivated by the translator who intends to “achieve a certain effect” ( Newmark, 1977 , p. 167). It is no surprise that authorial intention and translatorial intention in communication do not always converge. This is a double communication: the translator communicates first with the source text and then with the target reader. Moreover, communication tends to be interpretive in order to match a particular translated text with a contextualized understanding of reality.

Retranslation

The reasons for re-translating certain texts can be manifold but improving the effectiveness of communication is one of the main reasons. The outdated nature of earlier translations may have hindered or impaired communication, creating the need to “update” existing texts. With earlier translations, ideological and aesthetic issues come into play in the context of changing cultural standards and the ceaseless pursuit of an ideal translation. A new translation may not be ideal, but it signals a conscious effort to improve. Moreover, as Massardier-Kenney notes, a number of steps can be taken to get things right: “...corrections of mistranslations, reinstatement of censored or deleted passages, datedness of the language, new insights into the text, allusions clarified, improvement of the awkward style of the first translation, etc.” ( Massardier-Kenney, 2015 , p. 73). When retranslation is deemed necessary, the communicative situation in the target culture has usually changed and a contextual evolution can be observed. In addition, the changed circumstances can bring about tolerance of the foreign, and the target reader is more willing to experience or even embrace foreign otherness. As a result, more accuracy and reliability are provided by the retranslator, who is able to actualize, in the new version, the potential meaning that is not included in the previous version(s). Improved inclusiveness is a strong justification for retranslation.

The aforementioned are some general patterns for retranslation. The history of literary translation is not a clear linear progression. D. H. Lawrence's Lady Chatterley's Lover in Chinese translation has gone through many versions since 1936. Many of them are abridged versions, and so far, two complete translations are available. The first of the two, translated by Rao Shuyi, was released in 1936. The retranslation by Zhao Susu was published in 2004. With a temporal gap of 68 years between the two versions, one would expect some significant differences. Not surprisingly, the retranslation is more circumspect in translating sex scenes than the early version when censorship regarding sex scenes was not as strict. Yet the most extraordinary part of the story was the 1986 reprint of this 1936 translation by Hunan Renmin Chubanshe (Human People's Publishing House). It caused a sensational stir. 50,000 copies of the first edition were printed. However, the timing of the publication was not favorable. Soon after its publication, some people considered the book “pornographic” and reported it to the highest authorities. The release of this translated text was banned. However, when Zhao Susu, who would be the retranslator, came across this Lawrence's novel, he believed that it deserved wider circulation in China. Almost immediately after its publication in January 2004, followed by a new edition in March of the same year, Zhao's retranslation became a seasonal bestseller and sold over 100,000 copies, making it a popular book among readers ( Liu, 2013 , p. 75).

While the 1936 translation was republished in 1986—half a century after its first release, the retranslation was not published until 2004, 18 years after the controversy over the reprint. Both translations are marked “Complete Translation” on the front cover. Yet, as mentioned above, the new version is a bowdlerized one, perhaps because the translator or/and the publisher did not want to get into trouble with the censors. So, in the 1936 version practically all the “sensual” sexual descriptions of the original text are retained. In this sense, it is an unabridged translation. However, the retranslation is not strictly a complete version of the original, since many of the sex scenes are either missing or heavily abridged, or simply marked by apostrophes. Some of the “offensive” words have been toned down by the translator. An outstanding example is “fuck”. In the translation, it is rendered “love making” (zuoai) as opposed to “sexual intercourse” in the original translation. It is, admittedly also a less direct way of translating. Another word is “penis.” Rao's translation is quite simple, calling a penis a penis. However, Zhao's translation is euphemistic and is rendered as “spear” (qiang), “root of life” (minggenzi), and “that thing” (nahuo). He conceded the publisher should eliminate hundreds of sexual organ allusions and explicit sex scenes, which must be appropriately toned down to avoid being grouped with pornographic literature ( Liu, 2013 , p. 75). Despite everything, the translation primarily serves the purpose of proving an “acceptable” translation for the target reader. It can be felicitously interpreted as an “improvement” in terms of acceptability in the sense of circumventing censorship.

Given the improved reception situation (even if this is not always the case, as the example above shows), the intertextual possibilities can be further explored so that the reading experience of the target reader can be reshaped. According to Venuti, “Intertextuality enables and complicates translation, preventing it from being an untroubled communication and opening the translated text to interpretive possibilities that vary with cultural constituencies in the receiving situation” ( Venuti, 2009 , p. 157). The reception situation has no doubt changed. The intertextually untranslatable has become somewhat translatable, or at least less untranslatable. While it is true that “... intertextual relations, in particular, cannot be reproduced merely by a close rendering of the words and phrases that establish those relations in the foreign text” ( Venuti, 2009 , p. 159), a retranslation can take advantage of the changed “intertextual relations” and open up more dimensions of the source text to the target reader. The richness and magnitude of cross-cultural communication can be better realized. Against this background, canonical works are more likely to be retranslated in the belief that what is merely inchoate and amorphous in the earlier translation can be rendered or developed, possibly in a different light but more in line with what was originally intended. Also, more aspects of empathy, motivation, and emotional involvement should be conveyed to the target reader.

All this is made possible by the changed situational context that has become the basis for the development of meaning. What was explicitly rendered becomes redundant. With better-developed cross-cultural knowledge on the part of the target reader, more of the implicitness can be recovered in the new translation, along with more referential properties of the original words. In short, the once-impaired adequacy of the previous translation can be restored. As Susanne Cadera notes, “… a new translation of the same literary work can indicate historical, social and cultural changes in the target culture that lead to the need for a new version” ( Cadera, 2016 , p. 11). The retranslator also has the opportunity to bring out more of the multiple implications and nuances, reconcile cultural incompatibilities, and eliminate metaphorical incongruities. Moreover, the retranslator should be better able to convey the ineffable or the untranslatable. The resulting more interpretive possibilities lead to a greater variety of manipulations. Furthermore, “… comparison of retranslations of the same work can reveal different types of manipulation due to the social and historical context” ( Cadera, 2016 , p. 14). Manipulations suggest that a slightly different message is being conveyed, or they may be motivated by an effort to overcome untranslatability. Retranslation is an act of re-rewriting based on the previous rewriting, and different spatial scales are created to allow for re-mediated communication.

Translation is a means of communication between different worldviews and cultural experiences connected by a communication infrastructure that enables the flow of knowledge and information. One of the ways to enable and promote global communication is through literary translation. The effectiveness of translation is a primary concern that is inextricably linked to whether it succeeds in bringing outstanding literary works to the target reader. This depends largely on the quality of communication and involves more than semantic translation, for the communication of literary meaning through translation must be central. The socio-political dimension cannot be separated from the difference and diversity inherent in the practice of translation. Unlike other types of translation, poetics plays a prominent role in literary translation in a cross-cultural context, and the transmission of aesthetic pleasure and aesthetic taste is essential. The incommensurability of one context with another leads to a form of recontextualization. The uprooting and displacement caused by translation are unsettling and contextualization on the part of the translator can help situate a text in a particular historical moment, providing a basis or framework for interpretation. The originally contextualized cultural material is decontextualized to facilitate communication and then recontextualized so that the target reader can engage with the introduced cultural material. Interpretation, contextualization, and recontextualization involve cross-cultural references and allusions as well as intertextual understanding. The recoverability and irrecoverability of the original context aside, in order to bring foreign otherness manifested as the unknown or the unfamiliar into the target text and for it to make sense to the target reader, mediation is an essential part of cross-cultural communication, which leads to intercultural rewriting since forceful transfer is not conducive to communication. Therefore, literary irreducibility is required, which underlines the instability and indeterminacy of literary meaning. All this contributes to the complexity and interconnectedness of the multiple dimensions of literary communication.

Data availability statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author/s.

Author contributions

The author confirms being the sole contributor of this work and has approved it for publication.

Conflict of interest

The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Cadera, S. M. (2016). “Literary retranslation in context: a historical, social and cultural perspective”, in Literary Retranslation in Context , eds S. M. Cadera, and A. S. Walsh (Oxford and New York, NY: Peter Lang). doi: 10.3726/b10749

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Derrida, J. (1988). “Letter to a Japanese Friend trans. David B. Allison,” in Derrida and Différance , eds D. Wood, and R. Bernasconi (Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press), 1–8.

Google Scholar

Dixon, P., and Bortolussi, M. (1996). Literary communication: effects of reader-narrator cooperation. Poetics 23, 405–430.

Gonzales, L., and Zantjer, R. (2015). Translation as a user-localization practice. Techn. Commun. 62, 271–284.

Gutt, E. A. (1990). A theoretical account of translation-without a translation theory. Target. Int. J. Transl. Stud. 2, 135–164.

Hatim, B. (1997). Communication Across Cultures: Translation Theory and Contrastive Text Linguistics . Exeter: University of Exeter Press.

Jones, F. R. (2004). Ethics, aesthetics and Décision : literary translating in the wars of the Yugoslav succession. Meta Transl. J. 49, 711–728. doi: 10.7202/009777ar

Krause, J. R. (2010). Translation and the reception and influence of latin american literature in the United States (PhD Dissertation). Vanderbilt University.

Liang, Q. (2001). “On the relationship between the novel and the masses,” in An Edited Collection of Articles in the Yinbing Room, Vol. 1 (Kunming: Yunnan Education Press), 758–760.

Liddicoata, A. J. (2015). Intercultural mediation, intercultural communication and translation. Perspect. Stud. Translatol . 24, 354–364. doi: 10.1080/0907676X.2014.980279

Liu, Y. (2013). “性伦理视角下的《查泰莱夫人的情人》: 赵苏苏译本分析 ( Lady Chatterley's Lover from the perspective of sexual ethics: an analysis of Zhao Susu's translated version). J. Lang. Literat. For. Lang. Educ. Teach . 41, 74–75; 129.

Luo, X. (2005). Ideology and literary translation. Perspect. Stud. Transl. Theory Pract. 13, 178–187. doi: 10.1080/09076760508668990

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Massardier-Kenney, F. (2015). Toward a rethinking of retranslation. Transl. Rev. 92, 73–85. doi: 10.1080/07374836.2015.1086289

Menacere, M. (1992). Arabic discourse: overcoming stylistic difficulties in translation. Babel 38, 28–37.

Minford, J. (1993). The Deer and the Cauldron by Louis Cha and translated by John Minford . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Newmark, P. (1977). Communicative and semantic translation. Babel 23, 163–180.

Newmark, P. (1982). A further note on communicative and semantic translation. Babel 28, 18–20.

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

Nida, E. A. (1972). Communication and translation. Bible Transl . 23, 309–316.

Tsui, C. S. K. (2012). “The authenticity in ‘adaptation': a theoretical perspective from translation studies,” in Translation, Adaptation and Transformation , eds X. Y. Lawrence, and A. Raw (London and New York, NY: Bloomsbury Publishing).

Venuti, L. (2007). Adaptation, Translation, Culture. J. Vis. Cult. 6, 25–44. doi: 10.1177/1470412907075066

Venuti, L. (2009). Translation, intertextuality, interpretation. Rom. Stud. 27, 157–173. doi: 10.1179/174581509X455169

Vinay, J. P., and Darbelnet, J. (1995). Comparative Stylistics of FrenchandEnglish: A Methodology for Translation . Transl. by J. C. Sagar, and M. J. Hamel. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Zhang, Y. (2004). “劳伦斯悄悄复活: 专访 《查泰莱夫人的情人》 (The quite resurrection of Lawrence: an interview with the translator Zhao Susu of Lady Chatterley's Lover ). Tianjin Daily .

Keywords: literary translation, literary communication, cross-cultural context, rewriting and mediation, referential communication, retranslation

Citation: Sun Y (2022) Literary translation and communication. Front. Commun. 7:1073773. doi: 10.3389/fcomm.2022.1073773

Received: 18 October 2022; Accepted: 14 November 2022; Published: 02 December 2022.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2022 Sun. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Yifeng Sun, sunyf@um.edu.mo

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• Tools and Resources
• Customer Services
• African Literatures
• Asian Literatures
• British and Irish Literatures
• Latin American and Caribbean Literatures
• North American Literatures
• Oceanic Literatures
• Slavic and Eastern European Literatures
• West Asian Literatures, including Middle East
• Western European Literatures
• Ancient Literatures (before 500)
• Middle Ages and Renaissance (500-1600)
• Enlightenment and Early Modern (1600-1800)
• 19th Century (1800-1900)
• 20th and 21st Century (1900-present)
• Children’s Literature
• Cultural Studies
• Film, TV, and Media
• Literary Theory
• Non-Fiction and Life Writing
• Print Culture and Digital Humanities
• Theater and Drama
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Literary translation.

• Anthony Pym Anthony Pym School of Languages and Linguistics, University of Melbourne
• https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190201098.013.1107
• Published online: 30 April 2020

Literary translation has progressively been dominated by a Western translation form that imposes basic binarisms, assuming separate (national) languages, a foundational opposition between domesticating and foreignizing translation strategies, and separate voices for author and translator, with the latter in a subordinate position. This binary, individualist, and nationalist conceptualization furnishes a way of talking about translations that often has little to do with the vitality and pragmatism of the literary translator’s craft, where there are mostly more than two options in play. When coupled to notions of literariness that privilege means of expression, the form also produces strong concepts of untranslatability, usually based on the banal observation that different languages offer different means of expression. A strong answer to the alleged impossibility of translation is the idea, found in Walter Benjamin and Andrey Fedorov, that literary translations do not replace their “source” or “start texts” but are instead an interpretative extension of them, and should be read as such. The Western translation form also overlooks the variety of translative activities that existed prior to its rise in the early modern period. With its emphasis on separation and accuracy, it traveled out with the railway lines and steam printing presses of modernity, supplanting most of the non-Western translation forms as literary practices. Western translation studies, as an academic discipline, has followed the same paths several generations later, imposing its binary metalanguage in the process. In this, it has become part and parcel of a world configuration of networks where a few central languages, with English as a super-central language, have enormous numbers of translations being done from them, while they themselves appear to have relatively few translations in them. This has been called the “three-percent problem,” so named because only 3 to 4 percent of texts in English are translations. The low percentage is nevertheless a function of the huge number of titles published in English, which means that English regularly has more translations than do French or Italian, for example. There are nevertheless hegemonic relations in the way that international literary events are created in central languages and then translated outward, such that a disproportionate degree of fame tends to accrue to those who write in the central languages. Can this configuration be changed? If the foundational binarisms of the Western translation form were based on the fixity of the printing press, which separated languages and objectified stable texts, then new translation forms should be sought in the global accessibility and fluidity of digital technologies, which offer translators unexplored possibilities.

• translation forms
• translation flows
• the three-percent problem
• translator identity
• translation policy

You do not currently have access to this article

Please login to access the full content.

Access to the full content requires a subscription

Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, Literature. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 04 July 2024

• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility
• [185.147.128.134]
• 185.147.128.134

Character limit 500 /500

Introduction: Literary Texts and their Translations as an Object of Research

• Leena Kolehmainen University of Eastern Finland
• Esa Penttilä University of Eastern Finland
• Piet Van Poucke University of Gent

This special issue of the International Journal of Literary Linguistics offers seven state-of-the-art contributions on the current linguistic study of literary translation. Although the articles are based on similar data – literary source texts and their translations – they focus on diverse aspects of literary translation, study a range of linguistic phenomena and utilize different methodologies. In other words, it is an important goal of this special issue to illuminate the current diversity of possible approaches in the linguistic study of translated literary texts within the discipline of translation studies. At the same time, new theoretical and empirical insights are opened to the study of the linguistic phenomena chosen by the authors of the articles and their representation or use in literary texts and translations. The analyzed features range from neologisms to the category of passive and from spoken language features to the representation of speech and multilingualism in writing. Therefore, the articles in this issue are not only relevant for the study of literary translation or translation theory in general, but also for the disciplines of linguistics and literary studies – or most importantly, for the cross-disciplinary co-operation between these three fields of study.

The common theme that all these articles share is how the translation process shapes, transfers and changes the linguistic properties of literary texts as compared to their sources texts, other translations or non-translated literary texts in the same language and how this question can be approached in research. All articles provide new information about the forces that direct and affect translators’ textual choices and the previously formulated hypotheses about the functioning of such forces. The articles illustrate how translators may perform differently from authors and how  translators’ and authors’ norms may diverge at different times and in different cultures. The question of how translation affects the linguistic properties of literary translations is approached from the viewpoint of previously proposed claims or hypotheses about translation. In the following, we will introduce these viewpoints for readers who are not familiar with the recent developments in translation studies. At the same time, we will shortly present the articles in this issue.

Information

• For Readers
• For Authors
• For Librarians

Developed By

Literary Theory and Criticism

Home › Translation Studies

Translation Studies

By NASRULLAH MAMBROL on December 15, 2017 • ( 3 )

The 1980s was a decade of consolidation for the fledgling discipline known as Translation Studies. Having emerged onto the world stage in the late 1970s, the subject began to be taken seriously, and was no longer seen as an unscientific field of enquiry of secondary importance. Throughout the 1980s interest in the theory and practice of translation grew steadily. Then, in the 1990s, Translation Studies finally came into its own, for this proved to be the decade of its global expansion. Once perceived as a marginal activity, translation began to be seen as a fundamental act of human exchange. Today, interest in the field has never been stronger and the study of translation is taking place alongside an increase in its practice all over the world.

The electronic media explosion of the 1990s and its implications for the processes of globalization highlighted issues of intercultural communication. Not only has it become important to access more of the world through the information revolution, but it has become urgently important to understand more about one’s own point of departure. For globalization has its antithesis, as has been demonstrated by the world-wide renewal of interest in cultural origins and in exploring questions of identity. Translation has a crucial role to play in aiding understanding of an increasingly fragmentary world. The translator, as the Irish scholar Michael Cronin has pointed out, is also a traveller, someone engaged in a journey from one source to another. The twenty-first century surely promises to be the great age of travel, not only across space but also across time.1 Significantly, a major development in translation studies since the 1970s has been research into the history of translation, for an examination of how translation has helped shape our knowledge of the world in the past better equips us to shape our own futures.

Evidence of the interest in translation is everywhere. A great many books on translation have appeared steadily throughout the past two decades, new journals of translation studies have been established, international professional bodies such as the European Society for Translation have come into being and at least half a dozen translation encyclopaedias have appeared in print, with more to follow. New courses on translation in universities from Hong Kong to Brazil, and from Montreal to Vienna offer further evidence of extensive international interest in translation studies. It shows no sign of slowing down in the twenty-first century.

With so much energy directed at further investigation of the phenomenon of translation, it is obvious that any such development will not be homogeneous and that different trends and tendencies are bound to develop. We should not be surprised, therefore, that consensus in translation studies disappeared in the 1990s. However, that has been followed by lively diversification that continues today around the world. During the 1980s, Ernst-August Gutt ’s relevance theory, the skopos theory of Katharina Reiss and Hans Vermeer , and Gideon Toury ’s research into pseudotranslation all offered new methods for approaching translation, while in the 1990s the enormous interest generated by corpus-based translation enquiry as articulated by Mona Baker opened distinct lines of enquiry that continue to flourish. Indeed, after a period in which research in computer translation seemed to have foundered, the importance of the relationship between translation and the new technology has risen to prominence and shows every sign of becoming even more important in the future. Nevertheless, despite the diversity of methods and approaches, one common feature of much of the research in Translation Studies is an emphasis on cultural aspects of translation, on the contexts within which translation occurs. Once seen as a sub-branch of linguistics, translation today is perceived as an inter-disciplinary field of study and the indissoluble connection between language and way of life has become a focal point of scholarly attention.

Literary studies have also moved on from an early and more elitist view of translation. As Peter France , editor of the Oxford Guide to Literature in English Translation points out:

Theorists and scholars have a far more complex agenda than deciding between the good and the bad; they are concerned, for instance, to tease out the different possibilities open to the translator, and the way these change according to the historical, social, and cultural context.

There is a growing body of research that reflects this newer, more complex agenda, for as research in Translation Studies increases and historical data become more readily available, so important questions are starting to be asked, about the role of translation in shaping a literary canon, the strategies employed by translators and the norms in operation at a given point in time, the discourse of translators, the problems of measuring the impact of translations and, most recently, the problems of determining an ethics of translation.

Perhaps the most exciting new trend of all is the expansion of the discipline of Translation Studies beyond the boundaries of Europe. In Canada, India, Hong Kong, China, Africa, Brazil and Latin America, the concerns of scholars and translators have diverged significantly from those of Europeans. More emphasis has been placed on the inequality of the translation relationship, with writers such as Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak , Tejaswini Niranjana and Eric Cheyfitz arguing that translation was effectively used in the past as an instrument of colonial domination, a means of depriving the colonized peoples of a voice. For in the colonial model, one culture dominated and the others were subservient, hence translation reinforced that power hierarchy. As Anuradha Dingwaney puts it,

The processes of translation involved in making another culture comprehensible entail varying degrees of violence, especially when the culture being translated is constituted as that of the “other”.3

In the 1990s two contrasting images of the translator emerged. According to one reading of the translator’s role, the translator is a force for good, a creative artist who ensures the survival of writing across time and space, an intercultural mediator and interpreter, a figure whose importance to the continuity and diffusion of culture is immeasurable. In contrast, another interpretation sees translation as a highly suspect activity, one in which an inequality of power relations (inequalities of economics, politics, gender and geography) is reflected in the mechanics of textual production. As Mahasweta Sengupta argues, translation can become submission to the hegemonic power of images created by the target culture: a cursory review of what sells in the West as representative of India and its culture provides ample proof of the binding power of representation; we remain trapped in the cultural stereotypes created and nurtured through translated texts.4

In the new millennium translation scholarship will continue to emphasize the unequal power relationships that have characterized the translation process. But whereas in earlier centuries this inequality was presented in terms of a superior original and an inferior copy, today the relationship is considered from other points of view that can best be termed post-colonial. Parallel to the exciting work of Indian, Chinese and Canadian translation scholars, writers such as Octavio Paz , Carlos Fuentes and Haroldo de Campos and Augusto de Campos have called for a new definition of translation. Significantly, all these writers have come from countries located in the continent of South America, from former colonies engaged in reassessing their own past. Arguing for a rethinking of the role and significance of translation, they draw parallels with the colonial experience. For just as the model of colonialism was based on the notion of a superior culture taking possession of an inferior one, so an original was always seen as superior to its ‘copy’. Hence the translation was doomed to exist in a position of inferiority with regard to the source text from which it was seen to derive.

In the new, post-colonial perception of the relationship between source and target texts, that inequality of status has been rethought. Both original and translation are now viewed as equal products of the creativity of writer and translator, though as Paz pointed out, the task of these two is different. It is up to the writer to fix words in an ideal, unchangeable form and it is the task of the translator to liberate those words from the confines of their source language and allow them to live again in the language into which they are translated.5 In consequence, the old arguments about the need to be faithful to an original start to dissolve. In Brazil, the cannibalistic theory of textual consumption, first proposed in the 1920s, has been reworked to offer an alternative perspective on the role of the translator, one in which the act of translation is seen in terms of physical metaphors that stress both the creativity and the independence of the translator.6

Today the movement of peoples around the globe can be seen to mirror the very process of translation itself, for translation is not just the transfer of texts from one language into another, it is now rightly seen as a process of negotiation between texts and between cultures, a process during which all kinds of transactions take place mediated by the figure of the translator. Significantly, Homi Bhabha uses the term ‘translation’ not to describe a transaction between texts and languages but in the etymological sense of being carried across from one place to another. He uses translation metaphorically to describe the condition of the contemporary world, a world in which millions migrate and change their location every day. In such a world, translation is fundamental:

We should remember that it is the ‘inter’—the cutting edge of translation and renegotiation, the in-between space—that carries the burden of the meaning of culture.7

Central to the many theories of translation articulated by nonEuropean writers are three recurring strategems: a redefinition of the terminology of faithfulness and equivalence, the importance of highlighting the visibility of the translator and a shift of emphasis that views translation as an act of creative rewriting. The translator is seen as a liberator, someone who frees the text from the fixed signs of its original shape making it no longer subordinate to the source text but visibly endeavouring to bridge the space between source author and text and the eventual target language readership. This revised perspective emphasizes the creativity of translation, seeing in it a more harmonious relationship than the one in previous models that described the translator in violent images of ‘appropriation’, ‘penetration’ or ‘possession’. The post-colonial approach to translation is to see linguistic exchange as essentially dialogic, as a process that happens in a space that belongs to neither source nor target absolutely. As Vanamala Viswanatha and Sherry Simon argue, ‘translations provide an especially revealing entry point into the dynamics of cultural identity-formation in the colonial and postcolonial contexts.’8

Until the end of the 1980s Translation Studies was dominated by the systemic approach pioneered by Itamar Even-Zohar and Gideon Toury. Polysystems theory was a radical development because it shifted the focus of attention away from arid debates about faithfulness and equivalence towards an examination of the role of the translated text in its new context. Significantly, this opened the way for further research into the history of translation, leading also to a reassessment of the importance of translation as a force for change and innovation in literary history.

In 1995, Gideon Toury published Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond , a book that reassessed the polysystems approach disliked by some scholars for its over-emphasis on the target system. Toury maintains that since a translation is designed primarily to fill a need in the target culture, it is logical to make the target system the object of study. He also points out the need to establish patterns of regularity of translational behaviour, in order to study the way in which norms are formulated and how they operate. Toury explicitly rejects any idea that the object of translation theory is to improve the quality of translations: theorists have one agenda, he argues, while practitioners have different responsibilities. Although Toury ’s views are not universally accepted they are widely respected, and it is significant that during the 1990s there has been a great deal of work on translation norms and a call for greater scientificity in the study of translation.

Polysystems theory filled the gap that opened up in the 1970s between linguistics and literary studies and provided the base upon which the new interdisciplinary Translation Studies could build. Central to polysystems theory was an emphasis on the poetics of the target culture. It was suggested that it should be possible to predict the conditions under which translations might occur and to predict also what kind of strategies translators might employ. To ascertain whether this hypothesis was valid and to establish fundamental principles, case studies of translations across time were required, hence the emergence of what has come to be termed descriptive studies in translation. Translation Studies began to move out into a distinctive space of its own, beginning to research its own genealogy and seeking to assert its independence as an academic field.

Whereas previously the emphasis had previously been on comparing original and translation, often with a view to establishing what had been ‘lost’ or ‘betrayed’ in the translation process, the new approach took a resolutely different line, seeking not to evaluate but to understand the shifts of emphasis that had taken place during the transfer of texts from one literary system into another. Polysystems theory focused exclusively on literary translation, though it operated with an enlarged notion of the literary which included a broad range of items of literary production including dubbing and subtitling, children’s literature, popular culture and advertising.

Through a series of case studies, this broadening of the object of study led to a division within the group of translation scholars loosely associated with the polysystems approach. Some, such as Theo Hermans and Gideon Toury sought to establish theoretical and methodological parameters within which the subject might develop, and others such as André Lefevere and Lawrence Venuti began to explore the implications of translation in a much broader cultural and historical frame. Lefevere first developed his idea of translation as refraction rather than reflection, offering a more complex model than the old idea of translation as a mirror of the original. Inherent in his view of translation as refraction was a rejection of any linear notion of the translation process. Texts, he argued, have to be seen as complex signifying systems and the task of the translator is to decode and re-encode whichever of those systems is accessible.9 Lefevere noted that much of the theorizing about translation was based on translation practice between European languages and pointed out that problems of the accessibility of linguistic and cultural codes intensifies once we move out beyond Western boundaries. In his later work, Lefevere expanded his concern with the metaphorics of translation to an enquiry into what he termed the conceptual and textual grids that constrain both writers and translators, suggesting that

Problems in translating are caused at least as much by discrepancies in conceptual and textual grids as by discrepancies in languages.10

These cultural grids determine how reality is constructed in both source and target texts, and the skill of the translator in manipulating these grids will determine the success of the outcome. Lefevere argues that these cultural grids, a notion deriving from Pierre Bourdieu ’s notion of cultural capital, highlight the creativity of the translator, for he or she is inevitably engaged in a complex creative process.

Similarly, Venuti insists upon the creativity of the translator and upon the his or her visible presence in a translation.11 So important has research into the visibility of the translator become in the 1990s, that it can be seen as a distinct line of development within the subject as a whole. Translation according to Venuti, with its allegiance both to source and target cultures ‘is a reminder that no act of interpretation can be definitive’.12 Translation is therefore a dangerous act, potentially subversive and always significant. In the 1990s the figure of the subservient translator has been replaced with the visibly manipulative translator, a creative artist mediating between cultures and languages. In an important book that appeared in 1991, the translator of Latin American fiction, Suzanne Jill Levine playfully described herself as ‘a subversive scribe’, an image that prefigures Venuti’s view of the translator as a powerful agent for cultural change.13

Levine ’s book is indicative of another line of enquiry within Translation Studies that focuses on the subjectivity of the translator. Translation scholars such as Venuti, Douglas Robinson , Anthony Pym and Mary Snell-Hornby , translators who have written about their own work such as Tim Parks , Peter Bush , Barbara Godard and Vanamala Viswanatha , have all stressed in different ways the importance of the translator’s role. This new emphasis on subjectivity derives from two distinct influences: on the one hand, the growing importance of research into the ethics of translation, and on the other hand a much greater attention to the broader philosophical issues that underpin translation. Jacques Derrida ’s rereading of Walter Benjamin opened the flood-gates to a reevaluation of the importance of translation not only as a form of communication but also as continuity.14 Translation, it is argued, ensures the survival of a text. The translation effectively becomes the after-life of a text, a new ‘original’ in another language. This positive view of translation serves to reinforce the importance of translating as an act both of inter-cultural and inter-temporal communication. Who, for example, would have any access to the forgotten women poets of ancient Greece without translation, asks Josephine Balmer in her illuminating preface to her translations of classical women poets?15

The development of Translation Studies in the 1990s can best be seen as the establishment of a series of new alliances that brought together research into the history, practice and philosophy of translation with other intellectual trends. The links between Translation Studies and post-colonial theory represent one such alliance, as do the links between Translation Studies and corpus linguistics. Another significant alliance is that between Translation Studies and gender studies. For language, as Sherry Simon points out, does not simply mirror reality, but intervenes in the shaping of meaning.16 Translators are directly involved in that shaping process, whether the text they are dealing with is an instruction manual, a legal document, a novel or a classical drama. Just as Gender Studies have challenged the notion of a single unified concept of culture by asking awkward questions about the ways in which canonical traditions are formed, so Translation Studies, through its many alliances, asks questions about what happens when a text is transferred from source to target culture.

Source:  Translation Studies Third edition Susan Bassnett Routledge London and New York, 2002.

Notes 1 Michael Cronin, Across the Lines: travel, language, translation (Cork: Cork University Press) 2000. 2 Peter France, Translation Studies and Translation Criticism, in Peter France ed. The Oxford Guide to Literature in English Translation (Oxford: Oxford University Press) 2000, p. 3. 3 Anuradha Dingwaney, Introduction: Translating ‘Third World’ Cultures, Anuradha Dingwaney and Carol Maier, eds. Between Languages and Cultures Translation and Cross-Cultural Texts (Pittsburgh and London: University of Pittsburgh Press) 1995, p. 4. 4 Mahasweta Sengupta, Translation as Manipulation: The Power of Images and Images of Power in Anuradha Dingwaney and Carol Maier, eds. Between Languages and Cultures. Translation and Cross-Cultural Texts (Pittsburgh and London: University of Pittsburgh Press) 1995, p. 172. 5 Octavio Paz, Translation: Literature and Letters, transl. Irene del Corral, in Rainer Schulte and John Biguenet eds. Theories of Translation. An Anthology of Essays from Dryden to Derrida (Chicago: University of Chicago Press) 1992, pp. 36–55. 6 For discussion of the cannibalistic metaphor, see Susan Bassnett and Harish Trivedi, eds. Postcolonial Translation: Theory and Practice (New York and London: Routledge) 2000. 7 Homi Bhabha, The Location of Culture (London and New York: Routledge) 1994, p. 38. 8 Vanamala Viswanatha and Sherry Simon, ‘Shifting Grounds of Exchange’: B.M.Srikantaiah and Kannada Translation, in Susan Bassnett and Harish Trivedi eds. Postcolonial Translation: Theory and Practice (London and New York: Routledge) 1999, p. 162. 9 See: Andre Lefevere, Translation, Rewriting and the Manipulation of Literary Fame (London and New York: Routledge) 1992. 10 Andre Lefevere, Composing the other, in Susan Bassnett and Harish Trivedi eds. Postcolonial Translation. Theory and Practice (London and New York: Routledge) 1999, p. 76. 11 Lawrence Venuti, The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation (London and New York: Routledge) 1995. 12 Lawrence Venuti, The Scandals of Translation (London and New York: Routledge) 1998, p. 46. 13 Suzanne Jill Levine, The Subversive Scribe (Saint Paul, Minnesota: Graywolf Press) 1991. 14 Jacques Derrida, Des Tours de Babel, in J.Graham, ed. Difference in Translation (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press) 1985. 15 Josephine Balmer, Classical Women Poets (Newcastle upon Tyne: Bloodaxe Books) 1997. 16 Sherry Simon, Gender in Translation. Cultural Identity and the Politics of Transmission (London and New York: Routledge) 1996.

Share this:

Categories: Uncategorized

Tags: André Lefevere , Anthony Pym , Anuradha Dingwaney , Augusto de Campos , Barbara Godard , Basil Hatim , Carlos Fuentes , Critical Readings in Translation Studies , Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond , Douglas Robinson , dynamic-equivalence Bible-translation theory , Ernst-August Gut , Eugene Nida , Hans Vermeer , Haroldo de Campos , Itamar Even-Zohar , J.C.Catford , Josephine Balmer , Katharina Reiss , Kirsten Malmkjaer , lan Mason , Lawrence Venuti , Literary Criticism , Literary Theory , Mahasweta Sengupta , Mary Snell-Hornby , Michael Cronin , Michael Halliday , Mona Baker , Octavio Paz , Oxford Guide to Literature in English Translation , Peter Bush , Peter France , Peter Newmark , Polysystems Theory , relevance theory , Roger Bell , Sherry Simon , skopos theory , Tejaswini Niranjana , Theo Hermans , Tim Parks , Translation and Relevance , Translation Studies , Translation Theory , Vanamala Viswanatha , Wolfram Wilss

Related Articles

• Postcolonial Translation Theory – Literary Theory and Criticism Notes
• Translation and Gender – Literary Theory and Criticism Notes
• Postcolonial Translation Theory | Literary Theory and Criticism

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Literary Theory and Translation Studies

The cluster of concerns that fall under literary theory remains a vital core interest of Comparative Literature as faculty research has expanded to include new critical and post-critical perspectives. Literary theory addresses questions regarding the nature and production of meaning and form in language generally and in literary works in particular (poetics, genre, and rhetoric), performativity, the constitution of the subject, cognitive science and philosophy of mind, theories of inscription, and practices of reading. Typically engaged with European philosophy and with psychoanalysis, this field of inquiry has been traditionally identified with structuralist and poststructuralist theory as well as the Critical Theory of the Frankfurt School and its heirs.

The Department of Comparative Literature at Cornell has been prominent in this area while orienting itself to the future by integrating work from Asia and the Global South into a more expansive, decentered, trans-regional field of theoretical investigation. Translation studies addresses traditional trans-linguistic theories and practices but also issues concerning the crossing of cultures and nations, both of which have become increasingly necessary and vexed in the context of globalization.

Related people

Class of 1916 Professor of English

Professor of French, Francophone & Comparative Literature

Associate Professor

All research areas

Translation Resources

• Reference Sources
• Find Books and Dissertations
• Find Articles

Encyclopedias

Selected books of interest.

• Translation for theatre and film

• << Previous: Journals
• Next: Translation for theatre and film >>
• Last Updated: Mar 11, 2024 12:02 PM
• URL: https://guides.libraries.uc.edu/translation

University of Cincinnati Libraries

PO Box 210033 Cincinnati, Ohio 45221-0033

Phone: 513-556-1424

Contact Us | Staff Directory

University of Cincinnati

Alerts | Clery and HEOA Notice | Notice of Non-Discrimination | eAccessibility Concern | Privacy Statement | Copyright Information

© 2021 University of Cincinnati

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Literature in and through Translation: Literary Translation as a Pedagogical Resource

This article is the revised version of the paper that I presented at the 5 th APTIS (Association of Programmes in Translation and Interpreting Studies) 2023 conference ("The teaching and learning that matter today"), whose proceedings were never published. As a result of globalisation, the number of books requiring translation considerably increased. Nevertheless, readers do not always acknowledge translations as such, and literary translators do not generally obtain the recognition they deserve. Academia may be partly responsible for that: on the one side, indeed, literary translation is not as discussed as other topics within the broader field of Translation Studies; on the other, whilst teaching texts in translation is becoming increasingly common, translated literature is not generally considered as an academic discipline on its own. To promote a wider circulation and appreciation of translated literature in and beyond academia, translated literary texts could be systematically introduced into the curricula of courses in literature and literary translation. This could be achieved through the compilation and use of parallel corpora, namely collections of source texts and respective translations. In this light, this paper has two main objectives: explaining how courses in literature and literary translation could be taught using parallel corpora; showcasing the pedagogical

Related Papers

Trabalhos em Linguística Aplicada

Wagner Monteiro

This paper aims to propose a possible methodological path in practices with literary texts in foreign language classes. Firstly, the idea of interpreting the literary text and the role of literature in an increasingly technocratic society will be debated. Secondly, the teaching of literature in foreign language classes will gain prominence in this study, and the role of pedagogical translation, among other factors, will be highlighted in this process. Therefore, recommending the use of literary texts as a genre with which grammatical content can be worked is not the intention. On the contrary, strategies that contemplate the specificity of the literary text will be outlined and a methodological path in the 21st-century school context will be proposed.

The Interpreter and Translator Trainer

Muftah Adam

Offering an original reconceptualization of literary translation, Clive Scott argues against traditional approaches to the theory and practice of translation. Instead, he suggests that translation should attend more to the phenomenology of reading, triggering creative textual thinking in the responsive reader rather than testing the hermeneutic skills of the professional translator. In this new guise, translation enlists the reader as an active participant in the constant re-fashioning of the text's structural, associative, intertextual and inter-sensory possibilities, so that our larger understanding of ecology, anthropology, comparative literature and aesthetics is fundamentally transformed and our sense of the expressive resources of language is radically extended. Literary translation thus assumes an existential value which takes us beyond the text itself to how it situates us in the world, and what part it plays in the geography of human relationships.

Tawfiq Yousef

This paper discusses the main challenges that face literary translation and literary translators. These challenges have been divided into three main categories: Linguistic, cultural, and human. The first type of challenges comes from the nature of the discipline itself since it involves the difficult task of dealing with phonological, syntactic, lexical, semantic, stylistic and pragmatic issues occurring in literary texts whose language is additionally characterized by its linguistic deviation from the norm, especially in its use of figurative language. The second source of challenges stems from the fact that literary translation is primarily concerned with translating culture-bound expressions and concepts which pose one of the most difficult tasks for translators when trying to render them into a foreign language. The third type of challenges is related to the barriers facing literary translation including lack of government funding, poor literary translator training, language and...

Eurasia Review

Mohamed Chtatou

From Antiquity to the present day, the art of literary translation has always been a fundamental element in the transmission of knowledge from one language to another. Translation is serious interactive conversational and communicative work, which requires great mastery of the target language and the source language being translated. Indeed, translating a literary text requires great linguistic, artistic and socio-cultural skills capable of transcending the slightest vicissitudes of the original text and its slightest emotions. Translation here must take into account the aesthetics of the text, but also its semantic essence, knowing how to transmit its style and keep its soul. The translator is not a simple receiver, he is an intermediary and a second author, who must guarantee the exact transmission of a message intended to be understood and well assimilated. Any semantic confusion can divert the original message or disfigure it.

abdollah keshavarzi

Riitta Oittinen

Some principles and challenges of translati,n are discussed, and three courses in translation of fiction offered at the University of Tampere (Finland) are described. &quot;Dialogic&quot; principles of translation include: acknowledging that messages are changed in the process of translation, creating a new text; pinpointing the intended purpose of the text in the target language; considering and incorporating literary traditions of each culture; understanding that just as every reading experience constitutes a dialogue between author and reader, the translator is engaged in transmitting his reading experience to others; and creating the new text as a believable whole. The first course is introductory and addresses various issues of genre, purpose, relationship with the author and other involved parties, adaptation versus translation, and dialogic approach. The focus on the second course is translation for publishers. Teaching is individualized, and the course draws on working relat...

Matthew Scribner

Lingue e Linguaggi

David Katan

The aim of this paper is to explore the 'literary' in literary translation. It begins with a discussion of what makes a text literary, focussing on some very famous literary works which did not (and indeed do not) necessarily fit what is generally considered the literary canon. The features that translators should identify when first reading a text, on the look-out for potential literary value, are then outlined. These features are both textual (covering non-casual language, rhetorical features and equivalences) and contextual (connotations, implicatures, intratextual and culture-bound associations). The paper then discusses changing translation theory and practice, in particular illustrating points with comments made by translators and theorists in this book and elsewhere. Importance is also given to the profession itself, to literary translator beliefs about their role, the changing importance of the model reader and to changing beliefs about accepted style, making reference also to results of a global survey recently carried out on the subject.

Research Journal of English Language and Literature

Jagdish Batra

While the importance of translation in the postmodern globalized world cannot be overemphasized , the act of translation calls for a unique talent. Translation is best described as a phenomenological act in which a translator seeks to enter the mind of the original author and translates on the basis of equivalence, with as little change to the original as possible. It calls for a certain historical sense and knowledge of linguistic transformation happening over a period of time. The translator has also to be aware of the cultural nuances which are untranslatable. Great translations have always been enjoyed as in the case of The Canterbury Tales. With the passage of time, there are calls to translate texts across the linguistic, cultural, medium and genre-specific barriers. My research shows that of all the considerations, a translation is, broadly speaking, a three-pronged strategy, being linguistic, cultural and political act at the same time. My paper takes up case studies of translations into English of an Urdu and a Haryanvi language text and analyses them from the aforesaid angles, bringing out the benefits and underlining the pitfalls on the way.

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• Book Series
• Online Resources
• Collections
• Art & Art History
• Communication Studies
• Consciousness Research
• Interaction Studies
• Linguistics
• Literature & Literary Studies
• Miscellaneous
• Terminology & Lexicography
• Translation & Interpreting Studies
• View Shopping Cart
• Translation Spaces
• Online First Articles
• Online First Article
• Navigate this Journal
• Online First
• Current issue
• Previous issues
• Submit a paper
• Editorial information

Revising a literary translation for publication

Insights from an autoethnographic study.

• View Affiliations Hide Affiliations Affiliations: 1 University of Malta
• Source: Translation Spaces Available online: 04 April 2024
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.23040.bor
• Received: 01 Sept 2023
• Accepted: 31 Jan 2024
• Version of Record published : 04 Apr 2024

Despite the surge of interest in translation revision and its ubiquitousness in translation processes, minimal scholarly research has been carried out into the revision of literary translations (Koponen et al. 2021, 10). This article responds to calls in the literature for empirical studies examining the creation of actual published translations. It aims to partially address this gap by reporting on the processes and practices occurring during the revision of my Maltese translation of Éric-Emmanuel Schmitt’s Concerto à la mémoire d’un ange . Although numerous translation scholars are also practising translators, we rarely look at our own processes and practices. Not only is this reality of translation revision largely overlooked but also the wealth of empirical data generated during the translation process remains unexploited. Drawing on my own translation practice, this study adopts an autoethnographic approach to provide insights into how revision materialised in this specific literary translation. Meticulously conserved real-life data are analysed in order to shed light on the agents involved in the revision process, their role and power.

Article metrics loading...

From This Site

Full text loading...

• Anderson, Alison (trans.) 2011   Concerto to the Memory of an Angel by Éric-Emmanuel Schmitt 2010 New York: Europa Editions. [Google Scholar]
• Atkinson, Paul 2006  “Rescuing Autoethnography.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography (): –. Accessed May 27, 2023. 10.1177/0891241606286980 https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241606286980 [Google Scholar]
• Bogic, Anna 2010  “Uncovering the Hidden Actors with the Help of Latour: The ‘making’ of the Second Sex.” Monografías De Traducción E Interpretación : –. Accessed April 14, 2023. 10.6035/MonTI.2010.2.9 https://doi.org/10.6035/MonTI.2010.2.9 [Google Scholar]
• Borg, Claudine 2022   A Literary Translation in the Making. A Process-Oriented Perspective . London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781003150909 https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003150909 [Google Scholar]
• Borg, Claudine (trans.) 2021   Kunċert b’Tifkira ta’ Anġlu [Concert in Memory of an Angel] by Éric-Emmanuel Schmitt 2002 Rabat: Faraxa Publishing. [Google Scholar]
• Borg, Claudine (trans.) 2015   Oscar u s-sinjura r-roża [Oscar and the pink lady] by Éric-Emmanuel Schmitt. Rabat: Faraxa Publishing. [Google Scholar]
• Bouton-Kelly, Ludivine 2020  “La Traduction Au Brouillon : Une Écriture À L’ouvrage.” Palimpsestes (): –. Accessed April 27, 2023. 10.4000/palimpsestes.6072 https://doi.org/10.4000/palimpsestes.6072 [Google Scholar]
• Buzelin, Hélène 2007  “Translations in the ‘Making’.” In Constructing a Sociology of Translation , edited by Michaela Wolf, and Alexandra Constructing a Sociology of Translation , –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.74.11buz https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.74.11buz [Google Scholar]
• Chang, Heewon 2008   Autoethnography as Method . London: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
• Ellis, Carolyn 2008  “Autoethnography.” In The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods , edited by Lisa M. Given, –. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar]
• Ellis, Carolyn, Tony E. Adams, and Arthur P. Bochner 2010  “Autoethnography: An Overview.” Forum, Qualitative Social Research (): paragraphs. Accessed July 02, 2010. nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs1101108 [Google Scholar]
• Feinauer, Ilse, and Amanda Lourens 2017  “The Loyalty of the Literary Reviser: Author, Source Text, Target Text Or Reader?” Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics Plus : –. 10.5842/53‑0‑735 https://doi.org/10.5842/53-0-735 [Google Scholar]
• Feinauer, Ilse, and Amanda Lourens 2021  “Another Look at Revision in Literary Translation.” In Translation Revision and Post-Editing , edited by Maarit Koponen, Brian Mossop, Isabelle S. Robert, and Giovanna Scocchera, –. London: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
• Feinauer, Ilse, and Amanda Lourens 2022  “Panel 25. the Reality of Revision. Conference Panel.” Abstract Booklet . EST 2022 Oslo, –. [Google Scholar]
• Flick, Uwe 2018   An Introduction to Qualitative Research . 6th edition. Los Angeles: Sage. [Google Scholar]
• Franco Aixelá, Javier 2001–2022   BITRA (Bibliography of Interpreting and Translation) . Open-access database. Accessed July 31, 2023. dti.ua.es/en/bitra/introduction.html [Google Scholar]
• Fryer, Louise 2020  “Audio Describing Ocean’s Eleven Scene 12 Out of Context: Decision Points in AD Drafting.” Perspectives, Studies in Translatology (): –. Accessed June 23, 2023. 10.1080/0907676X.2020.1712442 https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2020.1712442 [Google Scholar]
• Geertz, Clifford 1973   The Interpretation of Cultures . New York: Basic Books. [Google Scholar]
• Hokkanen, Sari 2016  To Serve and to Experience: An Autoethnographic Study of Simultaneous Church Interpreting. PhD Thesis, Tampere University. [Google Scholar]
• Kolb, Waltraud 2013  “‘Who are they?’ Decision-Making in Literary Translation.” In Tracks and Treks in Translation Studies , edited by Catherine Way, Sonia Vandepitte, Reine Meylaerts, and Magdalena Bartlomiejczyk, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.108.11kol https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.108.11kol [Google Scholar]
• Koponen, Maarit, Brian Mossop, Isabelle S. Robert, and Giovanna Scocchera (eds) 2021   Translation Revision and Post-Editing . London: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
• Marin-Lacarta, Maialen and Mireia Vargas-Urpi 2019  “Translators Revising Translators: A Fruitful Alliance.” Perspectives, Studies in Translatology (): –. Accessed June 22, 2023. 10.1080/0907676X.2018.1533569 https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2018.1533569 [Google Scholar]
• McIlveen, Peter 2008  “Autoethnography as a Method for Reflexive Research and Practice in Vocational Psychology.” Australian Journal of Career Development (): –. 10.1177/103841620801700204 https://doi.org/10.1177/103841620801700204 [Google Scholar]
• Mossop, Brian 2007  “Empirical studies of revision: What we know and need to know”. Journal of Specialised Translation : –. Accessed January 02, 2024. https://www.jostrans.org/issue08/art_mossop.pdf [Google Scholar]
• Rajalakshmi, Ratnavel, Varsha Sharma, and Anand Kumar M 2023  “Context Sensitive Tamil Language Spellchecker Using RoBERTa.” In Speech and Language Technologies for Low-Resource Languages , edited by Anand Kumar M, , –. Cham: Springer. Accessed December 30, 2023. 10.1007/978‑3‑031‑33231‑9_4 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33231-9_4 [Google Scholar]
• Risku, Hanna, Florian Windhager, and Matthias Apfelthaler 2013  “A Dynamic Network Model of Translatorial Cognition and Action.” Translation Spaces : –. Accessed August 17, 2023. 10.1075/ts.2.08ris https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.2.08ris [Google Scholar]
• Risku, Hanna, Maija Hirvonen, Regina Rogl, and Jelena Milošević 2022  “Ethnographic Research.” In The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Methodology , edited by Federico Rundle Zanettin Christopher, –. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315158945‑24 https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315158945-24 [Google Scholar]
• Schmitt, Éric-Emmanuel 2010   Concerto À La Mémoire D’un Ange [Concert to the Memory of an Angel]. Paris: Albin Michel. [Google Scholar]
• Scocchera, Giovanna 2016  “Computer-Based Collaborative Revision as a Virtual Lab of Translation Genetics.” Linguistica Antverpiensia: New Series: Themes in Translation Studies : –. Accessed June 22, 2023. 10.52034/lanstts.v14i0.347 https://doi.org/10.52034/lanstts.v14i0.347 [Google Scholar]
• Stratford, Madeleine 2020  “From Voluptuous Pleasure to Voluptés: Delving into the Literary Translation Process.” Palimpsestes : –. Accessed June 23, 2023. 10.4000/palimpsestes.5843 https://doi.org/10.4000/palimpsestes.5843 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

• Article Type: Research Article

Most Read This Month

Translation as human–computer interaction, making sense of neural machine translation, the turn of audiovisual translation: new audiences and new technologies, “a tiny cog in a large machine”, ergonomics of the translation workplace: potential for cognitive friction, translators’ perceptions of literary post-editing using statistical and neural machine translation, cognitive translation studies and the merging of empirical paradigms: the case of ‘literal translation’, a dynamic network model of translatorial cognition and action, training citizen translators, human factors in machine translation and post-editing among institutional translators.

General Catalog

Japanese literature in translation: modern.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• CORRESPONDENCE
• 25 June 2024

AI machine translation tools must be taught cultural differences too

• Helene Tenzer   ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8760-7777 0 ,
• Stefan Feuerriegel 1 &
• Rebecca Piekkari   ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4026-5850 2

LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Aalto University, Espoo, Finland

The ‘No Language Left Behind’ project has scaled machine translation to 200 of the world’s 7,000 or so languages ( Nature https://doi.org/m348; 2024 ). But to successfully preserve or revitalize minority languages, the scope of large-language-model (LLM) training needs to be broadened.

Access options

Nature 630 , 820 (2024)

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-02091-4

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Related Articles

See more letters to the editor

• Machine learning

Inside the maths that drives AI

Technology Feature 03 JUL 24

‘Fighting fire with fire’ — using LLMs to combat LLM hallucinations

News & Views 19 JUN 24

Not all ‘open source’ AI models are actually open: here’s a ranking

News 19 JUN 24

Streamlined collaboration can boost CRISPR gene therapies for rare diseases

Correspondence 02 JUL 24

Bionic leg moves like a natural limb — without conscious thought

News 01 JUL 24

Ultra-detailed brain map shows neurons that encode words’ meaning

News 03 JUL 24

Semantic encoding during language comprehension at single-cell resolution

Article 03 JUL 24

Language is primarily a tool for communication rather than thought

Perspective 19 JUN 24

Postdoctoral Research Scientist: DNA Replication and Repair in Haematopoietic Stem Cells

An exciting opportunity has arisen for a highly motivated Postdoctoral Research Scientist to join Professor Chapman’s Group, to investigate how DNA...

Oxford, Oxfordshire

University of Oxford, Radcliffe Department of Medicine

Tenure-Track Assistant Professor to the rank of Associate Professor in computational biology

UNIL is a leading international teaching and research institution, with over 5,000 employees and 15,500 students split between its Dorigny campus, ...

Lausanne, Canton of Vaud (CH)

University of Lausanne (UNIL)

Post-doctoral researcher (m/f/d) in Marine Microbial Natural Product Chemistry

GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel, Wischhofstraße 1-3, 24148 Kiel, Germany

Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel (GEOMAR)

Global Faculty Recruitment of School of Life Sciences, Tsinghua University

The School of Life Sciences at Tsinghua University invites applications for tenure-track or tenured faculty positions at all ranks (Assistant/Ass...

Beijing, China

Tsinghua University (The School of Life Sciences)

Sales Executive, Nature Careers

If you're customer-focused, thrive in sales, and want to impact Europe's job market, join our Nature Careers team !

London - hybrid working model

Springer Nature Ltd

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Indonesia Literature in Translation (Indonesia and Japanese Translation Context)

Tsukuba University, Japan, Indonesia

BibTex Citation Data :

Refworks Citation Data :

Indonesia has rich literature that is not widely known outside the country's borders. Translating Indonesian literary works can be the key to experiencing its literary richness and knowing its social, cultural, or political reality. There have been many studies on translating Japanese or English literature into Indonesian, but not vice versa. This study can play a role in formulating strategies for translating Indonesian literary works into foreign languages and, at the same time, become a contribution to introduce Indonesian literature through translation studies. The research questions proposed align with the study's primary objective of issues in translation; How is the passage of Indonesian literature in translation? Literary research with qualitative approaches will be conducted in this study. The stages are divided into three steps, i.e., 1) Data collection, 2) Data analysis, and 3) Data presentation. Before independence, Japan established an institution in Indonesia whose job was to translate literary works, either in book form or published in magazines and newspapers for the Indonesian people. However, in practice, this was done to control the reading of the Indonesian people and for propaganda purposes. Thus, the literary works circulated and translated supported colonial projects. After independence, the Japanese grant program for translating Southeast Asian literary works has also significantly impacted the number of Indonesian literary works translated into Japanese. However, these translated works have yet to reach the Japanese public and are mostly accessed by a limited circle of Indonesian observers in Japan. 

• Citing articles (0)
• Citing articles on Scopus (0)
• Anwar, Fithyani. 2022. 日本占領下のイン
• ドネシアにおける文学 (Literature in
• Indonesia under Japanese Occupation)
• Ph.D. diss., University of Tsukuba
• Aveling, Harry and Terry Shaffer Yamada,
• “Southeast Asian Traditions” in
• Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation
• Studies (London and New York:
• Routledge, 1997), 527
• Hasegawa, Yoko. The Routledge Course in
• Japanese Translation (London and New
• York: Routledge, 2012), 169
• Kasuya, Toshiki. 1983. インドネシアに翻
• 訳された日本文学 (Japanese
• Literature Translated into
• Indonesia), Journal of 外国語と外国文
• 学系列東京産業大学. 10 号: 22
• Munday, Jeremy. 2016. Introducing
• Translation Studies. London and New
• York: Routledge
• Namigata, Tsuyoshi. 2023. 近代アジアの
• 文学と翻訳 (Modern Asian Literature
• and Translation). Tokyo: Bensei
• Purnomo, Antonius R. Pujo. 2023. 日本軍
• 政下のメデアにおけるインドネシア
• 知識人の役割 (The Role of Indonesian
• Intellectuals in Media under Japanese
• Military Occupation) in 近代アジアの
• Robinson, Douglas. 1997. Translation and
• Empire. United Kingdom: St. Jerome
• Venuti, Lawrence. The Translator’s
• Invisibility: A History of Translation
• (London and New York: Routledge,
• Yaguchi, Shinya. 1997. 世界文学全集
• (Complete Works of World Literature)
• Tokyo: Topaz Press
• Yamashita, Shinji, James Siegel and
• Noriaki Oshikawa, “Indonesian into
• Japanese: An Interview with Noriaki
• Oshikawa,” Journal of Indonesia,
• Cornell University Press 64 (October
• Yudiono, K.S. 2010. Pengantar Sejarah
• Sastra Indonesia (Introduction to
• Indonesian Literature History). Jakarta:
• Online References
• https://www.toyotafound.or.jp/other/past_program/list_rinpro.html (Accessed January 15, 2024)
• http://www.tufs.ac.jp/ts/personal/aoyama/resources/japanesetranslation.html (Accessed January 16, 2024)
• Djawa Baroe Digital Collection (1943-45): https://www.disc.leiden.edu/view/item/3205435 (Accessed January 16, 2024)
• https://asiawa.jpf.go.jp/culture/projects/p-yomu-indonesia/ (Accessed January 16, 2024)

Last update:

Last update: 2024-07-02 16:15:10

Faculty of Humanities, Diponegoro University

Prof. Soedarto, SH Street, Tembalang, Semarang, Central Java 50275, Indonesia

e-mail: [email protected]

--> • 201 Mullica Hill Road • Glassboro, New Jersey 08028 • 856-256-4000 . Read the
	Rowan University
	Jul 04, 2024   2024-2025 Rowan University Academic Catalog (DRAFT COPY)     2024-2025 Rowan University Academic Catalog (DRAFT COPY) | The Certificate of Undergraduate Study in World Literature in English Translation, which may be declared in the World Languages Department, recognizes students’ completion of 12 s.h. in the study of World Literature in English Translation, and as such is accessible also to students who are not proficient in a second language. As our world becomes ever more global and interconnected, it is important for students not only to explore different literatures and cultures but also their interconnectedness. Such a program in literatures from different regions of the world allows students to consider texts within a global rather than a national framework as well as to recognize the various influences and interactions between literary traditions; for example, how do authors from different cultures address similar questions pertaining to the human condition? How do different political and economic contexts affect how authors write in similar genres and literary periods? By requiring the study of literary masterpieces from various traditions, students will be better equipped to answer such questions and to understand how culture, and more specifically literature, despite being profoundly impacted by its national context, is in fact never national, that it has always been and will continue to be profoundly global and interconnected. For more information visit our website, Department of World Languages or contact the Department for the latest details. Program Requirements Required courses: 12 s.h.. Students must select four courses from among the following options: FREN 02100 - Masterpieces of French Literature in English Translation Credits: 3 GERM 03100 - Masterpieces of German Literature in English Translation Credits: 3 ITAL 04100 - Masterpieces of Italian Literature in English Translation Credits: 3 SPAN 05100 - Masterpieces of Hispanic Literature in English Translation Credits: 3 ENGL 02231 - World Mythologies Credits: 3 Total Required Credits for the Program: 12 s.h. Because none of the required courses has a pre-requisite, students can take the courses in any order. All courses must be passed with a letter grade of “C-” or better and no courses may be taken P/NC. Students planning to study abroad must meet with the Program Mentor in order to determine course equivalents. Alessandra Mirra, Ph.D. Program Mentor Oak Hall, Room 206 856.256.5848 [email protected] Harold Thompson Advisor [email protected] A meta-analysis of the reliability of a metacognitive awareness instrument in second language listening Published: 04 July 2024 Cite this article Jiayu Zhai 1 , 2 & Vahid Aryadoust   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6960-2489 2   Metacognitive awareness is essential in regulating second language (L2) listening and has been predominantly assessed by a multidimensional instrument named the Metacognitive Awareness Listening Questionnaire (MALQ). Since previous studies have yielded inconclusive evidence concerning the generalization of MALQ, it is important to examine the overall reliability of the MALQ measures from a meta-analytical perspective. The purpose of the study was to examine variability in the reliability of MALQ measures in the field of L2 listening. A meta-analytic reliability generalization (RG) was conducted to synthesize Cronbach’s alpha coefficients derived from 45 studies that used MALQ. The results showed that the aggregated reliability estimate was 0.80 for MALQ measures, with four out of the five subscales having an aggregate reliability coefficient larger than 0.7, i.e., 0.73 for mental translation, 0.74 for planning and evaluating, 0.71 for person knowledge, and 0.79 for problem-solving. On the other hand, the reliability of directed attention was 0.68, falling short of meeting the minimum requirement of 0.70. In addition, as a high degree of heterogeneity was found in the studies included, a mixed effect meta-regression was performed, identifying four moderators affecting the reliability of MALQ measures: publication year, educational setting, participants’ L1, and L2 proficiency level. We further found evidence for publication bias in the included publications. Suggestions for future research are provided. This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access. Access this article Subscribe and save. Get 10 units per month Download Article/Chapter or Ebook 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter Cancel anytime Price includes VAT (Russian Federation) Instant access to the full article PDF. Rent this article via DeepDyve Institutional subscriptions Data Availability The data is available upon reasonable request from the corresponding author.  The alpha coefficient can be calculated using this formula: \(\alpha = \frac{k \overline{c} }{\overline{v }+ \left(k-1\right)\overline{c} }\) where \(\overline{v }\) represents the average variance and \(\overline{c }\) represents the average inter-item covariance. Akaike, H. (1974). A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 19 (6), 716–723. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.1974.1100705 Article   Google Scholar   Aryadoust, V. (2019). An integrated cognitive theory of comprehension. International Journal of Listening, 33 (2), 71–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2017.1397519 Beatty, P. C., Collins, D., Kaye, L., Padilla, J. L., Willis, G. B., & Wilmot, A. (Eds.). (2020).  Advances in questionnaire design, development, evaluation and testing . John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119263685 Blázquez-Rincón, D., Durán, J. I., & Botella, J. (2022). The Fear of COVID-19 Scale: A reliability generalization meta-analysis. Assessment (Odessa, Fla.), 29 (5), 940–948. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191121994164 Bonett, D. G. (2002). Sample size requirements for testing and estimating coefficient alpha. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 27 (4), 335–340. https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986027004335 Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to Meta-analysis. Wiley . https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470743386 Bozorgian, H. (2014). The role of metacognition in the development of EFL learners’ listening skill. International Journal of Listening, 28 (3), 149–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2013.861303 Bozorgian, H., Yaqubi, B., & Muhammadpour, M. (2020). Metacognitive intervention and awareness: Listeners with low working memory capacity. International Journal of Listening, 36 (3), 221–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2020.1857764 Brennan, R. L. (1992). Generalizability theory. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 11 , 27–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.1992.tb00260.x Bru-Luna, L. M., Marti-Vilar, M., Merino-Soto, C., & Livia, J. (2021). Reliability generalization study of the person-centered care assessment tool. Frontiers in Psychology, 12 , 712582. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.712582 Buck, G. (2001). Assessing listening. Cambridge University Press . https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511732959 Cabedo-Peris, J., Martí-Vilar, M., Merino-Soto, C., & Ortiz-Morán, M. (2021). Basic empathy scale: A systematic review and reliability generalization meta-analysis. Healthcare, 10 (1), 29. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10010029 Cooper, H., Hedges, L. V., & Valentine, J. C. (2019). The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (3rd ed.) . Russell Sage Foundation. https://doi.org/10.7758/9781610448864 Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78 (1), 98–104. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.1.98 de Vos, J. F., Schriefers, H., Nivard, M. G., & Lemhöfer, K. (2018). A meta-analysis and meta-regression of incidental second language word learning from spoken input. Language Learning, 68 (4), 906–941. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12296 DeVellis, R.F. (2016). Scale Development: Theory and Applications (4th ed.) . Sage. Dickersin, K. (2005). Publication bias: Recognizing the problem, understanding its origins and scope, and preventing harm. In Hannah R. R., Alexander J. S., and Michael B. (Eds.) Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis: Prevention, Assessment and Adjustments (pp.9–33) . John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/0470870168.ch2 Dowdy, A., Hantula, D. A., Travers, J. C., & Tincani, M. (2022). Meta-analytic methods to detect publication bias in behavior science research. Perspectives on Behavior Science, 45 (1), 37–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-021-00303-0 Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000). Trim and fill: A simple funnel-plot–based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics, 56 (2), 455–463. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0006-341X.2000.00455.x Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997). Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ, 315 (7109), 629–634. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.315.7 Field, A. P., & Gillett, R. (2010). How to do a meta-analysis. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 63 (3), 665–694. https://doi.org/10.1348/000711010X502733 Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). Sage. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34 (10), 906–911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906 Franco, A., Malhotra, N., & Simonovits, G. (2014). Publication bias in the social sciences: Unlocking the file drawer. Science, 345 (6203), 1502–1505. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1255484 Goh, C. C. M. (2000). A cognitive perspective on language learners’ listening comprehension problems. System, 28 , 55–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(99)00060-3 Goh, C. C. M. (2002). Exploring listening comprehension tactics and their interaction patterns. System, 30 , 185–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(02)00004-0 Goh, C. C. M., & Hu, G. (2014). Exploring the relationship between metacognitive awareness and listening performance with questionnaire data. Language Awareness, 23 (3), 255–274. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2013.769558 Goh, C. C. M., & Vandergrift, L. (2022). Teaching and learning second language listening: Metacognition in action (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203843376 Graesser, A. C., Cai, Z., Louwerse, M. M., & Daniel, F. (2006). Question Understanding Aid (QUAID): A Web Facility That Tests Question Comprehensibility. Public Opinion Quarterly, 70 (1), 3–22. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfj012 Green, C. E., Chen, C. E., Helms, J. E., & Henze, K. T. (2011). Recent reliability reporting practices in Psychological Assessment: Recognizing the people behind the data. Psychological Assessment, 23 (3), 656–669. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023089 Hair, J. F., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Black, W. C. (2018). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed). Cengage. Hayashino, Y., Noguchi, Y., & Fukui, T. (2005). Systematic evaluation and comparison of statistical tests for publication bias. Journal of Epidemiology, 15 (6), 235–243. https://doi.org/10.2188/jea.15.235 Henson, R. K. (2001). Understanding internal consistency reliability estimates: A conceptual primer on coefficient alpha. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34 (3), 177–189. https://doi.org/10.1080/07481756.2002.12069034 Henson, R. K., & Thompson, B. (2002). Characterizing measurement error in scores across studies: Some recommendations for conducting “reliability generalization” studies. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 35 (2), 113–127. https://doi.org/10.1080/07481756.2002.12069054 Herrington, H. M., Smith, T. B., Feinauer, E., & Griner, D. (2016). Reliability generalization of the Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure-Revised (MEIM-R). Journal of Counseling Psychology, 63 (5), 586–593. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000148 Higgins, J. P., & Thompson, S. G. (2002). Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 21 (11), 1539–1558. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1186 Higgins, J., Thompson, S., Deeks, J., & Altman, D. (2002). Statistical heterogeneity in systematic reviews of clinical trials: A critical appraisal of guidelines and practice. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 7 (1), 51–61. https://doi.org/10.1258/1355819021927674 Howell, R. T., & Shields, A. L. (2008). The file drawer problem in reliability generalization: A strategy to compute a fail-safe n with reliability coefficients. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68 (1), 120–128. https://doi.org/10.1177/00131644073015 Hox, J., Moerbeek, M., & van de Schoot, R. (2017). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications (3rd ed). Routledge.  https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315650982 Hu, Y., Gallagher, T., Wouters, P., Schaaf, M., & Kester, L. (2022). Game-based learning has good chemistry with chemistry education: A three-level meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 59 (9), 1499–1543. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21765 Huang, J., & Nisbet, D. (2019). An exploration of listening strategy use and proficiency in China. The Asian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 6 (1), 82–95. Google Scholar   In’nami, Y., & Koizumi, R. (2021). The Relationship between L2 Listening and Metacognitive Awareness across Listening Tests and Learner Samples. Int J Listen, 36 (2), 100–117. In’nami, Y., Cheung, M. W. L., Koizumi, R., & Wallace, M. P. (2023). Examining Second Language Listening and Metacognitive Awareness: A Meta-Analytic Structural Equation Modeling Approach. Language Learning, 73 (3), 759–798. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12548 In’nami, Y., Koizumi, R., & Tomita, Y. (2019). Meta-analysis in applied linguistics. In J. McKinley, & H. Rose (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of research methods in applied linguistics (pp. 240–252). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367824471-21 . In’nami, Y., Koizumi, R., Jeon, E. H., & Arai, Y. (2022). L2 listening and its correlates: A meta-analysis. In E. H. Jeon & Y. In’nami (Eds., pp. 235–283) Understanding L2 proficiency: Theoretical and meta-analytic investigations . John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/bpa.13 Karalık, T., & Merç, A. (2019). Correlates of Listening Comprehension in L1 and L2: A Meta-analysis. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics , 5 (3), 353–383. https://doi.org/10.32601/ejal.651387 Koricheva, J. (2003). Non-significant results in ecology: A burden or a blessing in disguise? Oikos, 102 (2), 397–401. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0579.2003.12353.x Kromrey, J. D., & Rendina-Gobioff, G. (2006). On Knowing What We Do Not Know: An Empirical Comparison of Methods to Detect Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66 (3), 357–373. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164405278585 Lee, C. P., Chiu, Y. W., Chu, C. L., Chen, Y., Jiang, K. H., Chen, J. L., & Chen, C. Y. (2016). A reliability generalization meta-analysis of coefficient alpha and test-retest coefficient for the aging males’ symptoms (AMS) scale. The Aging Male, 19 (4), 244–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/13685538.2016.1246525 Lenz, A. S., Ho, C.-M., Rocha, L., & Aras, Y. (2020). Reliability Generalization of Scores on the Post-Traumatic Growth Inventory. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 54 (2), 106–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/07481756.2020.1747940 Li, A., & Bagger, J. (2007). The Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR): A reliability generalization study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67 (3), 525–544. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164406292087 Lim, M. H., Aryadoust, V., & Esposito, G. (2023). A meta-analysis of the effect of virtual reality on reducing public speaking anxiety. Current Psychology, 42 , 12912–12928. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-02684-6 Lin, L., Chu, H., Murad, M. H., Hong, C., Qu, Z., Cole, S. R., & Chen, Y. (2018). Empirical Comparison of Publication Bias Tests in Meta-Analysis. Journal of General Internal Medicine : JGIM, 33 (8), 1260–1267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-018-4425-7 Lovejoy, J., Watson, B. R., Lacy, S., & Riffe, D. (2016). Three Decades of Reliability in Communication Content Analyses: Reporting of Reliability Statistics and Coefficient Levels in Three Top Journals. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 93 (4), 1135–1159. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699016644558 Marks-Anglin, A., & Chen, Y. (2020). A historical review of publication bias. Research Synthesis Methods, 11 (6), 725–742. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1452 Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & Group, P. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6 (7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 Mueller, K. F., Meerpohl, J. J., Briel, M., Antes, G., von Elm, E., Lang, B., Gloy, V., Motschall, E., Schwarzer, G., & Bassler, D. (2013). Detecting, quantifying and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analyses: Protocol of a systematic review on methods. Systematic Reviews, 2 (1), 60–60. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-2-60 Myers, R. (1990). Classical and modern regression with application (2nd ed.). Duxbury. Nakagawa, S., & Schielzeth, H. (2013). A general and simple method for obtaining R2 from generalized linear mixed-effects models. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 4 (2), 133–142. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-210x.2012.00261.x Nalley, E. M., Tuttle, L. J., Conklin, E. E., Barkman, A. L., Wulstein, D. M., Schmidbauer, M. C., & Donahue, M. J. (2023). A systematic review and meta-analysis of the direct effects of nutrients on corals. The Science of the Total Environment, 856 , 159093–159093. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.159093 Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hrobjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. PLoS Medicine, 18 (3), e1003583. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003583 Payaprom, S. (2023). Investigating the relationship among metacognitive awareness, self-efficacy, and EFL learners’ listening comprehension performance. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 13 (1), 27–34. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1301.04 Pedhazur, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. P. (1991). Measurement, design, and analysis: An integrated approach . Erlbaum.  https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203726389 Piqueras, J. A., Martin-Vivar, M., Sandin, B., San Luis, C., & Pineda, D. (2017). The Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale: A systematic review and reliability generalization meta-analysis. Journal of Affective Disorders, 218 , 153–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2017.04.022 Plonsky, L., & Derrick, D. J. (2016). A Meta-Analysis of Reliability Coefficients in Second Language Research. The Modern Language Journal, 100 (2), 538–553. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12335 Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002).  Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods  (2nd ed.). Sage Publications. Rothstein, H. R., Sutton, A. J., & Borenstein, M. (2005). Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis: Prevention, Assessment and Adjustments . John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/0470870168 Book   Google Scholar   Ryngala, D. J., Shields, A. L., & Caruso, J. C. (2005). Reliability generalization of the revised Children’s Manifest Anxiety Scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 65 (2), 259–271. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164404272495 Sánchez-Meca, J., Marin-Martinez, F., López-López, J. A., Núñez-Núñez, R. M., Rubio-Aparicio, M., López-García, J. J., López-Pina, J. A., Blázquez-Rincón, D. M., López-Ibáñez, C., & López-Nicolás, R. (2021). Improving the reporting quality of reliability generalization meta-analyses: The REGEMA checklist. Research Synthesis Methods, 12 (4), 516–536. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1487 Saris, W. E., & Gallhofer, I. N. (2014). Design, evaluation, and analysis of questionnaires for survey research . Wiley. Schwarz, G. (1978). Estimating the dimension of a model. The Annals of Statistics, 6 (2), 461–464. https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176344136 Sen, S. (2021). A Reliability Generalization Meta-Analysis of Runco Ideational Behavior Scale. Creativity Research Journal, 34 (2), 178–194. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2021.1960719 Shin, H. W., Sok, S., & Do, J. (2023). Role of individual differences in incidental L2 vocabulary acquisition through listening to stories: Metacognitive awareness and motivation. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, IRAL, 61 (4), 1669–1695. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2021-0212 Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86 (2), 420. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420 Smith, T. E., Sheridan, S. M., Kim, E. M., Park, S., & Beretvas, S. N. (2020). The effects of family-school partnership interventions on academic and social-emotional functioning: A meta-analysis exploring what works for whom. Educational Psychology Review, 32 (2), 511–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09509-w Sok, S., & Shin, H. W. (2021). Investigating the Role of Cognitive Variables in Second Language Learners’ Listening Comprehension: Aptitude and Metacognitive Awareness. International Journal of Listening, 36 (2), 138–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2021.1954926 Song, F., Parekh, S., Hooper, L., Loke, Y. K., Ryder, J., Sutton, A. J., Hing, C., Kwok, C. S., Pang, C., & Harvey, I. (2010). Dissemination and Publication of Research Findings: An Updated Review of Related Biases. Health Technology Assessment, 14 (8), 1–193. https://doi.org/10.3310/hta14080 Sterne, J. A. C., & Egger, M. (2001). Funnel plots for detecting bias in meta-analysis: Guidelines on choice of axis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 54 (10), 1046–1055. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-4356(01)00377-8 Tanewong, S. (2019). Metacognitive pedagogical sequence for less-proficient Thai EFL listeners: A comparative investigation. RELC Journal, 50 (1), 86–103. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688218754942 Tang, J.-L., & Liu, J. L. (2000). Misleading funnel plot for detection of bias in meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 53 (5), 477–484. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-4356(99)00204-8 Thompson, B., & Vacha-Haase, T. (2000). Psychometrics is Datametrics: The Test is not reliable. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60 (2), 174–195. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164400602002 Thorlund, K., Imberger, G., Johnston, B. C., Walsh, M., Awad, T., Thabane, L., & Wetterslev, J. (2012). Evolution of heterogeneity ( I 2 ) estimates and their 95% confdence intervals in large meta-analyses. PLoS ONE, 7 (7), e39471. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0039471 Trajković, G., Starčević, V., Latas, M., Leštarević, M., Ille, T., Bukumirić, Z., & Marinković, J. (2011). Reliability of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression: A meta-analysis over a period of 49 years. Psychiatry Research, 189 (1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2010.12.007 Vacha-Haase, T. (1998). Reliability generalization: Exploring variance in measurement error affecting score reliability across studies. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58 , 6–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164498058001002 Vacha-Haase, T., & Thompson, B. (2011). Score Reliability: A retrospective look back at 12 years of reliability generalization studies. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 44 (3), 159–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0748175611409845 Vacha-Haase, T., Kogan, L. R., & Thompson, B. (2000). Sample compositions and variabilities in published studies versus those in test manuals: Validity of score reliability inductions. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60 (4), 509–522. https://doi.org/10.1177/00131640021970682 Vacha-haase, T., Ness, C., Nilsson, J., & Reetz, D. (1999). Practices Regarding Reporting of Reliability Coefficients: A Review of Three Journals. The Journal of Experimental Education, 67 (4), 335–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220979909598487 Vandergrift, L. (2002). It was nice to see that our predictions were right: Developing metacognition in L2 listening comprehension. Canadian Modern Language Review, 58 , 556–575. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.58.4.555 Vandergrift, L. (2003). Orchestrating strategy use toward a model of the skilled second language listener. Language Learning, 53 (3), 463–496. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00232 Vandergrift, L., & Baker, S. (2015). Learner variables in second language listening comprehension: An exploratory path analysis. Language Learning, 65 (2), 390–416. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12105 Vandergrift, L., Goh, C. C. M., Mareschal, C. J., & Tafaghodtari, M. H. (2006). The metacognitive awareness listening questionnaire: Development and validation. Language Learning, 56 (3), 431–462. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2006.00373.x Vandergrift, L. (2008). Learning strategies for listening comprehension. In S. Hurd, & T. Lewis (Eds.), Language learning strategies in independent settings. Multilingual matters (pp. 84–102).  https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847690999-007 Viechtbauer, W. (2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. Journal of Statistical Software, 36 (3), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v036.i03 Wang, L., & MacIntyre, P. (2021). Second language listening comprehension: The role of anxiety and enjoyment in listening metacognitive awareness. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 11 (4), 491–515. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2021.11.4.2 Wang, Y., & Treffers-Daller, J. (2017). Explaining listening comprehension among L2 learners of English: The contribution of general language proficiency, vocabulary knowledge and metacognitive awareness. System, 65 , 139–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.12.013 Webb, N. M., Shavelson, R. J., & Haertel, E. H. (2006). 4 Reliability Coefficients and Generalizability Theory. In  Handbook of Statistics  (Vol. 26, pp. 81–124). Elsevier Science & Technology. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-7161(06)26004-8 Willis, G.B. and Lessler, J. (1999). Question appraisal system (QAS-99) . Research Triangle Institute. Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267938670_Question_Appraisal_System_QAS-99_By Xu, J. (2017). The Mediating Effect of Listening Metacognitive Awareness between Test-Taking Motivation and Listening Test Score: An Expectancy-Value Theory Approach. Frontiers in Psychology, 8 , 2201. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02201 Xu, J., & Huang, Y.-T. (2018). The Mediating Effect of Listening Metacognitive Awareness Between Listening Test Anxiety and Listening Test Performance. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 27 (4), 313–324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-018-0388-z Yin, P., & Fan, X. (2000). Assessing the reliability of Beck depression inventory scores: Reliability generalization across studies. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60 (2), 201–223. https://doi.org/10.1177/00131640021970466 Download references Acknowledgements Acknowledgement is extended to Nanyang Technological University (NTU) Provost Graduate Award (PGA). We would also like to thank the three reviewers of the journal for their valuable comments and constructive feedback, which contributed to the improvement of the manuscript. Some of the sentences in this text were revised for clarity using generative artificial intelligence. This study was supported by the Research Project Fund by Sichuan International Studies University (Grant No. SISU202144) and Humanity and Social Science Research Project by Chongqing Municipal Education Commission (Grant No. 24SKGH182).  Author information Authors and affiliations. School of English Studies, Sichuan International Studies University, Chongqing, China National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore Jiayu Zhai & Vahid Aryadoust You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar Corresponding author Correspondence to Vahid Aryadoust . Ethics declarations Competing interests. The authors declared no conflict of interest. Additional information Publisher's note. Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Rights and permissions Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. Reprints and permissions About this article Zhai, J., Aryadoust, V. A meta-analysis of the reliability of a metacognitive awareness instrument in second language listening. Metacognition Learning (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-024-09392-z Download citation Received : 06 January 2024 Accepted : 11 June 2024 Published : 04 July 2024 DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-024-09392-z Share this article Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content: Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article. Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative Metacognitive awareness L2 listening Reliability generalization (RG) Find a journal Publish with us Track your research 405 IMAGES Introduction-To-Literary-Translation An Example Of Literary Translation By Dr. Shadia Yousef Banjar (PDF) The Work of Literary Translation , by Clive Scott (PDF) Literary translation difficulties (PDF) Introduction: Literary Texts and their Translations as an Object (PDF) Notes on Translation as Research VIDEO Literary Translation Theory Postcolonial Translation (ENG) Literary Translation Mid Term Project_Margaretha Imanuella_20J20022 Patchwork: A Graduate Reading in Literary Translation Equivalence and Strategies of Translation (ENG) Literary Translation Centre 2014 COMMENTS Full article: Topics and concepts in literary translation This brief article serves to introduce the papers selected for the special issue devoted to topics and concepts in literary translation. The texts study a variety of languages (including English, Spanish, Italian, Chinese, French, Japanese, Dutch, German and Swedish), use a wide range of approaches (quantitative review of literary translations ... Frontiers Further research is required on the underlying function or role of cross-cultural context in literary translation. Translation invariably entails contextual changes or adjustments, and although rendering the commonly assumed textual transfer is problematic, when it comes to context, the situation is somewhat different. The Role of Literary Theory in Literary Translation Literary Translation and Literary Theory. Literary translation is a kind of rewriting. On discussing the role of literary theory in literary studies. and studies of literary translation, Le fevere ... The Palgrave Handbook of Literary Translation This Handbook offers a comprehensive and engaging overview of contemporary issues in Literary Translation research through in-depth investigations of actual case studies of particular works, authors or translators. Leading researchers from across the globe discuss best practice, problems, and possibilities in the translation of poetry, novels ... Literary translation research in China China's literary tradition: the religious connection. China has a rich and varied translation tradition, arguably the longest 'extant record of continuous activities, covering some three thousand years' (Hung, Citation 2005, p. 43).Unlike neighbouring Indians (Trivedi, Citation 2006), the Chinese have been keen translators as well as proto-scholars interested in theorizing the practice ... Introduction: Literary Texts and their Translations as an Object of Volume 5, No. 3, Art. 1, August 2016. Introduction: Literary Texts and their Translations as. an Object of Research. Leena Kolehmainen, Esa Penttilä and Piet Van Poucke, University of Eastern ... (PDF) Literary translation and communication literary translation, literary traditions (Newmar k, 1982, p. 18). e performative act of literary translation is a n integral part of cross-cultural communication, the success o f which depends on Literary Translation Summary. Literary translation has progressively been dominated by a Western translation form that imposes basic binarisms, assuming separate (national) languages, a foundational opposition between domesticating and foreignizing translation strategies, and separate voices for author and translator, with the latter in a subordinate position. Qualitative Research Methods in Translation Theory Translation studies is at the "interface" of other disciplines (Duarte et al., 2006), including literary and cultural studies, history, and sociology. Thus, in addition to speaking to scholars concerned with translation, the article aims to comment more generally on how the humanities and social sciences utilize qualitative methods to ... Past, present and future trends in (research on) indirect literary What is indirect (literary) translation. Translations are not always done from the so-called original but can also be done from a translation. The processes and/or products of such translations have been called indirect translation, pivot translation, and second-hand translation, for example (for a more thorough discussion on terminological fluctuations, see, e.g., Assis Rosa et al., Citation ... Literary Translation As with any form of translation, literary translation is a multifaceted, hybrid, complex and immensely interesting phenomenon. From an institutional point of view it may be looked upon as a specific form of literary reception and cultural mediation, as a form of cultural production taking place within a specific environment in the interface between two (often national) literatures and cultures. Introduction: Literary Texts and their Translations as an Object of This special issue of the International Journal of Literary Linguistics offers seven state-of-the-art contributions on the current linguistic study of literary translation. Although the articles are based on similar data - literary source texts and their translations - they focus on diverse aspects of literary translation, study a range of linguistic phenomena and utilize different ... Translation Studies There is a growing body of research that reflects this newer, more complex agenda, for as research in Translation Studies increases and historical data become more readily available, so important questions are starting to be asked, about the role of translation in shaping a literary canon, the strategies employed by translators and the norms in operation at a given point in time, the discourse ... PDF Literary Translation as the many specialised graduate programmes on literary translation in higher education testify. For the purposes of this contribution that aspires to give an overview of the cultural, institutional, textual and linguistic issues involved in literary translation and a tentative outlook into the future of research Literary Theory and Translation Studies Literary Theory and Translation Studies. The cluster of concerns that fall under literary theory remains a vital core interest of Comparative Literature as faculty research has expanded to include new critical and post-critical perspectives. Literary theory addresses questions regarding the nature and production of meaning and form in language ... Literary Translation Literary Translation by Clifford E. Landers. Call Number: Langsam stacks PN241 .L29 2001. ISBN: 1853595209. Publication Date: 2001-09-13. In this book, both beginning and experienced translators will find pragmatic techniques for dealing with problems of literary translation, whatever the original language. Literature in and through Translation: Literary Translation as a In other words, small corpora of literary translated texts could be discussed in the classroom as case-studies for contrastive analysis purposes. Although the use of corpora in literary translation research is becoming increasingly popular (Dimitroulia and Goutsos, 2017), its potential from the teaching perspective remains understudied. The pivotal role of translators' research in literary translation Abstract Although much recent work in translation studies has focused on translators, the research conducted by translators remains understudied. This study explores translators' research and its impact on their translations and on translational trust. Taking Jeffrey C. Kinkley - an American translator, historian, and sinologist - as an illustrative case study, this paper investigates ... (PDF) Topics and concepts in literary translation This brief article serves to introduce the papers selected for the. special issue devoted to topics and concepts in literary translation. The texts study a variety of languages (including English ... Revising a literary translation for publication Abstract Despite the surge of interest in translation revision and its ubiquitousness in translation processes, minimal scholarly research has been carried out into the revision of literary translations (Koponen et al. 2021, 10). This article responds to calls in the literature for empirical studies examining the creation of actual published translations. Literary translation research in China Literary criticism, although distinct from literary translation, has also been in uential. fl. in introducing literary works in China as well as exporting Chinese texts abroad. Zhao (2009, 2011), for instance, has studied the importance of literary criticism for the reception of Henrik Ibsen's work. Research on Literary Translation Based on the Improved Optimization Machine translation is widely used in people's daily lives and production, occupying an important position. In order to improve the accuracy of the literary intelligent translation, research on literary intelligent translation is based on the improved optimization model. Japanese Literature in Translation: Modern Few universities in the world offer the extraordinary range and diversity of academic programs that students enjoy at UCLA. Leadership in education, research, and public service make UCLA a beacon of excellence in higher education, as students, faculty members, and staff come together in a true community of scholars to advance knowledge, address societal challenges, and pursue intellectual and ... AI machine translation tools must be taught cultural ... The 'No Language Left Behind' project has scaled machine translation to 200 of the world's 7,000 or so languages ... Immunology Frontier Research Center, Osaka University. Full article: Perspectives on translation and world literature Translation in colonial settings. The concepts informing the study of translation and world literature include ideology and patronage, which are at the basis of the article 'Translation as a modernizing agent: modern education and religious texts in colonial Manipur (1891-1947)' in which Akoijam Malemnganbi examines the role of translation in the modernization of Manipur, a small state ... Indonesia Literature in Translation (Indonesia and Japanese Translation The research questions proposed align with the study's primary objective of issues in translation; How is the passage of Indonesian literature in translation? Literary research with qualitative approaches will be conducted in this study. Program: Certificate of Undergraduate Study in World Literature in The Certificate of Undergraduate Study in World Literature in English Translation, which may be declared in the World Languages Department, recognizes students' completion of 12 s.h. in the study of World Literature in English Translation, and as such is accessible also to students who are not proficient in a second language. The Bloomsbury handbook of modern Chinese literature in translation The Bloomsbury handbook of modern Chinese literature in translation edited by Cosima Bruno, Lucas Klein, & Chris Song, Bloomsbury, 2023, 472 pp., £140.00 (hardback), £126.00 (eBook) Audrey Heijns The Chinese University of Hong Kong Correspondence [email protected] A meta-analysis of the reliability of a metacognitive awareness Assessing metacognitive awareness in L2 listening is challenging primarily due to its implicit and internal nature (Goh, 2000).The Metacognitive Awareness Listening Questionnaire (MALQ), developed by Vandergrift et al. (), is a widely used measurement tool in L2 listening research to gauge listeners' metacognition, particularly in studies examining the relationship between metacognitive ... assignment essay homework paper phd report resume review speech thesis