We are grateful to be able to share with you three recorded lectures by Jemina Napier (Heriot-Watt University), the Chair Professor of our 2019 CETRA Research Summer School in Translation Studies. Special thanks go to the master’s student Liesbeth Pittomvils for having subtitled these lectures, under supervision of our colleague Luc Dierickx, in order to make them available to deaf people.
Interpreting Studies as linguistic ethnography: New theories, new methods
The term linguistic ethnography is an umbrella term for “a growing body of research by scholars who combine linguistic and ethnographic approaches in order to understand how social and communicative processes operate in a range of settings and contexts” (Shaw, Copland & Snell, 2015). The core goal of linguistic ethnography is to examine language use in context, so by that very definition, various qualitative research conducted within Interpreting Studies could be considered as falling under this umbrella. First, I will give an overview of linguistic ethnography and how it can be used to examine interpreter-mediated interactions, and will highlight existing interpreting research that could be considered within this framework. I will give examples from my own current research to discuss the benefits of using innovative, visual methods to examine experiences of professional and non-professional interpreter-mediated communication within a linguistic ethnographic framework; and I will also propose the affordances of examining interpreter-mediated communication through the theoretical lens of translanguaging, which is widely used by linguistic ethnographers to examine direct communication. Finally, I will explore how re-framing our approach to interpreting studies through linguistic ethnography may also lead to a re-framing of what we mean by mediated communication.
Participatory research methods in interpreting studies
A participatory research approach is a qualitative methodology that is inductive and collaborative and relies on trust and relationships. This approach is typically used in public health research studies, and has been used specifically to investigate migrant communities and interpreters in public health settings in Ireland (Macfarlane et al, 2009). Participatory research is an approach that enables positive user involvement and empowerment, and enables marginalised ‘hidden’ voices to be heard. Through purposeful sampling (Patton, 2002), ‘information rich’ stakeholder groups who have a depth of experience to share can contribute to the research process, thus ensuring that the research is conducted not just on, for and with people (Turner & Harrington, 2000), but also by people from stakeholder groups.
In this presentation I will reflect on previous research to consider an innovative, interactive approach to interpreting research methodology. This presentation will draw particularly on studies that I have led that have employed a participatory approach and incorporated phenomenological principles to investigate aspects of sign language interpreting. The studies also adopted interactive principles of collaboration between researchers and key stakeholders and thus embed a participatory approach within the research design. The key principles of participatory research will be outlined, with examples from the data. This presentation will highlight how we can use sign language interpreting research to inform methodological approaches to the study of interpreter-mediated interaction generally.
Exploring mixed-methods research design in interpreting studies
The design of community interpreting research studies can incorporate triangulation of research data using different methodologies in order to test or explore the same phenomena from different perspectives (Hale & Napier, 2014). This approach is typically referred to as ‘mixed methods’ (Johnson, Onwuegbuzie, & Turner, 2007) or ‘multi-method’ research (Brewer & Hunter, 2006), and is particularly popular in social science research. Some researchers would consider this as one of the major research paradigms equal to, and alongside, quantitative and qualitative paradigms (Johnson, Onwuegbuzie & Turner, 2007) that “provides increased power of persuasion and strengthened claims to validity” (Brewer & Hunter, 2006, p.xi).
Pöchhacker (2011) considers that the use of mixed-methods research designs in interpreting studies are appropriate in order to account for the level of complexity in exploring interpreting processes and practices. Employing such an approach enables researchers to draw on traditional research methodologies, but also allows scope for innovation in research design. One such innovative approach is the use of a participatory approach to research (Cornwall & Jewkes, 1995), which includes community stakeholders in the research process. As recommended by Luker (2008), as social science researchers we need to “play out of our shoes” and “think at a higher level of generality” (p.218), which means considering which research method(s) will enable us to answer the questions we have about interpreting.
In this presentation I will give an overview of how mixed-methods have been employed in the study of sign language interpreting in legal contexts, highlighting why these projects employ these methods and the benefits of exploring various mixed-methods approaches to interpreting research generally.
Translating in Town uncovers administrative and cultural multilingualism and translation practices in multilingual European communities during the long 19th century. Challenging the traditional narrative of nationalist, monolingual language ideologies, this book focuses instead upon translation policies which aimed to accommodate complex language situations with new democratic principles at local levels.
Covering a time-frame from 1785 to 1914, chapters investigate towns and cities in the heartland of Europe, such as Barcelona, Milan and Vienna, as well as those on its outer rim, including Nicosia, Cork and Tampere. Highlighting the conflicts and negotiations that took place between official language(s), local language(s) and translation, the book explores the impact on both represented and non-represented monolingual and multilingual citizens. In so doing, Translating in Town highlights the subtle compromises obtained between official monolingualism, multilingualism and translation, and between competing views on official and private translation and transfer techniques, during this fascinating era of European history.
For more information, please visit this web page.
Our colleagues of the research group Translation and Culture at Ghent University seek to recruit a PhD fellow (doctoral candidate) for a project on Translation and Francoism (2020-2024), under supervision of Professor Jeroen Vandaele.
Between 1939 and 1975 Francisco Franco’s administration held a tight control over public discourse in Spain. This project studies the role of translation during Francoism. A site of tension and censorship under Franco, translation throws light on cultural struggle and on the values, practices, and institutions that Francoism—or sectors of the regime—defended and opposed in various times and places. The project is currently looking for a research proposal about translation between Spanish and, preferably, (one of) the following languages: French, English, Dutch, German, Norwegian, Danish, or Swedish.
For more information about this vacancy, click this link.
Retranslating the Bible and the Qur’an
Tensions between Authoritative Translations and Retranslations in Theory and in Practice
KU Leuven, Belgium, 23-25 March 2020
Venue: KU Leuven, Antwerp Campus, Korte Nieuwstraat 33, 2000 Antwerp, Belgium
CETRA – Centre for Translation Studies at KU Leuven, in collaboration with United Bible Societies, presents a three-day conference dedicated to the theme of retranslating the Bible and the Qur’an. Its aim is to bring together Translation Studies scholars and translators working with sacred writings, in particular Biblical and Quranic texts, and to stimulate the dialogue between theory and practice. Please find below information about the delegate registration.
Provisional Programme (version 16.1.2020)
Monday 23 March 2020
- 13:00-13:30 Coffee and registration
- 13:30-13:40 Welcome
- 13:40-14:40 Keynote lecture by Alexandra Assis Rosa (University of Lisbon). Retranslating theory and canonical texts
- 14:40-15:40 Keynote lecture by Henri Bloemen (KU Leuven). Retranslating the Bible and the Qur’an as sensitive texts
- 15:40-16:00 Coffee break
- 16:00-16:30 Christo H J van der Merwe (Stellenbosch University): The new Afrikaans Bible. An ‘active retranslation’ with a negotiated difference.
- 16:30-17:00 Aloo Osotsi Mojola (St. Paul’s University): Some key conjunctures and moments in retranslating the Bible into Kiswahili – 1890 to 1996
- 17:00-17:30 Sohaib Saeed (University of Glasow): The Untranslated Qur’an: Neglected Diversity in the Exegetical Corpus
- 17:30-18:00 Masood Khoshsaligheh (Ferdowsi University of Mashhad): Retranslations of the Qur’an into Persian in Iran: motives, orientations and criticisms
- 19:00-20:30 Evening program. Retranslating the Qur’an into Dutch. A conversation between the Iranian-Dutch writer Kader Abdolah and Helge Daniëls (KU Leuven)
- 20:30 Reception
Tuesday 24 March 2020
- 9:00-10:00 Keynote lecture by Lourens De Vries (VU Amsterdam). The Retranslation of holy texts in Christian traditions: questions of authority, actualization and intertextuality
- 10:00-11:30 Jenny Wong (University of Birmingham): Retranslating the Chinese Bible to make it gender-inclusive
- 10:30-11:00 Luise von Flotow (University of Ottawa): The “letter” of the text: when women translate the Bible word-for-word
- 11:00-11:20 Coffee break
- 11:20-11:50 Marijke de Lang (United Bible Societies): The Reformation and revisions of the Bible
- 11:50-12:50 Keynote lecture by Paraskevi Arapoglou (Hellenic Bible Society). The Curious Case of LXX in Greek Orthodoxy: Retranslating within Linguistic “dimorphia”
- 12:50-13:40 Lunch
- 13:40-14:40 Keynote lecture by Sameh Hanna (Leeds University). Retranslation and the re-definition of an ‘Authoritative Translation’: sociological insights from the Arabic translations of the Bible
- 14:40-15:10 Andy Warren-Rothlin (United Bible Societies): Retranslation of the Bible in Muslim idiom
- 15:10-15:40 Hilla Karas (Bar-Ilan University): Hebrew retranslations of the Bible and their contradictory reception
- 15:40-16:00 Coffee break
- 16:00-16:30 Jaap van Dorp (Netherlands Bible Society): Retranslating the Bible in Dutch
- 16:30-17:00 Gulnaz Sibgatullina (University of Amsterdam): The 18th-century Qur’an translations into Russian: The modes of rendering and reading
- 17:00-17:30 Marija Zlatnar Moe (University of Ljubljana) & Christian Moe: Negotiating a Slovene Qur’an with immigrant tradition
- 17:30-18:30 Keynote lecture by Ahmed Allaithy (American University of Sharjah). Found in translation ‒ the untranslatable Qur’an
- 19:30 Conference dinner (optional)
Wednesday 25 March 2020
- 10:00-10:30 Adriana Şerban (Paul Valéry University Montpellier 3): Retranslation of the Bible for liturgical use: The case of the French Traduction officielle liturgique
10:30-11:00 Richard Pleijel (Uppsala University): The Non-Reception of a new Swedish translation of the Lord’s Prayer
- 11:00-11:20 Coffee break
- 11:20-12:20 Keynote lecture by Alexey Somov (Institute for Bible Translation, Russia, Moscow). The authority of the old for producing the new: Bible translations in Russia in the 21st century
- 12:20-12:50 Plenary discussion and conclusion
Call for Participants
Call for Papers (closed)
Over the last two decades, research on retranslation has greatly expanded, partly under the influence of the so-called Retranslation Hypothesis (Chesterman 2000), based on the ideas by Berman (1990), claiming that retranslations tend to be more source-text-oriented than previous translations. The idea that translation is a process of improvement over time, from one translation to the next, coming closer and closer to the source text, has lately repeatedly been challenged and even undermined (Paloposki & Koskinen 2004). It is striking that research on retranslation has mainly focused on translations of literary source texts with a ‘canonized’ or ‘canonical’ status such as Shakespeare (e.g., Hanna 2009), Joyce (e.g. Alevato do Amaral 2019, Peeters 2016, Peeters & Sanaz Gallego 2019) and Dostoevsky (e.g., Boulogne 2018). Drawing on recent theoretical insights into retranslation (e.g., Deane-Cox Sharon 2014, Alvstad & Assis Rosa 2015, Peeters 2016, Van Poucke 2017) and on concrete case-studies, this conference wants to explore the theoretical and practical implications of the field of tension that exists between translations and retranslations when ‘canonized’ or ‘canonical’ writings in the literal sense of the word are at stake.
In doing so, the conference wants to shed light on the complex triangular relationships between a given sacred source text, its previous translations and new translations. Special attention will be given to the opportunities, pitfalls and challenges of retranslating a Biblical text or Quranic text (Abdel Haleem 2005, Allaithy 2014) – typical examples of highly sensitive texts (Simms 1998) – in the present time. A key issue that we propose for discussion in this respect concerns retranslations of canonical texts for which authoritative or indeed canonized translations already exist. Taking into account insights of narrative theory (Baker 2006, Brownlie 2006), we want to investigate which opportunities retranslation offers to counter, undermine or strengthen the existing narratives in the case when not only the source text, but also a given pre-existing translation has been attributed canonical status. How, for instance, can translators challenge the King James Version of the Bible, the Revised Standard Version, the Roman Catholic version, or the Jehovah Witnesses Version? On the other hand, in the case of the Qur’an, it seems that there is no such thing as an established or authoritative translation, let alone a canonical translation. What then is the historical and/or contemporary status of the numerous existing interlingual and intralingual translations of the Qur’an, both in and outside of the Islamic world? Are they merely pragmatic solutions to make the source text more widely or more easily accessible, or do they fulfill other functions (literary, ideological, theological, explanatory and other) as well?
The main issues we would like to discuss are related, but not limited, to the following topics:
- Motives for the retranslation of sacred texts. How do issues such as ageing, changing contexts of reception, and reinterpretation impact on retranslations of the Bible, the Qur’an and other sacred writings? To what extent does the practice of retranslating sacred texts confirm or undermine the above mentioned retranslation hypothesis?
- Strategies for retranslating sacred texts. How does the canonized nature of a given text (original or translation) influence the adopted retranslation strategies? How does the canonical nature of an already existing translation influence retranslation strategies? Which concrete retranslation strategies do translators of the Bible, the Qur’an and other sacred writings adopt? Which micro-textual (syntax, lexicon, terminology, etc.) and macro-textual choices are made? How can translators of the Bible and the Qur’an deal, both theoretically and in practice, with, among others, problems of sensitivity, intralingual translation, modernization versus archaisation, explicitness versus implicitness, denotation versus connotation, literarity versus functional equivalence?
- The reception of retranslations of sacred texts. How can we evaluate the success of a given retranslation of the Bible, the Qur’an or other sacred writings? What makes some retranslations more successful than others? What role do various agents play in the canonization process of retranslations of sacred writings? What functions do the intralingual and interlingual retranslations or sacred writings fulfill in the different receiving contexts? How can the assumed lack of authoritative translations of the Qur’an be explained and challenged? How is it possible to compete with established translations of the Bible and the Qur’an? How to account for the unsuccessful reception of some retranslations? What paratextual and other strategies are used to put a retranslation in the market?
Confirmed keynote lectures
- The Iranian-Dutch writer Kader Abdolah: ‘Retranslating the Qur’an into Dutch. A conversation with Helge Daniëls’ (KU Leuven)
- Ahmed Allaithy (American University of Sarjah): ‘Found in Translation ‒ The Untranslatable Qur’an’
- Paraskevi Arapoglou (Hellenic Bible Society): ‘The curious case of LXX in Greek Orthodoxy: Retranslating within linguistic “dimorphia”’
- Alexandra Assis Rosa (University of Lisbon): ‘Retranslating Theory and Canonical Texts’
- Henri Bloemen (KU Leuven): ‘Retranslating the Bible and the Qur’an as Sensitive Texts’
- Ralph Cleminson (University of Oxford): ‘Perpetual Translation and the Quest for the Canonical: the Holy Scriptures in Slavonic’
- Sameh Hanna (Leeds University): ‘Retranslation and the re-definition of an ‘authoritative translation’: sociological insights from the Arabic translations of the Bible’
- Lourens De Vries (VU Amsterdam): ‘The retranslation of holy texts in Christian traditions: questions of authority, actualization and intertextuality’
- Alexey Somov (Institute for Bible Translation, Russia, Moscow): ‘The Authority of the Old for producing the New: Bible Translations in Russia in the 21st Century’
- Pieter Boulogne (CETRA, KU Leuven)
- Marijke De Lang (United Bible Societies)
- Kris Peeters (UAntwerpen)
- Piet Van Poucke (UGent)
- Jos Verheyden (CETRA, KU Leuven)
- Abied Alswlaiman (CETRA, KU Leuven)
- Pieter Boulogne (CETRA, KU Leuven)
- Marijke De Lang (United Bible Societies)
- Kris Peeters (UAntwerpen)
- Piet Van Poucke (UGent)
- Jos Verheyden (CETRA, KU Leuven)
- Andy Warren (United Bible Societies)
- Abdel Haleem, Muhammad A.S. (2005). The Qur’an, A New Translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Alevato do Amaral, Vitor. (2019). Broadening the notion of retranslation. Cadernos de Traduçao 39:1. 239-259.
- Allaithy, Ahmed. (2014). Qur’anic Term Translation: A semantic Study from Arabic Perspective. Antwerp: Garant.
- Alvstad, Cecilia and Alexandra Assis Rosa. (2015). Voice in retranslation. An overview and some trends. International Journal of Translation Studies 27:1. 3-24.
- Baker, Mona. (2006). Translation and Conflict. A Narrative account. London and New York: Routledge.
- Berman, Antoine. (1990). La retraduction comme espace de la traduction.Palimspsestes 4 (Retraduire, edited by Paul Bensimon and Didier Coupaye). 1-7.
- Boulogne, Pieter. (2019). And now for something completely different … Once again the same book by Dostoevsky: A (con)textual analysis of early and recent Dostoevsky retranslations into Dutch. Cadernos de Tradução. Edição Regular Temática – Retranslation in Context. 39:1. 117-144.
- Brownlie, Siobhan. (2006). Narrative Theory and Retranslation Theory. Across Languages and Cultures 7:2. 145-170.
- Chesterman, Andrew. (2000). A causal model for translation studies. In: Intercultural Faultlines. Research Models in Translation Studies I : Textual and Cognitive Aspects, edited by Maeve Olohan. Manchester: St. Jerome. 15-27.
- Collombat, Isabelle. (2004). Le XXIe siècle : l’âge de la retraduction. Translation Studies in the New Millennium 1-15.
- Deane-Cox, Sharon. (2014) Retranslation: Translation, Literature and Reinterpretation. London: Bloomsbury.
- Desmidt, Isabelle. (2009). (Re)translation revisited. Meta 54:4. 669-683.
- Gambier, Yves. (1994). La retraduction, retour et détour. Meta 39:3. 413-417.
- Gambier, Yves. (2011) La retraduction: ambiguïtés et défis. Autour de la retraduction. Perspectives littéraires européennes, edited by Enrico Monti & Peter Schneyder. Orizons. 49-66.
- Gürçağlar, Şehnaz Tahir. (2009). Retranslation. In: Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, 2nd ed., edited by Mona Baker & Gabriela Saldanha. Routledge. 233-236.
- Hanna, Sameh. (2009). Othello in the Egyptian Vernacular: Negotiating the ‘doxic’ in Drama Translation and Identity Formation. The Translator: studies in intercultural communication. 15: 1. 157-178
- Izutsu, Toshihiko. (2001). Ethico-Religious Concepts in the Qur’an. Montreal: McGill-Queens University Press.
- Koskinen, Kaisa. (2019). Revising and retranslating. In: Routledge Handbook of Literary Translation, edited by Kelly Washbourne & Ben Van Wyke. Routledge. 315-324.
- Koskinen, Kaisa & Paloposki, Outi. (2015). Anxieties of influence. The voice of the first translator in retranslation. Target 27:1. 25-39.
- Leutzsch, Martin. (2019). Übersetzungstabus als Indikatoren normativer Grenzen in der Geschichte der christlichen Bibelübersetzung. In: Übertragungen heiliger Texte in Judentum, Christentum und Islam. Fallstudien zu Formen und Grenzen der Transposition, edited by K. Heyden & H. Manuwald, Hermeneutische Untersuchungen zur Theologie Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. 33-62.
- Liss, Hanna. (2019). Wort – Klang – Bild: Zur (Un-)Übersetzbarkeit heiliger Texte im Judentum. In: Übertragungen heiliger Texte in Judentum, Christentum und Islam. Fallstudien zu Formen und Grenzen der Transposition, edited by K. Heyden & H. Manuwald, Hermeneutische Untersuchungen zur Theologie Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. 19-32.
- Long, Lynne. (2005). Translation and Religion: Holy Untranslatable? Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
- Paloposki, Outi & Koskinen, Kaisa. (2004). Thousand and One Translations: Retranslation Revisited. In: Claims, Changes, and Challenges, edited by Gyde Hansen et al., John Benjamins. 27-38.
- Peeters, Kris (2016). Traduction, retraduction et dialogisme. Meta 61:3, 629-649.
- Peeters, Kris & Sanz Gallego, Guillermo (2019, to appear). Translators’ creativity in the Dutch and Spanish (re)translations of “Oxen of the Sun”: (re)translation the Bakhtinian way. In: European Joyce Studies, edited by Erika Mihálycsa & Jolanta Wawrzycka. (Re)Translating Joyce in/for the 21st-Century.
- Pink, Johanna. (2019). Text, Auslegung, Ritus. Kontroversen um die richtige und falsche Übersetzung des Korans am Beispiel Indonesien. In: Übertragungen heiliger Texte in Judentum, Christentum und Islam. Fallstudien zu Formen und Grenzen der Transposition, edited by K. Heyden & H. Manuwald. Hermeneutische Untersuchungen zur Theologie Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. 63-89.
- Simms, Karl. (1997). Translating Sensitive Texts: Linguistic Aspects (Approaches to Translation Studies 14). Brill/Rodopi.
- Topia, André. (2004). Retraduire Ulysses : le troisième texte. Palimpsestes 129-151.
- Van Poucke, Piet. (2017). Aging as a motive for literary translation. A survey of case studies on retranslation. Translation and Interpreting Studies. 12:1. 91-115.
- Venuti, Lawrence (2004). Retranslations: the creation of value. Bucknell Review 47: 1. 25-38.