Transcreation and New Historicism in Terms of Althusser’s Ideology in the Translations of Saadi’s Gulistan
الموضوعات : نشریه زبان و ترجمه
Elham Ehterami
1
,
امیر مرزبان
2
1 - MA in Translation Studies‚ English Department‚ Science and Research Branch‚
Islamic Azad University‚ Tehran‚ Iran
2 - ایران، قائمشهر، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد قائمشهر، دانشکده زبانهای خارجی
الکلمات المفتاحية: culture, Translation strategies, Althusser’s Ideological State Apparatuses, Farahzad’s Three-Dimensional Model of Translation Criticism, Transcreation,
ملخص المقالة :
This research aimed to study four translations of Saadi’s Gulistan by four English translators during three centuries in England, from the 19th to the 21st centuries, namely Gladwin (1806), Burton (1888), Platts (1904), and Thackston (2008) in terms of Transcreation and Althusser’s Ideology, in order to find the effect of the dominant ideology of England on the translators while rendering a piece of Persian literature. In this descriptive study, 30 anecdotes selected purposefully were examined. All the relevant features were extracted, compared, and contrasted with the original and subsequently the data were analyzed using the chi-square procedure. The result indicated no significant difference among the translations in question in terms of ideology and transcreation although huge differences among some elements are perceivable, which could provide significant evidence in the existence of hidden ideology in the translations in question. Moreover, transcreation was most frequently used in Thanckston’s translation while Gladwin’s had the highest frequency of ISA.
Al-Mohannadi, S. (2006). Translation and ideology. Social Semiotics, 18 (4), p.p. 529-542.
Althusser, L. (1971). Lenin and philosophy and other essays. London: New Left Books.
Althusser, L. (2014). Ideology and ideological state apparatuses. London: Verso Books.
Anvari, H. (1999). Saadi’s Gulistan with Explanation. Tehran: Ghatreh Publication.
Babaee, R. et al., (2014). Creativity, culture, and translation. English Language Teaching, 7 (6), p.p. 14-18.
Barry, P. (2002). Beginning theory: An introduction to literary and cultural theory. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Benetello, C. (2018). When translation is not enough: Transcreation as a convention defying practice. A practitioner’s perspective. The Journal of Specialised Translatio, 29, p.p. 28-44.
Bhat, A. A. (2014). A critical note on new historicism. Galaxy: Internationa Multidisciplinary Research Journal, 3 (3), p.p. 12-18.
Bressler, C. E. (2012). Literary criticism: An introduction to theory and practice. New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
Burton, R. (1888). Tale from the Gulistan. London: JTB.
Darbelnet, J. and Vinay, J. P. (1995). A methodology for translation. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
De Campos, H. (1992). Translation as creation and criticism, in metalinguagem e outras metas: Ensaios de teoria e crítica literária. Sao Paulo: Perspectiva.
Di Giovanni, E. (2008). Translations, transcreations, and transrepresentations of India in the Italian media. META, 53 (1), p.p. 26-43.
Eco, U. (2001). Experiences in translation. Toronto: University of Toronto press.
Fairclough, N. (2013). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Oxon: Routledge.
Farahzad, F. (2011). Translation criticism: A tree-dimensional model based on CDA. Iranian Translation Studies Journal, 9, p.p. 27-43.
Foucault, M. (1980). Power knowledge. Brighton: Harvester Press.
Gaballo, V. (2012). Exploring the boundaries of transcreation in specialized translation. ESP Across Cultures, 9, p.p. 95-113.
Gladwin, F. (1806). Saadi’s Gulistan for Flower Garden. London: JTB.
Glodjović, A. (2010). Translation as a means of cross-cultural communication: Some problems in literary text translations. Linguistics and literature, 8(2), p.p. 141-151.
Halverson, S. (2010). Translation. In Y. Gambier and L. van Doorslaer (Eds). Handbook of translation studies (p.p. 378-385). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Hickling, M. (2018). New historicism. Brock Education Journal, 27(2), p.p. 53-57.
Holts, L. F. J. (2019). Creativity in translation: A study of various source and target texts. Retrieved April 28, 2019, from www.pure.au.dk.
Katan, D. (2014). Translation and intercultural communication. In J. Munday (Eds). The routledge companion to translation studies (p.p. 74-92). Oxen and New York: Routledge.
Katan, D. and Spinzi, C. (2014). Transcreation and professions. CULTUS: The Journal of Intercultural Mediation and Communication, 7, p.p. 57-71.
Munday, J. (2016). Introducing in translation studies. London and New York: Routledge.
Newmark, P. (1988). A textbook of translation. Hertfordshire: Prentice Hall International.
Nida, E. A. (1964). Toward a science of translating. Netherland: JBL.
Nord, C. (2001). Translating as a purposeful activity: Functionalist approach explained. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.
Platts, J. (1904). The Gulistan or Rose Garden. London: Crosby Lockwood and Son.
Pym, A. (2010). Exploring translation theories. London: Routledge.
Reiss, K. and Vermeer, H. J. (1987/2013). Toward a general theory of translational action: Skopose theory explained. Manchester: St Jerome.
Schjoldager, A. (2008). Understanding translation. Aarhus: Academica.
Thackston, A. (2008). Gulistan. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Toury, G. (1995). Descriptive translation and beyond. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Venuti, L. (2004). The translation studies reader. London and New York: Routledge.
Yerli, K. (2017). On deconstruction and new historicism. The Journal of Turk & Islam World Social Studies TİDSAD, 4(13), p.p. 60-64.
Zareh-Behtash, E. (2019).Ideology in translation: The impact of socio-political factors on lexical equivalents in two Persian translations of Animal Farm. Retrieved March 28, 2019, from behtash@cmu.ac.ir.
