2 – Translating and Interpreting as Audience Design

1. 2 – Translating and Interpreting as Audience Design and socio-textual practice Ian Mason Sichuan University, October 2013

2. Functionalist theories • Human activity generally goal-directed. • Translating is a human, social activity. • Overriding consideration is the purpose (skopos) of the task. • ST as an “offer of information”. • Appropriateness of TT comes before ST/TTequivalence. (Vermeer, Nord, etc.)

3. ST/TT relationship • Nord: ‘loyalty’ • Toury: moral principle inappropriate in a descriptive model. • Participants assume each other’s cooperation (Session 3)

4. Skopos • action in relation to end-user • action in relation to end-use • action in relation to allother participants • (assumed cooperation: action in relation to intended meanings of ST).

5. Participants in translation events • The ST producer • The commissioner • The translator as receiver and producer • The editor/reviser • The publisher • Intended receivers of the translation • Unintended readers (the public)

6. The translation process SL textual record Commissioner TRANSLATOR assumptions Editor/Reviser/ Publisher TL textual record assumptions TL Receivers

7. The court interpreting process JURY Defence lawyers JUDGE Interpreter Prosecution lawyers WITNESS Court officials Public area

8. Participation Framework • Not just speaker + hearer (or writer + reader). • Footing • ‘the alignment of an individual to a particular utterance, whether involving a production format, as in the case of the speaker, or solely a participation status, as in the case of the hearer’ • (Goffman 1981: 227)

9. Production format • Animator “the sounding box from which utterances come” • Author “the agent who puts together, composes or scripts the lines that are uttered” • Principal “someone who is committed to what the words say”

10. Participation status • Addressees • Known, recognised participant, addressed • Auditors • Known, recognised participant, not addressed • Overhearers • Known, not recognised participant, not addressed • Eavesdroppers • Not known

11. Audience design (Bell 1984) • Accommodation theory • Travel agency experiment • mirror neurons • Speaker style influenced by addressee • Auditors less than addressees • Overhearers less than auditors

12. Audience design • Applies to spoken AND written translating • But: • Responsiveand Initiative Design • Referee groups (in-group/out-group)

13. An example: translating an airline magazine • The Spanish airline Iberia has a magazine with articles in Spanish and English about Spain and its culture. • An article about a traditional fiesta in a small village describes la vaquilla(‘the wild cow’)and los judios o motilones(‘the Jews or shorn-heads’). • Sutton (1997) reported in Baker (2006)

14. Problem Association between Jews and head-shaving = Nazis/anti-semitism. The translator is conscious of his audiences.

15. Participation framework • ST addressees = Spanish tourists + business travellers. • TT addressees = international tourists + business travellers. • Auditors = editors, publishers

16. Translator’s production footing Translator (as animator): ‘Jews or shorn-heads’ Translator (as author): ‘Jews’ or ‘friars’ (friar = monk) Translator (as principal): omit the reference

17. Participation framework • Overhearers: Simon Wiesenthal Center (New York). • Demands an apology from Iberia and a commitment by Spain to eliminate racist stereotypes from fiestas. • Court case • Apology by American ambassador to mayor of the village.

18. Footing and audience design Footing (production format + participation status). Now frequently applied to the analysis of interpreting. Equally relevant to the analysis of other kinds of translation event: The translator’s audience design.

19. Two more examples • Published translation of the works of a famous French historian: • FernandBraudel • ST: addresses readers directly. • TT: different readers • Intercultural dimension

20. 1. populations ST: We are more than 50 million people today . TT: There are about 50 million people living in France today.

21. 2. the economic cycle ST: I believe that the reader will accept the extension I give to the word ‘cycle’, for this particular usage. TT: I am confident that the general reader will be sufficiently familiar with the language of economics (if only from his or her daily paper) to accept the extension of meaning I have given to the word cycle.

22. Intercultural adjustment There is much evidence that translators and interpreters do make cultural adjustments for target-language readers. Especially where semiotics (cultural signs) are concerned.

23. Intercultural Semiotics: Two examples • President George W. Bush in a speech after 9/11: • a ‘crusade’ against terror

24. Intercultural Semiotics: Two examples • President George W. Bush after 9/11: • a ‘crusade’ against terror • UK Prime Minister David Cameron in Beijing, November 2010: • symbolism of the poppy (罂粟 yingsu)

25. Beyond words: Intertextuality • We recognise entities (words, texts) because we have met them before; • A text is made up of elements of previous texts; • Text users have their own intertextual history; • Communities of practice develop their own socio-textual practices.

26. Socio-textual practices • Genres (language used in relation to particular social occasions) • Discourses (language used to express the values and attitudes of social institutions or groups) • Text types (formats used for particular rhetorical purposes) • All these are cultural signs used within communities of practice

27. Examples • Genres: the birth certificate, the legal contract, the business letter • Discourses: military discourse (‘collateral damage’, ‘friendly fire’…), environmentalism (‘sustainable’, ‘carbon footprint’, ‘eco-friendly’…) • Text types: the counter-argument (‘Of course… However…’)

28. Case study 1: genre and discourse • Iraq War: case for Weapons of Mass Destruction. • US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, presented to the UN Security Council on 05.02.03 recordings of three intercepted conversations between Iraqi military officers, with an English translation.

29. “Modified vehicle” • “forbidden ammo” • “OK buddy”

30. Signs and sign values • What is the accepted value of these signs within the specialised genres of the Iraqi military? • What was the set of indicators and assumptions available to the translator? • What is the (discoursal) value of the distinction between ‘ammunition’ and ‘ammo’ in English? What does (not) constitute ‘ammo’? • What ST sign triggered the TT distinction?

31. Case study 2: structure and text focus • Context <-> Structure <-> Texture • Each culture develops structures for particular purposes: • Ways of describing, narrating, arguing, etc. • English: • [given] – [new] information structure • use of cohesion (links) to direct the reader.

32. Case study 2: structure and text focus • Text sample 1 • [panda] [Sanxingdui] [Jiuzhai] brought together at end of paragraph (as a conclusion). • sentence 2: [new] – [given] structure • Jiuzhai: ‘fairyland’ first. • Text sample 2 • [panda] [Sanxingdui] [Jiuzhai]: organizing sentence first. • [given] – [new] structure throughout. • ‘fairyland’ last.

33. Conclusions: Assumptions about translation • In international diplomacy, business, public service and among general public: • Automatic; input = output • Among Translation Studies scholars: • Choice: range of possible versions. • Even the word “equivalence” is unsafe because it implies that such a thing is possible across cultural boundaries.

34. The Source Text • A textual record. • Produced in a particular participation framework in a particular culture.

35. The Translator • Participation framework: commissioners, editors, etc. • Footing – as receiver and producer • The translation ‘brief’: instructions • Intertextual history • Audience design and text design (cf. Skopos theory and documentary versus instrumental translation)