The Routledge Handbook of Spanish Translation Studies [1st ed.] 1138698016, 9781138698017

Citation preview

THE ROUTLEDGE HANDBOOK OF SPANISH TRANSLATION STUDIES

Written by leading experts in the area, The Routledge Handbook of Spanish Translation Studies brings together original contributions representing a culmination of the extensive research to date within the field of Spanish Translation Studies. The Handbook covers a variety of translation related issues, both theoretical and practical, providing an overview of the field and establishing directions for future research. It starts by looking at the history of translation in Spain, the Americas during the colonial period and Latin America, and then moves on to discuss well-established areas of research such as literary translation and audiovisual translation, at which Spanish researchers have excelled. It also provides state-of-the-art information on new topics such as the interface between translation and humour on the one hand, and the translation of comics on the other. This Handbook is an indispensable resource for postgraduate students and researchers of translation studies. Roberto A. Valdeón is Professor in English Studies at the University of Oviedo, Spain. África Vidal is Professor of Translation at the University of Salamanca, Spain.

ROUTLEDGE SPANISH LANGUAGE HANDBOOKS Series Editors: Manel Lacorte, The University of Maryland, USA, and Javier Muñoz-Basols, The University of Oxford, UK

Routledge Spanish Language Handbooks provide comprehensive and state-of-the-art overviews of topics in Hispanic Linguistics, Hispanic Applied Linguistics and Spanish Language Teaching. Editors are well-known experts in the field. Each volume contains speciallycommissioned chapters written by leading international scholars. Each Handbook includes substantial pieces of research that analyse recent developments in the discipline, both from a theoretical and an applied perspective. Their user-friendly format allows the reader to acquire a panoramic perspective of selected topics in the fields of Spanish language and linguistics. Published in English or in Spanish, the Handbooks are an indispensable reference tool for undergraduate and postgraduate students, teachers, university lecturers, professional researchers, and university libraries worldwide. They are also valuable teaching resources to accompany textbooks, research publications, or as self-study material. Proposals for the series will be welcomed by the Series Editors. THE ROUTLEDGE HANDBOOK OF SPANISH AS A HERITAGE LANGUAGE Edited by Kim Potowski THE ROUTLEDGE HANDBOOK OF SPANISH LANGUAGE TEACHING Metodologías, contextos y recursos para la enseñanza del español L2 Edited by Javier Muñoz-Basols, Elisa Gironzetti and Manel Lacorte THE ROUTLEDGE HANDBOOK OF SPANISH TRANSLATION STUDIES Edited by Roberto A. Valdeón and África Vidal For more information about this series please visit: www.routledge.com/RoutledgeSpanish-Language-Handbooks/book-series/RSLH

THE ROUTLEDGE HANDBOOK OF SPANISH TRANSLATION STUDIES

Edited by Roberto A. Valdeón and África Vidal SPANISH LIST ADVISOR: JAVIER MUÑOZ-BASOLS

First published 2019 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2019 selection and editorial matter, Roberto A. Valdeón and África Vidal; individual chapters, the contributors The right of Roberto A. Valdeón and África Vidal to be identified as the authors of the editorial material, and of the authors for their individual chapters, has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record has been requested for this book ISBN: 978-1-138-69801-7 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-315-52013-1 (ebk) Typeset in Times New Roman by Apex CoVantage, LLC

CONTENTS

Notes on contributors

viii

Introduction: translation and translation studies in Spain and in Spanish-speaking areas Roberto A. Valdeón and África Vidal Claramonte

1

1 Spanish translation history Luis Pegenaute

13

2 Literary translation Juan Jesús Zaro

44

3 Translation and the Spanish Empire Roberto A. Valdeón

59

4 Translation in Hispanic America Álvaro Echeverri and Georges L. Bastin

72

5 Spanish translation in the US and Canada Kelly Washbourne

85

6 Translation and gender Pilar Godayol

102

7 Translation and ideology: Spanish perspectives Ovidi Carbonell i Cortés

118

v

Contents

8 Translation and humour Marta Mateo and Patrick Zabalbeascoa

139

9 Pedagogy of translation Dorothy Kelly

157

10 Cognitive approaches Amparo Hurtado Albir

175

11 An overview of interpreting in Spanish: past, present and future Robert Neal Baxter

196

12 Intercultural communication: public service interpreting and translation Carmen Valero-Garcés

211

13 Linguistic approaches to translation Gloria Corpas Pastor and María-Araceli Losey-León

227

14 Terminology Pamela Faber and Silvia Montero-Martínez

247

15 Legal and institutional translation M. Rosario Martín Ruano

267

16 Technical and medical translation Goretti Faya and Carmen Quijada

288

17 Audiovisual translation Frederic Chaume

311

18 Localization and localization research in Spanish-speaking contexts Miguel A. Jiménez-Crespo

352

19 Translation of Hispanic comics and graphic novels Javier Muñoz-Basols and Enrique del Rey Cabero

365

20 Journalistic translation María José Hernández Guerrero

386

21 Tourism, translation and advertising Elizabeth Woodward-Smith

402

22 Ethics and translation Alberto Fuertes

417

vi

Contents

23 Translation policies from/into the official languages in Spain Montserrat Bacardí

429

24 A bibliometric overview of translation studies research in Spanishspeaking countries Javier Franco Aixelá and Sara Rovira-Esteva

454

Index

500

vii

CONTRIBUTORS

Montserrat Bacardí is a professor at the Faculty of Translation and Interpreting of the Autonomous University of Barcelona (UAB). She has published articles on the history of literature and translation and various books, including Cent anys de traducció al català (1891–1990) (1998), Anna Murià. El vici d’escriure (2004), El Quixot en català (2006), Catalans a Buenos Aires (2009), La traducció catalana sota el franquisme (2012), Gràcia Bassa, poeta, periodista i traductora (2016) and, with Pilar Godayol, Diccionari de la traducció catalana (dir.) (2011) and Les traductores i la tradició (2013). Georges L. Bastin is a full professor of Translation Studies at the Université de Montréal. He is a leading researcher in the field of the translation history of Latin America. He has authored several books and papers in various refereed journals. He is the President of the Canadian Association of Translation Schools. He is the editor of Meta since 2014 and he heads the Research Group on Translation History in Latin America at his university since 2004. Robert Neal Baxter holds a PhD in Translation and Interpreting from the University of Vigo, where he has taught consecutive and simultaneous interpreting (English-Galician) since 1995. He has also worked extensively as a professional freelance translator and interpreter. His research interests include interpreter training and the sociolinguistic impact of interpreting and translating on subordinated (‘minority’) languages, with special emphasis on Galician and Breton, as well as the interplay between translation and gender. Ovidi Carbonell Cortés is a full professor of Translation Studies, University of Salamanca, Spain. He has also taught at the universities of Salford (UK), James Madison (US), Benito Juárez (Oaxaca, Mexico) and Hamad bin Khalifa (Doha, Qatar). He is author of Übersetzen ins Andere (2002), Traducción y cultura: de la ideología al texto (1999) and Traducir al Otro: traducción, exotismo, poscolonialismo (1997). Some of his edited works include, The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Culture (2018, with Sue-Ann Harding), Presencias japonesas (2014), Intercultural Translation in a Global World (2015, with Izaskun Elorza) and Ideology and Cross-Cultural Encounters (2009, with Myriam Salama-Carr). viii

Contributors

Frederic Chaume is a professor of Audiovisual Translation at Universitat Jaume I (Spain), where he teaches audiovisual translation theory and dubbing; and Honorary Professor at University College London (UK), Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (Peru) and Universidad Ricardo Palma (Peru). He is author of the books Doblatge i subtitulació per a la TV (Eumo, 2003), Cine y Traducción (Cátedra, 2004), Audiovisual Translation: Dubbing (Routledge, 2014) and co-author of Teories Contemporànies de la Traducció (Bromera, 2010), and La Traducción para el Doblaje: Mapa de Convenciones (UJI, 2016). He has been awarded the Berlanga Award and the Xènia Martínez Award for his support to audiovisual translation and his constant university training in this field. Gloria Corpas Pastor is a professor in Translation and Interpreting at the University of Malaga, visiting Professor in Translation Technologies at the University of Wolverhampton and Spanish delegate for AEN/CTN 174, CEN/BTTF 138 and ISO TC37. She is a regular evaluator for University Quality Assurance Agencies and various research funding bodies and has published extensively in corpus-based translation, tools and resources for translators and interpreters, phraseology and language technology. Álvaro Echeverri is an associate professor of Translation Studies at the Université de Montréal. He teaches graduate courses on translation theory and translation pedagogy as well as undergraduate courses on documentary research and other practical translation courses. He has published several book chapters and articles in refereed journals on topics related to the history of translation in Latin American. He is particularly interested in the translation of political texts at the time of independence. Pamela Faber is a full professor in the Department of Translation and Interpreting at the University of Granada, where she lectures on Terminology and Specialized Translation. She is the director of the LexiCon research group, with whom she has carried out various national and international research projects on Frame‑based Terminology. She is the author of over one hundred publications on translation, terminology and lexical semantics. Goretti Faya-Ornia graduated in Translation and Interpreting from the University of Valladolid. She specializes in medical and technical translation in English (University Jaume I) and German (University of Córdoba), and has professional experience as a translator, reviewer, proofreader and coordinator of translation projects. She was a lecturer and researcher at the University of Oviedo (where she earned her international doctorate), and currently works at the University of Valladolid. Her research pivots on specialized translation (mainly on medical translation), text genres, text typologies, contrastive linguistics and linguistic corpora. Javier Franco Aixelá is a senior lecturer at the Department of Translation and Interpreting of the Universidad de Alicante (Spain), where he teaches literary translation, ethics, documentation, and theory of translation. For twelve years, he was a professional translator and as such has published over thirty books in Spain. His research topics include the bibliometrics of translation, medical translation, and the manipulation of culture in translation, with some fifty academic publications in these areas. He is the creator of BITRA (Bibliography of Interpreting and Translation), available online, and comprising over 72,000 records as of June, 2018. Alberto Fuertes Puerta has a PhD in Translation Studies from the University of León, Spain. He has been a lecturer at Universitat Rovira i Virgili, where he taught courses on general ix

Contributors

and specialized English to Spanish translation. As a researcher, he is interested in translation property law and the reception of translational plagiarism. He currently works as a freelance translator for Vicens Vives and acts as an expert witness in cases of plagiarism. Pilar Godayol is a professor in Translation Studies at the University of Vic-Central University of Catalonia. Her field of expertise includes history and theory of translation, gender studies and censorship. She currently coordinates the Gender Studies Research Group: Translation, Literature, History and Communication (GETLIHC) and she has also led different R&D projects. She has published extensively on translation, gender and feminism. Her latest publications are Tres escritoras censuradas. Simone de Beauvoir, Betty Friedan y Mary McCarthy (2017), and, with Annarita Taronna, Foreign Women Authors under Fascism and Francoism. Gender, Translation and Censorship (2018). She coordinates the series “Biblioteca de Traducció i Interpretació” (BTI) in Eumo Editorial. María José Hernández Guerrero is tenured lecturer in Translation Studies at the University of Málaga and a member of the Grupo de Investigación Traductología e Interculturalidad. Her lines of research include news translation and journalistic translation. She was the editor of TRANS. Revista de Traductología and the director of the master’s degree program in “Traducción para el Mundo Editorial”. She teaches journalistic translation. Amparo Hurtado Albir is a full professor at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. She is the team leader of a number of research projects on translation pedagogy and the acquisition of translation competence and head of the PACTE group. She is the author of over one hundred publications on the theory and pedagogy of translation, including La notion de fidélité en traduction, 1990; Enseñar a traducir, 1999 (3rd ed. 2007); Traducción y Traductología, 2001 (5th rev. ed. 2011; 9th ed. 2017); Aprender a traducir del francés al español, 2015; and Researching Translation Competence by PACTE Group, 2017. She is also general editor of the Aprender a traducir series. Miguel Ángel Jiménez-Crespo holds a PhD in Translation and Interpreting Studies  from the University of Granada, Spain. He is an associate professor at Rutgers University where he directs the Master’s programme and the undergraduate certificate in Spanish English Translation and Interpreting. He is the author of Crowdsourcing and Online Collaborative Translations: Expanding the Limits of Translation Studies  published by John Benjamins in 2017 and Translation and Web Localization published by Routledge in 2013. He is the coeditor of the John Benjamins journal JIAL: the Journal of Internationalization and Localization. His research focuses on the intersection of translation theory, translation technologies, the world wide web, translation training, and corpus-based translation studies. María Araceli Losey-León is a lecturer in English Philology at the University of Cádiz. Member of the Terminology scientific committee of the Spanish Association of Languages for Specific Purposes (AELFE) since 2017. Her research lines cover descriptive and applied linguistics, terminology, corpus linguistics, specialized translation and communication, English for specific purposes and educational technologies. M. Rosario Martín Ruano is an associate professor at the University of Salamanca, Spain, where she is a member of the Research Group on Translation, Ideology and Culture and where she currently leads the research project entitled VIOSIMTRAD (‘Symbolic Violence x

Contributors

and Translation: Challenges in the Representation of Fragmented Identities within the Global Society’, FFI2015–66516-P; MINECO/FEDER, UE). She has published widely on translation and ideology, gender and postcolonial approaches to translation, and on legal and institutional translation. Marta Mateo is a professor of English Studies at the University of Oviedo, where she teaches Translation and English Phonetics. Her research interests and publications mostly cover the translation of humour, drama and musical texts (focussing on opera, musicals, surtitling and multilingualism), as well as translation theory (particularly Pragmatics and Translation). She has also done professional translation, both of fiction and academic works. Her most recent literary translation, the Spanish rendering of Tobias Smollett’s  The Expedition of Humphry Clinker, won her the 2013 National Translation Award given by the Spanish Association of Anglo-American Studies. Silvia Montero-Martínez holds an undergraduate degree in English Philology and a Master’s in Specialized Translation from the University of Valladolid. She has a PhD in Spanish Linguistics. She lectures on Translation, Terminology and Translation Technologies at the University of Granada. Her main research interests are terminology, specialized translation and knowledge engineering. Her work has been published in leading journals and prestigious publishers. She is responsible for the institutional terminological standardization at the University of Granada, the UGRTerm project. Javier Muñoz-Basols is a senior instructor in Spanish at the Faculty of Medieval and Modern Languages at the University of Oxford. He has published on Hispanic literature, translation studies and applied linguistics. His current research focuses on the interaction between language and culture in various settings, including contemporary graphic literature and humour. He is President of the Asociación para la Enseñanza del Español como Lengua Extranjera (ASELE). Luis Pegenaute is an associate professor of Translation at Pompeu Fabra University. His research areas include Comparative Literature, literary translation, translation history and translation theory. He has co-edited fifteen volumes on these subjects, including Historia de la traducción en España (2004), Diccionario histórico de la traducción en España (2009) and Diccionario histórico de la traducción en Hispanoamérica (2013). He is the coordinator of the book series Relaciones literarias en el ámbito hispánico: traducción, literatura y cultura (Peter Lang). Carmen Quijada Diez graduated and gained her PhD in Translation and Interpreting from the University of Salamanca. She is specialized in medical translation in German-Spanish and has professional experience as a translator, reviewer and proofreader. She worked as a junior lecturer at the Translation and Interpreting Department in Salamanca and works since 2013 at the University of Oviedo, where she teaches German language and Translation. Her research focuses on specialized translation, mainly in the medical field, science reception in nineteenthcentury Spain and the use of translation as a didactic tool in second-language learning. Enrique del Rey Cabero is a lector in Spanish at the University of Oxford. He has published in journals such as Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada and Journal of Iberian and Latin American Research. He is the Spanish news correspondent for the website Comics Forum xi

Contributors

and editorial assistant for the journal The Comics Grid, as well as co-convenor of the Oxford Comics and Graphic Novels research network at the Oxford Research Centre in the Humanities (TORCH). Sara Rovira-Esteva is a senior lecturer at the Department of Translation, Interpreting and East Asian Studies of the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (Spain), where she teaches Chinese language and linguistics and translation from Chinese. Her research topics include media accessibility, audiovisual translation, bibliometrics, Chinese-Spanish/Catalan translation, and teaching Chinese as a foreign language, with numerous books and articles in these areas. She is one of the creators of the online database RETI (devoted to the indexing of Translation and Interpreting journals). For more details, visit: http://pagines.uab.cat/sara_rovira/en. Roberto A. Valdeón is a professor of English Studies at the University of Oviedo, Spain; honorary professor at Jinan University, China; a research associate at the University of the Free State in South Africa; and a member of the Academia Europaea. He is the author of over one hundred publications, including Translation and the Spanish Empire in the Americas (Benjamins, 2014) and contributions to all the major Translation Studies journals. He is currently editing a special issue of Target devoted to “Language, Translation and Empire in the Americas”. He is the editor-in-chief of Perspectives Studies in Translation Theory and Practice and the general editor of the Benjamins Translation Library. Carmen Valero-Garcés is a full professor of Translation and Interpreting at the University of Alcalá, Madrid (Spain) and the Director of the Postgraduate Programme on Public Service Interpreting and Translation. She has taught and lectured in translation and interpreting programmes from several countries. Moreover, she is the coordinator of the Research Group FITISPos® and of the teaching innovation group FITISPos E-Learning as well as the managing editor of FITISPos International Journal and president of the association AFIPTISP. She has edited and authored several books and articles. Some of her most recent publications include Ideology, Ethics and Policy Development in Public Service Interpreting and Translation (Valero-Garcés & Tipton, eds., 2017) and Beyond Public Service Interpreting and Translation (Valero-Garcés et al., eds., 2017). (http://www3.uah.es/traduccion) M. Carmen África Vidal Claramonte is a professor of translation at the University of Salamanca, Spain. Her research interests include translation theory, post-structuralism, postcolonialism, contemporary art and gender studies. She has published 14 books, 10 anthologies, and over a hundred essays (Meta, Perspectives, The Translator, European Journal of English Studies, Translating and Interpreting Studies, Forum, etc.) on these issues. She has lectured in Mexico, Puerto Rico, Argentina, Chile, Italy, England and France. She is a practising translator specialized in the fields of philosophy, literature, history and contemporary art. Kelly Washbourne is a professor of Spanish Translation at Kent State University, Ohio, US. His works include  Autoepitaph: Selected Poems of Reinaldo Arenas,  which was longlisted for the PEN Award for Poetry in Translation in 2015, and  Handbook of Literary Translation (Routledge, 2018, co-edited with Ben Van Wyke). He won a National Endowment for the Arts Translation Fellowship and a National Endowment for the Humanities stipend (2010) for his translation of Nobel Laureate Miguel Ángel Asturias’ Leyendas de Guatemala (Legends of Guatemala), and is co-editor of the series Translation Practices Explained (St. Jerome, UK). He has worked as a medical interpreter for several years with migrant populations at the xii

Contributors

Hartville Migrant Center, and leads a bilingual academic enhancement programme for migrant children. Elizabeth Woodward-Smith is a senior lecturer in English at the University of A Coruña, Spain, received her English Philology degree and PhD from the University of Santiago de Compostela, and her BA in Spanish and French from the University of Bradford. Her main areas of research interest include: translation of cultural concepts; cultural and linguistic analysis of advertising discourse, history and culture of the British Isles; cultural references in English literature; and translation of humour. She has published widely in both Spanish and international journals, editing and co-editing collections of essays on cultural diversity, and identity through language and literature. Patrick Zabalbeascoa is a professor in translation studies at the Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona. Within translation studies, his research and publications deal mostly with humour, dubbing and subtitling, metaphor, and new theoretical proposals and concepts. Examples can be found in his model of priorities and restrictions, L3 theory, types of humour for translation, and a system for mapping translation solutions as an alternative approach to traditional lists of “technqiues”. Juan Jesus Zaro is a professor of translation at the University de Málaga since 2008. His research interests include translation theory, history of translation and literary translation. He has been a guest lecturer in universities in Argentina, Chile, Mexico, Spain, United Kingdom, United States, and Uruguay. He has published a number of books, anthologies and articles, including Shakespeare y sus traductores (Bern: Peter Lang, 2008) and Diez estudios sobre la traducción en la España del siglo XIX (Granada: Atrio, 2009). He is also a practising translator and has translated, among other books, Charles Dickens’ Historia de dos ciudades (Cátedra, 2000) and Jane Austen’s Persuasión (Cátedra, 2004). He is now supervising a research project on the translation of classics.

xiii

INTRODUCTION Translation and Translation Studies in Spain  and in Spanish-speaking areas Roberto A. Valdeón and África Vidal Claramonte

Spain has always been a country of translators. Its long history is one full of encounters and clashes with other nations and cultures. It is a land which was initially a settlement for Iberians, Celts, Phoenicians, Carthaginians, Greeks and, later, it formed part of the Roman Empire until its fall when it became a Visigoth Kingdom from 500 to 700 ad. The first Muslim conquest occurred in 711, and Islam ruled in parts of the country for almost eight centuries in an area known as Al-Andalus. The so-called Reconquest (comprising the period from Don Pelayo’s first rebellion in Asturias in 722 until the conquest of Granada in 1492) allowed the Christian kingdoms to recover all the territory under Muslim domination. This was completed in 1492 by King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella, the Catholic Monarchs who not only financed Columbus’ voyages to America but also unified Spain and expelled the Jews. This brief description of Spain’s early history allows us to conclude that contact with the Other is not something new. The Iberian Peninsula has always been a space for encounters and clashes and has long required the help of the so-called alfaqueques, or interpreters, who acted as multilingual mediators during the long period when Jews, Muslims and Christians shared the same geographical areas. Thus, this Handbook aims to provide a comprehensive panorama of the crucial role of translators and translation in the history of Spain, as well as of the emergence and evolution of Translation Studies. And although Translation Studies is indeed healthy we must bear in mind that Spain was not present when translation emerged as a discipline: there were no Spanish representatives at the meeting held at the University of Leuven in April 1976 (for some the founding symposium of the discipline), which gathered James Holmes, José Lambert, Raymond van den Broeck and André Lefevere, nor at the conference of the British Comparative Literature Association at the University of East Anglia, which included plenary lectures by René Wellek, Jan Knott and Itamar Even-Zohar. Nor were there Spanish representatives at the conferences in Tel-Aviv in 1978 and Antwerp in 1980. Spain entered the field gradually, as CETRA was created in 1989 and the European Society for Translation Studies was founded in Vienna in 1992. Both were crucial to develop an international network of translation scholars. During the 1980s and 1990s, as numerous and very well-attended conferences and seminars were organized in Europe and Canada, Spanish researchers began to leave their mark in the discipline. In addition, Spanish authors have been instrumental in the consolidation of international Translation Studies journals such as Babel (the Netherlands, 1

Roberto A. Valdeón and África Vidal

founded in 1955), META (Canada, 1955), Traduction. Terminologie, Rédaction (Canada, 1988), Target (The Netherlands, 1989), Perspectives Studies on Translatology (Denmark, 1993), The Translator (UK, 1995) and Across Languages and Cultures (Hungary, 2001); and they have contributed to terminologies, bibliographies, anthologies, readers and other documents key to the development and institutionalization of Translation and Interpreting Studies (Gambier and van Doorslaer 2010; Munday 2010). In addition, most international translation journals include Spanish researchers in their boards, and some are edited or co-edited by Spanish scholars. This Handbook opens with a chapter by Luis Pegenaute, who provides substantial references to all the work that translation historians have done and continue to do, with particular reference to literary translation. Pegenaute, who contends that these scholars need to surmount many difficulties pertaining to the methodologies used and the access to the documents, offers a wide panorama of the importance of translation in Spain, and points to the many areas of research that are likely to produce significant publications in the future. Not unrelated to Pegenaute’s chapter, Juan Jesús Zaro reviews literary translation, which has been traditionally associated with translation practice and the early theoretical approaches. Zaro points out that the publishing industry in Spain is now among the most active in Europe. Drawing on Even-Zohar, Zaro highlights the primary function of translation in Spain and other Spanishspeaking areas, and reminds us that literary translation can be traced back to the thirteenth century when the future king Alfonso X of Castile became a patron of translation on a large scale. As in many other European nations, translation also played a key role in the standardization of the language. Zaro highlights the close connection between writing and translation in the following centuries, as writers such as Ramón de la Cruz and Fernández de Moratín rendered foreign classics into Spanish, while he points out that the outbreak of the civil war and the dictatorship meant a setback for the publishing industry in general and for translation in particular. Meanwhile, a significant number of classics were translated for the first time in Argentina, Chile and Mexico. André Lefevere (1992, 2) posited that translation is a “window opened on another world . . . a channel opened, often not without a certain reluctance, through which foreign influences can penetrate the native culture, challenge it and even contribute to subverting it”. That is why in this volume the editors start from the premise that translation in Spain has been for centuries a tool to construct and represent the cultural Other, and that today, from the new visions proposed by such fields as ethnography, sociology, anthropology and others, translation should be a productive space for critical self-reflection on such burning questions of our globalized society as its role in asymmetry between languages or in the creation of stereotyped clichés of the foreign. Thus, translation was not only essential in Spain, but also in the Americas. As Spain initiated the process of colonization, the need for cultural and linguistic mediation was reflected in the presence of what were called lenguas or nahuatlatos, who acted as interpreters in the many meetings that took place all over the continent between the indigenous peoples and the Spanish, Portuguese, French and English colonisers was fundamental. Interpreters-translators-mediators, trujamanes, alfaqueques, nahuatlatos, lenguas, capitanes de amigo . . . they carried out the work required in the frontiers, acting as interlinguistic and intercultural mediators in contact zones, and were an example of the human need to find communication bridges. (Sales 2012, p. 181, our translation) 2

Introduction

In his chapter, Roberto A. Valdeón reviews the publications that have delved into the role of language and translators during the Spanish colonial period and highlights the work of scholars such as Georges L. Bastin, Galen Brokaw and Gertrudis Payàs, who have made significant contributions to the study of this controversial period, when translation was necessary for the purpose of administration and for the evangelization of the native populations. Undeniably the Spanish Empire, as any empire, required mediators. That is probably the reason why, in his novel El Naranjo, Mexican writer Carlos Fuentes (2008) points out that in the case of the Spanish Empire, the asymmetries between the two sides of the colonial enterprise began with language, or rather languages; in other words, with the power of translators. Thus, right from the start, we find the roots of the conflicts generated by imperialist visions of the world and the feelings of superiority which were and may remain ingrained in the language and culture of colonial powers. In the conquest of the Americas, translation was undoubtedly a fundamental tool for domination, communication and representation of the Other, a symbol of the expansion of ideologies and ways of looking at the world. Translators and interpreters have been regarded as metaphors of the violation of the Americas, of treason (for instance, in the case of La Malinche), but translations also played a fundamental role in imperial rivalries, such as those of Bartolomé de las Casas’s Brevísima relación de la destrucción de las Indias into English (Valdeón 2014). After Valdeón’s chapter, Álvaro Echeverri and Georges L. Bastin explore the translational activity in Hispanic America after the colonial era, paying particular attention to two phases: the pre-Independence and Emancipation years (going from the end of the eighteenth century to the first half of the nineteenth century), and the period comprising the creation and consolidation of the different republics (from the second half of the nineteenth century to the present day). Bastin and Echeverri emphasized the hybrid nature of translation in the area, and the role of appropriation in translation. In this sense, research being done in universities in Colombia, Chile, and Argentina looks very promising. On the other hand, it is important to notice that, in this volume, Hispanic America will be used to refer to the Spanish-speaking areas of the continent, including large portions of South, Central, and North America, as opposed to the most restricted use of Hispanic in the United States, where it often used to refer to the US population of Spanish-speaking ancestry. The term is far from stable, though, and the introduction of Latino (and Latina) in the final years of the twentieth century has not served to clarify its meaning and use. In fact, both Hispanic and Latino are currently used in the United States, albeit with some regional variations. Kelly Washbourne uses Hispanic (and Latino) in this restricted sense in the chapter devoted to Spanish in the United States and Canada, where he explores how translation facilitates “private and government commerce, education, health and human services, the legal system, the arts, multimedia localisation, and the work of many other institutions, cultural producers, and businesses in North America”, despite the difficulties derived from Donald Trump’s rise to power in 2017. Washbourne reminds us that the United States has always been a multilingual nation despite the calls for monolingualism, normally associated with patriotism. And yet the interest in the Spanish language and cultures is early in the US, as shown by the fact that the first training programmes in the country were created in the mid-twentieth century. Washbourne also highlights the significance of Latin American writers in translation and the role of translators such as Harriet de Onís and Gregory Rabassa in the popularization of the literature written in Spanish, although many key Spanish texts translated into English are published in the US and Canada as a result of the agreements with foreign publishing houses in order to save translation costs. Translation into Spanish is problematic, not only for political reasons, but also as regards the variety of the language chosen for the target texts. In commercial terms, companies have attempted to use a neutral variety that could reach most receptors, although 3

Roberto A. Valdeón and África Vidal

this has posed problems of understandability. In other cases, the influence of English on the target text has had a disastrous effect. Whatever the odds, Spanish will continue to expand in the region as the need for communication in areas such as commerce, healthcare and education will remain. Nowadays, long gone the pomp and splendour that at some time in the past might may have led Spaniards to believe they were superior to other nations, the situation has changed: English is currently the language of reference, even if Spanish remains the second most spoken language in the world. After the end of Franco’s rule in Spain and the return to democracy in 1978, Spanish institutions and organizations soon realized that translation was necessary. On the other hand, it is important to remember that the years prior to this period, i.e. the 1960s, brought about new ideas and radical changes as well as innumerable challenges in the field of the humanities, e.g. the transformations of the literary canon as a result of feminist and postcolonial scholarship that questioned the construction of the traditional canon included in the syllabi of so many American and European universities, together with the rise of cultural studies that highlighted the significance of class, ethnicity and identities for this discipline. All those concepts were ingrained in movements such as postmodernism, post-structuralism, deconstruction, postcolonial studies, feminism and queer studies, all of which would reach Spain later than other areas, as a result of the forty years of isolation, censorship and exiled intellectuals. And yet, research into the intersection between these fields and translation has produced a considerable bulk of relevant publications. The chapters by Pilar Godayol on translation and gender and Ovidi Carbonell on translation and ideology summarize the introduction and consolidation of these studies in Spain and Spanish-speaking areas. Following the Cultural Turn of the late 1980s, translation studies recognized its interdisciplinary and/or cross-disciplinary nature by incorporating some of the theoretical tenets of feminism, postcolonial studies, critical linguistics, sociology and so on. Carbonell’s chapter presents a survey starting with discourse approaches to translation, many of which have relied on Critical Discourse Analysis as described and practised by authors such as Roger Fowler and Norman Fairclough, and moves on to discuss sociolinguistic perspectives delving into the relationship between translation, language and power. On the other hand, theorists such as Niranjana, Spivak and Said have been at the base of the work produced by both Spanish and Latin American researchers. Carbonell also provides the readers with a review of the publications and doctoral theses that have begun to explore the complex relationship between Spanish, Arabic and their respective cultures in a world that has seen the rise of Islamic terrorism and the Western response to the threat it poses. As Carbonell reminds us, translation has been part and parcel of the conflict both in war zones and during the trials that ensue following terrorist attacks on Western soil. On the other hand, Godayol discusses the interface between feminism and translation studies in Spain and Spanish-speaking areas, paying particular attention to women translators, the texts they produced and their accompanying paratexts. Godayol claims that this connection has also helped to raise criticism and self-criticism of the theories and practices of feminist translation at home and abroad; to reflect on the ethics and the responsibility of feminist translators and of the relationship between them and the publishers who publish their work; and to explore the linguistic representation of gender in translation and carry out linguistic analyses of feminist and sexist translations. The interaction between translation and other disciplines is also explored in the chapter by Marta Mateo and Patrick Zabalbeascoa, who have published extensively on the topic of humour, albeit focusing on different genres and from different perspectives. In this chapter, they highlight the interaction between humour, translation and various text genres calling for 4

Introduction

humour translation studies as a subarea of research with its own complex features and challenges. They provide ample evidence of the text types that can be studied from this perspective, ranging from literary texts, including novels and plays, to audiovisual material, such as situation comedies. Mateo herself has focused on plays while Zabalbeascoa was among the first to study the translation of screen humour. Mateo and Zabalbeascoa relate the study of humour in translation to disciplines such as Pragmatics, Frame Semantics, Reception Studies and Cultural Studies, and call for a greater integration of humour translation studies within Spanish Translation Studies. In professional terms, the recognition of the profession of the translator and of the interpreter took place after the international trials that followed World War I and World War II, as well as the South African Waarheidstribunaal. In the aftermath of World War II a number of countries created training institutes (based in Geneva, Ottawa, Mons, Trieste and, later, in Moscow and Prague) to give professional support to the multilingual services required in these international courts. The international progress in the institutionalization of translation also illustrates a societal attitude: translation was finally considered a service. Around the beginning of the 1970s, translation theories began to look attractive to academia as well (Lambert 2013, 7). The first Translation Schools to be set up in Spain (Barcelona in 1972, Granada in 1979 and Las Palmas in 1988) were groundbreaking and, as some of the chapters in this Handbook demonstrate, scholars gradually drew on the most innovative concepts and theories being developed at that time, which would be the base of the discipline as we know it today. At the beginning of the 1990s the first Faculties of Translation opened in Spain. The discipline was becoming institutionalized and translator training was crucial for the new professionals, as Dorothy Kelly points out in her chapter on the pedagogy of translation. Kelly provides the reader with an overview of the evolution of translation programmes in Spain, from the previous five-year licenciaturas to the current four-year degrees resulting from the so-called Bologna educational reform, a pan-European move that was introduced in the first years of the twenty-first century. Kelly discusses highly relevant issues such as the fact that, unlike other European centres, Spanish universities do not offer programmes where the A (native) language is not one of the official languages of the country or that the success story of Spain’s translation and interpreting degrees is partly the result of the decline in demand for the more traditional language and literature programmes known as filologías. Kelly also introduces the most significant debates on pedagogical approaches to training, ranging from the application of the concept of textual genre to the analysis of intercultural communication to the study of functionalism, as well as issues of quality assessment and cognitive approaches to the translation process. For her part, Amparo Hurtado Albir focuses specifically on the latter, tracing cognitive approaches to translation back to the late 1990s. Hurtado Albir, who is the main researcher of the PACTE group based at the Autonomous University of Barcelona, examines the main concepts associated with this strand of enquiry that has burgeoned over the past decade, both nationally and internationally. Hurtado Albir and her group have indeed contributed to the advancement of research on translation competence acquisition through a series of important projects and doctoral dissertations. Likewise, she reviews the work of the PETRA group, headed by Ricardo Muñoz at the University of Las Palmas, which has made equally significant contributions to the field since its inception at the University of Granada in 2000, and has also produced a number of doctoral dissertations, whose authors have later moved to academic institutions worldwide. Hurtado Albir also reviews the work of researchers in various Spanishspeaking universities and research centres around the globe: Adolfo García in Argentina; Isabel 5

Roberto A. Valdeón and África Vidal

Lacruz, based at Kent State University in the United States; Stephanie Díaz-Galaz in Chile; and, back in Europe, the work carried out at the University of Vigo and at Jaume I University. Training is also central to Robert Neal Baxter’s chapter on interpreting and Carmen Valero-Garcés’s on community interpreting. The former presents its various modes and discusses the introduction of interpreting courses in Spain, mostly taught by state universities, and in Latin America, mostly by private ones. Baxter traces the origins of interpreting in the Spanish context back to the Toledo School of Translators first and to the conquest of the Americas later, and also reviews the work of interpreters and interpreting scholars such as Baigorri Jalón. Finally, he reviews the main topics studied by translation scholars working on any of the official languages of Spain and stresses the increasing number of publications and doctoral theses produced on the subject. On the other hand, Carmen Valero-Garcés’s chapter offers an insight into a new type of translation where the foreign and the national live together and have to learn how to live together. As a result of the economic, political and historic situation of the country, Spain began to receive waves of immigrants from Latin America, Africa and Eastern Europe, which gave way to a new form of intercultural communication involving interpreters between the languages of Spain and languages as varied as Romanian, Chinese and Arabic. The University of Alcalá, where Valero is based, has been very active in this area. Valero and her colleagues have organized numerous conferences, published manuals, articles and monographs and, above all, have trained mediators to work in the public services. In her chapter, Valero studies the evolution of the intercultural communication in Spain by providing relevant information on the latest advancements and the connection with the work being done in other parts of the world. It is important to point out that when Translation Studies was beginning to become institutionalized it was often associated with comparative literature or with linguistics studies before becoming a discipline in its own right. This meant that translating was often regarded as an art or a science. In those early years, John Catford and others were more concerned with language than with other issues such as ideology, power, identity, ethnicity or gender. The seminal work of Eugene Nida, Vinay and Darbelnet, and Catford had a great impact worldwide, and contrastive approaches to languages and translation also produced and continue to produce important work in Spain. For instance, Gloria Corpas and Maria-Araceli Losey highlight the work carried out by Vázquez-Ayora and García Yebra in the late 1970s and 1980s, and the publications by Amparo Hurtado and Pamela Faber in the 1990s. Among the many areas of interest, Corpas and Losey mention contrastive linguistics, cognitive linguistics, corpus linguistics, pragmatics and so on. In their chapter, they also look at the research groups based at the Universities of León, Jaume I, the Basque Country, Granada and Málaga, and stress that the strong links between linguistics and translation has not been overshadowed by the arrival of other more ideological and sociological approaches, because, Corpas and Losey argue, the various foundations of Translation Studies are inextricably intertwined. Language is also at the base of the next chapters of the Handbook. In fact, this volume provides ample evidence of the vitality and diversity of Spain’s researchers in areas such as terminology, legal translation, intercultural mediation, and medical and technical translation. Thus, Pamela Faber and Silvia Montero-Martínez’s chapter offers a comprehensive view of terminology, i.e. the study of specialized concepts necessary for communication among experts of specific domains. Starting with a definition and classification of terminology, Faber and Montero-Martínez provide a historical review of the two main theories that have influenced translated-oriented terminology research in Spain, namely Communicative Theory of Terminology, proposed by María Teresa Cabré at the University Pompeu Fabra in Barcelona, and Frame-based Terminology proposed by Pamela Faber at the University of Granada. Faber 6

Introduction

and Montero-Martínez also present the factors that intervene in terminology research such as needs assessment and resource collection, term identification and extraction, concept and term description, the elaboration of term entries, and quality assurance. Finally, they discuss the many challenges facing this dynamic and much-needed area of research. The next three chapters deal with specialized fields. Rosario Martín Ruano explores the features and complexity of legal and institutional translation, or, as she puts it “the intricate and multidimensional nature of the practices in a field which resists concrete definitions”. This complexity is often the result of the very divergent legal systems translators work with. Therefore, research into these vast fields is difficult on account of the fact that although the practice itself has a long tradition, research is a much more recent phenomenon. As is the case with other areas, Martín Ruano claims, the evolution of this field has evolved from the more prescriptive and didactic approaches towards more functional-descriptive paradigms that take into account issues related to status and power. This evolution is also reflected in the methodologies used by the various research groups, e.g. contrastive and textual, corpus-based, sociology-based, and so on. Martín Ruano concludes that, although legal and institutional translation is a respected academic subarea within Translation Studies, there is still a long way to go in terms of research. On the other hand, Goretti Faya and Carmen Quijada review the publications on technical and scientific translation, an area of limited appeal to researchers, although it represents an important percentage of the translation practice carried out in the world. Faya and Quijada contend that this lack of interest may be partly due to the fact that, in aesthetic terms, this type of mediation tends to be considered less of a challenge and may require less attention. Besides, the content of the documents may be less attractive than that of other text types widely researched. However, the interest in technical and scientific translation keeps growing, as shown by the numerous collections and articles published in recent years. Particularly noteworthy is the existence of several manuals, dictionaries, and terminological databases aimed at helping professionals who have to combine translation skills and a sound knowledge of the field they have to translate. From here we move to the translation of multimodal texts. In his chapter, Frederic Chaume presents a comprehensive view of audiovisual translation, an activity and a research area in which Spanish translators and scholars have excelled. Considered a type of “constrained” or “subordinate” translation, the film industry has always viewed audiovisual translation as a must in order to expand and reach other markets. Initially, Hollywood used to make movies in various languages, and later the studios commissioned non-English versions of their Englishlanguage films. Not surprisingly, Spanish-speaking audiences were a natural market for the Hollywood industry. On the other hand, Spanish scholars have been at the forefront of the research carried out into this area, as shown by the length of a chapter that aims to highlight the extraordinary contribution of Spanish authors and translators to this important area of research. Chaume’s chapter guides the reader of the Handbook through the linguistic, technical and historical issues that have fascinated scholars and will continued to do so in the coming years. Although Chaume focuses on dubbing and subtitling, he also reviews the work done into other modes, including surtitling, audio description, and localization. It is precisely on localization that Miguel A. Jiménez-Crespo focuses in the following chapter. The digital revolution of the twentieth century had a great impact on the way cultural artefacts were produced, translated and accessed. Jiménez-Crespo considers localization as a by-product of the digitalization that has affected all spheres of life that can be traced in products such as websites, software and videogames, although the term has also been used in other fields such as news translation (Orengo 2005). Two areas have been of particular interest for Spanish researchers, i.e. 7

Roberto A. Valdeón and África Vidal

web localization and videogame localization. As digitalization continues to expand, JiménezCrespo sees several emerging areas that will attract professionals and researchers alike. Multimodality is also central to the chapter authored by Javier Muñoz-Basols and Enrique del Rey Cabero, who look at the role of translation in the dissemination of Spanish graphic novels and comics. Thus, their chapter aims to show the contribution of translation to the popularity of this type of literature, as foreign works are translated for the Spanish market and Spanish texts are rendered into foreign languages. It also provides a different approach to translation, discussed here not only from the perspective of the Spanish target texts, but also from that of the authors wanting to publish their work in other languages. They also consider the Latin American market, where they find fine examples of cultural and linguistic hybridity. Muñoz-Basols and del Rey Cabero propose the use of multimodality, a paradigm developed by communication scholars Kress and van Leeuwen, and use a case study to support the validity of this approach to the study of graphic novels and comics as well as their translations. In fact, in a world where multilingualism has almost become the norm, translation reflects what it means to live in a state of in-betweenness. This Handbook wants to highlight through very different types of texts what it means to be endlessly negotiating between the familiar and the unfamiliar. What it means to ‘belong’ to a culture, a society, a place. In this sense, the next two chapters exemplify how the global has become the norm. María José Hernández Guerrero, a specialist on news translation based at the University of Málaga, examines the emergence and consolidation of journalistic translation as a line of research initiated in Europe and that has gradually attracted researchers from other parts of the world, including North America, China, and South Africa. As Hernández Guerrero reminds us, translation has always been crucial in news production, albeit the way in which translation is viewed in the journalistic profession does not necessarily correspond with the more open approaches to translation in translation studies. She also contends that the first significant publications on news translation came from two Spanish-speaking countries, i.e. Spain and Argentina. Hernández Guerrero, who is indeed one of the pioneers in this field (she has published a number of books in Spanish, including Traducción y periodismo in 2009, as well as numerous articles in English in all the major translation journals) provides the readers with a veritable state-of-the-art chapter on the field, pointing to the need for collaboration with related disciplines such as communication studies. For her part, Elizabeth Woodward-Smith tackles the role of translation in tourism, which, since the 1960s, has been one of Spain’s main industries. Tourist texts come in many shapes and genres, including guidebooks, leaflets, TV advertisements, magazine articles and websites, all of which need to be translated both for advertising and for information purposes. WoodwardSmith, who traces the interaction of tourism and translation back to the well-known slogan “Spain is different”, discusses the need of adequate communication skills in order to persuade prospective tourists to travel to the country, and to provide adequate information once they have arrived. She also points to the lack of quality controls when it comes to the translation of tourist texts. In this respect, she stresses the potential of research into this area for the production of adequate texts by carrying out both textual analysis and reception studies. The results of these studies should have an impact on the current position of languages and translation in degrees in tourism, as in Spanish universities law and economy subjects occupy a more prominent position than languages and culture. On the other hand, and given the interdisciplinary and complex nature of tourist texts, Woodward-Smith also stresses the need of treating them as specialized texts with very specific goals, including the persuasive function characteristic of advertising, which she discusses in the final section. 8

Introduction

Translation Studies in Spain has reached a point of meta-reflection, which is also exemplified in the various chapters of this volume. After decades of continuous progress (which has finally made the translator visible), after successive paradigms, turns and new methodologies, almost two decades into the twenty-first century, and once Translation Studies has become institutionalized, the need to rethink the discipline has arisen as a result of the social, cultural and political changes in which translation activity is currently being carried out. The reader of this Handbook will see that there are many Spanish publications dealing with these subjects, which take into account all the new approaches and contexts translators are involved with. They will make us reflect on the future of our discipline and ask ourselves to what extent the contributions of researchers whose mother tongue is not English, but one of the many ‘Spanishes’ or of the other languages of Spain might be important. In his chapter, Alberto Fuertes discusses ethical issues focusing on deontology, literary ethics and social ethics or activism. After providing a short historical overview, Fuertes delves into the initial connections between ethics and fidelity, which in the second half of the twentieth century gave prominence to source-oriented views of translation and of the translation process. From here, and partly as a result of the move towards a more descriptive approach to translation and of an interest in the translator as an agent of social change, Fuertes surveys the work carried out by interpreting scholars such as Valero Garcés, and literary translators and academics such as Vidal Claramonte and her research group at the University of Salamanca. He concludes with a reference to the Granada Declaration of 2010, which called for action on the part of translators and scholars against colonization and other forms of domination. Thus, now seems to be the time to look back in order to move forward. From the Cultural Turn, which was crucial to help us understand another way of translating, to the Technilogical Turn, which is a reflection of how the contemporary world has changed, we need to reexamine “conventional understandings of what constitutes translation and the position of the translator” (Cronin 2010, 1). Now is the time to analyse the evolution of translation between Spain and the Americas, where, according to Gentzler (2008, 2013, 2017), translation is a discursive practice that reveals identities, that is constitutive of cultures, and a way to construct and maintain identities often obscured by monolinguist imperialism (van Doorslaer and Flynn 2013, 2–3) and not a mere marker of linguistic differences. Today, many mestizo and hybrid writers of the Americas avoid assimilation into the dominant languages, which are in their case both English and Spanish, using translation as a tool to enrich their Spanishes. But it is also the time to draw a new map of power relations, of multicultural dialogues from an ever-growing range of domains. In order to do so, the Handbook surveys the work into the discourse of the co-official languages of Spain (Basque, Catalan, and Galician) and what role translation has played with regard to Spanish as the language of the state. In fact, as Montserrat Bacardí shows in her chapter, these languages have been standardized partly by translations, which have had a very literary flavour. Bacardí mentions the importance of the translations of the works of Goethe, Shakespeare, Molière and Dante, amongst many others. Translation research has also been relevant in Basque, Catalan and Galician, as revealed by an sizeable number of published collections. Bacardí also stresses that translations from these languages have also grown after the end of Franco’s dictatorial regime. The last chapter of this Handbook is devoted to bibliometrics, a burgeoning area of research. In their chapter, Javier Franco and Sara Rovira offer a bibliometric analysis of the publications produced by scholars in the Hispanic world. Although the emphasis is on publications in Spanish, they also provide figures for publications in Catalan, Basque and Galician. And, most importantly, they present a preliminary approach to English publications authored by Spanish and Spanish-speaking scholars. 9

Roberto A. Valdeón and África Vidal

Before we conclude this introduction, two points need to be made. The first one refers to the term Hispanic. Given the instability of the concept, it is important to indicate that Hispanic will be used throughout the book to refer in a very general way to the scholars who work in areas where Spanish is used for communication, notably Spain and the Americas. The second one pertains to the structure of the chapters. Although most chapters in the Handbook follow a similar structure, it was necessary to make adjustments to the peculiarity of the topic at hand. For instance, Spanish researchers have been particularly productive in audiovisual translation research. This is reflected in a longer chapter that provides an overview of the many modes associated with it. On the other hand, the chapter on comics aims to offer a proposal for the study of this genre, which does not have a consolidated tradition. Translation completes the original, wrote Jorge Luis Borges. Translating increases the meanings of the texts, opens up new interpretations and asks questions; and those questions lead to other questions: how to read the original text in order to discover a journey over rough terrain with views covered in mist which, nonetheless, deserve to be explored. In this Handbook the reader will set off on a journey which is not without incident; a journey which is a cartography where fortresses will be replaced by thresholds where we can translate from a vernacular cosmopolitism (Bhabha 2000) which will try to create routes without limits or frontiers, capable of looking in order to explore the other. Translating is understood here as a way of looking at foreign geographies spread out before us to enrich us, by leaving behind any false sense of legitimacy. We hope that after plunging into this volume the reader will have a clear idea that, in Spain, translating nowadays does not mean walking safely over a solid bridge, but over a provisional walkway, in continuous movement backwards and forwards with every step the translator takes, and, every movement as a result creates questionable realities that can be revised, which only makes them all the more fascinating. And from this way of looking at things, translation ceases to be a secondary process to become one of the most important processes that can shape or question culture.

References Bhabha, Homi K. 2000. The Location of Culture. New York: Routledge. Cronin, Michael. 2010. “The Translation Crowd.” Revista Tradumàtica 8. www.fti.uab.es/tradumatica/ revista/num8/articles/04art.htm. Doorslaer, Luc van, and Peter Flynn, eds. 2013. Eurocentrism in Translation Studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Flynn, Peter, and Luc van Doorslaer. 2013. “On Constructing Continental Views on Translation Studies: An Introduction.” In Eurocentrism in Translation Studies, edited by Luc van Doorslaer and Peter Flynn, 1–8. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Fuentes, Carlos. 2008 [1993]. El naranjo. Madrid: Santillana. Gambier, Yves, and Luc van Doorsaer, eds. 2010. Handbook of Translation Studies. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Gentzler, Edwin. 2008. Translation and Identity in the Americas: New Directions in Translation Theory. London: Routledge. ———. 2013. “Macro- and Micro-Turns in Translation Studies.” In Eurocentrism in Translation Studies, edited by Luc van Doorslaer and Peter Flynn, 9–28. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ———. 2017. Translation and Rewriting in the Age of Post-Translation Studies. London: Routledge. Hernández Guerrero, María José. 2009. Traducción y periodismo. Bern: Peter Lang. Lambert, José. 2013. “Prelude: The Institutionalization of the Discipline.” In The Routledge Handbook of Translation Studies, edited by Carmen Millán and Francesca Bartrina, 7–27. New York/London: Routledge. Lefevere, André. 1992. Translation, Rewriting and the Manipulation of Literary Fame. London: Routledge.

10

Introduction Munday, Jeremy. 2010. “Translation Studies.” In Handbook of Translation Studies, edited by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer, 419–28. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Orengo, Alberto. 2005. “Localising News: Translation and the ‘Global-National’ Dichotomy.” Language and Intercultural Communication 5 (2): 168–87. Sales, Dora. 2012. “ ‘Calibán ha salido de la isla . . .’ Viaje y traducción.” In Traducción, política(s), conflictos, edited by África Vidal and Rosario Martín. Granada: Comares. Valdeón, Roberto A. 2014. Translation and the Spanish Empire in the Americas. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

11

1 SPANISH TRANSLATION HISTORY Luis Pegenaute

Spanish translation history and historiography In a much-cited phrase, Antoine Berman (1984, 12) stated that the constitution of a history of translation is the first task of a modern theory of translation. Verdicts of a similar nature have been presented by Bassnett (1980, 38), D’Hulst (1991, 61; 1995, 14), Lambert (1993, 22), and Delisle (1997–1998, 22). If we accept Berman’s words, we should acknowledge that researchers, both inside and outside Spain, seem to have applied themselves diligently to laying the foundations of a modern theory of Spanish translation, as works of a historical nature  – be they the study of a past translation, a past translator or a past translation ­theorist – constitute a bibliographical corpus whose dimensions are certainly of note. A query on keywords “History” and “Spain” provides 2750 hits in BITRA (a Spanish free and online bibliography on translation and interpreting which includes more than 75,000 references, far exceeding those of other bibliographies such as, for example, John Benjamins’ Translation Studies Bibliography). Although those 2750 hits constitute quite an impressive amount of references, the specialized ­bibliography compiled by Francisco Lafarga on the history of translation in Spain – ­continuously in progress and available at http://hte.upf.edu/ in Lafarga and Pegenaute’s website on this topic) – triples that figure, providing the amazing figure of 8000 references, which bears testimony to the tremendous activity undertaken in this particular field of research. It is legitimate to consider, therefore, that the study of translation throughout the history of Spain (or, if you prefer, the study of the history of Spanish translation, or the study of the Spanish history of translation) has experienced a boom worthy of attention, even if research is still too often scattered or fragmented, as a consequence of a certain lack of cooperation among research teams, and even if enough attention has still not been paid to certain issues (see the following). Although an interest in studying the history of Spanish translation is highly appreciable, there still is, however, a shortage of historiographical contributions taking a systematic and integrated analytical approach to the difficulties and problems implicit in the specific study of Spanish translation history, with a clear definition of the field of study and sharp methodological precision. By translation historiography, Woodsworth understands “the discourse upon [translational] historical data, organized and analysed along certain principles” (2001, 101), which must clearly be differenced from translation history, which is the actual narration of the 13

Luis Pegenaute

events of the past. A similar position is adopted by Apak (2003), Fernández (2016) or Lambert, who states that “we have to distinguish between the object of study and the discourse on the object of study, although such a discourse can also be itself part of the investigation” (1993, 4), as opposed to, for example, Pym (1998, 5) and Gürçaglar (2013, 132), who make no distinction between both concepts. D’Hulst (2010), for his part, introduces a tripartite classification between history, historiography, and metahistoriography, the latter category coinciding with Woodsworth’s and Lambert’s notion of historiography. According to D’Hulst, history is the “proper sequence of facts, events, ideas, discourses, etc.”, while metahistoriography is “the explicit reflection on the concepts and methods to write history and also on epistemological and methodological problems that are related to the use of these concepts and methods” (D’Hulst 2010, 397). Within this terminological scheme the concept of historiography acquires for D’Hulst a new meaning, namely, “the history of histories, i.e., the history of the practices of history-writing” (2010, 398). However, in this chapter, I shall understand history and historiography in Woodsworth and Lambert’s terms, and conceptualize metahistoriography as both (1) the history of histories and (2) the discussion upon the historiographical sources, as it involves a “discourse which is concerned or alludes to other discourses” (definition of ‘metadiscourse’ in the Oxford English Dictionary). The historiography of Spanish translation history is still a field very much in need of academic development. Bibliographical references of interest come from different sources: general historiographical studies on translation, with occasional attention to Spain, such as those by Lepinette (1997), Pym (1998), López Alcalá (2001), Sabio (2006), Vega (2006), and Lafarga and Pegenaute (2015b); specific historiographical studies on Spanish translation (sometimes biased towards metahistoriography), such as Pym (2000b), Santoyo (2004, 2012, 2014), Lafarga (2005), Pegenaute (2010, 2012, 2017), Navarro-Domínguez (2012), Sabio and Ordóñez (2012), Ordóñez and Sabio’s edited volume (2015), Pérez Blázquez (2013) and Ordóñez (2016); and introductory studies to the history of Spanish translation, such as Lafarga and Pegenaute (2004, 1–18) and Ruiz Casanova (2018, 31–61). The majority of the aforementioned studies have revealed – albeit not always explicitly – how historical studies of translation display several shortcomings: firstly, an indeterminacy in the conceptualization of the object of study, such as the – not always obvious – concepts of translation and translator; secondly, certain problems of a methodological nature (most prominently, the segmentation of time and space), which are largely a consequence of not paying enough attention to Lambert’s admonition to avoid two extremes when studying the history of translation, namely: (1) simply borrowing historical and historiographical frameworks derived from other disciplines (as, for example, literary studies, history, linguistics, etc.); (2) considering that translation (whether viewed as process or product) constitutes something intrinsically unique which has nothing to do with the general characteristics of a culture or society (Lambert 1993, 4).

Translations The scholar carrying out research in translation history depends, of course, on catalogues documenting bibliographical information on existing translations. There are different resources which are particularly useful, the most evident of which is the Index Translationum, UNESCO’s database of book translations, which contains indexes of authors, publishers, and translators. This database contains cumulative bibliographical information on books translated and published in about 100 of the UNESCO Member States since 1979 and totals more than 1,800,000 entries in all disciplines. The references before 1979 can be found in the printed 14

Spanish translation history

editions. Although the following are not specific resources for translation, it is also useful to check Dionisio Hidalgo’s Diccionario general de bibliografía española (1862–1881), Antonio Palau’s Manual del librero hispanoamericano (1948–1977), the Catálogo general de la Librería española e hispanoamericana, 1901–1930 (1932–1951), the Catálogo general de la Librería española, 1931–1950 (1957–1965), and – in the case of eighteenth century works – Aguilar Piñal’s Bibliografía de autores españoles del siglo XVIII (1981–1995). In electronic form it is available at the database Proyecto Boscán. Catálogo histórico crítico de las traducciones de la literatura italiana al castellano y al catalán desde 1300 a 1939, www.ub.edu/ boscan, coordinated by María de las Nieves Muñiz and Cesáreo Calvo, which incorporates detailed information on the translations of not only Italian literary works but also of other pieces in the field of social sciences (see Muñiz 2007). The research group TRILCAT (Traducció, recepció i literatura catalana) has made available in its website http://trilcat.upf.edu a catalogue of translations of literary works into Catalan (nineteenth century–2000) and of Catalan literary works into Spanish (from the end of the nineteenth century). The research group BITRAGA (Biblioteca da tradución galega) presents in its website http://bibliotraducion. uvigo.es) a catalogue of the translations of literary works into Galician from 1980 (see Montero 2010 and Galanes 2012). A book series is specialized in these kinds of catalogues: BT: bibliografías de traducción, directed by Francisco Lafarga, which has hitherto published eight volumes on topics such as the translations of Balzac and Hugo, English novelists translated in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, etc. This series, restricted to translations published in book form, presents onomastic indexes of translators, prologuists, editors, etc. Other  – also partial  – catalogues worth mentioning include the ones by Portnoff (1931) on the translations of Russian novels until 1930; Montesinos (1955) on the translations of novels in the first half of the nineteenth century; Beardsley (1970), on the translations of Greek and Latin in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries; Lafarga (1983, 1988) on the translations of French dramas between 1700 and 1835; Garulo (1988) on the translations from Arabian between 1800 and 1987; and Ballestero (2007) on the translations published between 1918 and 1936. Some websites have collected the translations themselves: the research group Traducción y Lenguajes Especializados grants access to translations of literary works and essays, some of which have been edited and annotated, together with specific studies on these translations (see Zaro 2007); the website BITRES (Biblioteca de traducciones españolas www. cervantesvirtual.com), directed by Francisco Lafarga and Luis Pegenaute, presents numerous translations – otherwise, of rather difficult access – and specific studies on them, fifty of which have been collected in Lafarga and Pegenaute (2011) and another thirty-one in Lafarga and Pegenaute (2015c). In many instances the translation historian comes up against an ontological problem, as it is not always possible to clearly establish the dividing line between writing and rewriting, that is, between creation and the different forms of re-creation, such as imitation, adaptation, parody, and translation. We should be aware that different practices of rewriting are very much determined by changing ethical and aesthetic codes (that is, by norms, in Toury’s terms). The difficulties of ascertaining when a text is a translation increase when dealing with early texts, inscribed in a manuscript tradition. Santoyo (2014), for example, draws attention to the exigencies of constituting a corpus of medieval translations in the Iberian Peninsula, distinguishing those in book form from those presented in documents and glosses, and occasional translations inserted in original texts. In the Middle Ages, when the poetics of (re)writing was so unanimously different from ours, texts were translated from a variety of sources, in many instances from texts to which numerous glosses had been added, and which may not have 15

Luis Pegenaute

survived (see Rubio Tovar 1997). Very often, the translator would add his own commentaries, correcting or amending the text. These interpolations and switches in meaning were in many instances perpetuated when the translations became the source texts for new translations (for example, when Latin authors were translated from French and Italian intermediary texts). In other instances, the agent manipulating the text was the amanuensis. Some of these manipulations might certainly be involuntary, due to the circumstances under which the task was being carried out, but others were very much premeditated; for example, when domesticating into Christian terms pagan texts from Classical sources. The problem of drawing a clear borderline between translation and adaptation/imitation is not restricted to medieval times. Quite often the plot of the source text would be transposed from one locale to another, in a process of cultural transposition: for example, the translation/adaptation of Machiavelli’s Arte della guerra into Spanish by Diego de Salazar in 1536 (Tratado de re militari. Tratado de caballeria) displaced the dialogue from Italy to Spain and turned the speakers into two Spaniards, while converting the political language of civic humanism into that of theological rights, which allowed this piece of work not to be prohibited by the Inquisition (Botella 2000). One century later, still within the limits of the Spanish Renaissance, the version of Garzoni’s Piazza universale (1615) by Cristóbal Suárez Figueroa was described in its title page as ‘parte traduzida del toscano y parte compuesta’ (Burke 2007, 31). In the late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century numerous examples can also be produced. Tomás de Iriarte, in 1789, in his prologue to his translation of Robinson der Jungere by Joachim Heinrich Campe – which he did from the French – openly admitted that “lejos de ceñirme a una traducción rigurosa y literal, me he tomado la libertad en suprimir, aumentar o alterar en no pocos lugares” (in García Garrosa and Lafarga 2004, 240). Cándido María Trigueros, for his part, asserted in very clear terms his poetics of translation in Mis pasatiempos (1804), stating that “cuando traduzca lo haré libremente, y jamás al pie de la letra; alteraré, mudaré, quitaré o añadiré lo que me pareciere a propósito para mejorar el original, y reformaré hasta el plan y la conducta de la fábula cuando juzgue que así conviene” (in García Garrosa and Lafarga 2004, 360). These procedures were implemented, for example, in his translation of Galatée: roman pastoral, by Floran (itself an imitation of La Galatea, by Cervantes) in 1798: “con los materiales ajenos, agregando algunos propios que no se hallan en el original [. . .], he procurado levantar un edificio nuevo que sea en algún modo original y mío propio, esto es, otra imitación que tenga algo nuevo”. His creative interventions gave him the right, he considered, to compete with the author in terms of recognition: “solo aspiro a competir con el original, ya sea por la regularidad de la disposición, ya por la propiedad y gracia de la expression” (in García Garrosa and Lafarga 2004, 338). Félix Enciso Castrillón (1808) drastically abridged the History of Bruce and Emily, or, The Amicable Quixote, reducing the long threevolume source work that he was working with (Chanin’s French intermediary translation) to two short volumes, in an attempt to facilitate for the reader a better understanding of the English culture that it depicted. He retained little but the names of the protagonists and wrote an ending very different from that of the original. He considered, however, this procedure absolutely legitimate, justifying it for moral and ethical reasons: “Miro esta obra como un manojo de rosas: yo la he quitado las espinas que podían dañar a las buenas costumbres de mi nación, y he dejado las flores que no pueden menos de divertir a todos” (in García Garrosa and Lafarga 2004, 375). Finally, by way of example, in order to illustrate the occasionally fragile frontier between translation and creation, we can cite the case of well-known Spanish author Mariano José de Larra, who presented as his own ‘original comedy’ a piece which he had adapted from the French, as was the case of his No más mostrador (first performed in 1831), an 16

Spanish translation history

imitation/adaptation/translation of Les adieux au comptoir, by E. Scribe. When an anonymous columnist objected to his supposed plagiarism, Larra replied in the following terms: tendré mi comedia por mía y por original, a pesar de las escenas que he creído deber y poder robar a Scribe. Es de advertir que siempre que escriba sobre un asunto que haya tratado otro escritor, al cual yo me crea inferior, pienso hacer otro tanto, y seguir llamando original a lo que de aquí resulte. (in Lafarga 2016, 139)

Translators When studying the relation between translation and creation it is possible to conceive the translator as author or the author as translator (Flynn 2010, n. p.). Understanding the translator as author equals to understanding translation as creation, in that it presupposes that translation can imply a large degree of creativity (see Bassnett and Bush 2006; Loffredo and Perteghella 2006; Buffagni, Garzelli, and Zanotti 2011), despite Pym’s (2011) opposing arguments, based on Habermas’s formal pragmatics and Goffman’s definition of authorship. On the other hand, conceiving creation as translation implies recognizing – as Walter Benjamin’s epigones and, in general, postructuralist theoreticians would do – that the former can never be totally original, paying homage to the debt that all writers have to other writers, and recognizing that intertextuality is an intrinsic feature of literature. Considering – albeit metaphorically – the writer as translator implies agreeing with Paul Valéry, when in the prologue to his translation of Virgil’s Bucolics he says that Écrire quoi que ce soit, aussitôt que l’acte d’écrire exige de la réflexion, et n’est pas l’inscription machinale et sans arrêts d’une parole intérieure toute spontanée, est un travail de traduction exactement comparable à celui qui opère la transmutation d’un texte d’une langue dans une autre. (1957, vol. I, 211) In a similar sense, for George Steiner, any activity implying an understanding of a linguistic utterance is always some kind of translation: “A human being performs an act of translation, in the full sense of the word, when receiving a speech-message from any other human being” (1975, 47). For Octavio Paz, finally, “aprender a hablar es aprender a traducir” (1975, 9). In his manual on translation history methodology, Pym (1998) gives translators a privileged place in historical research, while Chesterman (2009) underlines that a number of recent research tendencies in Translation Studies – mostly of a sociological nature – focus explicitly on the translator in some way, rather than on translations as texts. In his opinion, these trends might be grouped under the term ‘Translator Studies’. In later papers, Pym (2000b, 2009) proposes two fundamental principles: to study translators before translations; and to consider them intercultural mediators who cannot be placed in just one social or geographic context. This calls into question Toury’s assertion (1995), held unquestioningly by so many descriptivist researchers, that translations, and, by extension, translators, can be only located within the target context. It is important to point out that there is a need for a real history of translators, and in fact, translators can constitute as valid an organizing principle as original authors, original texts or target texts. The work of translators is largely invisible, as Venuti (1995) has rightly made clear. With the aim of creating the illusion of a work which can be read as an original, translations are often subjected to a process of domestication through which 17

Luis Pegenaute

all trace of the translator’s work is erased. Tradition has more often than not rewarded those translations which do not read like translations, which is the same as saying that, paradoxically, translators have to be unnoticed in order to be appreciated. This may well be the reason why translators are not always awarded the recognition they deserve (which in the case of female translators can lead to an invisibility often heightened by questions of gender), despite their importance as crucial agents in cultural development. Moreover, translators are sometimes difficult to locate or identify due to their very condition as intermediaries, whose existence is sited metaphorically on the frontier between various cultures, playing a role in more than one. It is no surprise that there have been so many translators among exiles, deportees, expatriates, refugees, émigrés and displaced persons. The difficulties of ascribing a certain translator to one specific cultural context – such as the Spanish one – can be exemplified by making reference, for example, to the translational activity undertaken by the numerous liberal intellectuals forced into exile in 1814 and 1823 as a consequence of Ferdinand VII of Spain’s absolutist repression, and who found refuge in France (Francisco Altés y Gurena, Juan Florán, Luis Lamarca, Francisco Martínez de la Rosa, Eugenio de Ochoa) and England (José María Blanco White, José Joaquín de Mora, Telesforo de Trueba y Cossío and José de Urcullu); or, in more recent times, those who settled down in countries such as Argentina, Cuba, Chile and Mexico, after the Spanish Civil War (1936–1939) (such as, Francisco Ayala, Rafael Alberti, Ricardo Baeza, Agustí Bartra, Xavier Benguerel, Josep Carner, Luis Cernuda, Rosa Chacel, Enrique Díez-Canedo, José Gaos, León Felipe, Wenceslao Roces, Tomás Segovia and many others). But, in many instances, writers are also translators, in a very literal sense of the word. Studying the double facet of the author/translator (the writer who translates and the translator who writes) contributes to a better conceptualization of the relationship between both activities and to better reconciling their respective status in a not hierarchical relationship, that is, it invites us not to exclusively associate literary creation with production, originality and innovation, and not to relegate translation to a mere imitative and derivative reproduction (Pegenaute 2013). Writers have often been prolific translators, although this aspect of their biography tends to be somewhat silenced in literary histories, as if it was considered some kind of petty crime contradicting their capacity for originality or just a means of acquiring literary apprenticeship. In Spain, as in any other geographical environment, the list of writers/translators is quite impressive. So is the list of self-translators, as it so often happens in multilingual territories (being it necessary, of course, for the writer to be bilingual in order to translate himself/ herself ). The dominance of a specific language in terms of cultural prestige may encourage self-translation from a minority language to the dominant one, just like the author’s desire to reclaim his/her capacity to express himself/herself in a minorized language can prompt translation into it. Independently of the reasons that may encourage self-translation, it may occur either some time after the original has been completed or during the process of ­creation  – that is, there can be consecutive or simultaneous self-translation, in Grutman’s words (2009, 258–259). For a comprehensive overview of the history of self-translation see Santoyo (2005, 2013) and, more extensively, Hokenson & Munson’s edited volume (2007). In particular, the history of self-translation in the Iberian Peninsula has been studied by Santoyo (2003, 2010), Gallén, Lafarga and Pegenaute’s edited volume (2011), and Dasilva (2013). According to Santoyo, self-translation has been practiced in the Iberian Peninsula very extensively from the twelfth century, with early practisioners such as “Pedro Alfons, Ramon Llull, Berenguer Eimeric, Arnau de Vilanova, Abner de Burgos, Alonso de Cartagena, Alonso de Madrigal el Tostado o Alfono (Fernández) de Palencia” (Santoyo 2010, 369). In the twentieth and twentyfirst centuries, self-translation has been prominent among Basque writers, such as Gabriel Aresti, Bernardo Atxaga, Carmelo de Echegaray, Juan Kruz Igerabide, Koldo Izaguirre, Felipe 18

Spanish translation history

Juaristi and Nicolás Ormaechea “Orixe’ (see Manterola 2011); Catalan writers, such as Agustí Bartra, Roser Caminals, Narcís Comadira, Flàvia Company, Pau Faner, Feliu Formosa, Pere Gimferrer, Llorca, Antoni Marí, Francesc Mira, Terenci Moix, Baltasar Porcel, Valentí Puig, Carme Riera, Josep Riera, Pep Subirós and Lluís Maria Todó (see Arnau i Segarra 2016); and Galician writers, such as Eduardo Blanco-Amor, Xurxi Borrazán, Ramón Cabanillas, Carlos Casares, Alfredo Conde, Rosalía de Castro, Álvaro Cunqueiro, Luis Pimentel, Euardo Pondal, Manuel Rivas, Eduardo Rosal and Suso del Toro (see Dasilva 2009). Despite the obvious fact that translators are the creators of translation, only recently have they been the object of systematic study. Two volumes are worthy of special note: those by Lafarga and Pegenaute (2009) and by Bacardí and Godayol (2011), as they cover vast panoramas and involve the collaboration of large teams of scholars. The former, presented as an encyclopaedic dictionary, was prepared by 400 specialists covering 800 entries. Its focus is both on foreign literature (with entries on foreign authors and foreign national literatures translated into Spanish) and on the target system (with entries on the best-known Basque, Castilian, Catalan, and Galician translators, from the Middle Ages to the present time). The latter dictionary, prepared by eighty specialists, presents some 1000 entries on Catalan translators, with systematic accounts of their translations. Other studies are more specific, restricted to certain periods or genres: Cobos Castro (1998) presents a biobibliographical catalogue of the translators of French drama between 1830 and 1930; Bautista Riera and Riera Climent (2003) present an exhaustive catalogue of 126 Spanish translators of scientific works in the Spanish Enlightenment (more in particular, between 1700 and 1808); Alvar (2009) presents a total of 103 translators dating from the end of the fourteenth century to the early sixteenth century, a fair amount of whom had already been dealt with in previous studies (Alvar and Lucía 2001, 2003, 2004).

The segmentation of space: cartography One of the main methodological problems to be resolved in the historiography of translation is the conceptualization of geographical space. When literary translation is under scrutiny, the concept of national literature turns out to be particularly ineffective, since it is based on the establishment of literary maps which confuse geographical boundaries with linguistic territories, both of which are unstable, heterogeneous and subject to persistent alterations: different countries speak the same language and the same country speaks different languages. The concept of national literature is also regulatory, given that it excludes what is not canonized, and tends to homogenize cultures (Lambert 1991). Just as Delabastita, D’Hulst and Meylaerts point out in their introduction to Lambert (2006), “the near monopoly of the romantic ‘national‘ paradigm – one territory, one nation, one language, one literature – leads to anachronistic views of the literary world” (xiii), which makes it necessary to adopt a more dynamic and flexible concept, such as that of polysystem, for example. For his part, Mario J. Valdés (2004) has pointed out that the concept of national literature bears implicit numerous ideological connotations related to the presence of national identity, in that it is exclusively associated with creative writing and the reading habits of a specific linguistic group in a particular geographical area, most often in connection with one political state. National literatures have been the axes around which most literary histories have been articulated, stressing diachronic change in time. In recent times, however, the discussions of space in literary and cultural studies have advocated for a spatial, topographical or tolopogical turn. Drawing on Foucault’s notion of heterotopia (in a lecture delivered in 1967, but not published until 1986) and Lefebvre’s (1974) considerations about the cultural production of space, geographer Edward J. Soja 19

Luis Pegenaute

(1989) and literary theorist Fredric Jameson (1992) coined the term ‘spatial turn’ in the context of their respective diagnoses of the postmodern condition. In Jameson’s terms, the valorization of spatiality implies a reaction against the “canonized rhetoric of temporality of the critics and theorists of high modernism” (1992, 365). Areas such as literary and cultural studies, sociology, anthropology, political science and history have become increasingly spatial in their methodological orientation. In their introduction to a recent comprehensive volume on the plethora of interdisciplinary approaches to this spatial turn, Barney Warf and Santa Arias stress how these perspectives assert that “space is a social construction relevant to the understanding of the different histories of human subjects and to the production of cultural phenomena”, stressing the fact that “geography matters, not for the simplistic and overly used reason that everything happens in space, but because where things happen is critical to knowing how and why they happen” (2009, 1). Just as Cabo (2004, 22) has pointed out, in literary studies the spatial orientation has quite often been associated with a comparatist model, while a teleological temporality has been associated with a more traditional model of literary history, often rooted in the concept of national literature. This methodological dichotomy has been expressed in clear-cut terms by Valdés: Comparative literary history [. . .] can be described as a collaborative interdisciplinary study of the production and reception of literatures in specific social and cultural contexts. Instead of writing a historical narrative of one language in one geographic area, comparative literary history examines literature as a process of cultural communication within one language area or among a number of them without attempting to minimize cultural diversity. (Valdés 2002, 75) This conception renders itself more easily, of course, to a conceptualization of literature as a real means of conveying cultural identity, without submitting itself to the arbitrary structures of political power that separate and agglutinate social conglomerates. National literature has been, quite obviously, the object of study of traditional Hispanism. In recent times, however, the rise of Iberian Studies has brought about an increasing interest in creating a comparative supranational space characterized by linguistic and cultural diversity. In this respect, the Iberian space can be understood as a polysystem. Joan Ramon Resina, for example, has advocated for a disciplinary reformulation, capable of fighting back tendencies deeply rooted in Spanish philology, such as the condemnation into oblivion of non-Castilian cultures – with its subsequent reinforcement of monolinguism – and the atomization of Iberian cultures into mutually exclusive national philologies. In his own words, the innovative idea behind Iberian Studies as a discipline is its intrinsic relationality and its reorganization of monolingual fields based on nation-states and their postcolonial extensions into a peninsular plurality of cultures and languages pre-existing and co-existing with the official cultures of the state. (2013, vii) Besides Resina’s contribution (2013), other edited volumes contributing to the consolidation of the discipline of Iberian Studies include those by Abuín and Tarrío (2004), Perez Isasi and Fernandes (2013), Muñoz-Basols, Lonsdale, and Delgado (2017) and, most notably, Cabo, Abuín, and Domínguez (2011) and Domínguez, Abuín, and Sapega (2016). Other volumes underlining the cultural diversity of the Iberian Peninsula and advocating for a new approach 20

Spanish translation history

to Hispanism are the one by Cabo (2012) and those edited by Epps and Fernández Cifuentes (2005) and Martín-Estudillo and Spadaccini (2010). In the specific realm of translation, an Iberian approach is undertaken in Gallén, Lafarga, and Pegenaute’s edited volume (2010), which pays attention to intrapeninsular translation and self-translation in the Iberian Peninsula. It is also worthy of note here Pym’s (2000a) attempt to construct a historical approach to Hispanic translation, rather than to Spanish translation.

The segmentation of time: periodization Finally, the division of time, or periodization, is also challenging. Different global periodizations have been suggested, such as those by Steiner (1975), Santoyo (1987), and Ballard (1992), all of which are examined by Foz, who criticizes the fact that [the] different ways of (re)presenting translation history and of analysing its objects in the wider sense [. . .] appear as preconstructions which accommodate the object of translation to and present translation (process, products, and actors) as part of a teleological movement, as a practice that moves towards a determined and essential end. (2006, 141–42) National translation histories, on the other hand, are generally far too derivative from literary history. There does not seem to be any particular objection to using literary periodization when undertaking a history of literary translation (thus, carrying out a descriptive, target-oriented analysis), but we should admit that it has little applicability when studying the translation of non-literary texts. On the other hand, we should be aware that, even if we restrict ourselves to literary translation, there is not a chronological overlap in the literary traditions of the different countries (a problem which is exacerbated, quite obviously, when studying the whole foreign literary output being translated in a particular period). So, for example, Renaissance Humanism was born, quite naturally, in Italy, where the humanist educational programme inspired in the study of classical antiquity was evident as early as the later years of the thirteenth century. The first major representative was Francesco Petrarca, who exerted a tremendous influence on Florentine disciples, such as Giovanni Bocaccio and Coluccio Salutati. The latter contributed to promoting the growth of Humanism by employing Manuel Chrysoloras, who taught Greek in Florence between 1397 and 1400. From Florence Humanism spread rapidly throughout Italy in the fifteenth century and established itself as the most prototypical expression of the Renaissance. It was not until the fifteenth century that the movement established itself in France, England, Germany, and also Spain, where it took a definite impulse in 1492, in close relation with sociopolitical factors such as the unification of the Christian kingdom, the discovery of America and the publication of the first grammar of a vernacular language, the Gramática de la lengua castellana by Antonio de Nebrija. The Neoclassical and Romantic movements also provide good examples. The former settled in Spain when it was already in decline in France – where it had originated – and then, in turn, lasted so long that it affected the arrival of Romanticism. It is difficult to find discussions on Romanticism in Spain before Monteggia’s and López Soler’s discussion of the topic in the short-lived journal El europeo (1823–1824), mainly as a response to the stimulus caused by Juan Nicolás Böhl de Faber’s decision to publish “Reflexiones de Schlegel sobre el teatro” (excerpted from A. W. Schlegel’s Vorlesungen über dramatische Kunst und Literatur, 1809– 1811) in Mercurio gaditano in 1814. Faber was one of the first in Spain to focus attention on ancient folk poetry and seventeenth-century drama, exhorting a return to national traditions, 21

Luis Pegenaute

inspired by Herder and Grimm, and, most notably, by A. W. Schelegel himself. Although there had been translations of pre-romantics such as Young, Ossian, Goethe, Rousseu, Chateaubriand, and Lamartine in the last years of the eighteenth century and the first years of the nineteenth century they had not really exerted a tremendous influence. It was not until 1834, after the return of Spanish liberal exiles, that Romanticism took its roots in Spain. This delay, when compared with the situation in other European countries, becomes evident if we consider that by that date some of the most archetypical Romantic authors, such as Walter Scott, lord Byron or Goethe, were already dead. Realism also arrived relatively late in Spain, especially in comparison with France, the home country of its main precursors, including Stendhal and Balzac. Besides this lack of synchrony in the development of literary/cultural movement, it is noticeable that opposing tendencies coexisted in the movements mentioned, which in some cases led to eclectic works. If a division of translation history according to the traditional parameters of literary history proves to be problematic, the division into centuries is equally challenging: historically, the eighteenth century in Spain finishes in Spain in 1808, with the events associated with the Peninsular war (in literary terms, the Neoclassical aesthetics associated with this century was not superseded by Romanticism until a much later date, until the death of king Fernando VII in 1833 allowed the coming back of the intellectual liberals who had fled the country). The year of 1898 also marks a boundary, since the so-called Generation of 1898 was a group of fin de siècle intellectuals and writers active in Spain at the time of the Spanish-American war and the end of the Spanish colonial empire. In any case, it should be obvious that division into centuries means joining the mathematical convention based on the decimal system with the astronomic calendar, these being matters that have little to do with the historical development of humanity, and in this respect, affecting culture in no way (except in the psychological effect that the end of a century or the beginning of another may exert on us).

Metahistoriography: a history of the histories of translation in Spain We still lack a history of the histories of translation in Spain. The first attempt was probably the work of Valencian priest and professor of Rhetoric Joaquín de Lorga, who in his unpublished Memories – currently lost – supposedly included many of the notes he had taken for a prospective Biblioteca de traductores españoles. The project did not reach conclusion, as a consequence of Lorga’s untimely death in 1769, but it provided material for bibliographer and Cervantist Antonio Pellicer y Saforcada’s well-known Ensayo de una biblioteca de traductores españoles in 1778 (see Marco García 1999; Verdegal 2001, 2004; Ruiz Casanova 2009). In the prologue to his Ensayo, Pellicer acknowledged his debt to Lorga’s work, and mentioned that Lorga had drafted informal but valuable studies on a number of translators of ancient pieces – although there were many significant absences and no references were made to the translators of the Holy Scriptures – and on many translators of modern works, adding sporadically insightful meditations on the relative value of some specific translations. Pellicer y Saforcada relied not only on Lorga, but also on Nicolás Antonio’s Bibliotheca Hispana Nova (1667–1696), which he himself aimed to complete in his Adiciones a la Biblotheca Hispana Nova (1783–1788). His Ensayo de una biblioteca de traductores españoles is divided into two parts, not bearing any connection whatsoever between them, since the first one consists in three studies on three authors from the Spanish Golden Age: Cervantes, Bartolomé Argensola, and his brother Lupercio Argensola. The second part consists of thirty-six studies on Spanish translators, arranged alphabetically. A good number of them are translators of the Bible – in some instances medieval translators –, but the largest part corresponds to secular translators 22

Spanish translation history

from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. A few years later, in 1795, Juan Pablo Forner, a relevant figure in the Spanish Enlightenment, produced his Exequias de la lengua castellana, in which he devoted some attention to a number of exemplary Spanish translators (see Lafarga 1998b). However, the most significant contribution was, of course, that of Marcelino Menéndez Pelayo, one of the greatest literary critics and scholars in Spanish history, a specialist on the history of ideas and Spanish philology, who also cultivated poetry, translation, and philosophy, and who was nominated for the Nobel Prize five times. Besides other relevant works in the field of translation – Horacio en España (1877), Traductores españoles de La Eneida (1879), Traductores de las Églogas y Bucólicas de Virgilio (1879), Bibliografía hispano-clásica (1902) – he is the author of the monumental Biblioteca de traductores españoles (written mostly in 1873–1878, published in four volumes in 1952–1953), which consists in a systematic compendium of 293 studies with biobibliographical information on translations and translators from Greek, Latin, and other languages into Spanish, together with excerpts from the translations and numerous critical observations (Gargatagli and Catelli 1998–1999; Ruiz Casanova 2006; Fillière 2016). Besides his own scholarly contributions, mention must also be made of his own translations (Zarandona 2016)

Spanish translation theory: anthologies According to Lepinette (1997, 24), translation anthologies constitute the documentary basis of the historical metadiscourse of Translation Studies. Sabio (2011) and Sabio and Ordóñez (2012, 109–18) point out the main defining features in the anthologies of the historical discourse on translation, while Sabio and Ordóñez (2012, 119–99) and Sabio (2013) revise Iberian anthologies, and Ordóñez (2016) compares the selection of authors included in anthologies of translation discourse published in the Iberian Peninsula with those included in anthologies published abroad. Five anthologies – not discussed here – have been published in Spain, covering authors from the European tradition, with scarce presence of Spanish authors (with the exception of Santoyo 2011, which probably represents the most fully documented anthology of medieval discourse on translation to date, in any language). Santoyo (1987) had previously gathered the first anthology devoted exclusively to Spanish-speaking authors, which includes one hundred essays, the vast majority (ninety) of which were written by Spaniards between 1367 and 1984. Catelli and Gargatagli (1998) present and comment on a plethora of texts written in the Iberian Peninsula from the tenth century and, later on, in Spanish America. Theirs constitutes an exceptional treasure of information, since they have included not only essays in the strict sense of the word, but also epistles, prologues, official dispositions, etc. Other anthologies are devoted to a specific particular period, such as the ones by Cartagena (2009) on the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, García Rolán and López Fonseca (2014) on the fifteenth century, García Garrosa and Lafarga (2004) on the eighteenth century and Lafarga et al. (2016) on the nineteenth century, all of them with substantial and comprehensive introductory studies. Other anthologies focus on particular combinations of languages, such as the one by Dasilva (2006) on Portuguese literature translated in Spain, and Dasilva (2008) on Spanish literature translated in Portugal. Others are devoted to the translations of a particular foreign author, such as Lafarga (2008) on Victor Hugo, with texts written between 1834 and 1930; Pujante and Campillo (2007) on Shakespeare, with texts written between 1764 and 1916; Pujol (2007) on Catalan translations of Shakespeare; and Fontcuberta (2007) on Catalan translations of Molière. Other anthologies are devoted to non-Castilian writings, such as the ones by Dasilva (2003) on Galician theory between 1869 and 1999 and Bacardí, Fontcuberta, and Parcerisas (1998) on Catalan theory between 1891 and 1990. More restricted in scope – albeit with 23

Luis Pegenaute

extensive introductory studies – are the ones by Malé (2006) on Catalan translator Carles Riba and by Marrugat (2009) on Catalan translator Maria Mànent. Finally, Toro Santos and Cancelo López (2008) compile fifteen articles on translation theory and twenty-seven articles on translation criticism published in the Spanish press between 1900 and 1965.

Histories of Spanish translation Van Hoof (1998) and Pym (1998) offer very brief panoramic views on the history of translation in Spain. The first study in book form – albeit also rather brief, only eighty pages long – was that by Sánchez Montero (1998), written in Italian. Pym (2000a) presents twelve case studies on Hispanic history (not specifically Spanish), ranging from the Toledo School of Translation to the task of translators during the 1992 Olympic Games in Barcelona, designed to test his hypothesis that translators belong to professional intercultures rather to the source or target cultures. Ruiz Casanova (2000) published the first book-length work in Spanish, which presents five lengthy chapters – on the Middle Ages, the Golden Age, the eighteenth century, the nineteenth century and the twentieth century – together with an introductory chapter on the role attributed to translation in Spanish literary history. Each chapter is preceded by a study on the linguistic and literary variety of each period. This book was later updated by Ruiz Casanova (2018). Lafarga and Pegenaute (2004) gathered a number of specialists to cover the different periods and linguistic/cultural fields. Their edited collection pays attention not only to translation in Castilian, but also in Basque, Catalan and Galician. The chapters dealing with Castilian are divided thus: the Middle Ages (written by Santoyo), the Renaissance and the Baroque (Micó), Romanticism (Pegenaute), Realism and the fin de siècle (Pegenaute), the period from the literary avant-garde movements to the Civil War (Gallego Roca), the years from the Civil War to the restoration of democracy (Vega), and a final chapter on contemporary Spain (Pegenaute). In the following pages I will refer mostly to books, leaving out chapters and articles. Due to space constraints, most of the works referred to here will deal only with Castilian. I will focus on the most significant contributions, but I will also try to rescue from oblivion some very valuable works produced in earlier times, that is, before systematic research started to be attempted in the 1970s. I will not discuss, on the other hand, two major Spanish treatises on translation – José Ortega y Gasset’s Miseria y esplendor de la traducción (1937) and Francisco Ayala’s Breve teoría de la traducción (1946–1947) – since, essential as they are, they do not deal specifically with the history of translation in Spain.

The Middle Ages In strict terms, it is not possible to speak of Spain – a word deriving from “Hispania”, the Roman name for the Iberian Peninsula – until the marriage of Isabella I of Castile and Ferdinand II of Aragon in 1469, when their respective kingdoms were reunited. The centralization of royal power, together with the relinquishment of the sovereignty of the Moorish Emirate of Granada in January 1492 (founded five centuries earlier) to the Catholic monarchs of Spain, and the discovery of the New World in that same year, contributed to reinforcing the unification of the crown. Navarre was annexated in 1512, and Portugal in 1580. It was after the independence of Portugal in 1640 – which led to the restoration of the House of Braganza – when the concept of Spain started to be applied to the entire Peninsula except Portugal. According to Santoyo (2017, 93), “tracing the history of medieval translation in Iberian Peninsula is an extremely complex task, especially because a degree of periodization is rendered necessary, 24

Spanish translation history

the broad time span involved, and the existence of texts and documentation from different stages within it”. Despite the difficulties, however, the Middle Ages remain one of the periods more extensively dealt with by scholars devoted to the history of translation in Spain, most notably by Carlos Alvar and Julio-César Santoyo (see the following). Medieval translation was a topic frequently treated in the 1940s and 1950s. José María Millás Vallicrosa, for example, studied the translation of Arabian scientific texts in the Late Middle Ages in a long series of studies published in scholarly journals such as Al-Andalus or Sefarad, but he was also responsible for an early study in 1933 on the translations undertaken under the patronage of King Alfonso X. In 1942 Arabist and literary critic Ángel González Palencia published a study on Don Raimundo y los traductores de Toledo. José Llamas, for his part, produced numerous studies on the translations of the Holy Scriptures into Castilian, which he published in journals such as Estudios Bíblicos, Sefarad and La ciudad de Dios. These studies enabled him to successfully complete his well-known edition of the Biblia medieval romanceada judeo-cristiana. Versión del Antiguo Testamento en el siglo XIV, sobre los textos hebreo y latino (1950–1955). Philologist and historian Ramón Menéndez Pidal, one of the most respected Spanish scholars in the field of Romance Studies, devoted some attention to the so-called Toledo School of Translators in his España, eslabón entre la cristianidad y el Islam (1956), while Italian hispanist Margherita Morreale published from the mid-1950s a number of studies on medieval translation in journals such as Sefarad and Revista de Literatura, besides specific studies on the translations of Virgil and Dante, and a monograph on Spanish Renaissance poet Boscán, well-known for his 1534 translation of Castiglione’s Il Cortegiano and for his role as introducer of Petrarchism in Spain (see below). Morreale also authored a volume on Humanist translator Pedro Simón de Abril in 1949. Bible translation as a topic was developed in the 1960s and 1970s thanks to the contributions of the best-known specialist on the subject, Luis Alonso Schöckel, professor at the Pontifical Biblical Institute in Rome. He combined research and translation practice in Salmos y cánticos del Breviario (1966) and – together with Juan Mateos – in Nueva Biblia Española (1975). In the second part of La traducción bíblica. Lingüística y estilística – written with Eduardo Zurro (1977) – Alonso Schöckel presented an overview of the history of Bible translation into Castilian. Valentín García Yebra has probably been one of the most erudite Spanish scholars in the field of translation history. He is also very well known for his contributions on the linguistic aspects of translation – mainly from the point of view of Contrastive Linguistics – and for his translations of Aristotle, Caesar, Cicero, and Seneca. When he became a member of the Royal Spanish Academy he delivered his speech Traducción y enriquecimiento de la lengua del traductor in 1985 (published in expanded form in 2004), where he makes numerous references to translation history. Some of his most important contributions to translation history are included in En torno a la traducción. Teoría. Crítica. Historia (1983) and Traducción: historia y teoría (1994). As can be expected, the so-called Toledo School of Translation has attracted considerable scholarly attention (for an extensive bibliography, see Foz 1999). As is well known, Toledo became instrumental in the transmission of Greek knowledge from Arabian sources into Latin in the twelfth century under the religious patronage of Archbishop Raimundo, and into Romance languages in the thirteenth century under the courtly patronage of King Alphonse X. It was French historian Amable Jourdain who first described the translation activity undertaken in Toledo as a ‘school’ (in his Recherches critiques sur l’âge et l’origine des traductions latines d’Aristote, et sur des commentaires grecs ou arabes employés par les docteurs scholastiques, published post mortem in 1819 and reprinted in 1843). This false conception – that there was a school as such in Toledo – has endured to this day. The journal Quaderns de traducció devoted one issue to this topic in 1999, which included one article by Marietta 25

Luis Pegenaute

Gargatagli, together with facsimilar reprints of pieces of work by Amable Jourdain, José María Millás Villacrosa, and Gonzalo Menéndez Pidal, which had become ‘classics’ and had not been reprinted in recent times. Other important contributions are those by Gil (1974) on the Jewish translators working in Toledo, and Gil (1990) on the translators working under the patronage of Archbishop Raimundo. In recent times, Clara Foz has published very significant studies on this topic, e.g. a general characterization of the Toledo Translation School (Foz 1987, 1991); a study of the poetics underlying translation practice in Toledo (Foz 1988); and an overview of the cultural, political and linguistic features of the main periods in the Toledo Translation School, together with an analysis of the agents involved (Foz 1998). Pym (1994), for his part, analyzes the potential conflict between the foreign scientific translators working in Toledo and the clergy at the Toledo cathedral, and how translations brought with them a questioning spirit that would contest and eventually undermine Church authority. Finally, Samsó’s edited volume (1996) includes articles by Samsó himself, Márquez Villanueva, Gonzálvez Ruiz and Sáenz-Badillos. Alvar (2010) compiles thirty of his previous studies on medieval translation in Castile. These contributions – written between 1987 and 2009 – focus on topics such as the translation of specific genres (technical, scientific, religious, and literary); translation under the patronage of King Alphonse X; translations from French, Provençal and Italian; the role of interpreters; the poetics of medieval translation; the different methodological approaches to translation during the period, etc. He presents a brief overview of medieval translation in Castile in Alvar (2012). For his part, Santoyo (2009) provides an exhaustive and systematic study of translation in the Iberian Peninsula from the very first and virtually unknown instances of translation in the Early Middle Ages until the progressive rise of Humanism in the fifteenth century. Some distinguishing features of his work include the adoption of an Iberian perspective, the use of a large diversity of excerpts from primary sources, and the emphasis on day-to-day practice and anonymous translation in numerous contexts, such as translation into Arabian in Muslim Córdoba in mid-tenth century; the translational activity undertaken in the monastery of Ripoll in the tenth and eleventh centuries; the role of Jewish translators and the importance of translation from Hebrew from the end of the eleventh century; the Toledo School of Translators; the role of philosopher, poet and theologian Ramón Llull as translator in the thirteenth century; intrapeninsular translation in the fourteenth century, and the progressive abandonment of Arabian as a source language in favour of Latin, Greek and Romance languages, together with the rise of Catalan as a target language; the activity of translators such as Juan de Mena, Alonso de Madrigal, the Marquis of Villena, Juan del Enzina, Alfonso de Cartagena, Antonio de Nebrija and Alfonso de Palencia in the fifteenth century. Other important contributions by Santoyo on medieval Iberian Peninsula have been compiled in Santoyo (1999), where he discusses day-to-day translations (9–34), translation theory in the fourteenth century (35–50), translator and theoretician Alonso de Madrigal (51– 70); and also in Santoyo (2008), where he studies translation from the 3rd to the 10th centuries (27–41), non-Toledan translations between 1250 and 1300 (43–66), translation theory (67–83), translator Íñigo López de Mendoza (85–102), translator and theorist of translation Alonso de Madrigal, ‘el Tostado’ (103–17), and translations of religious texts in the fifteenth century (119–35). See also Santoyo (2004, 23–174, 2017) for comprehensive panoramas of translation in the Iberian Peninsula. Roxana Recio’s edited La traducción en España, siglos XIV–XVI (1995) compiles thirteen contributions presented at the conference entitled Medieval and 16th century translation in the Iberian Peninsula, held at the University of Kentucky in 1993. The articles are distributed under the following headings: history and theoretical aspects; translation at the Crown 26

Spanish translation history

of Aragon; the Castilian fifteenth century; progression and synthesis (the sixteenth century). On the other hand, Tomàs Martínez Romero and Roxana Recio’s collection Essays on Medieval Translation in the Iberian Peninsula (2001) brings together several essays devoted to translation theory and practice in the fifteenth century by authors from different countries and backgrounds, such as Carlos Alvar, Lluís Cifuentes, Peter Russell and Curt Wittlin. Both volumes focus on the period studied by Peter Russell in his seminal Traducciones y traductores en la Península Ibérica (1400–1550) (1985). For a brief overview on this period, see Recio (2004–2011). Finally, in his anthology of Hispanic medieval translation theory, Cartagena (2009, xi–xliii) analyzes the degree of development of Spanish translation theory in the late Middle Ages, as compared to Italian Humanism and French Renaissance.

The Renaissance Spanish Renaissance has often been considered the historical period leading to the so-called Siglos de Oro (the Golden Age), which span the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The earliest manifestations of a cultural rebirth – the rise of Humanism – after the supposedly dark period of the Middle Ages can be dated back to the second decade of the fifteenth century, that is, much later than in Italy or France. From the point of view of translation, a most interesting process – in so many different geographical contexts in Europe – was the change in attitude towards the vernaculars, a change that, according to Recio (2012, 1990) began in the Iberian Peninsula in the fourteenth century and continued until the sixteenth century. The rise of Castilian as a vernacular force in Europe was, of course, closely associated to its imposition in the American colonies. For a clear and comprehensive overview of the debate on the vernacular and its implications for translation, see Ruiz Pérez (1987). Probably, the most comprehensive study to date is that of Russell (1985), which provides a general overview of translation in the Iberian Peninsula between 1400 and 1550. Other important contributions on this period are those by Barrass (1978) on the function of translated literature in sixteenth-century Spain; Lasperas (1980) on translation theory and practice; Cantrelle (1991) on the paratexts of translations of French texts; Terracini (1996) on the concept of translation; Santoyo (1999, 71–83) on translation theory; Micó (2002) on the different modalities of poetic translation; and Seco (1990) on literary translations from Italian. Other studies of note, even if not dealing exclusively with translation, include Meregalli (1962) on the relations between Italy and Spain in the Renaissance; Lawrance (1985) on the spread of lay literacy in late Medieval Castile; Darst (1985) on the concept of imitatio; and Lawrance (1990) on Humanism in the Iberian Peninsula. One of the most important foreign influences was, of course, that of Petrarch, who originated an innovating literary movement that would mature thanks to poets Boscán and Garcilaso (see the following). Some of the most outstanding studies on Petrarchism in Spain – mostly in book form – are Sansiventi (1902), Farinelli (1904, 1929), Fucilla (1960), Cruz (1988), Meregalli (1975), Recio (1978), Manero Sorolla (1987) and Cabello Porras (1995). Valero Moreno (2015), for his part, provides a review of the literature on the subject. In the field of translation, both from the point of view of theory and practice, the three most relevant personalities are probably Juan Boscán, Luis de León, and Juan Luis Vives. Boscán’s translation of Baldassare de Castiglione’s Il Cortegiano (1534), and his collaboration with poet Garcilaso de la Vega, together with their poetics of translation and the influence of this translation in the development of Humanism in Spain have been studied – among many others  – by Morreale (1959) and Torre (1987). León’s translations (of religious texts, such as The Song of Songs, The Book of Job, and The Psalms, but also Classical authors, such as 27

Luis Pegenaute

Horace and Virgil), together with his defence of his method of translation in his version of The Song of Songs have been studied, for example, by Calero (1991), García de la Fuente (1994) and Codoñer (1994). Humanist scholar Juan Luis Vives’ views on translation, as expressed – mainly – in the essay ‘Versiones seu interpretationes’, included in De ratione dicendi (1532), but also in De causis corrumptarum artium (1531) have been studied by Coseriu (1977) and García Yebra (1994, 171–86). Other important translators in this period are Pedro Simón Abril, Bartolomé Leonardo de Argensola, Lupercio Leonaro de Argensola, Benito Arias Montano, Juan de Arjona, Cristóbal de Castillejo, Gonzalo Correas, Francisco de Enzinas, Alonso Fernández de Madrid, Juan de Jáuregui, Martín Laso de Oropesa, Diego López de Cortegana, Vicente de Mariner, Jorge de Montemayor, José Pellicer de Ossau, Quevedo, Francisco Sánchez de las Brozas, Cristóbal Suárez de Figueroa, Jerónimo de Urrea, Salomón Usque, Juan de Valdés, Cipriano de Valera, Diego Vázquez de Contreras and Esteban Manuel de Villegas. Unfortunately, reasons of space prevent me from making reference to the publications on these translators, but Lafarga and Pegenaute (2009) provide the most relevant bibliographical references.

The eighteenth century In the eighteenth century the number of translations increased dramatically. Translations were done fundamentally from French (about two-thirds of them). German and English texts were mostly translated through French intermediate sources. In general terms, the poetics and ideology of the period were largely dictated from France. In many instances, the increase in the number of translations did not go hand in hand with an increase in their quality. Gallicisms were frequent, which, for some, was an explicit symptom of the excessive presence of France in all the spheres of social life. The ubiquity of censorship and a pronounced didacticism dictated the choice of works to be translated and how it was done (García Garrosa 2009, 2012). For comprehensive panoramas on this period, see Lafarga (2004), García Garrosa and Lafarga (2009), Pajares (2012), and Ruiz Casanova (2018, 349–440). Pageaux (1964) bears testimony to the French influence during this period and studies the image of France in Spain, while Lafarga (1998a) provides an annotated bibliography of studies on the reception of French culture in Spain. Other studies analyse the influence of England (Effross 1962; Glendinning 1968; Pajares 1994, 1996, 2006, 9–42, 2010) and Italy (Arce 1968). Quantitative and bibliographic data about the translations in this period are offered by Fernández Gómez and Nieto (1991) García-Hurtado (1999), Buiguès (2002) and – in the case of translated drama – by Lafarga (1983–1988) and García Garrosa and Vega García-Luengos (1991). Paratexts of translations – from which a poetics of translation can be inferred – are studied by García de León (1983), Urzainqui (1991), and García Garrosa and Lafarga (2004, 3–91). García Garrosa (2006, 2016) analyzes the debates on translation during this period. On the other hand, the translation of drama has also attracted scholarly attention (Parducci 1941; Belorgey 1988; Lafarga 1988, 1996, 1997, 1998c; Sánchez de León 1993, 1999), with numerous studies on particular playwrights, such as Corneille, Diderot, Marivaux, Molière, Racine and Voltaire. Other contributions focus on the translation of novels (Álvarez Barrientos 1991, 1998). The leading researcher in the intercultural relations between France and Spain is Francisco Lafarga, who, as a specialist in this period, has devoted numerous publications to the history of translation in eighteenth century Spain. He has studied the translation and reception of French authors, such as Beaumarchais, Diderot, Molière, Prèvost and Voltaire; and numerous Spanish translators, such as Ramón de la Cruz, Bretón de los Herreros, Marchena, Sempere y 28

Spanish translation history

Guarinos, etc. Lafarga has also edited or co-edited volumes on the image of France in Spanish literature (1989), the reception and translation of European drama in eighteenth century Spain (1997), translation in eighteenth century Spain (1999, 2002), and an anthology of the theoretical discourse on translation in this century (2004). The most conspicuous personalities in the field of translation in this period are José Miguel Alea, Bernardo María de Calzada, Antonio de Capmany, Cristóbal Cladera, José Clavijo y Fajardo, José Antonio Conde, Ramón de la Cruz, Félix Enciso Castrillón, Juan de Escoiquiz, Perdro Estala, Leandro Fernández de Moratín, Agustín García de Arrieta, Ignacio García Malo, Tomás de Iriarte, José Francisco de Isla, José Marchena, José Mor de Fuentes, Jesús Munárriz, Francisco Mariano Nifo, Pablo de Olavide, Rodrigo de Oviedo, José Pellicer, Antonio Ranz de Romanillos, Antonio Saviñón, Juan Sempere y Guarinos, Esteban de Terreros, Cándido María Trigueros, José de Viera y Clavijo and Gaspar Zavala y Zamora. For comprehensive overviews of them, together with full bibliographic references of secondary resources, see Lafarga and Pegenaute (2009).

The nineteenth century From a cultural point of view, the nineteenth century in Spain can be roughly divided into three periods quite equal in length: Neoclassicism (with the persistence of the old poetics from the eighteenth century), Romanticism, and Realism. Panoramic overviews on translation in Spain the nineteenth century can be found in Zaro’s edited volumes (2007, 2008), with studies on particular translations; Lafarga and Pegenaute’s edited volume (2015a), on the relation between creation and translation; Lafarga and Pegenaute’s edited volume (2016), on a large number of writers who practised translation; Lafarga and others (2016) on translation theory, with studies covering the different periods: García Garrosa (1800–1830), Lafarga (1830–1850), Zaro (1850–1880) and Fillière (1880–1900). Other, briefer, contributions are the ones by Álvarez Barrientos (1997), Crespo Hidalgo (2007), Hériz and San Vicente (2012, 197–217) and Ruiz Casanova (2018, 441–534). Romanticism reached Spain when it had already reached its apex in Germany and England – where it originated –, France and Italy. It is generally agreed that the return of many exiled intellectuals, after the death of king Fernando VII, propitiated the inauguration of Romanticism in Spain. For an overview of the translational activity carried out by these exiles in England, see Durán (2015) and Pegenaute (2015). Lafarga and Pegenaute’s edited volume (2006) is devoted to both foreign authors translated in this period and to the most relevant translators, while Pegenaute (2004b) presents a panoramic account of translation in this period. Other studies are restricted to particular genres, such as drama (Menarini 1982, 2002; Álvarez Barrientos 1991). Many others have paid attention to the authors most frequently translated during this period, that is, to Byron and Scott; Dumas, Hugo, Lamartine, Sand, and Sue; Goethe, Hoffmann, and Schiller; Alfieri, Leopardi and Manzoni. The second half of the century is mainly dominated by Realism and Naturalism, two literary movements which grew out of the French impulse for a more objective description of reality, with a focus on social character. Pegenaute (2004a) provides an overview on translation practice in this period, while Zaro (2016) presents an overview on translation theory. During this period, the most characteristic means of expression was the novel, in many instances published in instalments. Balzac and Stendhal’s realism led to Zola and the Goncourt brothers’ Naturalism, which emphasized the scientific method in the fictional portrayal of reality. In the last decades of the century Naturalism was superseded in narrative by literary spiritualism,

29

Luis Pegenaute

imported from Russia (Dostoievski, Tolstoi) and Portugal (Eça de Queiroz), as a consequence of the fatigue of traditional literary Realism. In poetry, the main influences came from Germany (specially the fables by Lessing; the ballads by Goethe, Bürger and Schiller; and the lieder – songs – by Heine) and, at a later stage, from French symbolism (Baudelaire). Symbolism also left an important imprint on Spanish drama through the translations of Scandinavians Ibsen and Strindberg, and also Belgian Maeterlinck. Numerous studies focus on the translation and reception of these authors (see Lafarga and Pegenaute 2009 for comprehensive studies on them). The main translators in the nineteenth century were Francisco Altés, Manuel Aranda y San Juan, Víctor Balaguer, Jacinto Benavente, José María Blanco-White, Vicente Blasco Ibáñez, Manuel Bretón de los Herreros, Carmen de Burgos, Clarín, José Andrew Covert-Spring, José María Díaz de la Torre, Nemesio Fernández Cuesta, Augusto Ferrán, Juan Nicasio Gallego, José García de Villalta, Antonio Gil y Zárate, Hermenegildo Giner de los Ríos, Gorostiza brothers, Juan Eugenio Hartzenbusch, Jacinto Labaila, Mariano José de Larra, Teodoro Llorente, Guillermo Macpherson, Francisco Martínez de la Rosa, Milà y Fontanals, Eugenio de Ochoa, Emilia Pardo Bazán, Amancio Peratoner, Antonio Ribot, Cayetano Rosell, Faustina Sáez de Melgar, Eugenio Sanz, Dionisio Solís, Eugenio de Tapia, Juan Valera, Ramón de Valladares y Saavedra, Ventura de la Vega and Antonio Zozaya. As recommended in previous sections, see Lafarga and Pegenaute (2009) for a comprehensive view.

The twentieth century Rabadán, Merino, and Chamosa (2012) and Ruiz Casanova (2018, 535–688) offer comprehensive panoramas of translation in twentieth century Spain. This century can be divided into three periods: up to the Civil War (that is, up to 1936), the Francoist dictatorship (1940–1975) and the restoration of democracy (1975–2000). The first period coincides, in rough terms, with what is sometimes labelled as the Silver Age of Spanish literature – due to the excellence of its writers –, comprising three generations of writers, namely, the Generation of 1898, the Generation of 1914 and the Generation of 1927. Two edited volumes focus on this Silver Age: Pegenaute (2001) and Romero López (2016), the latter being devoted exclusively to female translators. Gallego Roca (2004), for his part, presents an overview of the translation of prose, drama and poetry, underlining the role of translation in the modernization of the target literary scene. Vega’s edited volume (1998b) focuses specifically on the 1898 Generation, paying attention to both the translators who might be inscribed in this group and the translations of the most celebrated authors. The most comprehensive pieces on the translators are those by Vega (1998a) and Martín Gaitero (1998). For his part, Díez de Revenga (2007, 9–56) collects the poetic translations undertaken by members of the 1927 Generation such as Jorge Guillén, Gerardo Diego, Luis Cernuda, and Rafael Alberti, with an introductory study. Gallego Roca (1996) presents an exhaustive panorama of the evolution and renovation of Spanish poetry between 1909 and 1930 as a consequence of the influence of translated literature – in journals, anthologies and books – together with a catalogue of translations. Although it does not specifically focus on translation, it is also worth mentioning Doce’s (2005) study on the influence of English Romanticism in Unamuno, Machado, Juan Ramón Jiménez and Cernuda, all of them writers/translators who have received critical attention in too large a number of other studies to be mentioned here. The Francoist period and its aftermath are covered by Vega (2004), who distinguishes four different stages: the first post-war years (until the end of the 1940s), in which the country tried to recover from the devastating consequences of the conflict, and which was characterized by 30

Spanish translation history

the promotion of the ideals of National Catholicism (Franco’s ultraconservative amalgam of authoritarianism, nationalism, Catholicism and anti-communism); the years up to the mid1960s, characterized by a growing economic liberalization, but few political reforms, and in which new publishing houses, such as José Janés, Plaza, Planeta and Bruguera were founded; the latter years of Franco’s rule, which saw progressive economic and political liberalization and the birth of a tourism industry, and which witnessed a relative opening to foreign cultural influences thanks to the efforts of publishing houses such as Seix Barral, Taurus, Cátedra and Akal; the transition to democracy, after Franco’s death in 1975, with the restoration of the royal house of Bourbon and the introduction of a constitutional monarchy, which enabled Spain to become one of the countries with the highest percentages of translations in printed form. In general terms, of course, censorship characterized the Francoist period. Censorship meant the prohibition of liberal ideas imported from abroad. This has been studied in Rabadán’s (2000) and Merino’s (2008) edited volumes. Both Merino and Rabadán have led research projects studying this phenomenon, in many instances making use of a corpus (see Merino and Rabadán 2002). The translation of British drama between 1950 and 1990, in particular, has been studied by Merino (1994). Some of the most conspicuous translators were, for example, Astrana Marín, who produced a translation of the complete works of Shakespeare in 1941 (Calleja 1987), and Cansinos Assnes, who published numerous translations of works by Balzac, Dostoievski, and Goethe together with the Coran and many others (Fuentes Florido 1979; Linares 1978; Oteo Sans 1996). A  general overview of translation in contemporary Spain is provided by Pegenaute (2004c), who pays attention to the professional activity, the training of translators and the research undertaken in this field.

Future directions According to Santoyo, one of the most renowned specialists in Spanish translation history, the research hitherto carried out has mainly dealt with Biblical translations and works written in classical languages, and languages close to the Iberian Peninsula, such as Italian, French, English and German. He also adds that studies on “children’s literature, the use of translation in the audiovisual media, contemporary theatre, the role played by translators and interpreters in colonial and postcolonial processes, and the history of censorship as applied to translations” are scarce (2012, 1983). According to him, many areas remain virtually unknown, such as, for example, translation in the Roman and Visigoth periods, pragmatic translation in the Middle Ages, the work of Islamic and Jewish translators, and that of the Portuguese and Spanish missionaries in the Far East, especially in the Philippines. In another contribution, Santoyo (2006) describes what he considers to be ‘blank spaces in the history of translation’. Although he is not referring specifically to Iberian or Spanish translation, his observations can be aptly applied to that particular geographical context. In his view, those ‘uncultivated fields’ in translation history which should be ploughed in the future include the history of interpreting, the daily practice of translation, pseudotranslations, self-translations and translated texts as survivors of lost originals. Besides, attention should be paid to the role played by translation in History and a number of errors should be corrected. Other topics that have been scarcely treated include the translations undertaken by Spanish translators outside Spain (as in exile); the phenomenon of non-translation (in contexts of censorship or as a consequence of general translation policies); translations not published in book form (many of which have been carried out anonymously and for purely pragmatic reasons in contexts such as diplomatic offices, military expeditions, monasteries, scientific societies, etc.); the use of translation as a teaching tool (in the teaching of not only classical languages, 31

Luis Pegenaute

but also modern foreign ones); the translation tools available to translators along history (lexicographical and documentary resources); the kind of cooperation undertaken between translation teams which are not always clearly identifiable (as was the case in the so-called Toledo school of translation), etc. In general terms, there is a clear need for models and maps which are not defined by traditional notions of country, nation or linguistic community. In this respect, an Iberian approach rather a Spanish one might be more appropriate. In the same vein, it might be interesting to pay attention to the history of translation from the perspective of Ibero-American Atlanticism, in an attempt to merge the methodological postulates of two recent theoretical alternatives to traditional Hispanism, namely, Iberian Studies and Transatlantic Studies. Zaro and Peña’s (2017) and Peña and Zaro’s (2018) edited volumes constitute good examples of this promising line of research, with some forty contributions studying the phenomenon of retranslation in Spain in Spanish America. Pegenaute (2018, 194–98) proposes other new methodological approaches which are worthy of consideration in the field of translation history and which can be useful in the specific case of Iberian/Spanish translation, such as, for example, the concept of translation zone, which should be understood as a hybrid and multilingual space characterized by intense translational activity. The transactions of the translation zone challenge the notions of ‘foreign’ and ‘local’, and in this respect, the notion of a source language/culture and target language/culture, questioning the idealizing monolinguism of traditional translational models and challenging radical distinctions between monolinguism and multilinguism. At the same time, these spaces also challenge the binary distinction between creation and translation, with numerous translators being prompt to practise self-translation (see Meylaerts 2004). Although no attempt has yet been made to consider whether the postulates of microhistory can prove to be fruitful in the analysis of cities as spaces of translation, Pegenaute (2018, 191) suggests that the reduction of the ‘nominative’ scale of study to a microspace can open new venues for research and defends that the growth of the critical scholarship in the interdisciplinary field of spatiality studies – which can be defined as to encompass geocriticism, geopoetics and the spatial humanities, among other critical approaches – can bring about a new orientation in the field of translation history. Other approaches analysed by Pegenaute (2018) are socio-narrative theory and the theory of evolution, both of which were suggested by Hermans (2011) as two possible alternatives to polysystem theory. In the former approach, which was inspired by psychology and social and communication theory, the most basic idea is that narratives do not just represent the world but also help us build it. The second approach is by its very nature intrinsically historical, in that it implies the emergence of different species – translations – as a result of variation and retention. Another recent field of research, which has emerged over the past decade, is that of ‘genetic translation studies’, which analyzes the practices of the working translator and the genesis of the translated text by studying translators’ manuscripts, drafts and other working documents. Finally, Pegenaute (2018, 198) suggests that is desirable to study the role that media forms have played in the history and constitution of translation, and what kinds of practices of translation can be associated with different media cultures.

Recommended reading Lafarga, Francisco, and Luis Pegenaute, eds. 2004. Historia de la traducción en España. Madrid: Ambos mundos. It presents a complete overview of the history of translation into Basque, Castilian, Catalan, and Galician, with an emphasis on Castilian.

32

Spanish translation history Lafarga, Francisco, and Luis Pegenaute, eds. 2009. Diccionario histórico de la traducción en España. Madrid: Gredos. It includes 800 entries, prepared by 400 specialists, on Spanish translators into Basque, Castilian, Catalan, and Galician, and on the foreign authors most frequently translated, together with panoramic overviews of the translation of foreign literatures. Ordóñez, Pilar, and José Antonio Sabio, eds. 2015. Historiografía de la traducción en el espacio ibérico: Textos contemporáneos. Cuenca: Universidad Castilla–La Mancha. It collects fifteen historiographical studies which are very valuable for historians of translation, even if the title is somewhat misleading. The texts focus either on Spain or Portugal, treating them separately. On the other hand, some texts deal with interpreting, and another with Hispanic America. Ruiz Casanova, José Francisco. 2018. Ensayo de una historia de la traducción en España. Madrid: Cátedra. An updated revisión of Aproximación a una historia de la traducción en España (2000), mostly on the bibliographical side. It presents a complete panorama of the history of translation in Spain. Each chapter is prefaced by a study on the linguistic and literary variety of each particular period. Santoyo, Julio-César, ed. 1987. Teoría y crítica de la traducción: antología. Bellaterra: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. This anthology of discourse on translation presents Spanish and Spanish-American essays, with a strong emphasis on the former, since the vast majority of them (some 90) were written by Spanish authors between 1367 and 1984.

Acknowledgements This chapter is part of the research carried out in the project financed by the Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad, Creación y traducción en España entre 1898 y 1936, FFTI201563748-P (MINECO-FEDER),

References Abuín, Anxo, and Anxo Tarrío, eds. 2004. Bases metodolóxicas para una historia comparada das literaturas na península Ibérica. Santiago de Compostela: Universidade de Santiago de Compostela. Aguilar Piñal, Francisco. 1981–1995. Bibliografía de autores españoles del siglo XVIII. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas. Alvar, Carlos. 2009. Repertorio de traductores del siglo XV. Madrid: Ollero y Ramos. ———. 2010. Traducciones y traductores: materiales para una historia de la traducción en Castilla durante la Edad Media. Alcalá de Henares: Centro de Estudios Cervantinos. ———. 2012. “Medieval Translation in Castile.” In Übersetzung–Translation–Traduction: Ein internationals Handbuch zur Übersetzungsforschung/An International Encyclopedia of Translation Studies/ Encyclopédie internationals de la recherché sur la traduction, vol. III, edited by Harald Kittel et al., 1985–90. Berling: Walter de Gruyter. Alvar, Carlos, and José Manuel Lucía Megías. 2001. “Una veintena de traductores del siglo XV: Prolegómenos.” In Essays on Medieval Traslation in the Iberian Peninsula, edited by Tomás Martínez Romero and Roxana Recio, 13–44. Castelló: Universitat Jaume I/Omaha: Creighton University. ———. 2003. “Repertorio de traductores del siglo XV: Tercera veintena.” Quaderns de Filologia. Estudis literaris 8: 1–40. ———. 2004. “Repertorio de traductores del siglo XV: Segunda veintena.” In Literatura y transgresión (En homenaje al profesor Manuel Ferrer Chivite), edited by Fermín Sierra Martínez, 89–113. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Álvarez Barrientos, Joaquín. 1991. “Sobre la originalidad en la traducción de novelas.” In La novela del siglo XVIII, 198–213. Madrid: Júcar. ———. 1997. “Traducciones, adaptaciones y refundiciones.” In Historia de la literatura española: Siglo XIX, vol. I, edited by Guillermo Carnero, 267–75. Madrid: Espasa Calpe.

33

Luis Pegenaute ———. 1998. “Traducción y novela en la España del siglo XVIII: Una aproximación.” In I congreso internacional sobre novela del siglo XVIII, edited by Fernando García Lara, 11–21. Almería: Universidad de Almería. Apak, Fundagül. 2003. “A Preliminary Study on ‘History’ and ‘Historiography’ in Translation Studies.” Journal of Istambul Kültür University 3: 97–125. Arce, Joaquín. 1968. “El conocimiento de la literatura italiana en la España de la segunda mitad del siglo XVIII.” In La literatura española del siglo XVIII y sus fuentes extranjeras, edited by Joaquín Arce, Nigel Glendinning, and Lucien Dupuis, 7–45. Oviedo: Cátedra Feijoo. Arnau i Segarra, Pilar. 2016. “Apuntes sobre la autotraducción catalana contemporánea.” Pasavento. Revista de Estudios Hispánicos 6 (2): 215–328. Bacardí, Montserrat, Joan Fontcuberta, and Francesc Parcerisas. 1998. Cent anys de traducció al català (1891–1990): Antologia. Vic: Eumo. Bacardí, Montserrat, and Pilar Godayol, eds. 2011. Diccionari de la traducció catalana. Vic: Eumo Editorial. Ballard, Michel. 1992. De Ciceron á Benjamin.Tradutions, traducteurs, réflexions. Lille: Presses Universitaires de Lille. Ballestero, Alberto. 2007. Traducción y traductores de entreguerras (1918–1936). Pamplona: Eunate. Barrass, Tine. 1978. “The Function of Translated Literature Within a National Literature: The Example of Sixteenth Century Spain.” In Literature and Translation, edited by James S. Holmes, José Lambert, and Raymond van den Broeck, 181–203. Leuven: Acco. Bassnett, Susan. 1980. Translation Studies. London: Routledge. Bassnett, Susan, and Peter Bush, eds. 2006. The Translator as Writer. London: Continuum. Bautista Riera, Juan, and Luis Riera Climent. 2003. La ciencia extranjera en la España ilustrada: ensayo de un diccionario de traductores. Valladolid: Universidad de Valladolid. Beardsley, Theodore S. 1970. Hispano-Classical Translations Printed Between 1482 and 1699. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press. Belorgey, Jean. 1988. “Le théâtre espagnol d’inspiration française représenté à Madrid de 1801 à 1808.” Crisol 9: 15–34. Berman, Antoine. 1984. L’épreuve de l’étranger: Culture et traduction dans l’Allemagne romantique. Paris: Gallimard. Botella Ordinas, Eva. 2000. “Redención de la virtud: La primera traducción castellana del Arte della guerra de Maquiavelo.” Espacio, Tiempo y Forma 4 (13): 183–219. Buffagni, Claudia, Beatrice Garzelli, and Serenella Zanotti, eds. 2011. The Translator as Author: Perspectives on Literary Translation. Münster: LIT Verlag. Buiguès, Jean-Marc. 2002. “Les traductions dans l’Espagne des Lumières: langues, rythmes et contenus.” Bulletin Hispanique 2002 (1): 101–19. Burke, Peter. 2007. “Cultures of Translation in Early Modern Europe.” In Cultural Translation in Early Modern Europe, edited by Peter Burke and R. Po-chia Hsia, 7–39. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cabello Porras, Gregorio. 1995. Ensayos sobre tradición clásica y petrarquismo en el Siglo de Oro. Almería: Universidad de Almería. Cabo, Fernando. 2004. “El giro espacial en la historiografía literaria.” In Bases metodolóxicas para unha historia comparada das literaturas da península Ibérica, edited by Anxo Abuín González and Anxo Tarrío Varela, 21–43. Santiago de Compostela: Universidade de Santiago de Compostela. ———. 2012. El lugar de la literatura española. Barcelona: Crítica. Cabo, Fernando, Anxo Abuín, and César Domínguez, eds. 2011. A Comparative History of Literatures in the Iberian Peninsula, vol. 1. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Calero, Francisco. 1991. “Teoría y práctica de la traducción en fray Luis de León.” Epos 7: 541–58. Calleja Medel, Gilda. 1987. “Astrana Marín, traductor de Shakespeare.” In Fidus interpres: Actas de las Primeras Jornadas Nacionales de Historia de la traducción, edited by Julio-César Santoyo et al., 333–39. León: Universidad de León. Cámara Oficial del Libro. Catálogo general de la Librería española e hispanoamericana, 1901–1930. 1932–1951. Madrid: Cámaras Oficiales del Libro de Madrid y de Barcelona. Cantrelle, Sylvie. 1991. “Traductions espagnoles de libres français au XVI siècle: Études de quelques prologues de traducteurs.” Estudios de investigación franco-española 4: 11–34. Cartagena, Nelson. 2009. La contribución de España a la teoría de la traducción: introducción al estudio y antología de los siglos XIV y XV. Madrid: Iberoamericana/Frankfurt am Main: Vervuert.

34

Spanish translation history Catelli, Nora, and Marietta Gargatagli. 1998. El tabaco que fumaba Plinio: Escenas de la traducción en España y América; relatos, leyes y reflexiones sobre los otros. Barcelona: Ediciones del Serbal. Chesterman, Andrew. 2009. “The Name and Nature of Translator Studies.” Hermes–Journal of Language and Communication Studies 42: 13–22. Cobos Castro, Esperanza. 1998. Traductores al castellano de obras dramáticas francesas, 1830–1890. Córdoba: Universidad de Córdoba. Codoñer, Carmen. 1994. “Fray Luis: interpretación, traducción poética e imitatio.” Criticón 61: 31–46. Coseriu, Eugenio. 1977. Tradición y novedad en la ciencia del lenguaje. Madrid: Gredos. Crespo Hidalgo, Juan. 2007. “Políticas de traducción en la España del siglo XIX.” In Traductores y traducciones de literatura y ensayo (1835–1919), edited by Juan Jesús Zaro, 45–72. Granada: Comares. Cruz, Anne J. 1988. Imitación y transformación: El petrarquismo en la poesía de Boscán y Garcilaso de la Vega. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Darst, David. 1985. Imitatio (Polémicas sobre la imitación en el Siglo de Oro). Madrid: Orígenes. Dasilva, Xosé Manuel. 2003. Babel entre nos: escolma de textos sobre a traducción en Galicia. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. ———. 2006. Babel Ibérico: Antología de textos críticos sobre la literatura portugesa traducida en España. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. ———. 2008. Babel Ibérico: Antología de textos críticos sobre a literatura española traduzida em Portugal. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. ———. 2009. “Autotraducirse en Galicia: bilingüismo o diglosia?” Quaderns. Revista de traducció 16: 143–56. ———. 2013. Estudios sobre la autotraducción en el espacio ibérico. Bern: Peter Lang. D’Hulst, Lieven. 1991. “Pourquoi et comment écrire l’histoire des théories de la traduction.” In Actes du XIIe congrès mondial de la FIT, 57–62. Belgrad: Prevodilac. ———. 1995. “Pour une historiographie des theories de la traduction: questions de métjode.” TTR: traduction, terminologie, rédaction 8 (1): 13–33. ———. 2010. “History of Translation.” In Handbook of Translation Studies, edited by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer, vol. I, 397–405. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Díez de Revenga, Francisco Javier. 2007. Las traducciones del 27: Estudio y antología. Sevilla: Fundación José Manuel Lara. Doce, Jordi. 2005. Imán y desafío: presencia del Romanticismo inglés en la poesía española contemporánea. Barcelona: Península. Domínguez, César, Anxo Abuín, and Ellen Sapega, eds. 2016. A Comparative History of Literatures in the Iberian Peninsula, vol. 2. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Durán López, Fernando. 2015. Versiones de un exilio: los traductores españoles de la casa Ackermann (Londres, 1823–1830). Madrid: Escolar y Mayo. Effross, Susi H. 1962. English Influence in Eighteenth–Century Spanish Literature, 1700–1808. New York: Columbia University. Epps, Brad, and Luis Fernández Cifuentes, eds. 2005. Spain Beyond Spain: Modernity, Literary History, and National Identity. Lewisburg: Bucknell University Press. Farinelli, Arturo. 1904. Sulla fortuna del Petrarca in Ispagna nel Quattrocento. Turin: Ermanno Loescher. ———. 1929. “Petrarca in Spagna (nell’Età Media).” In Italia e Spagna, vol. I, 1–88. Turin: Fratelli Bocca. Fernández, María Manuela. 2016. “History and Historiography.” In Researching Translation and Interpreting, edited by Claudia V. Angelelli and Brian James Baer, 97–107. London: Routledge. Fernández Gómez, Juan, and Natividad Nieto. 1991. “Tendencias de la traducción de obras francesas en el siglo XVIII.” In Traducción y adaptación cultural: España–Francia, edited by María Luisa Donaire and Francisco Lafarga, 579–91. Oviedo: Universidad de Oviedo. Fillière, Carole. 2016. “Los albores de la historia cultural de la traducción y de la literatura comparada en Menéndez Pelayo y Clarín (1880–1900).” In Pensar la traducción en la España del siglo XIX, edited by Francisco Lafarga, Carole Fillière, María Jesús García Garrosa, and Juan Jesús Zaro, 227–311. Madrid: Escolar y Mayo. Flynn, Peter. 2010. “Author and Translator.” In Handbook of Translation Studies Onnline, edited by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Fontcuberta, Judit. 2007. Molière en català (Les reflexions dels traductors). Lleida: Punctum & Trilcat. Foucault, Michel. 1986 [1967]. “Of Other Spaces.” Diacritics 16 (1): 22–27.

35

Luis Pegenaute Foz, Clara. 1987. “El concepto de escuela de traductores de Toledo (ss. XII–XIII).” In Fidus Interpres: Actas de las Primeras Jornadas Nacionales de historia de la traducción, vol. I, 24–30, edited by Julio-César Santoyo et al. León: Universidad de León. ———. 1988. “La traduction-appropriation: le cas des traducteurs tolédans des 12e et 13e siècles.” TTR: traduction, terminologie, rédaction 1 (2): 58–64. ———. 1991. “Pratique de la traduction en Espagne au Moyen Age: les travaux tolédans.” In The Medieval Translator II, 29–43. London: University of London. ———. 1998. Le Traducteur, l’Église et le Roi. Ottawa: Presses de l’Université d’Ottawa. ———. 1999. “Bibliografía sobre la Escuela de Traductores de Toledo.” Quaderns de traducció 4: 85–91. ———. 2006. “Translation, History, and the Translation Scholar.” In Charting the Future of Translation History, edited by Georges Louis Bastin and Paul Bandia, 131–44. Ottawa: Ottawa University Press. Fucilla, Joseph G. 1960. Estudios sobre el petrarquismo de España. Madrid: CSIC. Fuentes Florido, Francisco. 1979. Rafael Cansinos Assens (novelista, poeta, crítico, ensayista y traductor). Madrid: Fundación Juan March. Galanes, Iolanda. 2012. “La traducción literaria en Galicia a partir del catálogo BITRAGA.” In Traducción de una cultura emergente: la literatura gallega contemporánea en el exterior, edited by Áurea Fernández, Iolanda Galanes, Ana Luna, and Silvia Montero, 88–108. Bern: Peter Lang. Gallego Roca, Miguel. 1996. Poesía importada: Traducción poética y renovación literaria en España (1909–1936). Almería: Universidad de Almería. ———. 2004. “De las Vanguardias a la Guerra Civil.” In Historia de la traducción en España, edited by Francisco Lafarga and Luis Pegenaute, 479–526. Salamanca: Ambos Mundos. Gallén, Enric, Francisco Lafarga, and Luis Pegenaute, eds. 2011. Traducción y autotraducción en las literaturas ibéricas. Bern: Peter Lang. García de la Fuente, Olegario.1994. “Traducciones y comentarios de fray Luis de León al Cantar de los cantares.” Analecta malacitana 14: 71–85. García de León, 1983. “Los prólogos de las traducciones de novelas en el s. XVIII.” In II Simposio sobre el padre Feijoo y su Siglo, vol. II, 483–494. Oviedo: Cátedra Feijoo. García Garrosa, María Jesús. 2006. “El debate sobre las traducciones en España en el siglo XVIII: un espacio de opinión pública.” In Redes y espacios de opinión pública. De la Ilustración al Romanticismo. Cádiz, América y Europa ante la Modernidad, 1750–1850, edited by Marieta Cantos Casenave, 541–53. Cádiz: Universidad de Cádiz. ———. 2009. “Estorbos a la Ilustración: la novela extranjera ante la censura.” In Ilustración, Ilustraciones, edited by Jesús Astigarraga, María Victoria López–Cordón, and José María Urkia, 369–87. San Sebastián: Real Sociedad Bascongada de los Amigos del País: Sociedad Estatal de Conmemoraciones Culturales. ———. 2012. “Censura y traducciones teatrales en España en la primera mitad del siglo XVIII.” Anagnórisis. Revista de investigación teatral 6: 92–115. ———. 2016. “Reflexiones sobre la traducción en España: 1800–1830. Entre tradición y renovación.” In Pensar la traducción en la España del siglo XIX, edited by Francisco Lafarga, Carole Fillière, María Jesús García Garrosa, and Juan Jesús, 13–96. Madrid: Escolar y Mayo. García Garrosa, María Jesús, and Francisco Lafarga. 2004. El discurso sobre la traducción en la España del siglo XVIII. Kassel: Reichenberger. ———. 2009. “La historia de la traducción en España en el siglo XVIII.” In La traducción en la época ilustrada (Panorámicas de la traducción en el siglo XVIII), edited by José Antonio Sabio Pinilla, 27–80. Granada: Comares. García Garrosa, María Jesús, and Germán Vega. 1991. “Las traducciones del teatro francés (1700–1835). Más impresos españoles.” Cuadernos de Estudios del Siglo XVIII 1: 85–104. García Hurtado, Manuel Reyes. 1999. “La traducción en España, 1750–1808: cuantificación y lenguas en contacto.” In La traducción en España (1750–1830): Lengua, literatura, cultura, edited by Francisco Lafarga, 35–43. Lleida: Universitat de Lleida. García Yebra, Valentín. 1983. En torno a la traducción. Teoría. Crítica. Historia. Madrid: Gredos. ———. 1985. Traducción y enriquecimiento de la lengua del traductor. Madrid: Real Academia Española. ———. 1994. Traducción: historia y teoría. Madrid: Gredos. Gargatagli, Marietta. 1999. “La historia de la escuela de traductores de Toledo.” Quaderns. Revista de traducció 4: 9–13.

36

Spanish translation history Gargatagli, Marietta, and Nora Catelli. 1998–1999. “La Biblioteca de traductores de Menéndez Pelayo.” Vasos Comunicantes 12: 65–74. Garulo, Teresa. 1988. Bibliografía provisional de obras árabes traducidas al español, 1800–1987. Madrid: Instituto Hispano-Árabe de Cultura. Gil, José S. 1974. Los colaboradores judíos en la Escuela de traductores de Toledo. Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America. ———. 1990. “The Translators of the Period of D. Raimundo: Their Personalities and Translations (1125–1187).” In Rencontres de cultures dans la philosophie médiévale. Traductions et traducteurs de l’Antiquité tardive au XIVe siècle, edited by Jacqueline Hamesse and Marta Fattori, 109–19. Louvain-la-Neuve: Cassino. Glendinning, Nigel. 1968. “Influencia de la literatura inglesa en el siglo XVIII.” In La literatura española del siglo XVIII y sus fuentes extranjeras, edited by Joaquín Arce, Nigel Glendinning, and Lucien Dupuis, 47–83. Oviedo: Cátedra Feijoo. González Rolán, Tomás, and Antonio López Fonseca. 2014. Traduccción y elementos paratextuales: los prólogos a las versiones castellanas de los textos latinos en el siglo XV. Introducción general, edición y estudio. Madrid: Escolar y Mayo. Grutman, Rainier. 2009. “Self-Translation.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, edited by Mona Baker, 257–60. London: Routledge. Gürçaglar, Şehnaz Tahir. 2013. “Translation History.” In The Routledge Handbook of Translation Studies, edited by Carmen Millán and Francesca Bartrina, 131–43. London: Routledge. Heriz, Ana Lourdes de, and Félix San Vicente. 2012. “La traducción al español en el siglo XIX: agentes y contextos.” In Reflexión lingüística y lengua en la España del siglo XIX: marcos, panoramas y nuevas aportaciones, edited by Alfonso Zamorano, 197–228. Munich: Lincom. Hermans, Theo. 2011. “Introduction: How Is Translation Possible?” In Between Cultures and Texts. Itineraries in Translation History, edited by Antoine Chalvin, Anne Lange, and Daniele Monticelli, 11–18. Bern: Peter Lang. Hidalgo, Dionisio. 1862–1881. Diccionario general de bibliografía Española, 7 vols. Madrid: Imprenta de las Escuelas Pías. Reprinted in New York: Georg Olms Verlag, 1973. Hokenson, Jan Walsh, and Marcella Munson, eds. 2007. The Biblingual Text: History and Theory of Literary Self-Translation. Manchester: St. Jerome. Instituto Nacional del Libro Español. 1957–1965. Catálogo general de la Librería española, 1931–1950. Madrid: Instituto Nacional del Libro Español. Jameson, Fredric. 1992. Postmodernism, or, the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. London: Verso. Lafarga, Francisco. 1983–1988. Las traducciones españolas del teatro francés (1700–1835). Barcelona: Universidad de Barcelona. 2 vols. ———. 1988. “Acerca de las traducciones españolas de dramas franceses.” In Coloquio internacional sobre el teatro español del siglo XVIII, 227–37. Abano Terme: Piovan. ———, ed. 1989. Imágenes de Francia en las letras hispánicas. Barcelona: PPU. ———. 1996. “La traducción y el desarrollo de la literatura dramática.” In Teatro clásico en traducción: texto, representación, recepción, edited by Á.-L. Pujante and K. Gregor, 21–36. Murcia: Universidad de Murcia. ———, ed. 1997. El teatro europeo en la España del siglo XVIII. Lleida: Universitat de Lleida. ———. 1998a. Bibliografía anotada de estudios sobre recepción de la cultura francesa en España (siglos XVI–XX). Barcelona: PPU. ———. 1998b. “Juan Pablo Forner y la traducción.” In Juan Pablo Forner y su época (1756–1794), edited by J. Cañas and M. Á. Lama, 111–22. Mérida: Editora Regional de Extremadura. ———. 1998c. “Traducción y evolución del teatro en la España del siglo XVIII: La comedia.” In Le théâtre en Espagne: perméabilité du genre et traduction, 125–34, edited by Mireille Coulon. Pau: Université de Pau–Éditions Covedi. ———, ed. 1999. La traducción en España (1750–1830): Lengua, literatura, cultura. Lleida: Universitat de Lleida. ———. 2004. “El siglo XVIII, de la Ilustración al Romanticismo.” In Historia de la traducción en España, edited by F. Lafarga and L. Pegenaute, 209–320. Salamanca: Ambos mundos. ———. 2005. “Sobre la historia de la traducción en España: contextos, métodos, realizaciones.” Meta 50 (4): 1133–47. ———. 2008. Traductores y prologuistas de Victor Hugo en España (1834–1930): Antología de un discurso crítico. Barcelona: PPU.

37

Luis Pegenaute ———. 2016. “El pensamiento sobre la traducción en la España romántica.” In Pensar la traducción en la España del siglo XIX, edited by F. Lafarga, C. Fillière, M. J. García Garrosa, and J. J. Zaro, 97–172. Madrid: Escolar y Mayo. Lafarga, Francisco, Carole Fillière, María Jesús García Garrosa, and Juan Jesús Zaro. 2016. Pensar la traducción en la España del siglo XIX. Madrid: Escolar y Mayo. Lafarga, Francisco, Concepción Palacios, and Alfonso Saura, eds. 2002. Neoclásicos y románticos ante la traducción. Murcia: Universidad de Murcia. Lafarga, Francisco, and Luis Pegenaute, eds. 2004. Historia de la traducción en España. Madrid: Ambos mundos. ———, eds. 2006. Traducción y traductores, del Romanticismo al Realismo. Bern: Peter Lang. ———, eds. 2009. Diccionario histórico de la traducción en España. Madrid: Gredos. ———, eds. 2011. Cincuenta estudios sobre traducciones españolas. Bern: Peter Lang. ———, eds. 2015a. Creación y traducción en la España del siglo XIX. Bern: Peter Lang. ———. 2015b. “Historiografía de la traducción.” In Historiografía y teoría de la historia del pensamiento, la literatura y el arte, edited by Pedro Aullón de Haro, 257–92. Madrid: Dykinson. ———, eds. 2015c. Varia lección de traducciones españolas. Madrid: Ediciones del Orto. ———, eds. 2016. Autores traductores en la España del siglo XIX. Kassel: Reichenberger. Lambert, José. 1991. “In Quest of Literary World Maps.” In Interculturality and the Historical Study of Literary Translations, edited by Harald Kittel and Armin Paul Frank, 133–45. Berlin: Irich Schmidt Verlag. ———. 1993. “History, Historiography and the Discipline: A Programme.” In Translation and Knowledge, edited by Yves Gambier and Jorma Tommola, 3–26. Turku: University of Turku. ———. 2006. Functional Approaches to Culture and Translation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Laspéras, Jean Michel. 1980. “La traduction et ses théories en Espagne aux XVe et XVIe siècles.” Revue des langues romanes 84: 81–91. Lawrance, Jeremy N. H. 1985. “The Spread of Lay Literacy in Late Medieval Castile.” Bulletin of Hispanic Studies 62: 79–94. ———. 1990. “Humanism in the Iberian Peninsula.” In The Impact of Humanism in Western Europe, edited by Anthony Goodman and Angus Mackay, 220–58. London: Longman. Lefebvre, Michel. 1974. La production de l’espace. Paris: Anthropos. Lepinette, Brigitte. 1997. La historia de la traducción. Metodología. Apuntes bibliográficos (LynX Documentos de trabajo 14). Linares, Abelardo. 1978. Fortuna y fracaso de Rafael Cansinos–Assens. Sevilla: Gráficas del Sur. Loffredo, Eugenia, and Manuela Perteghella, eds. 2006. Translation and Creativity: Perspectives on Creative Writing and Translation Studies. London: Continuum. López Alcalá, Samuel. 2001. La historia, la traducción y el control del pasado. Madrid: Universidad Pontificia de Comillas. Malé, Jordi. 2006. Carles Riba i la traducció. Lleida: Punctum & Trilcat. Manero Sorolla, Mª Pilar. 1987. Introducción al estudio del petrarquismo en España. Barcelona: PPU. Manterola, Elizabete. 2011. “Autotraducción en la literatura vasca.” In Aproximaciones a la autotraducción, edited by Xosé Manuel Dasilva and Helena Tanqueiro, 111–40. Vigo: Editorial Académica del Hispanismo. Marco García, Antonio. 1999. “Sobre el Ensayo de una biblioteca de traductores españoles, de J. A. Pellicer y Saforcada.” In La traducción en España (1750–1830): Lengua, literatura, cultura, edited by Francisco Lafarga, 71–78. Lleida: Universitat de Lleida. Marrugat, Jordi. 2009. Marià Manent i la traducció. Lleida: Punctum & Trilcat. Martín-Estudillo, Luis, and Nicholas Spadaccini, eds. 2010. New Spain, New Literatures. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press. Martín-Gaitero, Rafael. 1998. “Vientos de fuera: los traductores españoles del 98.” In La traducción en torno al 98, edited by Miguel Ángel Vega Cernuda, 73–87. Madrid: Universidad Compultense. Martínez Romero, Tomás, and Roxana Recio, eds. 2001. Essays on Medieval Translation in the Iberian Peninsula. Castelló: Universitat Jaume I. Menarini, Piero. 1982. “El problema de las traducciones en el teatro romántico español.” In Actas del VII congreso de la Asociación Internacional de Hispanistas, edited by G. Bellini, 751–59. Roma: Bulzoni.

38

Spanish translation history ———. 2002. “Las teorías de la traducción teatral en la prensa romántica.” In La elaboración del canon en la literatura española del siglo XIX, edited by L. F. Díaz Larios et al., 279–88. Barcelona: Universitat de Barcelona. Meregalli, Franco. 1962. “Las relaciones entre Italia y España en el Renacimiento.” Thesaurus 17: 606–24. ———. 1975. “Sulle prime traduzioni spagnole di sonetti del Petrarca.” In Traduzione e tradizione europea del Petrarca, 55–63. Padua: Antenore. Merino, Raquel. 1994. Traducción, tradición y manipulación: teatro inglés en España, 1950–1990. León: Universidad de León. ———, ed. 2008. Traducción y censura en España (1939–1985). Estudios sobre corpus TRACE: cine, narrativa, teatro. León–Bilbao: Universidad de León–Universidad del País Vasco. Merino, Raquel, and Rosa Rabadán. 2002. “Censored Translations in Franco’s Spain: The TRACE Project–Theatre and Fiction (English–Spanish).” TTR: traduction, terminologie, rédaction 15 (2): 125–52. Meylaerts, Reine. 2004. “La traduction dans la culture multilingüe.” Target 16 (2): 289–317. Micó, José María. 2002. “Verso y traducción en el Siglo de Oro.” Quaderns. Revista de traducció 7: 83–93. Montero, Silvia. 2010. “Parámetros e funcionalidade do Catálogo de Tradución Galega.” In Traducción y autotraducción en las literaturas ibéricas, edited by Enric Gallén, Francisco Lafarga, and Luis Pegenaute, 175–192. Bern: Peter Lang. Montesinos, José F. 1955. Introducción a una historia de la novela en España en el siglo XIX, seguida del esbozo de una bibliografía española de traducciones de novelas (1800–1850). Valencia: Castalia. Morreale, Margherita. 1959. Castiglione y Boscán: el ideal cortesano en el Renacimiento español. Madrid: Real Academia Española. Muñiz, María de las Nieves. 2007. “Le traduzioni spagnole della letteratura italiana nella rete dei libri: dal catalogo all’ipertesto (a proposito del ‘Progetto Boscán’).” In La traduzione della letteratura italiana in Spagna (1300–1939), edited by M. de las N. Muñiz, 595–644. Florence: F. Cesati. Muñoz-Basols, Javier, Laura Lonsdale, and Manuel Delgado, eds. 2017. The Routledge Companion to Iberian Studies. London: Routledge. Navarro Domínguez, Fernando. 2012. “La historia de la traducción en España en el siglo XX: metodologías de investigación, periodos históricos, tipología de obras.” In Al humanista, traductor y maestro Miguel Ángel Vega Cernuda, edited by Pilar Martino, Juan A. Albadalejo, and Martha Pulido, 155–70. Madrid: Dyknison. Ordóñez, Pilar. 2016. “Shaping the Canon of Translation History: Translation Anthologies in the Iberian Peninsula.” The Translator 22 (3): 340–53. Ordóñez, Pilar, and José Antonio Sabio, eds. 2015. Historiografía de la traducción en el espacio ibérico. Textos contemporáneos. Cuenca: Universidad de Castilla–La Mancha. Oteo Sans, Ramón. 1996. Cansinos–Assens: entre el Modernismo y la Vanguardia. Alicante: Aguaclara. Pageaux, Daniel-Henri. 1964. “Nature et signification de la gallomanie dans l’Espagne du XVIIe siècle.” In Actes du IVe congrès de l’Association Internationale de Littérature Comparée, edited by François Jost, 1205–20. The Hague: Mouton. Pajares, Eterio. 1994. “La traducción inglés–español en el siglo XVIII: ¿manipulación o norma estética?” In Trasvases culturales. Literatura, cine y traducción, edited by Federico Eguíluz et  al., 385–94. Vitoria: Universidad del País Vasco. ———. 1996. “Traducción inglés–español en el siglo XVIII: la traducción tutelada.” In El mundo hispánico en el Siglo de las Luces, vol. II, 991–1000. Madrid: Editorial Complutense. ———. 2006. La novela inglesa en traducción al español durante los siglos XVIII y XIX: aproximación bibliográfica. Barcelona: PPU. ———. 2010. La traducción de la novela inglesa del siglo XVIII. Vitoria: Portal Education. ———. 2012. “Translation in Spain in the 18th Century and the First Decades of the 19th Century.” In Übersetzung–Translation–Traduction. Ein internationals Handbuch zur Übersetzungsforschung/An International Encyclopedia of Translation Studies/Encyclopédie internationals de la recherché sur la traduction, vol. III, edited by Harald Kittel et al., 1996–2001. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Palau, Antoni. 1948–1977. Manual del librero hispanoamericano: Bibliografía general española e hispanoamericana desde la invención de la imprenta hasta nuestros días. 28 vols. Barcelona: Librería Palau.

39

Luis Pegenaute Parducci, Annos. 1941. “Traduzioni e reduzioni spagnole di drammi italiani.” Giornale Storico della Letteratura Italiana 117: 98–124. Paz, Octavio. 1975. Traducción: literatura y literalidad. Barcelona: Tusquets. Pegenaute, Luis, ed. 2001. La traducción en la Edad de Plata. Barcelona: PPU. ———. 2004a. “La época realista y el Fin de siglo.” In Historia de la traducción en España, edited by Francisco Lafarga and L. Pegenaute, 397–478. Salamanca: Ambos mundos. ———. 2004b. “La época romántica.” In Historia de la traducción en España, edited by Francisco Lafarga and L. Pegenaute, 321–96. Salamanca: Ambos mundos. ———. 2004c. “La época actual.” In Historia de la traducción en España, edited by Francisco Lafarga and L. Pegenaute, 579–620. Salamanca: Ambos mundos. ———. 2010. “Fuentes para el estudio de la historia de la traducción en España.” In “El Cid” y la Guerra de la Independencia: dos hitos en la historia de la traducción y la literatura, edited by Pilar Blanco García, 25–35. Madrid: Universidad Complutense. ———. 2012. “United Notions: Spanish Translation History and Historiography.” In Iberian Studies on Translation and Interpreting, edited by Isabel García-Izquierdo and Esther Monzó, 105–21. Bern: Peter Lang. ———. 2013. “Escritores traductores y traductores escritores: un aspecto olvidado de la historia literaria.” In Al humanista, traductor y maestro Miguel Ángel Vega Cernuda, edited by Pilar Martino, 103–18. Madrid: Dykinson. ———. 2015. “Exiliados liberales decimonónicos en Inglaterra: su labor como traductores literarios.” In Traducimos desde el Sur: Actas del VI Congreso Internacional de la Asociación Ibérica de Estudios de Traducción e Interpretación, edited by José Jorge Amigo, 206–16. Las Palmas: Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. ———. 2017. “Elementos metodológicos para una microhistoria de la traducción en España.” In Superando límites en traducción e interpretación [Actas del VIII Congreso de la Asociación Ibérica de Estudios de Traducción e Interpretación], edited by Carmen Valero and Carmen Pena, 228–37. Alcalá de Henares: Universidad de Alcalá de Henares. ———. 2018. “Translation and Cultural Development: Historical Approaches.” In The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Culture, edited by Ovidi Carbonell and Sue-Ann Harding, 177–206. London: Routledge. Peña, Salvador and Juan Jesús Zaro, eds. 2018. Traducir a los clásicos: entornos y transformaciones. Granada: Comares. Pérez Blázquez, David. 2013. “Examen crítico de la bibliografía sobre la historia de la traducción en España.” MonTI 5: 117–27. Pérez Isasi, Santiago, and Ângela Fernandes, eds. 2013. Looking at Iberia: A Comparative European Perspective. Bern: Peter Lang. Portnoff, Gregory. 1931. La literatura rusa en España. New York: Instituto de las Españas en los Estados Unidos. Pujante, Ángel-Luis, and Laura Campillo. 2007. Shakespeare en España: Textos 1764–1916. Murcia: Universidad de Murcia/Granada: Universidad de Granada. Pujol, Dídac. 2007. Traduir Shakespeare: Les reflexions dels traductors catalans. Lleida: Punctum & Trilcat. Pym, Anthony. 1994. “Twelfth-Century Toledo and Strategies of the Literalist Trojan Horse.” Target 6 (1): 43–66. ———. 1998. Method in Translation History. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing. ———. 2000a. Negotiating the Frontier: Translators and Intercultures in Hispanic History. Manchester: St. Jerome. ———. 2000b. “On Method in Hispanic Translation History.” Paper presented to the V Jornadas Internacionales de Historia de la traducción, Universidad de León, May 29–31. Accessed September 22, 2017. http://usuaris.tinet.cat/apym/on-line/intercultures/methodleon.html. ———. 2009. “Humanizing Translation History.” Hermes–Journal of Language and Communication Studies 42: 23–48. ———. 2011. “The Translator as Non-Author, and I Am Sorry About That.” In The Translator as Author: Perspectives on Literary Translation, edited by Claudia Buffagni, Beatrice Garzelli, and Serenella Zanotti, 31–43. Münster: LIT Verlag. Rabadán, Rosa, ed. 2000. Traducción y censura inglés–español: 1939–1985. Estudio preliminar. León: Universidad de León.

40

Spanish translation history Rabadán, Rosa, Raquel Merino, and José Luis Chamosa. 2012. “Twentieth–Century Translation Cultures in Castilian.” In Übersetzung–Translation–Traduction: Ein internationals Handbuch zur Übersetzungsforschung/An International Encyclopedia of Translation Studies/Encyclopédie internationals de la recherché sur la traduction, vol. III, edited by H. Kittel et  al., 2016–22. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Recio, Roxana. 1978. Petrarca en la Península Ibérica. Madrid: Universidad de Alcalá de Henares. ———, ed. 1995. La traducción en España, siglos XIV–XVI. León: Universidad de León. ———. 2012. “Translation and Protohumanism in the Iberian Peninsula.” In Übersetzung–Translation– Traduction: Ein internationals Handbuch zur Übersetzungsforschung/An International Encyclopedia of Translation Studies/Encyclopédie internationals de la recherché sur la traduction, vol. III, edited by Harald Kittel et al., 1990–1996. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Resina, Joan Ramon, ed. 2013. Iberian Modalities: A Relational Approach to the Study of Culture in the Iberian Peninsula. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. Rodríguez Sánchez de León, María José. 1993. “Las traducciones del teatro francés durante la Ominosa Década: el sentido de la traducción y su consideración crítica.” Livius 4: 191–203. ———. 1999. “Las traducciones del teatro europeo y el restablecimiento del teatro nacional.” In La crítica dramática en España (1789–1833), edited by María José Rodríguez Sánchez de León, 127–67. Madrid: CSIC. Romero López, Dolores, ed. 2016. Retratos de traductoras en la Edad de Plata. Madrid: Escolar y Mayo. Rubio Tovar, Joaquín. 1997. “Algunas características de las traducciones medievales.” Revista de literatura medieval 9: 197–243. Ruiz Casanova, José Francisco. 2000. Aproximación a una historia de la traducción en España. Madrid: Cátedra. ———. 2006. “La melancolía del orangután. El comienzo de los estudios A en B: Menéndez Pelayo y su Horacio en España (1877).” In Traducción y traductores, del Romanticismo al Realismo, edited by Francisco Lafarga and Luis Pegenaute, 407–417. Bern: Peter Lang. ———. 2009. “Los comienzos de la historia de la traducción en España: Juan Antonio Pellicer y Saforcada, entre el humanismo áureo y el humanismo moderno.” 1611. Revista de historia de la traducción: 3. www.traduccionliteraria.org/1611/. ———. 2018. Ensayo de una historia de la traducción en España. Madrid: Cátedra. Ruiz Pérez, Pedro. 1987. “Sobre el debate de la lengua vulgar en el Renacimiento.” Criticón 38: 15–44. Russell, Peter. 1985. Traducciones y traductores en la Península Ibérica (1400–1550). Bellaterra: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Sabio, José Antonio. 2006. “La metodología en historia de la traducción: estado de la cuestión.” Sendebar 17: 21–47. ———. 2011. “¿Es la antología un género? A propósito de las antologías sobre traducción.” Hikma 10: 159–74. ———. 2013. “Las antologías sobre la traducción en la Península Ibérica: revisión crítica.” In Translation in Anthologies and Collections (19th and 20th Centures), edited by Teresa Seruya et al., 89–105. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Sabio, José Antonio, and Pilar Ordóñez. 2012. Las antologías sobre la traducción en el ámbito peninsular. Bern: Peter Lang. Samsó, Julio et al. 1996. La Escuela de traductores de Toledo. Toledo: Diputación Provincial de Toledo. Sánchez Montero, María del Carmen. 1998. Lineamenti di storia della traduzione in Spagna. Trieste: SSLMIT-Università degli Studi di Trieste. Sansiventi, Bernardo. 1902. I primi influssi di Dante, del Petrarca e del Boccaccio sulla letteratura spagnuola. Milan: Hoepli. Santoyo, Julio-César, ed. 1987. Teoría y crítica de la traducción: antología. Bellaterra: Universitat Atònoma de Barcelona. ———. 1999. Historia de la traducción: quince apuntes. León: Universidad de León. ———. 2003. “De Nebrija a Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz: apuntes someros para una historia de las traducciones de autor (autotraducciones) en España y Portugal, 1488–1700.” In Seis estudios sobre la traducción en los siglos XVI y XVII (España, Francia, Italia y Portugal), edited by José Antonio Sabio Pinilla and María Dolores Valencia, 1–49. Granada: Comares. ———. 2004. “Sobre la historia de la traducción en España: algunos errores recientes.” Hermēneus 6: 169–82. ———. 2005. “Autotraducciones: una perspectiva histórica.” Meta 50 (3): 858–67.

41

Luis Pegenaute ———. 2006. “Blank Spaces in the History of Translation.” In Charting the Future of Translation History, edited by Georges L. Bastin and Paul Bandia, 11–43. Ottawa: Ottawa University Press. ———. 2008. Historia de la traducción: viejos y nuevos apuntes. León: Universidad de León. ———. 2009. La traducción medieval en la Península Ibérica, siglos III–XV. León: Universidad de León. ———. 2010. “Autotraducciones intrapeninsulares: motivos históricos, razones actuales.” In Traducción y autotraducción en las literaturas ibéricas, edited by Enric Gallén, Francisco Lafarga, and Luis Pegenaute, 365–80. Bern: Peter Lang. ———, ed. 2011. Sobre la traducción: textos clásicos y medievales. León: Universidad de León. ———. 2012. “Iberian Translation History: What We Know and Do Not Know.” In Übersetzung– Translation–Traduction: Ein internationals Handbuch zur Übersetzungsforschung/An International Encyclopedia of Translation Studies/Encyclopédie internationals de la recherché sur la traduction, edited by Harald Kittel et al., vol. III, 1982–84. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. ———. 2013. “Esbozo de una historia de la autotraducción.” In L’autotraduction aux frontières de la langue et de la culture, edited by Christian Lagarde and Helena Tanqueiro, 23–36. Limoges: Lambert Lucas. ———. 2014. “Hacia un corpus total de traducciones medievales en la Península Ibérica.” eHumanista 28: 536–58. ———. 2017. “Revisiting the History of Medieval Translation in the Iberian Peninsula.” In The Routledge Companion to Iberian Studies, edited by Javier Muñoz-Basols, Laura Lonsdale, and Manuel Delgado, 93–104. London: Routledge. Schökel, Luis Alonso and Eduardo Zurro. 1977. La traducción bíblica: lingüística y estilística. Madrid: Ediciones Cristiandad. Seco, Esperanza. 1990. “Historia de las traducciones literarias del italiano al español en el Siglo de Oro español.” In Actas del III Congreso Internacional de Historia de la lengua española, vol. I, edited by Alegría Alonso González et al., 939–54. Madrid: Arco Libros. Soja, Edward W. 1989. Postmodern Geographies: The Reassertion of Space in Critical Social Theory. London: Verso. Steiner, George. 1975. After Babel: Aspects of Language and Translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Terracini, Lore. 1996. “Unas calas en el concepto de traducción en el Siglo de Oro.” In Actas del III Congreso Internacional de historia de la lengua española, vol. I, edited by A. Alonso González et al., 939–54. Madrid: Arco Libros. Toro Santos, Raúl de, and Pablo Cancelo López. 2008. “Teoría y práctica de la traducción en la prensa periódica (1900–1965).” Vertere. Monográficos de la revista Hermēneus 10. Torre, Esteban. 1987. “Garcilaso y Boscán en la historia de la traductología española.” In Fidus interpres, vol. I, edited by Julio-César Santoyo et al., 148–55. León: Universidad de León. Toury, Gideon. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Urzainqui, Inmaculada. 1991. “Hacia una tipología de la traducción en el siglo XVIII: los horizontes del traductor.” In Traducción y adaptación cultural España-Francia, edited by María Luisa Donaire and Francisco Lafarga, 623–638. Oviedo: Universidad de Oviedo. Valdés, Mario J. 2002. “Rethinking the History of Literary History.” In Rethinking Literary History: A Dialogue on Theory, edited by Linda Hutcheon and Mario J. Valdés, 63–115. New York: Oxford University Press. ———. 2004. “A modo de introducción: cómo se hace una historia literaria comparada. Algunas observaciones teóricas.” In Bases metodolóxicas para unha historia comparada das literaturas da península Ibérica, edited by Anxo Abuín and Anxo Tarrío, 11–20. Santiago de Compostela: Universidade de Santiago de Compostela. Valero Moreno, Juan Miguel. 2015. “Petrarca y el Humanismo en la Península Ibérica.” Petrarca y el humanismo en la Península Ibérica (Quaderns d’Italià) 20: 11–35. Valéry, Paul. 1957 [1944]. “Traduction en vers des Bucoliques de Virgile, preécedée de ‘Variations sus les Bucoliques’.” In Œuvres, vol. I, 207–81. Paris: Gallimard. Van Hoof, Henri. 1998. “Esquisse pour une histoire de la traduction en Espagne.” Hieronymus Complutensis 6–7: 9–23. Vega, Miguel Ángel. 1998a. “Consideraciones socio – culturales acerca del 98 traducido y el 98 traductor.” In La traducción en torno al 98. VII Encuentros Complutenses en torno a la traducción, edited by Miguel Ángel Vega, 1–14. Madrid: Universidad Complutense de Madrid.

42

Spanish translation history ———, ed. 1998b. La traducción en torno al 98: VII Encuentros Complutenses en torno a la traducción. Madrid: Universidad Complutense de Madrid. ———. 2004. “De la Guerra Civil al pasado inmediato.” In Historia de la traducción en España, edited by Francisco Lafarga and Luis Pegenaute, 527–78. Salamanca: Ambos Mundos. ———. 2006. “Propuestas para una metodología de la historiografía de la traducción.” In Corcillum: estudios de traducción, lingüística y filología dedicados a Valentín García Yebra, edited by C. Gonzalo García and P. Hernúñez, 589–601. Madrid: Arco. Venuti, Lawrence. 1995. The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation. London: Routledge. Verdegal, Joan. 2001. “La relación de dependencia de la labor traductora según una Biblioteca de Traductores.” In El discurso artístico: Literatura y poder, edited by José L. Caramés, Carmen Escobedo, and Carolina Taboada, 709–24. Oviedo: Universidad de Oviedo. ———. 2004. “Propuesta de estudio de la crítica de traducciones a partir de una muestra representativa (Juan Antonio Pellicer y Saforcada, 1778).” Hieronymus Complutensis 11: 43–62. Warf, Barney, and Santa Arias, eds. 2009. “Introduction: The Reinsertion of Space in the Humanities and Social Sciences.” In The Spatial Turn: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Barney Warf and Santa Arias, 1–10. London: Routledge. Woodsworth, Judith. 2001. “History of Translation.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, edited by Mona Baker, 100–5. London: Routledge. Zarandona, Juan Miguel. 2016. “Marcelino Menéndez Pelayo, erudito, poeta y traductor.” In Autores traductores en la España del siglo XIX, edited by Francisco Lafarga and Luis Pegenaute, 510–30. Kassel: Reichenberger. Zaro, Juan Jesús. 2007. Traductores y traducciones de literatura y ensayo (1835–1919). Granada: Comares. ———, ed. 2008. Diez estudios sobre la traducción en la España del siglo XIX. Granada: Atrio. ———. 2016. “Ideas y actitudes ante la traducción: la época realista naturalista (1850–1880).” In Pensar la traducción en la España del siglo XIX, edited by Francisco Lafarga, Carole Fillière, María Jesús García Garrosa, and Juan Jesús Zaro, 173–226. Madrid: Escolar y Mayo. Zaro, Juan Jesús, and Salvador Peña, eds. 2017. De Homero a Pavese: Hacia un canon iberoamericano de clásicos universales. Kassel: Reichenberger.

43

2 LITERARY TRANSLATION Juan Jesús Zaro

Introduction When we talk about ‘literary translation’ we are referring to the translation of originals in which translators are expected to preserve or somehow recreate the aesthetic intentions or effects that may be perceived in the source text (Delabastita 2011, 69). Therefore, “literary translation” would include the traditional “literary” genres (fiction, poetry, and drama; the inclusion of historical, philosophical or reflective writings being subject to debate) but it may also cover other specialized genres such as children’s literature or travel books and new genres such as graphic novels. According to the Spanish Ministry for Education, Culture and Sport (2016, 21), in 2014 literary translation in Spain represented 23.2% of the total number of books published under the term ‘literary creation’, which includes novels, poetry and plays, in a country where 16.2% of the total number of books published in 2015 were translations. The percentage of translations in the case of translated children’s literature was 37.5% of the total number of books published in this field. The most translated source language is English, at 56% in the case of “literary creation” translated books and 50.2% in the case of children’s translated books. That being said, translations rendered in Spanish reveal a great deal of cultural diversity. Strongly centralized in Madrid and Barcelona, the Spanish publishing industry is one of the most active within the field of translation in Europe, with percentages similar to those of countries such as Germany, France or Italy. Another interesting, although somewhat old fact (Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte 2016, 22), is that in 2012, twenty of the twentyfive best-selling authors in Spain were translated authors (in the case of translated children’s books, the percentage is even higher: twelve of the fifteen most read authors were translated). But Spain is not the only Spanish-speaking country that translates literary works. There is a worldwide diversity of types of Spanish, and similar percentages can be attributed to translations published in specific Spanish-speaking Latin American countries like Argentina, Colombia, Chile or Mexico. According to Even-Zohar (1990), this high percentage of translations, far below the meagre 3% of the United States, means that translated literature still performs a primary function in the Spanish and Spanish-speaking Latin American literary polysystems and that these are exposed to being influenced by other more powerful systems. 44

Literary translation

It is also noteworthy that the impressive corpus of Latin American translation theories, dedicated almost entirely to literary translation, with such prominent figures as Jorge Luis Borges, Guillermo Cabrera Infante, Octavio Paz, Ricardo Piglia, Alfonso Reyes and the Brazilians Haroldo and Augusto de Campos, and Silviano Santiago, among others, has tended to combat conventional opinions on translation in favour of a more complex theory where concepts such as “transculturation”, “reinvention” or “transcreation” establish a paradigm different from eurocentric views.

Historical perspective According to Ruiz Casanova (2000, 48) the first literary translation into Spanish was Calila e Dimna, a collection of tales (Kalîlah wa-Dimna) whose translation from Arabic in 1251 was commissioned by the Infante Alfonso, who later would become King Alfonso X of Castille (1221–1284), a patron of translation on a large scale. During the fourteenth century, the Spanish vernacular consolidates both as the language of common use and the target language of literary translations mainly from Latin, Greek, Galician and Catalan, but also from French, Italian and Provençal, like the Crónica troyana, a translation of the French Roman de Troie transcribed by Nicolás González in 1350. The translation of foreign works gained much greater relevance in the fifteenth century: some of the most outstanding translators of this period are Enrique de Aragón, Marquis of Villena, who translated Virgil’s Aeneid into Spanish prose in 1427; Pedro de Toledo, translator of the three volumes of Maimonides’ Môrè nebûchîm (Mostrador e enseñador de los turbados) from 1419 to 1432; Pero López de Ayala, translator of Boccaccio’s De casibus virorum illustrium (Caída de príncipes) in 1402; Alfonso de Palencia, translator of Plutarch’s Lives in 1491 and Juan de Cuenca, translator of John Gower’s Confessio amantis from a version in Portuguese (La confesión del amante, 1454). The invention of the printing press, which arrived in Spain circa 1470, signalled a new period in the history of literary translation in the Iberian kingdoms. One of the most famous translators of the sixteenth century is Juan Boscán, who translated Baldassar Castiglione’s Il Cortegiano into Spanish (El cortesano, 1534), a best-selling book that was printed 16 times between 1534 and 1599. Boscán is also well-known in the history of Spanish literature as he was the first to adopt and incorporate Italian verse forms, such as the sonnet and the hendecasyllable, a line of 11 syllables, into his poetry. The sixteenth century is prolific in the printing of literary translations, mostly from Italian: authors such as Ariosto, Boccaccio, Dante, Petrarch, Sannazaro and Tasso, among others, were translated before the end of the century. Translations from languages other than Latin or Italian were scarce: two exceptions are the poet Hernando de Acuña’s 1553 translation of the French writer Olivier de la Marche’s El caballero determinado (Le Chevalier Délibéré), and the diverse translations of the Portuguese poet Luis de Camõens’ Os Lusíadas by Benito Caldera, Luis Gómez de Tapia and Henrique Garcés. In the seventeenth century, some famous poets of the Spanish Golden Century were also translators: thus, Juan de Jáuregui translated Torquato Tasso’s Aminta in 1607; Juan de Tassis, Count of Villamediana, translated Gianbattista Marino’s Il Rapimento d’ Europa (Fábula de Europa, 1629), among other works, and Francisco de Quevedo translated classics from Hebrew and Greek, but also from Italian (El Rómulo by Virgilio Malvezzi, 1629) and French (Introducción a la vida devota by François de Sales, 1634). It is important to point out that in this century, translations of Spanish literary works into other European languages, especially French and English, were numerous, which explains the influence of the Spanish picaresque novel and Don Quixote in English literature (seen in authors like Defoe, Fielding, Smollett or 45

Juan Jesús Zaro

Sterne) and French (in authors like Sorel or Lesage). Of the first French translations of Don Quixote, the most widely read was Cesar Oudin’s in 1614, whereas the first English translation was Thomas Shelton’s in 1612. Other Spanish authors like Jorge de Montemayor, Francisco de Quevedo and Mateo Alemán were also translated into English and French. The eighteenth century shows a remarkable development in translation theories, represented in the works of Antonio de Capmany, author of a manual of translation from French into Spanish, Antonio Ranz Romanillos and Joseph de Covarrubias, among other theoreticians. For political reasons, the most important factor being the accession of the French Bourbon dynasty to the Spanish throne in 1700, the influence of French literature in Spain increased considerably, giving way to open criticism and complaints about the intrusion of French forms into the Spanish language. In any case, the influence of French neoclassicism is remarkable in the exercise of literary translation in Spain. Thus, in his version of Shakespeare’s Hamlet (Hamleto, 1772), Ramón de la Cruz translates the English author indirectly, as he translated the French version of Shakespeare’s play modified by Jean-François Ducis according to neoclassical precepts. However, Leandro Fernández de Moratín’s translated Hamlet directly from English in 1798 without great alterations of the source text, but showing his utter disagreement with Shakespeare’s text in the notes to the translation. The use of these precepts in the translation of theatrical works would continue for a long time in Spain, well into the nineteenth century. As for novels, they were translated under the constraints of censorship and applying the old Horatian platitude to both “instruct and delight” (docere/delectare), that is, translations must be done not just for the reader’s pleasure but also with a moral or educational purpose. Most novels are translated from French originals or translations; examples are the Spanish versions of Samuel Richardson’s novels: Pamela or virtue rewarded translated by Ignacio García Malo (Pamela Andrews o la virtud premiada, 1794–1795), and Clarissa Harlowe, translated by José Marcos Gutiérrez (Clara Harlowe, 1794–1796), from previous French translations. In the nineteenth century, Romanticism, which reached Spain much later than other European countries, was to assume other methods of translation, which were progressively more ‘faithful’ or close to the original. The same would happen with movements such as Realism and Naturalism, during the second half of the century. There are two features, however, that characterize literary translation in Spain practically throughout much of the nineteenth century: the first is, again, the almost absolute predominance of French as both the intermediate and the source language for literary translation: it is, therefore, the language through which most authors of all European literatures are translated, after their acceptance in France, with very few exceptions. Likewise, in the particular case of the translation of theatre and drama, the translation of French works also far exceeded that of other languages. The second feature is the markedly subsidiary and scarcely professional character of literary translators, which often results in a proliferation of translations rendered within a very short timeframe and fraught with errors, especially in the case of, again, drama translation. However, the fact is that literary translation as an active publishing activity open to criticism began in Spain in the nineteenth century; a time period in which the publishing of translations reached reasonably high levels of production for some decades, a fact that was inextricably linked to the increase of the reading public for translated works. Some of the major figures of Spanish literature of the nineteenth century who contributed to building a more focused theory of literary translation were Mariano José de Larra, Juan Eugenio Hartzenbusch and Juan Valera, inter alia. Among the great literary translators of the nineteenth century we find names like José Joaquín de Mora, Eugenio de Ochoa, Nemesio Fernández Cuesta, Víctor Balaguer, Marcelino Menéndez y Pelayo, and Jaime Clark and 46

Literary translation

Guillermo Macpherson, translators of Shakespeare, in Spain, and Andrés Bello, José Arnaldo Márquez, Bartolomé Mitre and Juan Antonio Pérez Bonalde in Latin America. From the beginning of the twentieth century, and since the international regulation of copyright laws, literary translation in Spain and Spanish-speaking Latin America began to become professionalized. Not only did first and second-rank authors become translators, as in the previous century, but also professional translators were for the first time in a position to earn a living from their work. The most important Spanish publishers, like Espasa-Calpe or Aguilar, increasingly began to hire professional literary translators to carry out the translation of foreign works: one very well-known example is Luis Astrana Marín, the first, and so far the only, translator of Shakespeare´s complete works into Spanish (1929). Other significant names are Rafael Cansinos-Assens, José Gaos (who was exiled in Mexico after the Spanish civil war), Julio Gómez de la Serna, Pedro González Blanco, Armando Lázaro Ros, Juan Ramón Masoliver, Manuel Ortega y Gasset and Luis Ruiz Contreras. Although there is an almost absolute predominance of male translators, some female literary translators like Carmen de Burgos, Isabel Oyarzábal, María de la O. Lejárraga or Carlota Remfry de Kidd did acquire some relevance during this period. The first half of the twentieth century saw the Spanish publishing industry undergo moments of renovated strength. Spain started exporting books and, of course, translations, to Latin America; at the same time, Latin American publishing houses were founded, some of them long-lasting. Spanish philosopher José Ortega y Gasset’s ideas on translation in favour of literalism and the maintaining of the strangeness of foreign works, expressed in his essay Miseria y esplendor de la traducción (1937), does not appear to have exerted much influence on the translation policies of the time, apart from bolstering the tendency to translate verse into prose. However, the Spanish Civil War was a significant setback to the Spanish publishing industry: book publishing was drastically reduced and afterwards, during Franco’s dictatorship (1939–1975), the publication of translations was limited and constrained by censorship, as was the rest of the Spanish publishing industry. This was a period in which works translated into Spanish in countries like Argentina, Chile and Mexico far exceeded Spain in the number of titles translated and print runs, a result also of an improvement in Latin American economies. This partly explains why some twentieth century literary masterpieces were translated for the first time in Spanish-speaking Latin American countries in the 1940s and 1950s. Thus, the first Spanish translations of Virginia Woolf’s The Waves and James Joyce’s Ulysses were carried out by the Chilean Lenka Franulic in 1941 and the Argentinian José Salas Subirat in 1945, while the first Spanish version of Vladimir Nabokov’s Lolita and Albert Camus’ Les Possédés were translated by the Argentinians Enrique Tejedor (a pseudonym of Enrique Pezzoni) and Victoria Ocampo and published in 1959 and 1960, respectively. Exiled translators from Spain (like Ricardo Baeza in Argentina or Ernestina de Champourcín in Mexico) also continued translating in their adoptive countries. This also meant that, for almost 20 years, the selection of foreign works to be translated was decided in Latin America, in countries whose literary polysystems were younger, more cosmopolitan and much more open to foreign influences than the Spanish. For a few decades, Buenos Aires became the publishing and literary translation centre of the Spanish-speaking world, with such important publishers as Losada, Emecé or Sudamericana, while Mexico City housed one of the most influential publishing groups in the Spanish-speaking world, namely the Fondo de Cultura Económica (FCE), founded by Daniel Cosío Villegas in 1934 and whose extensive catalog specialized in essays (Díaz Arciniega 1994, 284). Among the translators worthy of mention who worked for the FCE were names such as Antonio Alatorre, Eugenio Ímaz and Tomás Segovia. 47

Juan Jesús Zaro

Nevertheless, the protective measures of Franco’s government to help Spain’s publishers, together with the decline of the Latin American economies after 1950, especially Argentina, contributed to the recovery of Spain’s publishing industry, which by the 1970s had regained its leadership. At present, Spanish publishing houses manage most Latin American writers’ copyrights (including their translation rights from Spanish into other languages) and export works translated in Spain to Latin American countries, an asymmetrical fact which is sometimes described in the Americas as a “recolonization” (Adamo 2012, 17) on the part of Spain over her old colonies in an attempt to gain supremacy in the Spanish-speaking world. Among the great literary translators of the time, in Spain and Spanish-speaking America, are the likes of Francisco Ayala, Ricardo Baeza, Esther Benítez, Consuelo Bergés, Aurora Bernárdez, José Bianco, Ernestina de Champourcín, Ángel Crespo, Aurelio Espinosa Pólit, Lisandro Z. D. Galtier, Enrique González Martínez, Clara Janés, Marià Manent, Laura Mestre Hevia, Octavio Paz, Enrique Pezzoni, Alfonso Reyes, José María Valverde, Manuel Vallvé and Juan Rodolfo Wilcock. Since the passing of the 1996 Law of Intellectual Property, the status of literary translation in Spain has changed considerably: translators are entitled to obtain royalties from the sale of their work and literary translations are recognized as a creative work in their own way, legally a separate entity from the original text. Meanwhile, in Argentina, the ‘Ley de Traducción Autoral’, still a draft piece of legislation, shares similar goals. On the other hand, huge publishing firms (e. g. Planeta or Santillana) compete with a number of excellent smaller presses specialized in commissioning and publishing literary translations, mostly novels. There are also competitions and prizes awarded to translated literary works, like the ‘Premio nacional de Traducción’ or the ‘Esther Benítez’ translation prize in Spain, the ‘Premio Konex a las letras’ in Argentina and the ‘Premio de traducción literaria Tomás Segovia’ in Mexico. In Europe, the Literary Translation project within the ‘Creative Europe’ programme (2014–2020) offers grants to publishers and publishing houses for the co-financing of translation projects of literary translation.

Research issues On the history of literary translation The history of literary translation in Spain has always been a very active research field. One of the earliest reference books is the Ensayo de una bibliotheca de traductores españoles by Juan Antonio Pellicer y Saforcada (1778), perhaps the first historian of translation in Spain. In the nineteenth century, the great Spanish scholar and literary critic Marcelino Menéndez y Pelayo published more than 300 articles on different Spanish translators, articles which were compiled in 1952 into a volume titled Biblioteca de traductores, a seminal work in the history of translation, edited by Enrique Sánchez Reyes. In 1972, José Fernández Montesinos published an invaluable volume entitled Introducción a una historia de la novela en el siglo XIX. Seguida del esbozo de una bibliografía española de traducciones de novelas, which compiles a list of novels translated in Spain between 1800 and 1850 and is still widely cited today. Virtual libraries of historical literary translations can be found on the websites Biblioteca de traducciones españolas (www.cervantesvirtual.com/portales/biblioteca_traducciones_espanolas/), Traducciones y traductores de literatura y ensayo (www.ttle.uma.es) and Biblioteca de traductores (www.traduccionliteraria.org/biblib/index.htm). Two recent and useful reference works on the history of literary translation in Spain have been authored by Lafarga and Pegenaute (2008 and 2009). Lafarga and Pegenaute also edited 48

Literary translation

a Diccionario de la traducción en Hispanoamérica (2013) which remains the only reference work focusing on the history of translation in Spanish-speaking Latin America. Other relevant publications on the history of literary translation in Spain are Lafarga (1999); Ruiz Casanova (2000); Zaro (2007a, 2008); Pajares (2009) and Sabio Pinilla (2009). Likewise, the electronic journal 1611. Revista de historia de la traducción, edited by the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona deals mostly with the history and analysis of literary translations. Other reference works focusing on specific regions of Spain are the Diccionari de la traducció catalana (2011) edited by Bacardí and Godayol and La traducción como actividad editorial en la Andalucía del siglo XIX edited by Zaro (2011). In Latin America, authors like Aparicio (1991); Willson (2004), Santoveña et al. (2010); Pagni, Payás, and Willson (2011); Adamo (2012) and Lafarga and Pegenaute (2012a, 2012b) and Pagni (2014) are also worthy of mention. Finally, another extremely active line of historical research is the publishing history of specific literary translations of classics into Spanish. Two examples are the books edited by Lafarga and Pegenaute (2011) and Martino Alba and Jarilla (2012).

Other lines of research 1 The retranslation of canonical literary works. Retranslation as a distinct kind of literary translation and its special features that make it different from first translations has been an active field of research since Berman and Bensimon proposed their “Reetranslation Hypothesis” in 1990, which claims that the first translation of a literary text is more target-language oriented, while retranslations are closer to the source text and language. In other words, first translations would tend to favour a naturalizing approach in order to facilitate their reception in the target literature. The retranslation of classics has experienced a boom in recent years, both in Spain and Latin America, triggered perhaps by the fact that every year there are more and more works in the public domain, lowering publication costs considerably. One of the literary works which has been translated more times into Spanish is Shakespeare’s Sonnets, with more than seventy different versions. Retranslation research began in Spain in 2007 with the book Retraducir: una nueva mirada edited by Zaro and Ruiz Noguera, where the term was applied to “translations of a text previously translated into the same language and culture”. The latest contribution is a book edited by Cadera and Walsh (2016) where retranslations into Spanish of authors like Achebe, Mirbeau and Kafka, among others, are examined. A particular line of research which seems to be still unexplored is the recent use of retranslations to mark differences between the different linguistic varieties of Spanish. For instance, the latest Spanish translation of Finnegans Wake into Spanish made by the Argentinian Marcelo Zabaloy in 2016 has prompted a debate in Argentina on the use of localisms or local references as a valid translation strategy. 2 The study of Spanish literary authors and works translated into other languages (sometimes referred to as “extranslation”) and their impact into their national literatures. One of the most researched issues is, of course, the international circulation of Cervantes’ Don Quijote (paradoxically, one of the most famous pseudotranslations in the history of literature) via translations into other languages and cultures. Among the studies on this subject published in Spain are the books by Vega and Navarro (2007) and Pano Alamán and Vercher García (2010), while the American professor Ilan Stavans’ work Quixote: the Novel and the World (2015) takes a more Hispanic or Latin American perspective when examining the impact of Cervantes’ novel in the world. In any event, this line of research has been followed by Spanish and foreign researchers for a long time: perhaps the first book that can be cited is Santoyo’s book on the English 49

Juan Jesús Zaro

translations of El lazarillo de Tormes (1978), while Gentzler (1996) examines the influence of twentieth century Spanish poets like Juan Ramón Jiménez, Antonio Machado and Federico García Lorca on American poetry through the translations by Robert Bly and William Duffy published in the literary magazines The Fifties and The Sixties. More recently, Braga’s descriptive research (2009) into the translations of five Spanish plays of the Golden Age into English lists the strategies chosen by the translators in order to naturalize the source texts but also to preserve their ‘Spanishness’. Another recent and illuminating contribution to this line of research has been carried out by Navarro Domínguez (2015), who focuses on the translations into other languages of two Spanish classics of the twentieth century, the novelists José Martínez Ruiz, “Azorín”, and Gabriel Miró. The question concerning the translation of Latin American literature into other languages is addressed by Balderston and Schwartz in their book Voice-Overs (2002), especially in the contributions by Mudrovcic, Steenmeijer and White who, respectively, tackle features such as agency and canon formation in the 1960s and 1970s, the history of the translations of Latin American ‘Boom’ writers, and the role played by translation in the ‘representation’ of Latin America in the United States. A more recent work in this respect is Esperanza Bielsa’s analysis (2016) of Roberto Bolaño’s reception in English and the role that his cosmopolitanism played in his literary fame. 3 The translation of specific genres and literary tendencies. The study of the translation of traditional fiction genres (thriller, detective, science-fiction, romance, etc.) into Spanish is in general a rather unexplored line of research. Perhaps the only exception is the study of the translation of American crime fiction, exemplified in the doctoral dissertations by Linder (2008) and Abió Villarig (2013) and in an article by Franco Aixelá and Abió Villarig (2009). Likewise, studies focusing on the translation of the narrative features of modern fiction like, for example, free indirect speech, polyphony, and focalization or the stylistics of a particular work, are not so easy to find. Nevertheless, the description and comparison of translations of the same work is an active field of research: two pioneering works in this field are Crespo Allué (1981) and Rodríguez Espinosa’s (1998) doctoral dissertations. A particular field is the study of the translation of postcolonial literature with linguistic hybridity as a key element, namely the translation into Spanish of hybrid works by Latino writers of the United States: works where words, phrases or whole sentences in Spanish are included. Thus, code-switching is a key feature of some Hispanic American writers like Piri Thomas, Sandra Cisneros, Junot Díaz and many others, whose translations into peninsular Spanish have sometimes been questioned by the authors themselves. Two cases in point are The House on Mango Street by Sandra Cisneros and Drown by Junot Díaz. Both novels were first translated in Spain by Spanish translators: Enrique de Hériz (Una casa en Mango Street, 1992) and Miguel Martínez Lage (Los boys, 1996). The two versions were normalized into peninsular Spanish, a fact that perhaps prompted a second translation into a more SpanishAmerican linguistic variety, in this case Mexican (La casa en Mango Street, 1994), translated by Elena Poniatowska, or into a more neutral Spanish with some Dominican flavour (Negocios, 1997), translated by the Spanish translator and researcher Eduardo Lago, both published by Vintage in the United States. López Ponz (2009, 2014) highlights the translation problems posed by multilingualism in these novels/writers and Rodríguez Murphy (2015) examines similar issues in hybrid African postcolonial literatures. Of particular interest is the research on the translation of children’s literature. This is a specialized field which is of huge commercial importance in Spain, as mentioned previously: the high pecentage of translations seems to manifest a need to import texts from other cultures. However, it is a complex kind of translation whose norms are distinct and different from those 50

Literary translation

applied to adult literature. The pioneering work in this field was La adaptación en la traducción de literatura infantil (1998) by Pascua Febles, author as well of La literatura traducida y censurada para niños y jóvenes en la época franquista: Guillermo Brown (2011), a study focusing on the censorship methods imposed on the English author Richmal Crompton’s ‘William’ books translated and published in Spain during Franco’s regime. Other interesting contributions are Kenfel, Vázquez García, and Lorenzo García (2000) and Kenfel and Lorenzo García (2003). In the case of drama translation, the inmediacy of the text is perhaps the most formidable translation problem, as recognized by Spanish experts in this field. Among the works focusing on the translation of plays is Merino (1994), who develops a complete methodology for the study of drama translation based on the ‘réplica’ (referred to by Merino as an ‘utterance’ in English), as the ‘minimal structural unit’ in her book Traducción, tradición y manipulación: teatro inglés en España (1950–1990). Mateo Martínez-Bartolomé’s (1995) descriptive study centres on the translation of irony in six different English plays translated into Spanish, while Pujante and Gregor’s Teatro clásico en traducción: texto, representación, recepción (1996) is a compilation of proceedings of the International Conference on Theatre and Translation that took place in Murcia that same year. Other more recent books on drama translation are authored by Espasa (2001), Sanderson (2002) and Ezpeleta (2007). The research on poetry translation does not seem to be as productive. One of the classics in this field is the essay by the Mexican writer Octavio Paz, winner of the 1990 Literature Nobel Prize, Traducción: literatura y literalidad, first published in 1971, where the author vindicates the literary nature of the act of translation. In 2007 the Catalan poet and translator Jordi Doce edited Poesía en traducción, a compilation of chapters written by poets and translators of contemporary foreign poets into Spanish. Another recent contribution from Latin America is Muschietti’s compilation Traducir poesía. Mapa rítmico, partitura y plataforma flotante (2014). Finally, Calvillo’s doctoral dissertation (2017) presents an original application of Gutt’s translation and relevance theory to the analysis of translated poetry. 4) Translation and Reception studies. Although it is a fact that translations play a decisive role in the reception of foreign authors and works, this has not been a widely cultivated field of research in Spain, with some exceptions like the reception and translation of Shakespeare’s works, which has been a prolific research trend for decades, starting with the two seminal works by Alfonso Par (1935, 1938), which stand as masterpieces of historicist comparativism. Two more recent sequels are the works by Fernández de Sevilla (1993) and Pujante and Campillo (2007). In Argentina, Castagnino, Ghiano, and Barcia wrote their pioneering work Shakespeare en la Argentina in 1966. We should also mention Santa and Lafarga’s research (2006) into the Spanish reception of Alexandre Dumas and Victor Hugo, while Camps (2014) explores the relationship between translation and reception of major Italian writers in Catalan and Spanish translations. Linked to the previous point is the research on the past and current influence of translations on readers, on the literature produced in Spain, and on individual authors, works and genres. Despite the abundance of reference books and essays on the history of literary translation, the role of literary translation in the history of Spanish and other peninsular literatures is still, to a great extent, unexplored. In many ways, the gap between historians of literature and historians of literary translation is still wide, which points to the need for more collaboration between both fields of study. There are, of course, exceptions such as Ferreras (1973, 1992), who explores the influence of translated novels on Spanish nineteenthcentury narrative. A pioneering work in this respect is Gallego Roca (1994), where a debate is presented on the role of literary translation in the History of Literature. A subsequent work by the same author (1996) focuses specifically on the relationship between the norms adopted 51

Juan Jesús Zaro

by writers and translators while translating foreign works into Spanish, and their influence on modernist and avant-garde Spanish poetry of the 1920s and 1930s. Finally, another field of study is the assessment of literary translations carried out by critics, whose role in the reception and criticism of translated works remains negligible. Some issues of the sociolinguistics of literary translation were addressed by Fernández in his doctoral dissertation La recepción crítica de la literatura traducida en España (1999–2008); aportaciones a una sociología de la literatura transnacional (2011), where he tackles questions related to the concept of “world literature” and its transnational character from the study of a corpus of reviews of translated literary works published by the four most important Spanish daily papers, El País, El Mundo, ABC and La Vanguardia. 5) The theory and practice of literary translation in Spain and Latin America as it has been addressed by theorists and translators in specific works and paratexts. A seminal work in this respect was Torre’s Teoría de la traducción literaria (1994), while Marco Borillo edited another interesting title, La traducció literària, in 1995 and Márgara Averbach published the manual Traducir literatura. Una escritura controlada in Argentina in 2011. Useful reflections for prospective translators on the characteristics of literary language can be found in Alonso Schökel (1995) and Vallejo (1983). On the other hand, a lucid and updated account of the role of translated works in Spanish literature and of translation as a profession is Calvo’s essay El fantasma en el libro (2016). Similarly, an extensive view of the role of literary translation in Spanish-speaking Latin American countries can be found in Adamo (2012). Luis Pegenaute (2016) offers a panoramic and well-organized view of theoretical approaches to the research of literary translations including recent issues like the relationship between literary translation and world literatures. A related field of research is the teaching of literary translation in Spanish and Latin American universities. Although it is now a subject in undergraduate and graduate degrees, especially in countries like Argentina, Mexico, Peru and Spain, it is a relatively recent development. Questions on whether literary translation can be entirely taught in a university, or issues such as the literary translator’s degree of freedom, the definition of style and its imitation in translation, the stylistic analysis of texts prior to the translation, the prospective translator’s previous knowledge of the foreign literature and its literary language, as well as leaning on the expertise of professionals in the field are still under discussion. Perhaps the only work that offers a reasoned and detailed methodological description of the teaching of literary translation (from French into Spanish) is Navarro Domínguez (2013). The books edited by Gonzalo García and García Yebra (2005) and Peromingo and Braga Riera (2015) offer a detailed account of the techniques and resources available for prospective literary translators. 6) Translator studies: research on the lives of literary translators, their styles of translation, and their role in the image and visibility of literary translation in Spain and Latin America. Zaro (2007b) focuses on the translation of seven Shakespeare plays by seven different Spanish translators, while Rubio Jiménez (2015) focuses on the life of Augusto Ferrán, a remarkable nineteenth century translator of poetry, and Romero López (2016) studies the lives of nine female translators of the first quarter of thetwentieth century. Two other recent contributions, Creación y traducción en la España del siglo XIX (2015) and Autores traductores en la España del siglo XIX (2016), both edited by Lafarga and Pegenaute, investigate the relationship between literary and translatorial authorship in writer-translators of the nineteenth century. Self-translation, a special case of translation, has been recently approached by the Spanish researchers Da Silva and Tanqueiro (2011). A case in point in this respect is that of the Basque novelist Bernardo Atxaga, who writes his novels in Basque and self-translates them into Spanish. 52

Literary translation

7) Another research topic is the global translation strategies followed by Spanish language publishers and literary translators, which can basically be summed up, at least in the case of Spain, as a very clear decision to ensure the fluency and readability of texts, including the use of naturalization as a translation strategy when it is considered necessary (López Guix and Orero 2000). Some authors such as Cohen (2014) or Calvo (2016) even speak of a ‘Spanish of translations’ or ‘translationese’ capable of being described and which is used consistently by Spanish translators. According to this theory, this variety is imposed on translators by publishers until it becomes an element of their habitus. On the other hand, the interlinguistic differences between the Peninsular and American varieties of Spanish used for translation have been discussed by Calvo (2016), Cohen (2014), Gargatagli (2012a, 2012b), and Sáenz (2013), whereas a more detailed account of the history of the Spanish used by Argentinian translators can be found in Falcón (2010) and Lida (2012). It should be remembered that in the 1970s and 1980s, Spanish publishers went so far as to revise Latin American translations in order to edit out all alleged Latin American idiosincrasies. On the contrary, Latin American translators have tended to use a kind of ‘neutral’ or ‘general’ Spanish (Fólica and Villalba 2011), seemingly devoid of national features because of their awareness of the Spanish-speaking community’s linguistic diversity. As mentioned previously, translations made by Spanish translators and published in Spain occupy one of the main markets in Spanish-speaking American countries. This fact has caused some discomfort amongst Latin American critics, translators, readers, and publishers who object to the peninsular variety being used in the books translated in Spain (some of whose words and expressions are described as ‘incomprehensible’). They also protest their limitations in terms of the acquisition of the translation rights of foreign works, since they are unable to compete financially with Spanish publishers. It is important to point out the special configuration of Spanish-speaking countries, whose total population is about 470 million people, of whom only 46.7 million speak the “peninsular” variant. As previously described, this figure shows one of the main asymmetries within the field of literary translation in the Spanishspeaking world and is one of the main lines of research that may be followed at the moment. Works that can be mentioned in this respect are those of Ehrenhaus (2012), Zaro (2013) and Cohen (2014). In the particular field of Shakespeare’s plays translated into Spanish, this issue has gained visibility over the past few years. The Mexican professor and translator Alfredo Michel Modenessi (2004, 2015) has denounced the systematic use of Peninsular Spanish in the translation of Shakespeare’s plays made in Latin America. He exemplifies this by providing samples of his own translations, in which he adopts discursive patterns of Mexican Spanish deliberately. In this sense, a recent translation of William Shakespeare’s Sonnets by the Argentinian professor and translator Miguel Ángel Montezanti with the title Solo vos sos vos. Los Sonetos de Shakespeare en traducción rioplatense (2011) into the variety of Spanish spoken in Río de la Plata can be considered a breakthrough in the history of Shakespeare translations into Spanish. The high symbolic value of this translation acquires even more meaning if we bear in mind that Montezanti had already translated the Sonnets into a much more neutral variety of Spanish in 1987. 8) The relationship between Literary Translation and Comparative Literature. The critical study of literary translations is closely linked to the discipline of Comparative Literature. Perhaps one of the most influential comparatists in the Spanish-speaking world was Guillén, author of Entre lo uno y lo diverso: introducción a la literatura comparada (1985). Another early contribution was Villanueva (1994), perhaps the first book in Spain to describe the polysystem theory and the role of literary translation in the dissemination of literature. Three other 53

Juan Jesús Zaro

historical contributions to this field were translations: Iglesias Santos’ Teoría de los polisistemas (1999), a collection of essays authored by Toury, Even-Zohar and Lambert, among others; Lefevere’s Translation, Rewriting and the Manipulation of Literary Fame (Traducción, reescritura y la manipulación del canon literario, translated by professors Vidal and Álvarez in 1997), and Toury’s Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond (Los estudios descriptivos de traducción y más allá: metodología de la investigación en estudios de traducción, translated by professors Rabadán and Merino in 2004). The study of Borges’ theories on translation can be specifically found in Kristal (2002), Waisman (2005) and García Jurado and Salazar Morales (2014).

Future directions As in the rest of the world, literary translation in Spain faces unknowns whose resolutions seems difficult to imagine today, e. g. the continuity of the Spanish publishing hegemony in the Spanish-speaking world, the growth of digital publishing, the proliferation of translations on the internet, or the definitive professionalization of the literary translator. Furthermore, there are important issues facing research into literary translation which are still incipient in Spain and Latin American countries: the appraisal of the reflection translations have and will continue to have on national literatures, a factor which seems crucial in the case of Argentinian Literature (Gargatagli 2012b) and which has just started to be a field of research in Spain (Rabadán 2001; Gómez Castro 2005); the unfragmented histories of literary translation in Latin American countries which have an old and established tradition such as Argentina, Chile, Colombia or Mexico−an exception is Silva-Santisteban (2013) on the history of translation in Peru−; the application of sociological and gender (feminist and queer) theories to the analysis of literary translations (research groups in Translation Studies at the Universities of Málaga, Salamanca and Vich have already focused on this issue in their research) including accounts of female translators’ lives and works; the gap and reciprocal mistrust between professionals and theoreticians of literary translation; the study of the allegedly different ‘languages of translation’ used in the translation of literary texts into Spanish in Spain and the Americas; the translation of new genres like graphic novels; the role of intertextuality in modern fiction and how it is dealt with by literary translation; the history and influence of pseudotranslations in national literatures and the strategies of literary translators to deal with sociolects and dialects in the source text.

Recommended reading Adamo, Gabriela, ed. 2012. La traducción literaria en América Latina. Buenos Aires: Paidós. An original collection of essays written by translators on the recent history and present state of literary translation in some countries of Latin America, namely: Argentina, Chile, Central American countries (with a special emphasis on Costa Rica), Colombia, Mexico, and Venezuela. The contributions by Ana Gargatagli, Armando Roa Vial, Martha Pulido and María Victoria Tipiani, Edda Armas, Carlos Cortés, and Lucrecia Orensanz probably are the most thorough and updated attempt to describe this issue so far. Calvo, Javier. 2016. El fantasma en el libro. Madrid: Seix Barral. A lucid reflection on the history and practice of literary translation by a famous and reputed Spanish translator and writer. Calvo manages to explain the process of translation to the lay reader and describes the present context of the job of translation, illustrated with examples and anecdotes mostly unknown by the general public. The last chapter explores the future of literary translation based on recent experiments like the fan translation of books and TV series on the internet.

54

Literary translation Lafarga, Francisco, and Luis Pegenaute, eds. 2009. Diccionario histórico de la traducción en España. Madrid: Gredos. The most complete dictionary of translators ever published in Spain. In spite of its title, most of the biographical entries collected in this Dictionary, written by more than 300 experts, are about literary translators. It is a key work in the field of the history of translation and an extremely valuable source of data for research on Spanish literary translation and translators. Pagni, Andrea, Gertrudis Payás, and Patricia Willson, eds. 2011. Traductores y traducciones en la historia cultural de América latina. Ciudad de México: UNAM. This collective volume contains nine case studies on the cultural functions that literary translation has played at certain times in Latin American countries, namely Argentina, Colombia, Chile, and Venezuela. Of them, seven (Andrea Pagni, Patricia Willson, Patricio Fontana and Claudia Román, María Gabriela Iturriza, Milena Grass Kleiner, Annie Brisset and Paula Andrea Montoya Arango and Juan Guillermo Ramírez Giraldo) focus on specific translations or publishers of translations, while Clara Foz and Gertrudis Payás study the role of Latin American colonial bibliographies and ‘European’ libraries as research tools for investigations into the history of translation, and Laura Fólica and Gabriela Villalba examine the sensitive issue of the variety of Spanish used by publishers of translations in Argentina.

References Abió Villarig, Carlos. 2013. “Políticas de traducción y censura en la novela negra norteamericana publicada en España durante la II República y la dictadura franquista.” PhD diss., University of Alicante. Adamo, Gabriela. 2012. “Introducción.” In La traducción literaria en América latina, edited by G. Adamo, 13–22. Buenos Aires: Paidós. Alonso Schökel, Luis. 1995. El estilo literario: Arte y artesanía. Bilbao: Ega-Mensajero. Aparicio, Frances R. 1991. Versiones, interpretaciones, creaciones: Instancias de la traducción literaria en Hispanoamérica. Gaithersburg, MD: Ediciones Hispamérica. Averbach, Márgara. 2011. Traducir literatura. Una experiencia controlada. Córdoba, Argentina: Comunicarte. Bacardí, Montserrat and Pilar Godayol (dir.) 2011. Diccionari de la traducció catalana. Barcelona: Eumo Editorial. Bielsa, Esperanza. 2016. Cosmopolitanism and Translation. London/New York: Routledge. Braga, Jorge. 2009. Classical Spanish Drama in Restoration English (1660–1700). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Cadera, Susanne M., and Andrew Samuel Walsh. 2016. Literary Retranslation in Context. Bern: Peter Lang. Calvo, Javier. 2016. El fantasma en el libro. Madrid: Seix Barral. Calvillo, Juan Carlos. 2017. “ ‘Her translated faces’: Estudio valorativo de las traducciones de Emily Dickinson al español.” PhD diss., Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. Camps, Assumpta. 2014. Traducción y recepción de la literatura italiana en España. Barcelona: Edicions Universitat de Barcelona. Castagnino, Raúl H., Juan Carlos Ghiano, and Pedro Luis Barcia. 1966. Shakespeare en la Argentina. La Plata: Universidad de La Plata. Cohen, Marcelo. 2014. Música prosaica (cuatro piezas sobre traducción). Buenos Aires: Entropía. Crespo Allué, María José. 1981. “La problemática de las versiones españolas de Persuasión de Jane Austen. Crítica de su traducción.” PhD diss., Universidad de Valladolid. Da Silva, Xosé Manuel, and Helena Tanqueiro, eds. 2011. Aproximaciones a la autotraducción. Vigo: Academia del Hispanismo. Delabastita, Dirk. 2011. “Literary Translation.” In Handbook of Translation Studies, vol. 2, edited by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer, 69–78. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Díaz Arciniega, Víctor. 1994. Historia de la casa. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica. Doce, Jordi, ed. 2007. Poesía en traducción. Madrid: Círculo de Bellas Artes. Ehrenhaus, Andrés. 2012. “Traducción argentina en España: Hacia una poética de la experiencia.” In La traducción literaria en América Latina, edited by Gabriela Adamo, 193–209. Buenos Aires: Paidós. Espasa, Eva. 2001. La traducció dalt de l’escenari. Vic: Eumo.

55

Juan Jesús Zaro Even-Zohar, Itamar. 1990. “The Position of Translated Literature Within the Literary Polysystem.” Poetics Today 11 (1): 45–51. Ezpeleta, Pilar. 2007. Teatro y traducción. Madrid: Cátedra. Falcón, Alejandrina. 2010. “El idioma de los libros: antecedentes y proyecciones de la polémica ‘Madrid, meridiano editorial de Hispanoamérica.” Iberoamericana X (37): 39–58. Fernández, Fruela. 2011. “La recepción crítica de la literatura traducida en España (1999–2008); aportaciones a una sociología de la literatura transnacional.” PhD diss., University of Granada. Ferreras, Juan Ignacio. 1973. Los orígenes de la novela decimonónica. Madrid: Taurus. ———. 1992. La novela española en el siglo XIX (hasta 1868). Madrid: Taurus. Fólica, Laura, and Gabriela Villalba. 2011. “Español rioplatense y representaciones sobre la traducción en la globalización editorial.” In Traductores y traducciones en la historia cultural de América Latina, edited by Andrea Pagni, Gertrudis Payás, and Patricia Willson, 251–66. Ciudad de México: UNAM. Franco Aixelá, Javier, and Carlos Abió Villarig. 2009. “Manipulación ideológica y traducción: Atenuación e intensificación moral en la traducción de la novela negra norteamericana al español (1933– 2001).” Hermeneus 11: 109–44. Gallego Roca, Miguel. 1994. Traducción y literatura: los estudios literarios ante las obras traducidas. Madrid: Júcar. ———. 1996. Poesía importada. Traducción poética y renovación literaria en España (1909–1936). Almería: Universidad de Almería. García Jurado, Francisco, and Roberto Salazar Morales. 2014. La traducción y sus palimpsestos: Borges, Homero y Virgilio. Madrid: Escolar y Mayo. Gargatagli, Ana. 2012a. “La traducción neutra no es una pipa.” Clarín. Revista Ñ, September 9. ———. 2012b. “Escenas de la traducción en Argentina.” In La traducción literaria en América Latina, edited by Gabriela Adamo, 25–51. Buenos Aires: Paidós. Gentzler, Edwin. 1996. “Translation, Counter-Culture and The Fifties in the USA.” In Translation, Power, Subversion, edited by Román Álvarez and África Vidal, 116–37. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Gómez Castro, Cristina. 2005. “La presencia de la literatura traducida (inglés-español) en el polisistema literario español de los últimos años del franquismo.” In Actas del II Congreso Internacional de la Asociación Ibérica de Estudios de Traducción, edited by M. Luisa Romana García, 955–62. Madrid: AIETI. González Fernández de Sevilla, José Manuel, ed. 1993. Shakespeare en España. Crítica, traducciones y representaciones. Alicante: Universidad de Alicante/Libros Pórtico. Gonzalo García, Consuelo, and Valentín García Yebra, eds. 2005. Manual de documentación para la traducción literaria. Madrid: Arco/Libros. Guillén, Claudio. 1985. Entre lo uno y lo diverso: introducción a la literatura comparada. Barcelona: Crítica. Iglesias Santos, Montserrat. 1999. Teoría de los polisistemas. Madrid: Arco Libros. Kenfel, Velkka R., C. Vázquez García, and Lourdes Lorenzo García, eds. 2000. Literatura infantil y juvenil: tendencias actuales en investigación. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. Kenfel, Veljka R., and Lourdes Lorenzo García, eds. 2003. Estudios críticos de traducción de literatura infantil y juvenil: análisis de las traducciones de obras inglesas y alemanas a las cuatro lenguas oficiales en España. Oviedo: Septem. Kristal, Efrain. 2002. Invisible Work. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press. Lafarga, Francisco, ed. 1999. La traducción en España (1750–1830): Lengua, literatura, cultura. Lleida: Universitat de Lleida. Lafarga, Francisco, and Luis Pegenaute, eds. 2008. Historia de la traducción en España. Salamanca: Ambos Mundos. Lafarga, Francisco, and Luis Pegenaute, eds. 2009. Diccionario histórico de la traducción en España. Madrid: Gredos. Lafarga, Francisco, and Luis Pegenaute, eds. 2011. Cincuenta estudios sobre traducciones españolas. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. ———, eds. 2012a. Aspectos de la historia de la traducción en Hispanoamérica: autores, traductores y traducciones. Vigo: Academia del Hispanismo. ———, eds. 2012b. Lengua, cultura y política en la historia de la traducción en Hispanoamérica. Vigo: Academia del Hispanismo. ———, eds. 2013. Diccionario histórico de la traducción en Hispanoamérica. Madrid. Iberoamericana/ Vervuert.

56

Literary translation ———, eds. 2015. Creación y traducción en la España del siglo XIX. Bern: Peter Lang. ———, eds. 2016. Autores traductores en la España del siglo XIX. Kassel: Edition Reichenberger. Lefevere, André. 1997. Traducción, reescritura y la manipulación del canon literario. Translated by África Vidal and Román Álvarez. Salamanca: Colegio de España. Lida, Miranda. 2012. “Una lengua nacional aluvial para la Argentina: Jorge Luis Borges, Américo Castro y Amado Alonso en torno al idioma de los argentinos.” Prismas 16: 99–119. Linder, Daniel. 2008. “The American Detective Novel in Translation: The Translations of Raymond Chandler’s Novels into Spanish.” PhD diss., University of Salamanca. López Guix, Juan Gabriel, and Pilar Orero. 2000. “La edición y la traducción de la literatura inglesa en España.” Donaire 14: 13–17. López Ponz, María. 2009. Traducción y literatura chicana: nuevas perspectivas desde la hibridación. Granada: Comares. ———. 2014. Juego de capitales. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Martino Alba, Pilar, and Salud M. Jarilla, eds. 2012. Caleidoscopio de Traducción Literaria. Madrid: Dykinson. Marco Borillo, Josep, ed. 1994. La traducció literària. Castelló: Universitat Jaume I. Mateo Martínez-Bartolomé, Marta. 1995. La traducción del humor: las comedias inglesas en español. Oviedo: Universidad de Oviedo. Merino, Raquel. 1994. Traducción, tradición y manipulación: teatro inglés en España (1950–1990). León: Universidad de León. Michel Modenessi, Alfredo. 2004. “A Double Tongue Within Your Mask: Translating Shakespeare in/to Spanish-Speaking Latin America.” In Shakespeare and the Language of Translation, edited by Ton Hoenselaars, 240–54. London: Thomson. ———. 2015. “ ‘Every Like Is Not the Same’: Translating Shakespeare in Spanish Today.” Shakespeare Survey 68: 73–86. Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte. 2016. El sector del libro en España 2013–2015. Madrid: Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte. Mudrovcic, María Eugenia. 2002. “Reading Latin American Literature Abroad: Agency and Canon Formation in the Sixties and Seventies.” In Voice-Overs, edited by Daniel Balderston and Marcy E. Schwartz, 129–43. Albany: State University of New York Press. Muschietti, Delfina, ed. 2014. Traducir poesía: Mapa rítmico, partitura y plataforma flotante. Buenos Aires: Paradiso. Navarro Domínguez, Fernando. 2013. Metodologías en la enseñanza de la traducción literaria. Granada: Comares. ———, ed. 2015. Azorín y Miró en traducción. Alacant: Universitat d’Alacant. Pagni, Andrea. 2014. “Hacia una historia de la traducción en América Latina.” Iberoamericana XIV (56): 205–24. Pagni, Andrea, Gertrudis Payás, and Patricia Willson, eds. 2011. Traductores y traducciones en la historia cultural de América latina. Ciudad de México: UNAM. Pajares, Eterio. 2009. La traducción de la novela inglesa del siglo XVIII. Vitoria: PortalEditions. Pano Alamán, Ana, and Enrique Javier Vercher García. 2010. Avatares del Quijote en Europa. Madrid: Cátedra. Par, Alfonso. 1935. Shakespeare en la literatura española. Madrid: Librería general de Victoriano Suárez. ———. 1938. Representaciones shakesperianas en España. Madrid. Librería general de Victoriano Suárez. Pascua Febles, Isabel. 1998. La adaptación en la traducción de literatura infantil. Las Palmas: Universidad de Las Palmas. ———. 2011. La literatura traducida y censurada para niños y jóvenes en la época franquista: Guillermo Brown. Las Palmas: Universidad de Las Palmas. Paz, Octavio. 1971. Traducción: literatura y literalidad. Madrid: Tusquets. Pegenaute, Luis. 2016. “Aproximaciones teóricas contemporáneas a la traducción literaria.” In La traducción literaria: Nuevas investigaciones, edited by Iolanda Galanes Santos, Ana Luna Alonso et al., 5–29. Granada: Comares. Pujante, Ángel, and Laura Campillo, eds. 2007. Shakespeare en España: Textos 1764–1916. Murcia: Universidad de Granada/Universidad de Murcia. Pujante, Ángel, and Keith Gregor, eds. 1996. Teatro clásico en traducción: texto, representación, recepción. Murcia: Universidad de Murcia.

57

Juan Jesús Zaro Rabadán, Rosa. 2001. “Las cadenas intertextuales inglés-español: traducciones y otras transferencias (inter)semióticas.” In Trasvases culturales; literatura, cine y traducción, vol. 3, edited by Raquel Merino, Eterio Pajares, and José Miguel Santamaria, 29–41. Vitoria: UPV/EHU. Rica Peromingo, Juan Pedro, and Jorge Braga Riera. 2015. Herramientas y técnicas para la traducción inglés-español: los textos literarios. Madrid: Escolar y Mayo. Rodríguez Espinosa, Marcos. 1998. “Recepción y traducción como procesos de mediación cultural: Vanity Fair en España.” PhD Diss., University of Málaga. Rodríguez Murphy, Elena. 2015. Traducción y literatura africana: multilingüismo y transculturación en la narrativa nigeriana de expresión inglesa. Granada. Comares. Romero López, Dolores. 2016. Retratos de traductoras en la edad de plata. Madrid: Escolar y Mayo. Rubio Jiménez, Jesús. 2015. Augusto Ferrán Forniés, traductor. Madrid: Escolar y Mayo. Ruiz Casanova, José Francisco. 2000. Aproximación a una historia de la traducción en España. Madrid: Cátedra. Sabio Pinilla, José Antonio, ed. 2009. La traducción en la época ilustrada. Granada: Comares. Sáenz, Miguel. 2013. Traducción: Dieciocho conferencias nada magistrales y dos discursos de circunstancias. Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca. Sanderson, John. 2002. Traducir el teatro de Shakespeare: Figuras retóricas iterativas en Ricardo III. Valencia: Universitat de Valencia. Santa, Angels, and Francisco Lafarga, eds. 2006. Alexandre Dumas y Victor Hugo: Viaje de los textos y textos del viaje. Lleida: Pagès editor. Santoveña, Marianela, Lucrecia Orensanz et al. eds. 2010. De oficio, traductor: Panorama de la traducción literaria en México. México: Bonilla Artigas. Santoyo, Julio César. 1978. Ediciones y traducciones inglesas del “Lazarillo de Tormes” (1568–1977). Vitoria: Colegio Universitario de Álava. Shakespeare, William. 2011. Solo vos sos vos. Los Sonetos de Shakespeare en traducción rioplatense. Translated by Miguel Ángel Montezanti. Mar del Plata: Eudem. Silva-Santisteban, Ricardo. 2013. Breve historia de la traducción en el Perú. Lima: Instituto bibliográfico del Perú. Stavans, Ilan. 2015. Quixote: The Novel and the World. New York: Norton. Steenmeijer, Maarten. 2002. “How the West Was Won: Translations of Spanish American Fiction in Europe and the United States.” In Voice-Overs, edited by Daniel Balderston and Marcy E. Schwartz, 144–55. Albany: State University of New York Press. Toury, Gideon. 2004. Los estudios descriptivos de traducción y más allá: metodología de la investigación en estudios de traducción. Translated by Rosa Rabadán and Raquel Merino. Madrid: Cátedra. Villanueva, Darío, ed. 1994. Avances en teoría de la literatura. Santiago de Compostela: Universidade de Santiago de Compostela. Waisman, Sergio. 2005. Borges y la traducción. Translated by M. Cohen. Buenos Aires: Adriana Hidalgo. Vallejo, Fernando. 1983. Logoi. Una gramática del lenguaje literario. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica. Vega, Miguel A., and Fernando Navarro. 2007. España en Europa: La recepción de “El Quijote”. Alicante: Librería Logos. White, Steven F. 2002. “Translation and Teaching: The Dangers of Representing Latin America for Students in the United Staes.” In Voice-Overs, edited by Daniel Balderston and Marcy E. Schwartz, 235–44. Albany: State University of New York Press. Willson, Patricia. 2004. La constelación del Sur. Buenos Aires: Siglo XXI. Zaro, Juan Jesús, ed. 2007a. Traductores y traducciones de literatura y ensayo. Granada: Comares. ———. 2007b. Shakespeare y sus traductores. Bern: Peter Lang. ———, ed. 2008. Diez estudios sobre la traducción en la España del siglo XIX. Granada: Atrio. ––––––, ed. 2011. La traducción como actividad editorial en la Andalucía del siglo XIX. Sevilla: Alfar. ———. 2013. “El ‘desafío’ austral: las relaciones entre las industrias traductoras argentina y española.” In Traducción, política(s), conflictos: legados y retos para la era del multiculturalismo, edited by M. Carmen África Vidal Claramonte and Rosario Martín Ruano, 45–61. Granada: Comares.

58

3 TRANSLATION AND THE SPANISH EMPIRE Roberto A. Valdeón

Introduction Antonio de Nebrija’s observation that language and empire go hand in hand has become a classic for most writers interested in exploring the connections between language, translation and empire (Rafael 1988, 23; Durston 2007, 32; Mignolo 2003 [1995]; Valdeón 2014a, 25). When, in 1492, Christopher Columbus set sail to find an easier route to Asia, he was aware of the importance of languages. Consequently, in his first voyage, he took two interpreters, Domingo de Jérez and Luis de Torres, who would eventually prove useless (Giambruno 2008, 30). Columbus acknowledged this in the writings that have come down to us. In his third letter, for example, he recorded that he had taken a few Indians by force in order to be informed about the lands (1870, 12). Later he returned to Europe with some natives that he had kidnapped with a view to teach them Spanish before returning to the Caribbean. This has been called “the primal crime in the New World” (Greenblatt 1976, 563), which was performed in the interest of communication. For his part, Rafael (1988, 26) reminds us that Spanish still uses “dominate a language” when we refer to speaking a foreign language well, although this can be applied to other European languages. Translation was also present in the act of taking possession. After the Vatican granted Spain and Portugal the right to conquer the continent, it was decided that the conquistadors would claim possession of the lands by reading the so-called Requerimiento, a bewildering document that encouraged the listeners to surrender or face a just war. For some, the text was not translated (Mackenthun 1997, 13), while others believe it was (Gose 2008, 40; Lamana 2008, 101). In either case, the Requerimiento had recourse to language to claim the lands and, therefore, their inhabitants, for the European conquerors. The document, which has been described as a blend of “legal fiction and perverse idealism” (Greenblatt 1976, 573), is reminiscent of various biblical passages (Early 2006, 103) and reflects the ideology of its time (Hanke 1938, 34). Las Casas was particularly critical of the text, although his words have been often quoted (Restall 2003, 87) or misquoted when he wrote that he did not know whether to laugh or to cry at the Requirement. The full quotation reads like this: “cosa es de reír o llorar, por mejor decir, que creyesen los del Consejo del rey que estas gentes fuese más obligadas a recibir al rey por señor” (Las Casas 1956, 216). In other words, he posited that it was not possible to convert Native Americans by reading the text to them (1956, 216), and that it was difficult to believe 59

Roberto A. Valdeón

that the members of the Council took for granted that it was. In any case, the document and the debate over its validity are telling of the importance of language and translation not only during the initial years of the conquest.

Historical perspective The importance of translation during the colonial period in Spanish America is well documented. Spain’s heavily bureaucratic nature, which has remained to this day, means that the various branches of the colonial administration have left a wealth of documents that provide a clear picture of the vital role of translation during that period, both in the metropolis and in the colonies. As language and translation policies were not stable, laws were passed either to promote the expansion of Spanish or the use of local languages, depending on the political trend of the period. These regulations were often at the same time, but they had to be reissued, as they proved largely ineffective because of the distance between Spain and its colonial possessions. For example, the so-called Laws of Burgos (1512–1513) called the settlers to teach Spanish to the natives. To that effect, schools first and universities later were established both in New Spain and the Andean region. As the conquest progressed, this had unexpected consequences as the children of the local aristocracy were able to use the language of the conquerors and their own (Mignolo 1989, 69).

Translation and the administration of the colonies However, as commoners continued to use their own language (Klor de Alva 1989), the religious orders learned native tongues in order to evangelize them. The missionaries were, in fact, largely responsible for the appropriation of local languages (Payàs 2010; Bastin 2013). The grammars and lexicons they wrote served to train other missionaries and priests, and to translate religious texts into the so-called lenguas generales, that is, the languages the Spanish considered the most widely spoken. This “tyranny of the alphabet”, as has been called (Mignolo 1989, 68–9), had serious consequences for the linguistic landscapes of the continent: other less common languages would eventually disappear, while Nahuatl in Mesoamerica and Quechua in the Andes were used as a lingua franca in their respective areas to be used among and with the natives. Run by the church and supported by the state, schools and universities were founded throughout the empire and, as the need for interpreters and translators increased, local languages were taught. Thus, educational institutions such as the University of San Marcos in Lima and the Colegio de Santa Cruz in Mexico were the first universities and colleges in the Americas. In the Philippines, on the other hand, the situation was different. Tagalog had a writing system called baybayin (Rafael 1988, 39), but the Latin alphabet eventually replaced it as well. Similarly, in nineteenth-century Equatorial Guinea, the Spanish missionaries used a Latin-inspired phonetic version of native languages (Castillo Rodríguez 2015). In addition, the need for translators and interpreters led to the passing of a number of laws and regulations that described the duties of these mediators as well as their rights. These laws helped to shape a professional ethical code pertaining to their salaries, presents and the relationship of the interpreters with the colonized and with the colonists. They aimed to curb the abuse against the native population as well as to ensure the faithful reproduction of texts. For example, interpreters were not allowed to entertain Indians in their homes and town mayors could only select interpreters if they had been properly trained, had passed a state exam, and had been approved by the Indian council (Aguirre and Montalbán 1846, 230–1). Colonial rulers were also concerned with this issue. For instance, in the Andes viceroy Toledo passed 60

Translation and the Spanish Empire

similar laws (Toledo 1867, 250) and even appointed a lengua general (or interpreter general) who accompanied him during his visits to the provinces. However, the fact that these laws were passed in the sixteenth century and reissued on several occasions indicates that abusive situations remained a problem (Valdéon 2014a, 81–82). Interpreters were indeed necessary in all the spheres of the colonial system. They were particularly useful in the courts, as the local elites started claiming their rights shortly after the arrival of the Spanish (Ruiz Medrano 2010, 12). As interpreters were needed, Indians occupied this position at first, but later Spaniards would perform this function (Ruiz Medrano 2010, 24). In fact, interpreters of both native and European origin attempted to use their linguistic skills to climb the social ladder, i.e. many received pecuniary compensation as well as lands or political positions. In other cases, their knowledge of both Spanish and native languages, in addition to their familiarity with the judicial system of the colonizers, allowed some natives to file claims against the conquerors. The extant documents also prove that native languages were long used after the conquest, as wills, municipal records, land transactions and so on were written in the local languages, often accompanied by translations into Spanish (Anderson, Berdan, and Lockhart 1976, 225). Some of these translations were carried out a long time after the original texts had been written. Anderson, Berdan and Lockhart note that one of the most distinctive features of these documents is the very different narrative conveyed: whereas the originals talk about the “people from” and added the specific place, the Spanish versions replaced it by the generic word “indios” (1976, 226). Translators were also needed during the visits to the provinces, which served to compile the relaciones, a series of reports that provided the administration with all kinds of information about the colonies. This was used for taxation purposes but also to gather valuable information about many other aspects of the colonies such as their natural history, geography, cosmography, and so on (Barrera Osorio 2006, 92). In the Andes, the Europeans needed the assistance of the so-called khipu-keepers in order to interpret the khipus, a device consisting of knotted strings that stored all kinds of information (Brokaw 2010). These devices had to be read by the khipu-keepers, then interpreted into Spanish and finally the information was written down by the Spaniards for the purposes of the administration, but also to keep a historical record of the lands, e.g. Cieza de León in his Crónica del Perú (Valdeón 2012b). Interpreters were instrumental in retrieving all this information, both in Mesoamerica and in the Andes. Gaspar Antonio Chi, for instance, assisted the Spaniards during this process and, for this reason, as is the case with so many other interpreters of the time, he has been considered a traitor to his people (Kartunnen 1994, 113).

The evangelization of the indigenous peoples As mentioned, the religious orders soon realized the importance of using the local languages and of linguistic mediation. However, the official policies regarding the use of vernacular languages, of Spanish and of translation practices varied greatly during the long period of colonial rule. In the early part of the sixteenth century there was a tendency to accommodate native terms to explain core Christian concepts. The missionaries had attempted to integrate native religiosity in order to spread Catholic precepts (Sousa, Poole, and Lockhart 1998, 41). In Spain, though, many opposed the use of native languages in the evangelization process. This included institutions such as the Council of Indies and individuals like Antonio de Zúñiga, a member of one of Spain’s most influential families. Zúñiga wrote an epistle to Philip II and called for the imposition of Spanish throughout the colonies. He suggested that the natives 61

Roberto A. Valdeón

should be given a one or two-year period to learn the language or else be placed in a state of semi-imprisonment (1855, 94). The ambivalent attitude towards the role of translation and of local languages came to an end, at least officially, during the Third Lima Council, held in 1582–1583. Summoned by Archbishop Toribio de Mogrovejo, it served not only to organize the church in the area but also to recommend the use of local languages as an evangelization tool. In fact, the meeting led to the publication of the Doctrina Cristiana, a trilingual cathechism in Spanish, Quechua and Aymara. The document, regardless of its proselytizing intent, provides invaluable insights into the policy of the church as regards translation issues, as discussed in the introductory “Epístola de la traducción” [Epistle on translation]. This preface quoted Saint Paul to justify the importance of using a language that the listeners could understand and acknowledged that some Christian concepts were difficult to comprehend (Doctrina 1584, Epístola). For this reason, translators were expected to take care of how these notions were rendered into native languages. Then approved translations were supposed to be used by all the priests in the area in order to avoid conflicting renderings of the same text or concept. Other booklets, such as catechisms and confessionals, were also printed at the time and were in use until well into the nineteenth century. Particularly interesting are the confessionals written by the Jesuit Horacio Carochi, as they served as guidebooks for the priests to understand not only the language, but also the cultural background behind the native answers to the questions that priests were supposed to ask during the sacrament of confession. Benito Rinaldini and Fernando de la Carrera also wrote model confessionals for priests. Although the Third Lima Council accepted the need of translation for conversion, it was also agreed that certain concepts had to be kept in Spanish, assuming that, as Rabasa states (2011, 24), translation was a faulty language. Consequently, when translating key Christian terms the missionaries retained original words such as Dios, Virgen, and Espíritu Santo (Durston 2007, 214–15). This approach, which was later applied to the translation of religious texts in the Philippines (Rafael 1988, 29), followed the footsteps of earlier missionaries such as Domingo de Santo Tomás, who had written grammars and lexicons to facilitate the understanding of native languages and the translation process. Domingo de Santo Tomás’s own Gramática o arte de la legua general de los indios de los Reynos del Perú, published in Valladolid in 1560, was accompanied by a sermon booklet that was meant to facilitate the communication of Christian concepts to the Indians. The Plática para todos los indios, as the sermon was called, reflects Domingo de Santo Tomás’s views on translation, as every Spanish line is followed by a line in Quechua in bigger font, thus highlighting the importance of the target language. This practice was, in fact, common at the time (Salas García 2013, 79–81), as was the preservation of a number of Christian concepts that were considered untranslatable. Santo Domingo only preserved the words Dios [God], caballo [horse] and cristiano [Christian], whereas other key concepts were rendered in the Quechua language (see Taylor 2003, 22–25 for a discussion of Santo Domingo’s transformations). These and other similar texts were supposed to have been destroyed after the Third Lima Council in order to avoid religious controversies, but their survival allows researchers to investigate the way in which translation and translation policies evolved during the colonial period. In the Philippines, Tagalog was the most widely studied language (Sales 2016), as it was spoken in the highly populated areas of Luzon, in the south west of the country (Rafael 1988, 26). The Dominican priest Francisco Blancas de San José wrote a monumental work, Arte y reglas de la lengua tagala, first published in 1610, with subsequent editions in 1752 and 1832. The book, inspired by Latin and Spanish grammars, was used by the missionaries for conversion. In 1679, Father Agustín de Magdalena produced another grammar of Tagalog entitled 62

Translation and the Spanish Empire

Arte de la lengua tagala sacado de diversos artes, which was also based on the grammatical notions of Latin and Spanish. Thus, Tagalog was shaped following European linguistic conventions in order to be used for translation purposes, which highlights the existence of a hierarchy of languages (Rafael 1988, 27). The translation of the Christian doctrine into native languages has been compared to the Pentecostal flame (Rafael 1988, 32) or to the foundation of the church at the Pentecost (Durston 2007, 147), as it allowed the priests to spread the word of God among the natives. But the work of the various religious orders across the empire had other far-reaching consequences. Priests and friars were responsible for the Hispanization of the indigenous peoples. Thus, they founded and were in charge of schools and universities where local languages were taught. As mentioned, they wrote the grammars and lexicons needed to train translators, to translate religious texts and, in general, to communicate with the natives at various levels. In order to do this they imposed Western-style literacy and, in the long run, they contributed to the disappearance of many local languages and traditions. But, as Mannheim (1991) claims, the call to evangelize was also a stimulus to learn about the others, if only to subjugate them. Finally, it is worth noting that the church and the monarchy did not only work in harmony. The relationship between them was mutually dependent and often antagonistic, both in the Americas and in the Philippines (Rafael 2016, 24). We have to bear in mind that, very often, Spanish settlers and court representatives were more interested in profiteering than in converting the natives. In addition, as the laws concerning the teaching of Spanish and the use of translation changed over time, the mendicant orders were faced with everyday communication problems of different types.

The Black Legend and the translation of Spanish chronicles Translation also played a fundamental role in Europe’s national rivalries. Spanish chronicles of the conquest were translated into Latin, French, Dutch, English, German and Italian. One of the most famous documents dating from this period was authored by Bartolomé de las Casas, a former conqueror who later joined the Dominican order and wrote an indictment against the Spanish conquest of the Caribbean islands. Brevísima relación de la destrucción de las Indias, as the book was entitled, cannot be considered a historical account but rather a critique of the Spanish treatment of the natives. In it Las Casas appealed to Crown Prince Philip to take action in favour of the Indian population. Although the text was not supposed to be published, it came out in 1552 and was rapidly translated into all the major European languages, including French, Dutch and, of course, English. The Brevísima was crucial in the creation and consolidation of the so-called Black Legend, whose aim was to depict Spain in the worst possible light. Las Casas’s narrative was soon appropriated by Spain’s rivals for their own colonial schemes (Lamana 2007, 133) by adulterating his original calls to improve the situation of the indigenous peoples (Hanke 1965). Among the many translations of the book, two English versions, The Spanish Colonie and Tears of the Indians (Hanke 1965; Bumas 2000) are worth mentioning. Of particular interest is the intersemiotic translation by Dutch engraver De Bry, who gathered the most atrocious stories in Las Casas’s tract in a series of illustrations that have continued to appear in retranslations of his work until the present (Valdeón 2014b, 2012a). Las Casas’s tract was one of the many works by Spanish chroniclers and navigators to be translated into other European languages. The letters written by Christopher Columbus and Hernán Cortés, López de Gómara’s Historia general de las Indias, and Pedro Cieza de León’s Crónica del Perú were translated at various times both during the Spanish colonial period and after Spain’s empire had come to an end. Although many of the translators used the prefaces 63

Roberto A. Valdeón

and introductions to stress the violent nature of Spain’s conquest of the Americas, some translators held other views. In the English version of Crónica del Perú (1709) John Stevens, the translator, expressed his admiration for the Spaniards, who, in his view, had opened the way for European expansion. Ideological manipulation was, as can be expected, a common feature of these versions, e.g. Stevens omitted most of the references to the “moralising digressions about the reasons for the conquest” (Zaro 2000, 120). The different views that the translators expressed in the paratexts that accompanied the translations of the chronicles depended on the political climate and on the alliances of their own time. The chronicles were often retranslated and old versions republished whenever the occasion called for it. At the end of the nineteenth century, as the United States of America was poised to become the new world power, the conflict over Cuba, Puerto Rico and the Philippines would incite anti-Spanish propagandists to publish a text loosely based on Las Casas’s Brevísima in the run-up to the Spanish-American war (Valdeón 2017).

Research issues Over the past two decades, a number of publications have studied the role of translation in the emergence and consolidation of the Spanish empire, both as regards the creation of the colonial machinery and the evangelization process of the natives. The appropriation of native languages for the evangelization of the Americas led to the eventual disappearance of a number of minority languages and varieties (often referred to as the lenguas particulares) and the promotion of certain languages (notably Quechua and Nahuatl) for communication and evangelization. However, this has received little attention as the topic “falls through the cracks” of history, anthropology and linguistics (Durston 2007, 1). Alan Durston has studied the variety of Quechua, in reality a family of languages and dialects, spoken in the former capital of the Inca empire and imposed as the standard lengua general by the Spanish. The promotion of these languages and the teaching of Spanish is linked to the foundation of schools and universities. In Mesoamerica, for instance, these centres aimed to train native linguists that would translate European sacred texts in order to replace native ancestral beliefs, although some authors also posit that these schools may have, in fact, combined European humanism and Mesoamerican wisdom (Arencibia Rodríguez 2006, 264). The role that these centres played in the suppression of local culture as well as in the training of the ruling elites is of interest for the history of translation. In addition, considering the strategies used in the early translation of the Old and New Testaments into Nauhatl, Arencibia Rodríguez has stressed that texts can provide insights into the changing role of translation in the spread of Christianity, as priests replaced words that were believed too complex or shocking for the natives (2006, 270). Like Durston, Arencibia Rodríguez also stresses the Pentecostal view of translation as the gift of speech in order to spread Christianity (2006, 271). This meant that the various church councils and, in particular the Third Lima Council in the Andes, established a simplified variety of Quechua to be easily learned by the priests and used in the area (Durston 2014, 228–9). The language work carried out by Spanish missionaries (but also by their French, English, Portuguese and German counterparts) has been the basis of a subdiscipline referred to as missionary linguistics, which has thrived over the past decade and promises to provide more insights into the role of language and translation during the era of European empires. Missionary linguistics had not received much attention in linguistic circles until the twenty-first century, but it has burgeoned since the international conference held at the University of Oslo in 2003 (for an overview of the evolution of the discipline see Zwartjes 2012). As regards missionary linguistics and Spanish America, Zimmermann’s work is particularly relevant for TS research, as he 64

Translation and the Spanish Empire

has studied the use of Spanish religious terms in historic documents and religious texts (2009). The seventh international conference on missionary linguistics, held in Bremen in 2012, was devoted to translation theories and practices, and a collection of articles based on some of the presentation was subsequently published (Zwartjes, Zimmermann, and Schrader-Kniffki 2014). The book, which includes a section on Asian languages as well, attempted to fill the gap concerning translation and missionary linguistics, and also pointed to future avenues of research: the legacy of St Jerome and St Augustine in missionary translation, the role of translation in education, identities and acculturation and so on. The crucial role of translation in native resistance against European rule is another area of interest. While authors like Cheyfitz (1997) have tended to regard translation as a metaphor of violence, translators and interpreters also use their skills to their advantage (Valdeón 2014a, 220–4). Doña Marina, Cortés’s interpreter, has indeed been used as a metaphor for the violation of the lands and of native women, although this view has been regarded as very partial (Valdeón 2013) and probably ideologically motivated. Many interpreters were natives, but others were Spanish or mestizo. In spite of the regulations approved by the administration as regards their duties and salaries, both indigenous and native interpreters had their own private agendas as a consequence of the times they lived through. These also evolved over time as we move from the period of the conquest to the colonial era. Thus, the native elites became familiar with the Spanish administration, and used that knowledge to claim properties and rights. Extant documents, like Mesoamerican primordial titles, provide evidence of the complex relationship between languages and cultures. These documents were often used in litigations against Spanish rule (Haskett 2005). The use of translated Spanish chronicles as propaganda to promote alternative empires in the Americas and beyond has also been studied by a number of scholars. Among them, the translation of Bartolomé de las Casas’s Brevísima relación de la destrucción de las Indias has attracted the most attention. Philip W. Powell, a professor of history at the University of California Santa Barbara was particularly critical of the Dominican monk, whom he blamed for the spread of the Black Legend. In his book Tree of Hate, which can hardly be described as politically correct by twenty-first century standards, Powell described Las Casas as an immortal zealot (2008, 30–36), the “most powerful weapon of Spain’s enemies” (2008, 32). However, the narratives projected by the translations of the book (thoroughly studied by Marieke Delahaye 2010), have been called into question by many researchers (e.g. Bumas 2000) and unveil the rivalries between Spain as a global power and the emerging empires of the period, which coveted Iberian possessions in the Americas. Although the study of the source text and its innumerable translations has produced a considerable bulk of publications, the interest in Las Casas’s tract continues to attract considerable attention (Bumas 2000; Hart 2001; Mancall 2008). Valdeón has studied the first English translations (2012a) and one of the most recent translations of the book (2014b), as well as the propagandist use of Las Casas in the years before the Spanish-American war (2017). On the other hand, and not unrelated to the above, Barbara Fuchs (2013) has recently worked on the importance of the translation of Spanish texts for the development of English as a language and also as a nation. Fuchs stresses the relationship between what she terms as copia as a metaphor taken up by English early modern writers preoccupied with the poverty the English language (2013, 15): they believed it was necessary to draw on the Spanish language and to adapt it to their own vernacular. Fuchs adds that the influence of Spanish was greater and more fruitful than those of other languages (2013, 16). Fuchs’s book opens an important avenue of research in order to explore the relationship between language, translation, copia and appropriation, both as regards languages and ideology, during the colonial period. 65

Roberto A. Valdeón

Future directions As translators have become more central in TS, future studies could delve into the role of translators and interpreters in the Americas, but also in Europe. The many references to the interpreters in the chronicles could provide a historical perspective not only of that role, but also of how the chroniclers perceived it. On the other hand, the voices of the many translators that rendered the chronicles into other languages could throw light on the controversial relationship between the Spanish and their European rivals. Luckily, the names and work of most of these translators have come down to us. For example, Clements R. Markham, an explorer and geographer who travelled through much of South America in the nineteenth century, translated many of the chronicles. Apart from the Americas, the importance of translation during Spain’s colonial rule in Africa and Asia are also worth exploring. As it also happened in the Americas and in the Philippines, Susana Castillo Rodríguez (2013) has studied the role of the missions in the spread of Spanish in Equatorial Guinea, as well as the conflict with English in the area. Castillo Rodríguez (2015), who has just started delving into the linguistic policies in that part of the world, has shown that, like in other regions ruled by Spain, the missionaries were the first to describe the structure of native languages. This knowledge was used for the purposes of conversion and was related to the European feeling of superiority over the black population. Comparative studies of language and translation policies and practices among the various regions of the Spanish empire on the one hand, and between those of other European colonial powers on the other, could also provide insights into the intersections between language, translation, and empire. On the other hand, comparative studies on the role on translation in the colonies could be of interest. Even though in the Anglophone world some authors have claimed that there was a clear difference between the religious policies and goals of the Spanish, the Portuguese, the English and the French empires in the Americas, the truth is that all of them attempted the conversion of the natives in one way or another. In fact, authors like Cañizares-Esguerra (2006, 1–29) found important similarities between the evangelization processes carried out by the Catholics and the Protestants in the Continent. In the same way as the Spanish friars and priests wrote grammars and lexicons of native languages, so did English missionaries in North America. For instance, John Eliot, a Puritan educated at Cambridge, used a native Indian to help him translate prayers and sermons. In 1663 he published the first translation of the Bible into a native American language, Mamusse Wunneetupanatamwe Up-Biblum God, and in 1666, he published a grammar of the Algonquin language, entitled The English Grammar Begun. Both titles are indicative of the relationship between local languages and English, and are reminiscent of the hierarchical relationship between Spanish and local languages in South and Central America. The study of the representation of mediators in the chronicles (and how it was translated into other languages) could provide relevant insights into the role of interpreters during the conquest and the colonial period. Italiano (2016, 51–72), for instance, has recently analysed Cabeza de Vacas’s Naufragios, paying particular attention to the position of the interpreters amidst a group of Europeans stranded among Native Americas in the sixteenth century. The chronicles were translated and also adapted by historians for their own accounts of the conquest. The transformation of the representation of interpreters in the works of early Anglophone historians and translators could, thus, inform us of the relationship between imperial rivals. For instance, William H. Prescott in the United States and Robert B. Cunninghame in the United Kingdom have used the chronicles extensively in their own work, providing a 66

Translation and the Spanish Empire

picture not only of the complex relationship between the Anglophone and the Hispanic world, but also of Cunninghame’s critical view of Prescott’s work (1915, 87). Another important area of research could consider which texts were translated and why. As mentioned, many of the Spanish chronicles were rendered into the major European languages at some point or another. Las Casas’s Brevísima was, of course, a favourite that kept turning up whenever it was necessary to build up a case against the Spanish. However, it was not by any means the only one. Translations of the works by Cieza de León, José de Acosta and so on were very popular at various points. Thus, the reasons for the publication of these versions could be studied against the historical background in which they were produced. On the other hand, even though the historical accounts of the English conquest, or planting, are fewer, it is worth considering why these texts were not translated during the colonial period. Two such texts are John Smith’s Generall Historie of Virginia, published in 1624, and George Percys’ 1612 Trewe Relacyon, which provide clear evidence of English cruelty in the English colonies. These texts were not translated into Spanish. Thus, while the English used many Spanish chronicles as propaganda, the Spanish did not seem to be interested in this type of ideological warfare. Comparative studies could also contribute to enlightening the relationship between the Spanish empire and other colonial projects, as well as between the Spanish language and literary traditions and those of other nations. As mentioned, Barbara Fuchs (2013) has opened a line of research concerning the influence of translations of Spanish texts upon the English language and culture that could provide further insights into the complex set of relationships between England and Spain in the early modern period. Following on the footsteps of Hanke (1965 [1949]), some contemporary authors (Cañizares-Esguerra 2006; Hart 2001) have begun to question well-established narratives concerning the differences and similarities between Spain and other European colonial empires. Varela (2014, 30), for instance, mentions the case of John Smith’s version of his encounter with Pocahontas and Juan Ortiz’s experience as a case in point. Additionally, it could be worth exploring the extent to which some of these accounts have, in fact, been fictionalized and how translation scholars may have contributed to this fictionalization process (for a discussion of the fictionalization of Doña Marina, Hernán Cortés’s interpreter, see Valdeón 2013). Although less known than the Spanish texts on the conquest, research into the relationship between the Spanish chronicles and the accounts of other imperial projects written in other European languages could prove equally enlightening. One project based at the University of Leuven in Belgium (“Colonial ambitions, imperial interests”, directed by Wim Coudenys, Lieve Behiels and Johan Verberckmoes) could yield significant results in this sense. The analysis of the (translated) texts and paratexts, the agents involved in their production, the relationship between these translations and other nations and how the former contributed to shaping the latter are issues that have only begun to be explored. Future studies could provide insights into why some texts were retranslated centuries after the first versions were produced, while others were not translated until the twentieth or twenty-first centuries. For instance, Cieza de León’s Crónica del Perú was retranslated in the second half of the nineteenth century by Clements R. Markham. Clements’s introduction was highly critical of the Spanish conquest at the time even if Spain’s empire was long gone, Interestingly, information concerning British massacres of indigenous peoples in the different parts of the globe, e.g. Tasmania, was available, but Markham chose to ignore it: like so many authors before and after his time, he may have resorted to a critique of the Spanish conquest as a consolation myth. On the other hand, the first version of Juan de Betanzos’s Suma y Narración de los Incas was published in 1996. His work was largely unknown until the twentieth century. 67

Roberto A. Valdeón

Researchers could delve into the reasons why certain works were published, translated and retranslated with some regularity, while others were not. They could also contribute to the study of the chroniclers’ views on the use of translation and interpreters for the compilation of information. Betanzos, for instance, spoke of his duty to be faithful to the words of his witnesses, which he rendered into Spanish without adapting them to European writing conventions (Cañizares-Esguerra 2001, 75). In addition, during the past decades, we have witnessed a renewed interest in the chronicles, particularly in the United States, where academics from various disciplines have produced translations and retranslations of many of these works. In at least one case, this had given way to parallel versions of the same text, published almost simultaneously in 2005. Titu Cusi’s native account of the conquest of Peru was translated by Ralph Bauer (An Inca Account of the Conquest of Peru) and by Nicole Delia Legnani (A 16th Century Account of the Conquest). A year later, Catherine Julien rendered the text into English anew. This translation was entitled History of How the Spaniards Arrived in Peru. On the other hand, in the 1950s Toribio de Motolonía’s chronicles had become available in English thanks to two parallel translations. Research into these and other texts could delve into the motivations for these translations, the translatorial approaches (bearing in mind that some of the American translations of many of the chronicles were not carried by language specialists or trained translators), the significance of these texts within the American context as American academics are trying to revaluate the role of Spain in the formation of an American identity, an issue that has become even more complex during Donald Trump’s polemical presidency. Finally, the study of the motivation for the translation of certain documents may illustrate the complex relationships between the powers of the time. While Las Casas’s Brevísima has gone through several revisions since it was first published, the accounts of English cruelty in the Americas written by those involved in it have remained untranslated until recent decades. These texts, written by settlers like John Smith and George Percy, are rarely quoted in research (Mackenthun 1997, 263) and some had fallen conveniently into oblivion and were not published until, at least, the late nineteenth century.

Recommended reading Hanke, Lewis. 1965 [1949]. The Spanish Struggle for Justice in the Conquest of America. Boston: Little, Brown and Company. Although this is an old book, it is probably the first attempt to provide a solid study of the role of Bartolomé de las Casas in the struggle for justice, regardless of the way in which Anglophone writers may have used his work throughout the centuries. Hanke, a specialist in Las Casas, provides an intelligent critique of the English translations of the chronicles, which were used to support an English empire. Mackenthun, Gesa. 1997. Metaphors of Dispossession. American Beginnings and the Translation of Empire, 1492–1637. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press. This is an excellent study of the role of language and translation during the early colonial period. Although Mackenthun often uses the term translation as a metaphor, she analyzes many of the texts that served as the basis for the European colonial projects in Americas, comparing and contrasting Spanish and English approaches to empire vis-à-vis Native Americans. Payàs, Gertrudis. 2010. El revés del tapiz. Traducción y discurso de identidad en la Nueva España (1581–1821). Madrid: Vervuert Iberoamericana. Based on the author’s doctoral thesis, this book provides a comprehensive view of the history of translation in New Spain. Particularly interesting are the passages devoted to the production of the grammars and lexicons by the Spanish mendicants orders and their impact upon local languages, as well as those concerned with the changing policies as regards their use.

68

Translation and the Spanish Empire Valdeón, Roberto A. 2014. Translation and the Spanish Empire in the Americas. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. An overview of how translation was used during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries in Spanish America, both by the state and by the church. It also surveys the contribution of the translations of the Spanish chronicles to the narratives of other colonial empires. It provides many references to the work done in various disciplines over the past decades.

References Aguirre, Joaquín, and Juan Montalbán. 1846. Recopilación compendiada de las Leyes de Indias. Madrid: Ignacio Boix. Anderson, Arthur J. O., Frances Berdan, and James Lockhart. 1976. “The Historical-Anthropological Potential of Nahuatl Documentation.” In Beyond the Codices: The Nahua View of Colonial Mexico, edited by Arthur J. O. Anderson, Frances Berdan, and James Lockhart, 1–12. Berkeley: University of California Press. Arencibia Rodríguez, Lourdes. 2006. “The Imperial College of Santa Cruz de Tlatelolco: The First School of Translators and Interpreters in Sixteenth-Century Spanish America.” In Charting the Future of Translation History, edited by Georges L. Bastin and Paul F. Bandia, 263–75. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press. Barrera-Osorio, Antonio. 2006. Experiencing Nature: The Spanish American Empire and the Early Scientific Revolution. Austin: University of Texas Press. Bastin, Georges L. 2013. “La traducción en la conquista espiritual de Venezuela.” In Traducción y humanismo, edited by Antonio Bueno García and Miguel A. Vega Cernuda, 131–51. Brussels: Éditions du Hazard. Blancas de San José, Francisco. 1610. Arte y reglas de la lengua tagala. Bataan: Thomas Pinpin. Brokaw, Galen. 2010. A History of the Khipu. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bumas, E. Shaskan. 2000. “The Cannibal Butcher Shop: Protestant Uses of las Casas’s Brevísima relación in Europe and the American Colonies.” Early American Literature 35 (2): 107–36. Cañizares-Esguerra, Jorge. 2001. How to Write the History of the New World: Histories, Epistemologies, and Identities in the Eighteenth-Century Atlantic World. Stanford: Stanford University Press. ———. 2006. Puritan Conquistadors: Iberianizing the Atlantic, 1550–1700. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Castillo Rodríguez, Susana. 2013. “Language and the Hispanization of Equatorial Guinea.” In A Political History of Spanish: The Making of a Language, edited by José del Valle, 350–63. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ———. 2015. “The First Missionary Linguistics in Fernando Po.” In Colonialism and Missionary Linguistics, edited by Klaus Zimmermann and Birte Kellerman-Rehbein, 75–106. Berlin: De Gruyter. Cheyfitz, Eric. 1997 [1991]. The Poetics of Imperialism. Translation and Colonization from the Tempest to Tarzan. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Colón, Cristóbal. 1870. Carta de Cristóbal Colón. Paris: Librairie Tross. Cunninghame Graham, Robert B. 1915. Bernal Díaz del Castillo Being Some Account of Him, Taken from His True Story of the Conquest of New Spain. London: Eveleigh Nash. Delahaye, Marieke. 2010. “Intertextuality and Historiography. Case Study: The European Translation of Brevísima relación de la destrucción de las Indias, 1552, de Bartolomé de las Casas.” Paper presented at the 6th EST Congress “Tracks and Treks in TS”, Leuven, September 23–25. Doctrina Cristiana, y catecismo, para instrucción de indios. 1584. Lima: Antonio Ricardo. Durston, Alan. 2007. Pastoral Quechua: The History of Christian Translation in Colonial Peru, 1550– 1650. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press. ———. 2014. “Standard Colonial Quechua.” In Iberian Imperialism and Language Evolution in Latin America, edited by Salikoko S. Mufwene, 225–43. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Early, John D. 2006. The Maya and Catholicism: An Encounter of Worldviews. Gainsville, FL: University of Florida Press. Fuchs, Barbara. 2013. The Poetics of Piracy: Emulating Spain in English Literature. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Giambruno, Cynthia. 2008. “The Role of the Interpreter in the Governance of Sixteenth- and SeventeenthCentury Spanish Colonies in the ‘New World’: Lessons from the Past to the Present.” In Crossing

69

Roberto A. Valdeón Borders in Community Interpreting: Definitions and Dilemmas, edited by Carmen Valero-Garcés and Anne Martin, 27–49. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Gose, Peter. 2008. Invaders as Ancestors: On the Intercultural Making and Unmaking of Spanish Colonialism in the Andes. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Greenblatt, Stephen J. 1976. “Learning to Curse: Aspects of Linguistic Colonialism in the Sixteenth Century.” In First Images of America: The Impact of the New World on the Old, edited by Fredi Ciapelli, Michael J. B. Allen, and Robert L. Benson, 561–80. Berkeley: University of California Press. Hanke, Lewis. 1938. “The Requirement and Its Interpreters.” Revista de Historia de América 1: 25–34. ———. 1965 [1949]. The Spanish Struggle for Justice in the Conquest of America. Boston: Little, Brown and Company. Hart, Jonathan. 2001. Representing the New World: The English and French Uses of the Example of Spain. London: Palgrave. Haskett, Roberto. 2005. Visions of Paradise: Primordial Titles and Mesoamerican History in Cuernavaca. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press. Italiano, Federico. 2016. Translation and Geography. London: Routledge. Kartunnen, Frances. 1994. Between Worlds: Interpreters, Guides and Survivors. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Klor de Alva, J. Jorge. 1989. “Language, Politics and Translation: Colonial Discourse and Classical Nahuatl in New Spain.” In The Art of Translation. Voices from the Field, edited by Rosanna Warren, 143–62. Boston: Northeastern University Press. Lamana, Gonzalo. 2007. “Of Books, Popes, and Huacas; or, the Dilemmas of Being Christian.” In Rereading the Black Legend: The Discourses of Religious and Racial Difference in the Renaissance Empires, edited by Margaret R. Greer, Walter D. Mignolo, and Maureen Quilligan, 117–49. Chicago/ London: The University of Chicago Press. ———. 2008. Domination Without Dominance: Inca-Spanish Encounters in Early Colonial Peru. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Las Casas, Bartolomé de. 1956. Historia de las Indias. Caracas: Ayacucho. Mackenthun, Gesa. 1997. Metaphors of Dispossession. American Beginnings and the Translation of Empire, 1492–1637. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press. Mancall, Peter C. 2008. “Cultural Encounters, Americans and Europeans.” In A Companion to American Cultural History, edited by Karen Halttunen, 3–16. Oxford: Blackwell. Mannheim, Bruce. 1991. The Language of the Inka Since the European Invasion. Austin: The University of Texas Press. Mignolo, Walter. 1989. “Literacy and Colonization: The New World Experience.” In 1492–1992: Re/ Discovering Colonial Writing, edited by Rene Jara and Nicholas Spadaccini, 51–96. Minneapolis: The Prisma Institute. ———. 2003 [1995]. The Darker Side of the Renaissance. Literacy, Territoriality and Colonization. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press. Payàs, Gertrudis. 2010. El revés del tapiz: Traducción y discurso de identidad en la Nueva España (1581–1821). Madrid: Vervuert Iberoamericana. Powell, Philip W. 2008 [1971]. Tree of Hate. Propaganda and Prejudices Affecting United States Relations with the Hispanic World. Alburquerque: University of New Mexico Press. Rabasa, José. 2011. Tell Me the Story of How I  Conquered You: Elsewheres and Ethnosuicide in the Colonial Mesoamerican World. Austin: University of Texas Press. Rafael, Vicente L. 1988. Contracting Colonialism: Translation and Christian Conversion in Tagalog Society Under Early Spanish Rule. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. ———. 2016. Motherless Tongues: The Insurgency of Language amid Wars of Translation. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Restall, Matthew. 2003. Seven Myths of the Spanish Conquest. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ruiz Medrano, Ethelia. 2010. Mexico’s Indigenous Communities: Their Lands and Histories, 1500–2010. Boulder, CO: University Press of Colorado. Salas García, José Antonio. 2013. “Etapas del proceso de traducción colonial en el Perú, desde la óptica del mochica.” In La traducción a través de los tiempos, espacios y disciplinas, edited by Silke Jansen and Martina Schrader-Kniffki, 77–123. Berlin: Frank & Timme. Sales, Marlon James. 2016. “Translating Politeness Cues in the Philippine Missionary Linguistics: ‘Hail, Mister Mary!’ and Other Stories.” Journal of World Languages 3 (1): 54–66.

70

Translation and the Spanish Empire Sousa, Lisa, Stafford Poole, and James Lockhart. 1998. The Story of Guadalupe: Luis Laso de la Vega’s Huei tlamahuiçoltica of 1649. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Taylor, Gerald. 2003. El sol, la luna y las estrellas no son de Dios. . . . La evangelización en quechua (siglo XVI)/The Sun, the Moon and the Stars Do Not Belong to God . . . Evangelization in Quechua (16th Century). Lima: Ifea. Toledo, Francisco de. 1867. Relaciones de los vireyes y audiencias que han gobernado el Perú. Tomo I. Memorial y Ordenananzas de D. Francisco de Toledo. Lima: Imprenta del Estado por J. E. del Campo. Valdeón, Roberto A. 2012a. “Tears of the Indies and the Power of Translation: John Phillips’s Version of Brevísima relación de la destrucción de las Indias.” Bulletin of Spanish Studies 89 (6): 839–58. ———. 2012b. “Translation and the Crónica del Perú: The Many Voices of Pedro Cieza de León.” Philological Quarterly 91 (4): 569–90. ———. 2013. “Doña Marina/La Malinche: A  Historiographical Approach of the Interpreter/Traitor.” Target 25 (2): 157–79. doi:10.1075/target.25.2.02val. ———. 2014a. Translation and the Spanish Empire in the Americas. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ———. 2014b. “The 1992 Retranslation of Brevísima relación de la destrucción de las Indias.” Translation Studies 7 (1): 1–16. ———. 2017. “Bartolomé de las Casas and the Spanish-American War: Translation, Appropriation and the 1898 Edition of Brevísima relación de la destrucción de las Indias.” Translation and Interpreting Studies 12 (3): 367–82. Varela, Consuelo. 2014. “Las conquistas hispanas del siglo XVI: la función de los intérpretes, lenguas y guías.” In Legado español en los Estados Unidos, edited by José Luis de la Peña and Gabriel Alou, 15–34. Madrid: Escuela Diplomática. Zaro, Juan J. 2000. “Translation and Historical Stereotypes: The Case of Pedro Cieza de León’s Crónica del Perú.” TTR: traduction, terminologie, rédaction 13 (1): 113–35. Zimmermann, Klaus. 2009. “La construcción discursive del diccionario en la Langüística Misionera: Interculturalidad, glotocentrismo e hibridez en diccionarios náhuatl y hñähñu-otomí de los siglos XVI–XVII (Alonso de Molina, Alonso URbano, y autor anónimo 1640.” In Historiografía de las ciencias del lenguaje (ámbito hispánico y portugués). Revista Internacional de Lingüística Iberoamericana, vol. 13, edited by Klaus Zimmermann and Otto Zwartjes, 161–86. Frankfurt am Main: Vervuent/Madrid: Iberoamerica. Zúñiga, Antonio de. 1855. “Carta de Fray Antonio de Zúñiga al Rey Felipe II: Le habla de varios abusos que habia en el reino del Perú, àra que los corrigiese.” In Colección de documentos inéditos para la historia de España, Tomo XXVI, edited by Marqués de Pida and Miguel Salvá, 87–122. Madrid: Imprenta de la Viuda de Calero. Zwartjes, Otto. 2012. “The Historiography of Missionary Linguistics: Present State and Further Research Opportunities.” Historiographia Linguistica 39 (2/3): 185–242. doi:10.1075/hl.39.2.01zwa. Zwartjes, Otto, Klaus Zimmermann, and Martina Schrader-Kniffki, eds. 2014. Missionary Linguistics V/Lingüística Misionera V: Translation Theories and Practices. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

71

4 TRANSLATION IN HISPANIC AMERICA Álvaro Echeverri and Georges L. Bastin

Introduction “Uniform and diverse”, just like Hispanic America itself, is a most fitting definition for translation in the Hispanic subcontinent. Reflecting a basic linguistic and cultural unity built on the essential and paradoxical relation between Hispanism and Indigenism, Hispanic American translation unsurprisingly finds its ideal symbiosis in the real-magic figure of Malinalli Tenépal. This Aztec Indian, better known as la Malinche, symbol of the métissage of cultures, was the first American interpreter to stamp her controversial mark on the polemic process of universal history through which the hitherto unknown continent became the ‘New World’ of men and ideas, notwithstanding its millenary tradition. According to Valdeón’s reading of Octavio Paz, the latter “referred to the paradox of La Malinche as being at the root of the Mexican identity vis-à-vis the European conqueror” (2013, 102). Paz (1997, 110–12) also concluded that the Mexican people were unable to come to terms with their own mixed identity because of their inability to accept their own historical predicament (as quoted in Valdeón 2013). In America, translation was born with the continent and has not ceased to leave its mark upon its history and its peoples. Paraphrasing Paz (1990, 9), Americans learned to speak Spanish, and, therefore, to translate. Translation in Hispanic America was not only an essential tool for the successful evangelizing campaign during the spiritual Spanish conquest of the continent, it was also incorporated in the very first colonial literature, namely, the métis chronicles by Felipe Guamán Poma (1550–1616) and Inca Garcilaso de la Vega (1539–1616) as a precursor to South American literary writing (Viereck 2005). After Independence, translation activity (political, scientific and literary texts) was creatively carried out by members of the political and intellectual elites, especially to validate the local vis-a-vis the foreign. In many cases, this resulted in appropriation. Much like translation theory in the Western world, the first theoretical musings about translation in Hispanic America were documented by passionate translators like Andrés Bello (1781–1865), Miguel Antonio Caro (1843–1909), José Martí (1853–1895), and Bartolomé Mitre (1821–1906), and were appended as prefaces or introductions to translated texts. In Hispanic America, translation represents both a way of being and a way of thinking. As Edwin Gentzler (2008, 5) states, “Translation in the Americas is less something that happens 72

Translation in Hispanic America

between separate and distinct cultures and more something that is constitutive of those cultures”, or “Translation in South America is much more than a linguistic operation; rather, it has become one of the means by which an entire continent has come to define itself” (2008, 108). In 1827, 1831 and 1845, Andrés Bello included theoretical ideas in his prologues to and commentaries on translations. However, Julio César Santoyo (1987, 13) notes, in his proposed periodization of translation history in the Spanish-speaking world, that theorization starts in 1888. That year, the Colombian writer, Miguel Antonio Caro, wrote theoretical considerations that were added in 1889 as an introduction to his Traducciones poéticas [poetic translations]. In 1889, Bartolomé Mitre titled the foreword of his La Divina Comedia translation: “Translator’s Theory”; so, too, did José Martí (1875) in his translation of the Preface to Victor Hugo’s Mes fils. In more recent times, Octavio Paz, in Traducción: literatura y literalidad (1990), a magnificent reflection on translation, added another milestone to the theoretical discussion about translation in the region. The starting point of modern theorization in Hispanic America could, thus, be attributed to Bello, but, following Viereck and Payàs, it is Guaman Poma, Garcilaso de la Vega and Bernardino de Sahagún who are associated with the very birth of translation in Hispanic America. Hispanic American authors have also reached the international Translation Studies community and are often included in anthological publications on the history of translation. Jorge Luis Borges is, without doubt, the most quoted of Hispanic American translation thinkers, on the strength of his “Los traductores de las 1001 noches” [The Translators of the Thousand and One Nights] (1936) and many other translations. But many are the intellectuals who have helped lay the foundations of a ‘Hispanic American way of translating’. Waisman (2010, 53) also explains that since the movements of Independence and the processes of nation formation at the end of the colonial period, especially in the nineteenth century, “translation in Latin America has functioned as a dynamic source for founding, developing and expanding [the region’s] literary tradition”. Hispanic America has become a large market for translation. Apart from the increasing number of publishing houses, the demand for translation is guaranteed by the volume of diplomatic, commercial, industrial, and technological exchange required by a community of fifteen countries and more than 500 million people (Bastin 2009, 491). However, while training programmes in universities, institutes, or professional translation associations are to be found in most countries in the region, their existence is not synonymous with full institutionalization or recognition of the translation profession. Translation is still regarded as an ancillary activity and, even today, is hardly recognized as an object of study.

Historical perspective While no concrete evidence to this effect has been found, translation must have occurred well before Columbus, in the exchanges between the many different linguistic communities that lived on the continent. The Mayan, Incan and other similar empires could not have been constituted without close linguistic exchanges between their multiple ethnicities. In contrast with western European periodization, translation history in America after 1492 can be divided into four main periods: (1) encounter and conquest (1492 to 1521/1533, i.e., the fall of Moctezuma and Inca Atahualpa), (2) colonization (sixteenth to eighteenth century), (3) pre-Independence and Emancipation (end of the eighteenth to the first half of the nineteenth century), and (4) creation and consolidation of the different Republics (the second half of the nineteenth century to the present) (Fundación Polar 1988, Tome 3, 108). This periodization reveals two brief, crucial spells of intense translation activity: encounter and 73

Álvaro Echeverri and Georges L. Bastin

conquest; and pre-Independence and Emancipation. The first, encounter and conquest, lasting around fifty years, represents, principally, the very first exchanges between conquerors and the local populations, facilitated by Indian and Spanish “lenguas” or interpreters, including the so-called “caraspálidas” [palefaces] (Herren 1991). The second period, pre-Independence and Emancipation, also lasting half a century, was characterized by Spanish translations of European and North American philosophical and political texts aimed at nurturing the ideological aspirations of the South American elites for independence, and the building of the first republics (Bastin and Echeverri 2004). The role played by translation in the various periodicals of the region is to be underlined, as they contributed significantly to the spread of Enlightenment ideas and ideals (Navarro 2014) and to the development of liberal education (Montoya 2015). The two other periods were much lengthier and produced a considerable quantity of translations, as the activity was more stable, organized, and systematic. During the nearly three-centuries-long colonization period, the major translation activity was carried out by missionaries, in order to facilitate the evangelization of the native populations. This involved the translation from Spanish into the native tongues of mainly catechisms, books of prayer and confession, and doctrines (Payàs 2010; Bastin 2013), rendering the referential world of indigenous communities similar to that of the Europeans, the first step of a cultural assimilation. No less important are the translations from American languages into Spanish (Bastin 2009). A good example is provided by Historia general de las cosas de Nueva España [General History of the Things of New Spain], transcribed in Náhuatl by a team led by Franciscan friar, Bernardino de Sahagún, from testimonies of elders and old practitioners from Tlatelolco, and translated into Spanish by Sahagún between 1540 and 1585. Since the second half of the nineteenth century, the fourth period, translation has become a widespread activity in many different fields – literature, science, commerce, and law – to name a few. A  comprehensive account with translator details and examples of translations is provided in Lafarga y Pegenaute’s (2013) Diccionario histórico de la traducción en Hispanoamérica [Historical Dictionary of Translation in Hispanic America]. Another perspective on the historical development of translation is offered by Birgit Scharlau (2004, 25–28), according to whom interest in translation in Hispanic America is observable in three fields of studies which converge into a sort of historical periodization: translating in the Amerindian and non-Amerindian worlds, translating foreign literature, and translating within the colonial and postcolonial power relations. Surprisingly, the three categories of this diachronic description of translation evolution still apply today in studies that are being published, as we will see in our last section.

Concepts and theoretical approaches Modern theories originating in Europe and in North America have undoubtedly played a crucial role in the development of translation theory and practice in the Hispanic American continent, but in a quite peculiar way. After Independence, intellectuals and privileged members of the Hispanic American society created literary and intellectual social groups (Salones Literarios – Tertulias, Sociedades de Amigos). They looked mainly to the non-Spanish Western European traditions in their efforts to give birth to a new, national tradition in South America. “For the Salón Literario of 1837, translation is a key mechanism not only in the ‘civilizing’ Project of nation building, but also as a constitutive element of the very national identity that is being created” (Waisman 2010, 57). Juan María Gutiérrez declares, in Félix Weinberg’s 1837 Salón Literario: 74

Translation in Hispanic America

Pero esa importación del pensamiento y de la literatura europea no debe hacerse ciegamente . . . Debemos fijarnos antes en nuestras necesidades y exigencias, en el estado de nuestra sociedad y su índole . . . Y si hemos de tener una literatura, hagamos que sea nacional; que represente nuestras costumbres y nuestra naturaleza. (citado en Catelli y Gargatagli 1981, 365) But we ought not to blindly import European ideas and literature. . . . We must first carefully consider our [particular] needs and requirements, the nature of our society and its stage of development. . . . And if we must have a literature, let it be homegrown; let it represent our customs and our nature. (as quoted in Catelli y Gargatagli 1981, 365) Catelli y Gargatagli (369) note: “For the American intellectual task: it is necessary not only to escape Spain. To be American one must become a different kind of reader and translator”. Along the same lines, Marti wrote: “Ni con galos ni con celtas tenemos que hacer en nuestra América, sino con criollos y con indios” [We need neither the French nor the English to build our America. We need the Creole and the Indian] (Martí 1963, Tome 7, 59). Octavio Paz (1990, 13), like Borges before him, believes that: cada texto es único y simultáneamente la traducción de otro texto. Ningún texto es enteramente original porque el lenguaje mismo, en su esencia, es ya una traducción: primero del mundo no-verbal y, después, porque cada signo y cada frase es la traducción de otro signo y de otra frase. every text is unique and at the same time the translation of another text. No text is entirely original since language itself is, in essence, a translation: firstly, of the nonverbal world; and, secondly, in the sense that every sign and every sentence is the translation of another sign, another sentence. Paz and Borges do not believe in “cierta idea ingenua de la traducción. O sea: la traducción literal [. . .] significativamente, servil. No digo que la traducción literal sea imposible, sino que no es una traducción. [. . .] la traducción es siempre una operación literaria”. (Paz 1990, 13) [some naïve idea of translation. That is: the literal translation [.  .  .], namely, servile. I am not saying that the literal translation is impossible, but rather, that it is not a translation. [. . .] translation is always a literary operation] – and the translated piece is “[. . .] an example of the interdependency between creation and imitation, translation and original work” (Paz 1990, 26). Various examples of a like concept of refusal of literalness and acceptance of the manipulation of ‘original’ texts can be found in Hispanic American literature. Waisman (2003, 357), for instance, explains that Borges’ version of “El brujo postergado”, taken from “Exemplo XII” of Don Juan Manuel’s Conde Lucanor, is “a linguistic and cultural transposition from fourteenthcentury Medieval Spanish to twentieth-century Río de la Plata castellano, in which the temporal and geographic displacements are foregrounded by the acriollamiento of the text”. The same notion is apparent in José Martí, especially in his writings for children and teenagers, where he appropriates European translation models (Andersen, Perrault, and Mme D’Aulnay) in order to carry out, by means of fiction, a didactic project aimed at young Hispanic Americans (Arencibia 2000, 57). A similar approach can be observed in Andrés Bello, who, in his poem, Alocución a la poesía, invites the “divine poetry to leave cult Europe and set her flight to the Colombus world” (Paz 1981, LXII). It is even more obvious in his 75

Álvaro Echeverri and Georges L. Bastin

translations (or imitations, as he used to call them). In his Spanish version of Hugo’s La prière pour tous, for example, Bello leaves aside the moral, religious nature of the original, to introduce clear, political references related to his exile in London (Bastin, Echeverri, and Campo 2004, 78). As Pagni (2003, 354) puts it, translation can be seen as displacement practice that prompted the emergence of new cultural paradigms rather than as mere repetition of previous ones. This has to do with an anti-European position on the part of Hispanic American intellectuals. Waisman confirms: [. . .] Latin American writers can transform the original, including the values of the center where it was produced. This move destabilizes concepts of originality, authorship and influence, creating major cultural political implications for the periphery and its literatures. (Waisman 2003, 366) With regard to Hispanic America, therefore, one perceives a legitimate conception of translation that is significantly influenced by the ‘unfaithful’ and irreverent stance on translation and original texts adopted by key intellectuals such as Andrés Bello, Jorge Luis Borges, José Martí and Octavio Paz. Imitation through spatial displacement of foreign texts (e.g., Bello’s transplantation of Victor Hugo’s poems in tropical Hispanic America); adaptation by means of new, local references (e.g., Borges’s situating of his translations in the Rio de La Plata); or appropriation by masking a translation to the point of passing it off as a Hispanic American original (e.g., the appearance of William Burke’s translations of Hamilton, Madison and Jay texts as articles in the Gaceta de Caracas). Such are the main characteristics of what can be called the “Hispanic American way of translating”. For Justin Read: This would mean for the translator (read: “American”) to act in such a way that the act of translation becomes visible as such. Paradoxically, then, in order for one to properly speak in translation, one must willingly break the ethos of “proper” translation as self-abnegation. The language of the Americas must be bad translation. (2003, 302) For an understanding of the linguistic, cultural and ideological commitment of the intellectuals paving the way for a Hispanic American concept of translation (although, according to Viereck (2003) the idea was ushered in by the Inca Garcilaso and Felipe Guamán Poma in their hybrid chronicles), one should also consider the linguistic and cultural hybridity and heterogeneity that characterize the literature as well as the changing identity of Hispanic American societies. An Argentinian example of such a commitment is Mariano Moreno’s translation of Rousseau’s Le contrat social (1810), later published in serial instalments in the Gaceta de Buenos Aires, to spread the ideas of the revolutionary French movement. Moreno anticipates “a certain kind of translation [. . .] fragmented, with omissions and a strong, framing prologue by the translator” (Waisman 2010, 56); “. . . the kind of mis-translation that will be repeated throughout the nineteenth century” (ibid.) and well after in the whole region. Hence, the never-ending questioning of concepts such as the superiority of the original and the adoption of the concept of the author’s dethroning (well before Hans Vermeer) by appropriating foreign texts and ideas. From the respective periods of Independence to the present day (Bastin, Echeverri, and Campo 2004), appropriation appears to be a major 76

Translation in Hispanic America

emancipating project with three areas of focus: the first, sociocultural; the second, political; and the third, educational. Translation has played a major role in all three areas. The first aimed at building a new man, racially métis, intellectually and affectively hybrid – molding him, in effect, mainly through literature. The second, truly emancipating, is contemporaneous with the Independence movement in Hispanic America (i.e., around the end of the eighteenth century). It is fully discernible in translations of letters, manifests, as well as philosophical and official texts putting forward a republican project, a new postcolonial political organization and mentality. The purpose of the third area of focus was the education of new generations in universal knowledge, albeit with an American mindset.

Publications, research projects and methods Hispanic America has always participated in the general discussion surrounding the ideas that have been shaping translation practices since the first encounter between originary peoples and Europeans. In Bello’s comments about the translations of the Bible (1979, 393), there are references to Tytler’s paraphrase. Likewise, his criticism of José Gómez de Hermosilla’s translation of the Iliad has all the makings of the Newman-Arnold debate about translating Homer. In fact, Miguel Antonio Caro (1888) made explicit reference to Mathew Arnold’s criticism of some translations of Homer’s works. Also interesting is Bartolomé Mitre’s (1889) mention of the Belles infidèles idea in his ‘teoría del traductor’ [translator’s theory]. Hispanic Americans have joined in and contributed to the universal study of translation. While Borges’ texts have won worldwide recognition, those of Andrés Bello and Miguel Antonio Caro have yet to achieve the same within and without the Spanish-speaking world. The region’s interest in Translation Studies has produced such a vast bibliography that it would be manifestly naïve to pretend to draw a complete and detailed landscape of it in these pages. Instead, in the following pages, we produce a mere sketch of Hispanic America’s Translation Studies landscape by referencing publications and research activities undertaken by a group of scholars actively involved in the creation of the Red Latinoamericana de Estudios de Traducción e Interpretación (RELAETI http://relaeti.org/, Latin American Network of Translation and Interpretation Studies). The contributions to the study of translation in the region made by authors such as Borges, Paz and Martí, while undeniably important, were quite sporadic. Translation could hardly be considered the main ‘occupation’ of these men, who were nonetheless active translators. But in the region as a whole, Translation Studies has benefitted from a strong push in the last twenty years, owing to the continuous efforts of scholars and researchers who have made translation their principal research topic. The number of research activities and publications concerned with translation in the region is immense. The task of giving an account of such activities becomes harder when one considers that research initiatives whose focus is translation, translators, and translated texts in Hispanic America have thrived both inside and outside the region’s geographical limits. While important studies have been carried out mainly in Argentina, Chile, Colombia and Mexico, some of the most prominent research projects about Translation Studies in Hispanic America have come into being outside its geographical boundaries – in Canada, Germany, Spain and elsewhere. Since 2004, in Canada, the research group on the history of translation in Latin America (HISTAL, www.histal.ca/) has provided a platform for and a portal to the history and the practice of translation in the region. HISTAL’s publications have covered the translation of Independence political documents, the translation done by the religious communities inhabiting the 77

Álvaro Echeverri and Georges L. Bastin

continent in colonial times, and the role played by translation in early periodicals in Venezuela and Colombia. More recently, the research group has started to investigate exploratory travels by foreign visitors to Hispanic America, from a translational point of view. Although the research subjects are directly associated with political and cultural translation, literary topics can also be found on the website, as the group collaborates with researchers around the world. The history of literary translation in the region has been thoroughly documented by Andrea Pagni (2014) in an article published in the journal Iberoamericana. In this article, Pagni, who is a full professor at the Institute of Romanic Languages of the Friedrich-AlexanderUniversität Erlangen-Nürnberg, paints a detailed landscape of literary translation history in the region over the last fifty years. We relied considerably on Pagni’s work in what follows. Pagni conceived of a rich catalogue of researchers, research groups and publications dealing with literary translation. In addition to compiling a list of the most representative Translation Studies publications in the Spanish-speaking countries, she reviews chapters from the two volumes edited in 2012 by Francisco Lafarga and Luis Pegenaute: Aspectos de la traducción en Hispanoamerica: autores, traducciones y traductores [Aspects of Translation in Hispanic America: Authors, Translations and Translators] and Lengua, cultura y política en la historia de la traducción en Hispanoamérica [Language, Culture and Politics in the History of Translation in Hispanic America]. Pagni criticizes the editors’ decision to organize the contributions in alphabetical order. Their decision, however, is, perhaps, justifiable, given that the two volumes contain all the papers presented at a congress, On Translation History in Hispanic America, held at the Universidad de Barcelona, in 2011. Nonetheless, the volumes are dwarfed by what is arguably, to date, the most extensive and exhaustive project ever published on the history of translation in the region. In 2013, the year following the publication of the two aforementioned volumes, Lafarga and Pegenaute published the Diccionario histórico de la traducción en Hispanoamérica. The editors, recognizing that on many occasions research carried out in one country was not gaining sufficient scholarly awareness in others, had set about to produce the most comprehensive compendium of translations and translators in Hispanic America. With the help of Latin American colleagues, they constituted a committee of Translation Studies scholars from Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Mexico, Peru, Spain and Venezuela, supported by various collaborators – a team totalling 106 persons. In spite of that, as Pagni (2014, 219) observes, the translation landscape of five countries (Bolivia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua) does not appear in the dictionary. In her article, Pagni also highlights certain shortcomings and questions some decisions regarding this enormous enterprise. In her opinion, a supranational approach (i.e., classification of entries by country) is not as effective as the categorization of translation research in terms of networks, professional associations, literary genres or text types. Be that as it may, for those labouring at Translation Studies in the region, the unearthing of any evidence related to translation activity in the territories under study is an enormous step forward in consolidating Translation Studies as a field of scientific research. Translation students with an interest in translation history in any of the countries included in Lafarga and Pegenaute’s dictionary will find a treasure trove of potential research topics for master’s or doctoral theses. A particular strength of the dictionary is the considerable number of translators, translated texts, translation agents, and potential translation networks it succeeds in cataloguing. Its usefulness as a reference work is beyond question. However, the perceptive reader will soon come to recognize that in some cases, the same text may have been translated in more than one country. In Hispanic America, for example, one might find a Peruvian, a Colombian, a Venezuelan, an Argentinian and a Chilean translation of some of Baudelaire’s poems. The same could be 78

Translation in Hispanic America

said of texts written by the array of authors listed under ‘translated authors’ in the dictionary’s index. All things considered, Lafarga and Pegenaute’s dictionary, conceptualized in Spain, supported with Spanish funds, but realized mainly by Hispanic American researchers, provides a unique window into translation in the entire region. Increased interest in Translation Studies has also prompted significant research efforts from within the region. The information found on HISTAL’s website, in Lafarga and Pegenaute (2012a, 2012b) and (2013), and in Pagni (2014) is sufficient proof that Hispanic Americans have been active as translators and Translation Studies scholars. As mentioned in a previous study (Bastin 2003), the first exclusive international Translation Studies event in the region was held in Santiago de Chile in 1980. Notable for the attendance of Georges Mounin and Eugene Nida, it represents a key moment in the history of Translation Studies in South America. Patricia Hormann and Ileana Cabrera, translation teachers from the Department of translation of the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, are two names commonly associated with the first efforts to foster research on translation, mostly in the countries located in the Southern Cone of the American continent, namely, Argentina, Chile and Peru, according to Cabrera et  al. (1991, 141). The initial steps taken by this group of researchers in Santiago are very likely the earliest serious efforts towards the consolidation of translation as a research field in the region. In more recent years, Gertrudis Payás at the Universidad Católica de Temuco has done important historiographical research in order to highlight the role played by translation in the development of national Chilean culture. In 2007, she edited a revised and augmented edition of Biblioteca chilena de traductores (1820–1924). Ordenada por J.T. Medina [Chilean library of translators (1820–1924). Selected and compiled by J.T. Medina]. This publication is a catalogue of translations collected over a century by José Toribio Medina in Chile. According to Payás (2007, 34), Medina conceptualized his bibliographical endeavour as a record of translation practices of his time and not as a historical document. Medina’s Biblioteca represents, in Payás’ words, a project for future generations of people interested in translation. Payás has also developed an interest in intercultural translation and interpretation, specifically as it relates to the Araucanian frontier in the seventeenth century. In 2012, she co-edited, with José Manuel Zavala, La mediación lingüístico-cultural en tiempos de guerra: cruce de miradas desde España y América [Linguistic and Cultural Mediation in Wartime: Alternative Perspectives from Spain and America]. In this book, the editors bring together texts that analyse interlinguistic mediation from a Translation Studies point of view, as well as from philosophical, anthropological and historical perspectives. The intention is to make a contribution to the discussion about one of the oldest conflicts in the continent between originary peoples and the population of Spanish or other descent. Needless to say, translation has always played a key role in fostering understanding between the linguistic communities interacting in the Mapuche region. In El revés del tapiz. Traducción y discurso de identidad en la Nueva España (1521–1821) [The Other Side of the Tapestry. Translation and Discourse on Identity in the New Spain (1521–1821)], Payás provides an elaborate account of one of the most influential research projects carried out on Translation Studies and translation history in Hispanic America. Combining historiography, Translation Studies, and language studies with topics such as translation, language and nation creation, the author ends up bringing to life a book that opens the borders of Translation Studies to scholars from other human and social sciences. El revés del tapiz is slowly but surely becoming compulsory reading for those interested in translation in the Spanish-Speaking world. In Argentina, Patricia Willson’s La constelación del Sur: Traductores y traducciones en la literatura argentina del siglo XX [The South Constellation: Translators and Translation in 79

Álvaro Echeverri and Georges L. Bastin

Twentieth-Century Argentinian Literature] (2004) has also had an enormous influence on the Hispanic American Translation Studies community. Willson carried out her research according to the guidelines of polysystems theory and descriptive Translation Studies as interpreted by modern Translation Studies scholars. She has been particularly keen on revealing the treasures of literary translation history in Argentina. Among her many other publications, it is worth singling out the article (Willson, 2008), “El fin de una época: letrados-traductores en la primera colección de literatura traducida del siglo XX en la Argentina” [The End of an Era: Men of letters /Translators in the First Collection of Twentieth-Century Translated Literature in Argentina], in which she investigates a time when translation was practised principally by a limited number of intellectuals and politicians. She undertakes a detailed study of the translation policy in the Sur Editorial and describes the collaboration between the publishing house and three prominent translators. Although the Argentinian case is the focus of Willson’s research, her study could serve as the basis for comparable research projects in other Hispanic American countries where similar scenarios occurred. It is a fact that at a particular juncture in the region, translation was practiced mainly by the educated political elites. Colombia represents another important centre of translation activity in the region. The translation programme in the school of modern languages at the Universidad de Antioquia in Medellín has made enormous strides in terms of the institutionalization of Translation Studies. Today, two research groups in Translation Studies and one in terminology are associated with the school. The research group on Translation Studies, headed by Marta Lucía Pulido, has won recognition in Hispanic America for actively promoting the discipline. Two of the group’s initiatives have borne fruit: the translation into Spanish of (1) translation theory and (2) translation history books. As Translation Studies history teaches us, one of the first steps towards the institutionalization of a discipline is to work on its history. One of the group’s first projects dealt with the translation of Jean Delisle and Judith Woodworth’s (1995) Translators through History/Les traducteurs dans l’histoire (both the English and French versions), published under the title Los traductores en la historia (2005). Various works by Antoine Berman were also translated and published in Spanish. In addition to opening up the hitherto inaccessible content of books and papers, the collaborative nature of the project provided the opportunity to engage students and teachers in discussions about translation strategies and techniques, and, above all, to clarify Translation Studies concepts. Another of the group’s projects entailed the creation in 2008 of the online journal, Mutatis Mutandis,1 an important step towards the institutionalization of the discipline in the region. This journal has been gaining recognition among the community of established and young researchers with regard to translation at home and abroad. One of the key features of the multilingual journal is a special section dedicated to the translation of Translation Studies articles and books. In fact, the translation into Spanish of key theoretical texts about translation has been fundamental to developing Translation Studies discourse in the region; discourse, here, is to be understood as knowledge. The terminology project, led by Maria Cecilia Plested, has successfully organized training seminars and events and has collaborated with INFOTERM experts and Colombian academic libraries on ISO projects. Lastly, in the northern tip of the region, Mexico has been another active centre of intense research in Translation Studies. Higher education institutions like El Colegio de Mexico as well as the Direction of Literature and the Center for Foreign-Language Learning of the Universidad Autónoma de Mexico have been fertile ground for the study of translation. For more than twenty-five years, literary translators in Latin America have been gathering yearly for the 80

Translation in Hispanic America

Encuentro internacional de traductores literarios [International Meeting of Literary Translators]. This annual gathering has also provided a platform for shared knowledge about translation. As in the case of Martha Pulido in Colombia and Gertrudis Payás in Chile, efforts to ground Translation Studies in Mexico were undertaken, among others, by Danielle Zaslavsky, a teacher and researcher at El Colegio de México, who later collaborated with Patricia Willson and Nayelli Castro. The research of Zaslavsky, who has close ties to the Encuentro Internacional de traductores literarios and to the international Translation Studies community as a researcher as well as a very active translator, is characterized by the creation of links between Translation Studies and discourse analysis. She has conducted research on the translation of Zapatista discourse (2006) and, in 2013, published the result of a study on the role of legal interpreters and translators in the case of Ernestina Rosario Ascensio, a 73-year-old Nahuatl victim of gang rape. These two publications by Zaslavsky show that although subjects related to literary translation still dominate the landscape of Translation Studies in the region, the Cultural Turn in Translation Studies has been prominent in translation practice in Hispanic America. Two of the most recent collective works on Translation Studies in Latin America corroborate this trend. The first is Traducciones y traductores en la historia cultural de America Latina [Translations and Translators in the Cultural History of Latin America] (2011) edited by Andrea Pagni, Gertrudis Payás and Patricia Willson. Four of the book’s nine chapters deal only marginally with literary subjects. The second work is Traducción, identidad y nacionalismo en Latinoamérica [Translation, Identity, and Nationalism in Latin America] (2013), edited by Nayelli Castro Ramírez, an active member of RELAETI, who has done extensive research work on the translation of philosophical texts in the Mexican context. Literary topics do not figure in any of the book’s nine chapters. These last two books were published in Mexico. Gertrudis Payás, while working, earlier, in Mexico, also published two papers on Berman’s approach: “Ética para traductores” (1996) and “Posada para forasteros” (1997). Certainly, there are many other projects worth mentioning: research, for example, carried out by María Constanza Guzmán on translated Latin American literature (2013a, 2013b); on Gregory Rabassa (2010), the translator; and her own research into the role cultural journals have played in the history of translation in Latin America (forthcoming). Lourdes Arencibia (2000) has been a very active and prolific researcher working on translation history in Cuba. Her work on José Martí as a translator is of special interest. The same could be said of Lydia Fossa’s (2006) contributions to a better understanding of lexicographical issues in colonial times and translation practices in Perú; in her book Problemáticas narrativas. Los Inkas bajo la pluma española. Though mentioned in closing, other researchers from outside Hispanic America  – aside from Andrea Pagni and Georges Bastin, mentioned earlier  – have contributed, in no small measure, to the region’s heritage. Sergio Waisman (2005), Roberto Valdeón (2014), Icíar Alonso Araguás and Jesús Jalón (2002) and Julio César Santoyo (1987) are worthy of mention.

Conclusion Hispanic America, from its unique position, has made unquestionable contributions to Translation Studies. Beginning with the conquest, the work of interpreters and translators is evidenced in the chronicles and religious texts translated from and into indigenous languages. During the colonial period, numerous foreign documents – mainly political, ideological, and philosophical – enriched the transition, steering it towards a genuine Hispanic American identity that culminated in the creation of new, independent nations. Reflections on how to translate and essays on theoretical thoughts followed, in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The 81

Álvaro Echeverri and Georges L. Bastin

twentieth century saw prominent literary figures developing a genuinely theoretical approach to translation. Cultural hybridity, appropriation, resistance, irreverence and similar concepts have been widely discussed in books and papers dealing with translation, in recent years. Much like prominent intellectuals and certain statesmen of the nineteenth century, today’s translation scholars continue to view translation as a creative operation that is neither ancillary nor servile, but active in promoting appropriation in order to foster cultural heterogeneity. While translation training and research are yet to come of age in some countries, in others, translation is being taught at the highest educational levels and there has been a prolific outturn of translation research. Hispanic American scholars, dispersed the world over, have successfully established a regional network dedicated exclusively to translation and interpretation studies (RELAETI). Their common motivation is the desire to bring to light the translation history of their respective countries, to become more intimately knowledgeable about the numerous translations and translators that spanned half a millennium, and to open up new fields of inquiry. Together with scholars within and outside of the regional network and with new knowledge at their disposal, they are set on developing a credible approach to Translation Studies, an approach whose firm foundations have already been laid by a very rich, yet not fully apprehended, translation heritage.

Note 1 Mutatis Mutandi. Revista latinoamericana de traducción. Grupo de investigación en traductología, Universidad de Antioquia, Medellín, Colombia. http://aprendeenlinea.udea.edu.co/revistas/index. php/mutatismutandis/index

References Alonso Araguás, Icíar, and Jesús Jalón. 2002. “La mediación lingüístico-cultural en las crónicas de la conquista: reflexiones metodológicas en torno a Bernal Díaz del Castillo.” In Cronistas de Indias, edited by Ángel Baldomero Espina Barrio, 159–68. Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca. Arencibia, Lourdes. 2000. El traductor Martí: Ensayo. Pinar del Río, Cuba: Ediciones Hermanos Loynaz, Colección El Fausto. Bastin, Georges L. 2003. “Por una historia de la traducción en Hispano América.” Íkala: revista de cultura y lenguaje 8 (14): 193–217. ———. 2009. “Latin American Tradition.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. 2nd ed., edited by Mona Baker and Gabriela Saldanha, 486–93. London: Routledge. ———. 2013. “La traducción en la conquista espiritual de Venezuela.” In Traducción y humanismo, edited by Antonio Bueno and Miguel Angel Vega, 131–51. Brussels: Les éditions du Hazard. Bastin, Georges L., and Álvaro Echeverri. 2004. “Traduction et révolution à l’époque de l’indépendance hispano-américaine.” META 49 (3): 562–75. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.7202/009379ar. Bastin, Georges L., Álvaro Echeverri, and Ángela Campo. 2004. “La traducción en América Latina: propia y apropiada.” Estudios. Revista de Investigaciones Literarias y Culturales 24: 69–94. ———. 2010. “Translation as the Ideological Back-Bone of the Emancipation Ideology of Hispanic America.” In Translation, Resistance and Activism, edited by Maria Tymozcko, 42–64. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press. Bello, Andrés. 1979. Obra literaria. Selección y prólogo de Pedro Grases, Caracas: Biblioteca Ayacucho. Borges, Jorge Luis. 1936. “Los traductores de las 1001 noches: Historias de la eternidad.” In Obras completas 1923–1949, 397–413. Barcelona: Emecé editors. Cabrera, Ileana, Patricia Hormann, Emilio López, and Juan Carlos Palazuelos. 1991. Investigación y traducción: algunos planteamientos y perspectivas. Santiago de Chile: Ediciones Mar del Plata. Caro, Miguel Antonio. 1888. Traducciones poéticas. Bogotá: Imprenta de la luz.

82

Translation in Hispanic America Castro Ramírez, Nayelli, ed. 2013. Traducción, identidad y nacionalismo en Latinoamérica. México: Bonilla Artigas editores. Catelli, Nora, and Marietta Gargatagli. 1981. “La traducción como construction de la patria: Discurso de Juan María Gutiérrez.” In El tábaco que fumaba Plinio. Escenas de la traducción en España y América: relatos, leyes, reflexiones sobre los otros, edited by Nora Catelli and Marietta Gargatagli, 361–8. Barcelona: Ediciones del Sebal. Delisle, Jean, and Judith Woodsworth, eds. 1995. Translators Through History. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ———, eds. 2005. Los traductores en la historia, traducción al español: Grupo de investigación en traductología, bajo la coordinación de Martha Lucía Pulido. Medellín: Editorial Universidad de Antioquia. Fossa, Lydia. 2006. Narrativas problemáticas: Los Inkas bajo la pluma española. Lima: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú. Fundación Polar. 1988. Diccionario histórico de Venezuela, Tomo 3. Caracas: Fundación Empresas Polar. Gentzler, Edwin. 2008. Translation and Identity in the Americas. London: Routledge. Guzmán, María Constanza. 2010. Gregory Rabassa’s Latin American Literature: A Translator’s Visible Legacy. Lewisburg: Bucknell University Press. ———. 2013a. “Translation North and South: Composing the Translator’s Archive.” TTR 27 (2): 171– 91. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.7202/1037136ar. [Print Version  – Guzmán, María Constanza. 2013a. “Translation North and South: Composing the Translator’s Archive.” Special issue: Buzelin, Hélène, and Alexis Nouss, eds. Traduction et conscience sociale/Translation and Social Conscience: Around the Work of Daniel Simeoni. TTR 27 (2): 171–91.] ———. 2013b. “Ángel Rama y la traducción como praxis y experiencia americana.” In La tradición teórico-crítica en América Latina: mapas y perspectivas, edited by Irene Fenoglio, Rodrigo Díaz de la Sienra, and Mónica Quijano, 57–71. México: Bonilla Artigas Editores. Herren, Ricardo. 1991. Los indios caraspálidas. Barcelona: Planeta. Lafarga, Francisco, and Luis Pegenaute, eds. 2012a. Aspectos de la traducción en Hispanoamerica: autores, traducciones y traductores. Vigo, Spain: Editorial Academia del Hispanismo. ———, eds. 2012b. Lengua, cultura y política en la historia de la traducción en Hispanoamérica. Vigo, Spain: Editorial Academia del Hispanismo. ———, eds. 2013. Diccionario histórico de la traducción en Hispanoamérica. Madrid: Iberoamericana/ Vervuert. Martí, José. 1875. Prologue to Victor Hugo’s Mes fils, translation in Martí, José. 1963–1966. Obras completas. La Habana: Editorial Nacional de Cuba. Mitré, Bartolomé. 1889. El Infierno de La divina comedia/Dante Alighieri; traducción en verso castellano ajustada al original por Bartolomé Mitre; con un prefacio y notas del traductor. Buenos Aires: Félix Lajouane. Montoya Arango, Paula Andrea. 2015. “Traducción y transferencia cultural en la reforma educativa radical en Colombia: descripción y análisis de La Escuela normal (1871–1879).” PhD thesis, Université de Montréal. Navarro, Aura. 2014. “Las intervenciones del sujeto traductor en la Gaceta de Caracas (1808–1822).” PhD thesis, Université de Montréal. Pagni, Andrea. 2003. “Traducción del espacio y espacios de la traducción: Les Jardins rde Jacques Delille en versión de Andrés Bello.” In Fricciones y silencios fundacionales, edited by En Schmidt-Welle, Friedhelm, 337–356. Madrid/Franckfurt an Main, Iberoamericana/Vervuert. ———. 2014. “Hacia una historia de la traducción en América Latina.” Iberoamericana, 14 (56): 205–224. Pagni, Andrea, Gertrudis Payás, and Patricia Willson, eds. 2011. Traducciones y traductores en la historia cultural de America Latina. Mexico City: Universidad Autónoma de Mexico. Payàs, Gertrudis. 1996. “Ética para traductores.” Proceedings of 3rd RCNA of FIT, Colorado Springs. ———. 1997. “Posada para forasteros.” ATA Proceedings, San Francisco. ———. 2007. “La biblioteca chilena de traductores, o el sentido de una colección (preliminary study).” In Biblioteca chilena de traductores (1820–1924), edited by José Toribio Medina, 23–71. Santiago, Chile: Centro de investigaciones Diego Barros Arana. ———. 2010. El revés del tapiz: Traducción y discurso de identidad en la Nueva España (1521–1821). Madrid: Iberoamericana Vervuert.

83

Álvaro Echeverri and Georges L. Bastin Payás, Gertrudis, and José Manuel Zavala. 2012. La mediación lingüístico-cultural en tiempos de guerra: cruce de miradas desde España y América. Temuco: Ediciones de la Univesidad Católica de Temuco. Paz, Fernando. 1981. “Introducción a la Poesía de Andrés Bello.” In Obras Completas de Andrés Bello, edited by Rafael Caldera, XXXVII–CXXXI. Caracas: Comisión Editora de las Obras Completas e Andrés Bello y Fundación de la Casa de Bello. Paz, Octavio. 1990. Traducción: Literatura y Literalidad. 3rd ed. Barcelona: Tusquets Editores. ———. 1997. El laberinto de la soledad y otras obras. Hardmonsworth: Penguin. Read, Justin. 2003. “Manners of Mistranslation: The Antropofaguismo of Elizabeth Bishop’s Prose and Poetry.” The New Centenial Review, 3 (1): 297–327. Santoyo, Julio César. 1987. Teoría y crítica de la traducción: Antología. Barcelona: Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona. Scharlau, Birgit. 2004. “Traducir en América Latina: genealogía de un tópico de investigación.” Estudios. Revista de Investigaciones Literarias y Culturales 24: 15–33. Valdeón, Roberto A. 2013. “On Fictional Turns, Fictionalizing Twists and the Invention of the Americas.” In Eurocentrism in Translation Studies, edited by Luc van Doorslaer and Peter Flynn, 95–108. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ———. 2014. Translation and the Spanish Empire in the Americas. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Viereck, Roberto. 2003. “La traducción como instrumento y estética de la literatura hispanoamericana.” PhD thesis, Complutense University of Madrid. ———. 2005. “La Traducción Como Práctica Generadora de Escritura en el Inca Garcilaso de la Vega y Guaman Poma de Ayala, Cultural Profiles in Hispanic Literature.” Association of Hispanic Cultural Studies, N°5, 17–35. Lima, Peru. Waisman, Sergio. 2003. “ The Thousand and One Nights in Argentina: Translation, Narrative and Politics in Borges, Puig and Piglia.” Comparative Literature Studies, 40 (4): 351–371. ———. 2005. Borges and Translation: The Irreverence of the Periphery. Lewisburg: Bucknell University Press. ———. 2010. “Foundational Scenes of Translation.” Estudios interdisciplinarios de América Latina y el Caribe 21 (1): 53–75. Willson, Patricia. 2004. La constelación del sur. Traductores y traducciones en la literature argentina del siglo XX. Avellaneda: Siglo veintiuno editores Argentina. ———. 2008. “El fin de una época: letrados-traductores en la primera colecciôn de literatura traducida en el siglo XX en la Argentina.” TRANS. Revista de traductología (12): 29–42. Zaslavsky, Danielle. 2006. “La traduction du discours zapatiste.” TTR 19 (2): 117–47. doi:http://dx.doi. org/10.7202/017827ar. ———. 2013. “Cuando traducción e interpretación se contradicen.” In Traducción, identidad y nacionalismo en Latinoamérica, edited by Nayelli Castro Ramírez, 221–51. México: Bonilla Artigas editores.

84

5 SPANISH TRANSLATION IN THE US AND CANADA Kelly Washbourne

Introduction Spanish translation facilitates private and government commerce, education, health and human services, the legal system, the arts, multimedia localization and the work of many other institutions, cultural producers, and businesses in North America. Spanish translators may work into or out of English, French, indigenous languages, or any number of other combinations; they work with written and digital media, including sound files and video games; they may work inhouse, or increasingly, due to vendor consolidation, as freelancers; they translate the gamut of communications: documentation from international accords (e.g. diplomatic negotiations over the Panama Canal), family law (divorce decrees or restraining orders) to web content (press releases and news feeds), and much more. Spanish translations are created not only for end users but also for relay translations into indigenous languages commonly spoken in the US, particularly in the area of healthcare. Spanish, in this sense, serves as a lingua franca between underserved speakers of less common languages, frequently immigrants from Mexico and Central America, and healthcare providers, researchers and educators. The U.S. Department of Defense is the US’s largest employer of language service providers (“Using Languages in National Security” 2015). National security jobs, including FBI Linguists, Foreign-Language Professionals, Language Analysts and other positions, have high demand in Spanish both for domestic and international law enforcement operations. The ‘War on Drugs’, led by such organizations as the federal Drug Enforcement Agency, frequently involves wiretaps and translated linguistic evidence from Spanish. In Canada, large sectors of employment for translation are professional, scientific and technical services; educational services; public administration; and finance and insurance. Translators in Canada are classified as Writing, Translating and Public Relations Professionals under the National Occupation Classification (NOC), and salaried positions in large banks, telecoms, law firms and other employers are more abundant than in the US. The Canadian government’s Translation Bureau hires over 1,200 linguists and provides language services such as Termium, the English-Spanish-French terminology databank (Hamilton 2010, 13). US Spanish speakers have been described as ‘diverse, growing, digital’, and demographics are trending ever upward:

85

Kelly Washbourne

online audience

27,720,332

online GDP (US$ billions)

1,496.62

total audience

32,258,301

total GDP (US$ billions)

1,741.63 (Sargent 2015, 41)

Hispanics/Latinos represent approximately 17% of the US population. While the largest Latino/a populations are still concentrated in the large cities of New York, Los Angeles, Houston, San Antonio, Chicago, Phoenix and El Paso, migration patterns are affecting Spanish translation in new ways by changing the profile of historically Anglophone sections of rural America. The national characters long attributed to given cities – New York as Puerto Rican, Los Angeles as Mexican, Miami as Cuban  – are diversifying. Increased Puerto Rican migration to the mainland US is also changing the demographics, particularly in the Southeast, which has shown unprecedented net growth of Hispanophone populations in general. Mexicans are the largest Latino population in the country, followed by Puerto Ricans, then Cubans. Puerto Ricans living on the island, which has the ambiguous colonial status of Estado Libre Asociado, roughly a commonwealth, are bound by Rule 6 of the Federal District Court rules to carry out translations into English of non-English documents used in U.S. District Courts on the Caribbean island, despite Spanish’s status as the de facto language of litigants. The signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1993 has meant increased demand for translation of commercial documents, and legal frameworks such as the Mexican Civil and Commercial Codes have freed cross-border movement of translators and interpreters for temporary entry into the signatory countries of the US, Mexico and Canada. However, the Trump regime, which took power in 2017, augurs ill for translational access to services both on the community level, in part due to the reduction of immigration and asylum eligibility, and for diplomatic translation, owing to proposed cuts to State Department funding, the impending NAFTA renegotiation, and the U.S.’s increased economic and political isolationism.

Historical perspective/review The ‘hidden translation history’ of the US, in Gentzler’s term (2008, 10–12), reveals a nation that always was multilingual, but one too in which language mediation and other efforts on behalf of minitoritarian language rights were also beset by resistance from proponents of monolingualism. Samuel Huntington’s Who Are We? (2004), which argued that the spread of Spanish in the US presented a security threat (Miller 2010, 127), offers one such example. The nativist politics of the English Only movement has further stirred animosities by framing language accommodation efforts as pandering to groups who refuse to assimilate. Such movements have been a countervailing force against the free movement of cultural goods under NAFTA (Sánchez 2009, 53). Ideological and exclusionary pressures to make citizenship depend on English language proficiency have resulted in literacy tests at different times in US history (Perea 2011). This impetus almost certainly affects the conditions for the translation profession today. Over half of US states have English as the official language. Arguments that translations cause dependency, reduce civic participation, and disincentivize the learning of English are wielded perennially (Perea 2011, 575). When “The Star-Spangled Banner” was 86

Spanish translation in the US and Canada

recorded in a Spanish translation in 2006, then-President George W. Bush argued that the translation went against the idea of citizenship rather than furthering Latino activists’ goal to promote inclusion (Simon 2010, 182). Without question, monolingualism and patriotism are inextricably associated in conservative thinking in the United States, and persistent connections abide between language and nation in US political discourse in general. Monolingual orthodoxy may only be apparent, however. Miller contends that perhaps “what has been understood as normative or ‘standard’ languages are far more complex and unstable sites of multiplicity”, filled with variations and tensions that exploit the heteroglossic instabilities within English (Miller 2010, 135). In this sense, a kind of covert shaping of the dominant language from within – through contact with stigmatized dialects and languages – constitutes a kind of translation, one that is often contestatory toward mainstream conceptions of English. The US remains, however, a diglossic country, that is, one in which English and Spanish share space but are accorded unequal statuses (Perea 2011, 576) and emblematize the tension between “plurality and conformism” at the heart of American polity (577). Even when translations exist, bias may be present. Valero Garcés (2002), for example, shows how stereotypical attitudes toward Latinos can influence translation, and how receptivity of translation among Latinos in turn depends on the group’s perception of information such as health education material as culturally appropriate. The legislative framework of Executive Order 13166 and Title VI are particularly relevant to Spanish translation in the United States: On August 11, 2000, the President signed Executive Order 13166, “Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency.” The Executive Order requires Federal agencies to examine the services they provide, identify any need for services to those with limited English proficiency (LEP), and develop and implement a system to provide those services so LEP persons can have meaningful access to them. [. . .] To assist Federal agencies in carrying out these responsibilities, the U.S. Department of Justice has issued a Policy Guidance Document, “Enforcement of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 – National Origin Discrimination Against Persons With Limited English Proficiency” (LEP Guidance). This LEP Guidance sets forth the compliance standards that recipients of Federal financial assistance must follow to ensure that their programs and activities normally provided in English are accessible to LEP persons and thus do not discriminate on the basis of national origin [.] . . . (“Executive Order 13166” 2015) National origin discrimination has been widely interpreted by organizations such as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and by many courts to subsume language discrimination, practices symbolized by English-only policies. Federal financial assistance for recipients depends upon reasonable steps taken to provide meaningful access, which may include signage, bilingual staff, interpreting and vital document translation (National Archives 2004). Courts at different levels in the United States have been found to be lagging behind in compliance with providing access to non-English vital documents, and at the state court level, more information is translated into Spanish than it is at the federal (Abel 2013, 13–14).

Academic institutions, translator training, and certification Ad hoc or non-professional Spanish-English translators have been used extensively in North America, in part due to the youth of the profession. Formal translator training and education in 87

Kelly Washbourne

North America is a relatively recent phenomenon, but Spanish has always had among the top enrollments of any language combination at the postgraduate level in North American institutions. Georgetown University (Washington, D.C.) saw the first programme in 1949, followed by the Monterey Institute of International Studies (originally the Monterey Institute of Foreign Studies, and now the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey; 1955), Brigham Young University (1976), Florida International University (1978), Kent State University (1988), and literary translation programmes in Birmingham (1971), Arkansas (1974) and Iowa (1977), plus certificate programmes and summer schools at more than 45 institutions (Pym et al. 2013, 53). Community colleges in the US have also become important hosts to Spanish translation and interpreting curricula, as have university extension programmes and schools of continuing studies. Undergraduate or postgraduate programmes at the University of Louisville, University of North Carolina Charlotte, Brigham Young University, University of Massachusetts Amherst, University of Texas at Brownsville, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, Rutgers University, University of Maryland at College Park, American University (Washington, D.C.), and others have also seen perennially strong interest in Spanish. Blended or online learning programmes exist as well, such as University of Massachusetts Boston, University of Arizona and New York University. In Canada, programmes in Spanish-English or Spanish-English-French include the University of Ottawa, Glendon College, Concordia University and the online course of study at the University of British Columbia, to name a few. Experiential learning, field experience, mentoring programmes, and practicums are becoming more common components of translator training at all levels, from providing language support for local grassroots advocacy groups (defensorías) or legal aid societies to serving an internship as an editor or translator in the Department for General Assembly and Conference Management at the United Nations in New York, or to subtitling film for a human rights non-governmental organization in Washington. Translation volunteers account for much of the translation activity that emerging or part-time translators engage in either to improve their skills or simply to donate to socially conscious groups such as Kiva, a San Francisco-based non-profit providing microloans, or Human Rights Watch in New York. The explicit goal of educating translators to be a force for social change, translator agency and ethical commitment can be noted in such works as Gill and Constanza Guzmán’s “Teaching Translation for Social Awareness in Toronto” (2011). In addition to academic credentials, many SpanishEnglish translators seek certification by the American Translators Association, one of the most recognized credentials, and may opt to have their translation performance ranked for government or other settings by the Interagency Language Roundtable. Canadian certification, both as a translator and as a terminologist, is granted in one of three ways: via relevant work experience and a diploma, mentorship, or certification exam by the Conseil des traducteúrs, terminologies et interprètes du Canada. The Order of Certified Translators, Terminologists and Interpreters of Quebec (OTTIAQ) is the primary association of language professions in the country. Translation in Canada plays a key role in ensuring compliance with the Official Languages Act, which provides for bilingual services and promotes official language minority communities.

Research issues and methods Editorial translation Editorial translation – translation for the publishing industries – is still struggling against the asymmetry of translation traffic out of English despite far fewer translations into it, though 88

Spanish translation in the US and Canada

signs point to improvement. The rise of new technologies such as tablet computers, e-readers, and mobile devices may signal a change in how Spanish translations are consumed, moreover, given the early and widespread adoption of these devices among US Latinos (“Hispanics Have Highest Tablet Adoption” 2011; Jackson and Toro 2015, 30–31). Literary translation from and into Spanish has established a long, important tradition in North America. American publisher Alfred A. Knopf and translator Harriet De Onis actively produced Latin American literature from the 1930s to the 1960s. Many significant figures contributed to an internationalization of the American canon, particularly starting in the 1960s with the advent of subsidized translation activity in university presses, particularly the University of Texas Press and the University of California Press, and philanthropic institutions such as the Ford Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation (Cohn 2012, 112–14). The Association of American University Presses and the Center for Inter-American Relations were other major patrons. Translations of Pablo Neruda, Federico García Lorca, Octavio Paz, Jorge Luis Borges, César Vallejo, Gabriel García Márquez, and others made of these figures cultural touchstones, even if in the process early translations showed growing pains: Neruda was often shorn of his roots and ideology, reappearing in English as a lovelorn troubadour (Longo 2002). Other writers were embraced for their revolutionary poetics, such as the Beat Generation’s canonization of Nicanor Parra, or simply for their revolution, such as the Roque Dalton Cultural Brigade’s translations of militant Central American writers. Lorca, for his part, deeply influenced transnational poetics, such as the work of the deep image writers Jack Spicer, Robert Bly, and Jerome Rothenberg, and even US Latino/a writing (see Zavalia 2000; Silva Gruesz 2002; Mayhew 2009). Many major North American writers have also been translators from Spanish, including Langston Hughes, W.S. Merwin, and Willis Barnstone. Others have worked as translators into Spanish, as José Martí did for D. Appleton and Company in the late nineteenth century in New York (see Lomas 2008). Several Spanish-language writers, many of them transnational, are also prominent translators of North American literature in their own right, such as Colombian Juan Gabriel Vásquez. American translators that have been instrumental in the Boom and post-Boom literary movements include Gregory Rabassa, Margaret Sayers Peden, Carol Maier, Helen Lane, and Suzanne Jill Levine, many of whom have written translation memoirs or translation apologia (for the latter, see Why Translation Matters by Edith Grossman 2010). The Boom itself may be seen as a ‘worlding’ of a literature through a globalizing process involving North American and British translators, Spanish literary agents, South American rights holders and publishing houses, and readers everywhere. Lowe and Fitz (2007) have traced the specifically hemispheric reception and influence, charting an inter-American literature and its translational flows. Although numbering fewer than 100 titles per year, Spanishlanguage novels in English translation have found readerships in North America, such as Carlos Ruiz Zafón’s worldwide bestseller, The Shadow of the Wind (trans. 2004), and works by multinational writers such as Isabel Allende circulate alongside Anglophone novels while belonging also to a Spanish American literature in English. The number of literary translators has burgeoned in recent decades, aided by field-specific academic training; notable North American translators from Spanish in the younger generations include Sergio Waisman, Esther Allen, Gary Racz, and Anne McLean. Literary translation, while a domain of comparatively lesser scope in North America than that of pragmatic translation, remains vibrant through active conference, print, and online presence: the American Literary Translators Association and its Declamación, a recital of memorized Spanish-language works and translations in the oral tradition; the Spanish division of the American Translators Association, which publishes the journal Beacons; and 89

Kelly Washbourne

many literary journals that have documented and translated both contemporary and classic writers from the Spanish-speaking world, such as Review: Latin American Literature and Arts. Many ‘webzines’ devoted to literary translation present writers from the Hispanophone world. Archives of translators’ drafts, notes, and correspondence also are accessible. The Lilly Library at Indiana University at Bloomington houses thousands of translation-related items, including Spanish-English translation, in its collections. Patronage of literary translation into and out of Spanish is sparse, but subsidies for the promotion of Spanish literature are available from the Spanish Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport, for example, and support from the PEN Translation Prize from PEN American Center/Book of the Month Club, the Harold Morton Landon Translation Award, the International Latino Book Award, National Endowment for the Humanities Scholarly Editions and Translations grants, the Latin American Writers Institute Prize, the Banff Center’s Banff International Literary Translation residency (Canada), and the Bread Loaf Translators’ Conference have all made possible EnglishSpanish (or SpanishFrench) projects by American and Canadian translators. The PEN/Ralph Manheim Medal for Translation, moreover, is the United States’ ‘lifetime achievement award’, and it has been conferred on three Spanish-English translators since 1982. Translation rights for North America and elsewhere are negotiated at such venues as the FIL Rights Exchange programme at the Guadalajara Book Fair in Mexico, and Spanish publishers and agents announce new and select works for translation on New Spanish Books (www.newspanishbooks.us). Surveys such as The New Essential Guide to Spanish Reading: Librarians’ Selections, published by the Trade Commission of Spain in Florida, inform translators and publishers. Canada, for its part, holds a Translation Rights Fair in Montreal, sponsored by the Canada Council for the Arts. Many publishers, including university and independent presses, devote themselves to translation and have a significant presence in Hispanophone literature in translation: Penguin, University of Nebraska Press, Deep Vellum Publishing, LALR Press, Two Lines World Library (Centre for the Art of Translation), and Open Letter Books, among others. American translators also work with book publishers abroad, such as Madrid-based Hispabooks Publishing, and British translators also frequently publish with American publishing houses, as happens with Margaret Jull Costa, who has translated Javier Marías for Knopf. Stavans (2009, 391) notes that the early publishing history from the colonial period includes many foundational works such as Cabeza de Vaca’s La Relación, which appeared in translation in the US but no original Spanish edition has been published in the country, thus readers have had to rely on imported foreign editions. Names such as Arte Público, Bilingual Press, and Quinto Sol were fundamental in promoting Chicano/a literature in both English and Spanish translation (396–97), and many presses since then have ridden the wave of Latino/a ascension in the literary world, among them Lectorum Publications (acquired by Scholastic en Español), Libros Sin Fronteras, Penguin Libros, Rayo (HarperCollins), Vintage Español, and Siete Cuentos Editorial, an imprint of Seven Stories Press (400–1). The Spanish company Planeta, the largest Spanish-language publisher, releases English-language translations into the US through a co-publishing agreement with Harper. Procedurally, editorial houses have generally cut costs by buying US territorial rights to Spanish-language translations of works translated in Spain, rather than commissioning their own, but have found the time lag between original and translation to be long (405). Today the innovation of the bilingual ‘flip’ format whereby two books, the English and Spanish editions, are published in one volume, proves to be an attractive and efficient translation production system. Developments such as multiculturalism and advances in telecommunications helped pave the way for a more democratized publishing industry in Spanish in the US, one that is less dependent on the major cities’ publishers (399). 90

Spanish translation in the US and Canada

Canada has a similarly productive editorial history in these genres. Immigration to Canada after the Spanish Civil War marked the first large wave of immigration from the Hispanophone world, and contributed to original and translated literary production in English, French, and Spanish (Hazelton 2007, 5). Refugees from military dictatorships in Latin American followed in the 1960s and 1970s, many of them artists and writers, particularly from Chile, who published landmark collections such as Literatura chilena en Canadá/Chilean Literature in Canada, the first anthology of Latin American literature produced in Canada (9). A  trilingual anthology entitled Literatura hispano-canadiense/Hispano-Canadian Literature/Littérature hispano-canadienne in 1984 brought together both Spanish and Latin American authors, and in 1987 an issue of Canadian Fiction magazine appeared, showcasing in translation the Latino-Canadian writers of the time (12–13). Government support from Multiculturalism Canada, the Canada Council, the Ontario Arts Council, and other entities were instrumental in supporting Spanish-language and bilingual small presses producing translations (15). Journals that published bilingually include Indigo: The Spanish/Canadian Presence in the Arts, Trilce, Ruptures: The Review of the 3 Americas, and Helios; and publishers involved in translating Canadian Hispanic writers include Cormorant Books and Les Écrits des Forges (17–20; see also Hazelton 2014). The latter publisher has produced influential French-Spanish translations of Québécois poets. Somacarrera (2013) provides more about the context and exchanges of English Canadian literature with Spain, and Grant and Mezei (2004) describe efforts underway to update earlier databases to include minority languages and literatures translated into Spanish. Translation flows between Canada and the United States in language combinations involving Spanish are far less than these countries’ Hispanophone exchanges with the rest of the world; Hispanic-Canadian literature, too, has been largely destined for national consumption and export overseas, thus far bypassing Canada’s neighbour to the south. Children’s literature produced in North America, both bilingual and stand-alone volumes, has met with great success in expanding the region’s formerly Anglocentric canon in the genre. Drawing from such sources as folklore, history, and social realism, Latino/a children’s literature has produced many self-translating authors, and important translator-activists such as Pura Belpré and Ada Flor Alma. Children’s literature from Spain has met with some success in US English, including the Manolito Gafotas series by Elvira Lindo and Juan Ramón Jiménez’ Platero y Yo (Platero and I), one of the most translated texts in the domain despite its ambiguous status as a children’s book. Children are also taught to translate. The Poetry Inside Out programme in the San Francisco Bay Area in California and other US cities offers language arts instruction, including translation, to children, many of them heritage Spanish speakers. Children’s literature in translation is recognized by the Batchelder Award, which goes to the “most outstanding children’s book originally published in a language other than English in a country other than the United States”, and which was given to a writer from Spain, Pilar Molina Llorente, in 1994. Non-fiction translation into Spanish merits mention here as well. North America exports or sells rights to translation into Spanish not only for fiction and poetry, but for a host of other genres, including essays, memoir, history, and textbooks and other reference works. Also worthy of note are Spanish-language authors residing in the US, such as Miami-based journalist Jorge Ramos, whose important exposés on immigration and meditations on egalitarianism are usually translated within a year. The case of the classic Our Bodies, Ourselves offers an insight into some of the translation roadblocks that may arise, lengthening the publication process. A group translation targeted for Latin American readers sought to localize a US Spanish version, adapting it to make it culturally relevant (Davis 2007, 175). Many of the women’s rights assumed, or taboos unaccounted for, by the book’s white, heterosexual, middle-class woman’s 91

Kelly Washbourne

perspective (175–76, 66) met with concern from the project team, which argued that not all feminisms were alike. In fact many adaptations, requiring reconceptualizations, took years, sometimes decades in some markets (64). The multinational collaborative translation for Latin America would help replace the inadequate version circulating at the time in the region (176), but it was beset by competing priorities and low funding. The resulting product shifted the focus from the self, and from a mostly informative function, to critical reflection on the social systems and spaces women occupied. ‘Anglo’ notions of self-help and the edition’s healthas-a-product mindset were replaced by relational notions of community support and ‘gender justice’, and a section on religion was added (178–81). Other forms of media involving Spanish translation are noteworthy. Spanish-language newspapers burgeoned in the nineteenth century, and many remain today, such as El Diario/ La Prensa (New York) and El Nuevo Herald (Miami) (Stavans 2009, 395). The latter, in addition to mainstream Anglophone papers such as The Washington Post and The New York Times, have run translated editorials in Spanish (Rodríguez 1999, 122–3). Spanish-language newspapers may offer Spanish translation assistance to advertisers, as happens with the widely circulating El Especialito (New Jersey). Many serial publications hispanicized with ‘en español’ in their titles (Discover en español, etc.) are not, or not wholly, synchronized with their Englishlanguage counterparts, and properly speaking are partial translations with some customized content. Recording artists in North American commonly release both English and Spanish versions of their music. Historically, translated songs into Spanish have been repurposed for new political movements in North America, such as “The Battle Hyman of the Republic”, which was adapted by the United Farmworkers’ Movement into “Solidaridad Pa’ Siempre”. Spanishlanguage videogame translation and localization have been well underway in the past decade for the US and the Americas. In addition to Spanish-language programming, Anglophone television is broadcast with a Secondary Audio Program (SAP) option in the larger Spanishspeaking markets, for which translators mostly work from scripts. Spanish advertising spots with English subtitles began appearing on national broadcasts in approximately 2012, and significantly, CNN/Univisión – historically separate markets – moderated a 2016 presidential debate in Spanish with English subtitles, a tentative but decidedly new direction in mainstream coequality of the country’s two principle languages.

US Latino/a, Chicano/a authors in Spanish translation: the question of Spanishes For some observers, for example Sánchez (2009), into-Spanish literary translation in the US anomalously works against the dominant power structure that places English as the priority target language. Hispanic American literature is frequently written in English, and its Spanish translation will often generate resistance over the matter of whether a given work featuring, for example, Dominican immigrants in the US, is captured in a culturally specific Spanish. Readers and authors alike have held translations produced in regionally identifiable Spanish other than that of the story’s heritage to be inauthentic or incongruous, irrespective of the language’s objective correctness. Whether this reception shows reader bias or simply a horizon of expectations concerning identity is a point for future analysis, but a distinct field, perceptual dialectology, studies the ‘folk linguistic’ language attitudes of nonspecialists toward language variance, and particularly how we label certain varieties as inferior, usually to our own. For US Chicano/a writers, “Otherness, hybridity, changing borders, fragmentation, multiculturality is the new norm – the new world (B)order” (Gentzler 2008, 158). Mistranslation, multilingualism, non-translation, and subversions of ‘original’ and ‘translation’ (146–165) are 92

Spanish translation in the US and Canada

employed by these writers to negotiate shifting identities, and to upend power relations. Multilingual texts common to these writers’ production “draw upon, code-switch among, and/or mix languages to generate moments of partial translation and strategic non-translation”; in other words, translation occurring at the word and phrase level rather than between discrete source and target texts (Miller 2010, 140).

Hispanic marketing Rather than considering consumers of translations in terms of pure monolingualism, in the United States it is useful to consider distinctions such as Spanish-dominant, or Spanish-preferring, users. First generation Latinos are overwhelmingly Spanish-dominant (61%), though by second generation that figure drops to a mere 8%; the first generation is 33% bilingual, then grows to 53% by the second generation, and by the third generation and beyond, bilingualism drops to roughly a third of Latinos, or 29%, while English-dominance grows exponentially by generation (“Engaging the US Market 2014 . . .”). Translation is employed strategically in marketing, but often is mandated by law in matters such as dual language product labelling. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration sets forth that: When an accepted common or usual name for a food is in a language other than English (e.g., salsa, chili con carne, croissants, rigatoni), use of this common or usual name does not necessitate dual language declaration. However, if the name of the food is intended to bring the article to the attention of a person who does not speak English (e.g., Frijoles Pintos), all required information must be presented in the foreign language. (FDA 2013, 41) Use of Spanish is restricted by the requirement that an English translation accompany it: “If a foreign language is used anywhere on the label, all required label statements must appear both in English and in the foreign language. 21 CFR 101.15(c)(2)”(8). Consumer contracts in some states are required to be translated into the language in which the product was negotiated; this law applies to leases and loans, and to patients’ bills of rights in long-term care facilities (California Department of Consumer Affairs 2012). Trademarks are another translation issue provided for in law; they are judged, in Canada for example, under the standard of whether they cause confusion for the ‘reasonable bilingual person’. In the case of KOLA LOKA, a translation of KRAZY GLUE, it was ruled in Krazy Glue Inc. v. Grupo Cranomex, S.A. de C.F [1989] that the Spanish translation would not be perceived to bear an infringing resemblance (McCormack 2010, 155). In this case, legally, translation produced a new original. While not mandated by law, multilingual signage in shops is on the rise. Sears and Lowe’s Home Improvement were among the first North American companies to produce Spanish translations of directories and aisle signs in their brick-and-mortar shops in North America.

‘US Spanish’, ‘neutral Spanish’, ‘universal Spanish’, and Spanglish While translation is a prime mode of marketing to the highly diverse Latino populations in North America, the strategic mantra of ‘beyond translation’ is gaining ground along with the attendant rise of diversity marketing and culturally appropriate product development in US Latino marketing. Companies may partner with or acquire existing Hispanic-serving 93

Kelly Washbourne

organizations or their products as forms of engagement, host sponsorships or events, or they may culturally adapt or transcreate. Transcreation, defined as adapted language, re-written content or a hybrid of the two processes, seeks to deliver the same impact as that of the source (Ray and Kelly 2010, 2–3) and may shift rhetorical emphasis or foreground different features of a product or service. Multimodal and intersemiotic shifts also occur in translation and in multilingual copywriting, using direct, recreative or what we might call a valuethrough translation in which Latinidad is preserved regardless of language (Colombi 2012). In marketing and advertising, English-Spanish translation in North America often must occur across a ‘values divide’: messaging centred on ‘we’, versus the more competitive Anglo mainstream values (see Jackson and Toro 2015). Tensions between assimilation (abandoning one’s ways) and acculturation (maintaining one’s heritage while adapting) create microsegments of markets and complex households for marketers in which one household may have monolingual Spanish speakers, language learners, monolingual English-speakers, and members of the ambiguously termed ‘Generation ñ’, who are comfortable bilingually, biculturally, and digitally. Spanish translations thus serve various purposes: language acquisition tools, comparative exercises or vital lifelines to resources. As they are in a position to judge the translation quality of bilingual marketing materials, the bilingual user of translations thus is far from dependency, and occupies a position of power that may destabilize orthodoxies; in a similar sense, prosecutors in the US have placed in doubt prospective bilingual jurors’ fitness to serve, arguing they may not accept official translations of courtroom proceedings (Legal Information Institute 1991). Dependence upon translation, and choosing translation, thus ought to be distinguished when one is considering US Latinos’ translation use. Dávila (2012, 70–71) calls ‘nativist’ the US marketing industry’s assumption that Hispanics necessarily speak Spanish and therefore are more responsive to messages in ‘their language’. She rejects the thinking that “[e]ven if they do not speak it, Latinos are hence deemed to be symbolically moved and touched by Spanish, reproducing essentialist equations of Latinos with their language” (ibid.). Dávila further notes the market’s overemphasis on the “immigrant and Spanish-dominant Hispanic” is held as the authentic Latino, to the detriment of the “ ‘complicated’, bilingual, bicultural” (86), an emphasis that overstates the image of Latinos as immigrants, as ‘foreign’, rather than as native-born (86–87). The decision of what variety of Spanish to use in translation is a fraught one. Many North American companies attempt a pan-Hispanic Spanish native to no one locale. Microsoft’s Spanish style guide, under the heading “The importance of using neutral, international Spanish when localizing Microsoft products”, asserts that Spanish speakers from one country or region might find that the nuances, colloquialisms and variations in word use in another Spanish-speaking country can cause confusion and even social embarrassment. In today’s world of localization, the need to localize into “neutral” or “international Spanish” is a recurrent theme. The term “neutral” or “international” Spanish does not refer to any specific dialect of the language, and it certainly does not imply creating a new language or coining new terms. Rather, it refers to the process of finding terms or phrases that would be understood or best suited to a multinational target audience. For instance, the term “computer” can be translated as “computadora”, “computador” or “ordenador” depending on the country or region in which that term is used. In order to avoid this, we at Microsoft decided to use either “su PC” or “equipo”. Spanish is supported in 20 different locales in Windows [. . .]. No matter where Microsoft’s Spanish-speaking users come 94

Spanish translation in the US and Canada

from, we need to make sure that our products are understandable and that no legal issues might arise for using a non-neutral term or concept. (Spanish Style Guide, Microsoft, 5–6) One overlooked aspect of ‘neutrality’, independent of whether it can be maintained successfully, is whether a neutral language variety can have the requisite emotional resonance to persuade readers. Authoring and translating by human beings inevitably involves choices tied to dialect, regionalect, and idiolect, and not all readers or users have the same tolerance for different Spanishes or else they may consider some variations to be substandard. If a universal or neutral Spanish is not an unimpeachable idea, neither is the use of a single variety, for example Mexican Spanish to stand for a universal form. Cross-cultural marketing books have latched onto the favourite example of the disastrous translation of ‘jugo de china’ for the Miami, Florida orange juice market – a Puerto Rican localism for a largely Cuban population. Texts in some domains may be said to be more apt than others for single, harmonized translations to be used in all markets. It is more common for translations to be cross-culturally adapted and validated for such medical text types as health outcome measures, questionnaires and inventories, and clinical scales, including regional preference, reading level, and even propositional content. As an example of the latter, in a patient information booklet on managed care, the Spanish version adds information about doctor home visits not being the cultural norm in the US in comparison to Latin American norms (Zarcadoolas and Blanco 2000, 2–3). It is common for Castilian Spanish materials, whether originals or translations, to be localized for other Spanish-speaking markets, including the US. Multiple versions of a text, moreover, are commonly authored for different Spanish-speaking markets, one for Spain and another for ‘general’ Spanish. The Healthy Eating Plate, the Harvard School of Public Health’s dietary guidelines, for instance, shows lexical differences that might prevent understanding (for example the ‘Spanish-Spain’ infographic uses patatas, verduras, beicon and frutos secos where the unmarked ‘Spanish’ one uses patatas (papas), vegetales, tocineta (‘bacon’), and nueces) (“Healthy Eating Plate Translations”, 2017). In other instances, and in particular for text types such as sociological surveys, frequently multiple lexemes are given in translation to cater to variegated audiences. In the National Agricultural Workers Survey, for example, respondents are asked “¿le provee su empleador seguro (‘aseguranza’) médico?” (Department of Labor, 2010, 15). They are asked with both the source and target terms, about ‘asistencia pública (Welfare)’, reflecting differing degrees of acculturation by naming both the conceptual level and the referential one. Goya Foods, to give another example, ran an ad that translated beans as both frijoles and habichuelas – the term for both Mexican and Caribbean audiences, respectively – within the same ad text (Dávila 2012, 120). Clearly there is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ solution: Jiménez-Crespo (2010) argues that the “fuzzy” US locale has complicated Spanishlanguage internationalization strategies. Some countries reject universal Spanish as unnatural to any one country or speaker, much like the utopian artificial languages such as Esperanto, even despite the form’s predominance, and as the Internet constitutes a force that blurs the boundaries between many national distinctions of marked usage. The reasoning may well be that this language variant has less resonance but is also less likely to offend. Regardless of the strategic thinking behind such translations in the United States, they reflect a descriptivist approach to translation rather than a prescriptivist one: the goal of translations that use non-standard terms for low-literacy audiences, and often seek meaningfulness for a broad spectrum of users rather than regional specificity or authenticity. Providers have begun to include readability information in their best practices. 95

Kelly Washbourne

The Fernández-Huerta Readability Formula, for instance, is used to evaluate literacy levels of Spanish-language healthcare materials. The rise of Spanglish in marketing materials and other aspects of cultural life, including literature, has detractors, and prominent critics such as Foster (2005) fret over the unnatural substitution of Spanish words in Anglophone constructions, ‘contamination’ in his view, passing for translation. Such border contact had produced consternation among those who feel these combinations are artificial, even marking Mexican Spanish with pochismos such as the baseball terms jom, tim, faul and jit (home, team, foul, and hit) (Wilson 1946, 345–6). The Los Angeles Dodgers have even trademarked and commercialized the phoneticized name “Los Doyers”, meeting with controversy. The reproduction of words through translation arguably is a force for legitimizing or delegitimizing language forms around the world. The North American Academy for the Spanish Language (ANLE, for its Spanish acronym) has worked to include what it calls estadounidismos in the Royal Academy of the Language’s dictionary. While there have been successful literary works employing code-switching, a translation perceived as Spanglish may suggest contextual inappropriateness or a lack of rigour even to observers who may be sympathetic to those who privilege Spanglish as a marker of identity rather than a language mastery issue. Consider one notorious high-profile translation failure: When the Affordable Care Act, “Obamacare”, rolled out in 2014, its Spanish-language website – CuidadoDeSalud.gov – became a costly economic and public relations debacle for its delayed debut, calqued language, poor terminology, partial localization, reduced features, and lack of glossary or explicitation of culture-bound concepts such as ‘pre-existing condition’. Legitimacy is ever-shifting and shaped by real users of the language even before translations are finalized. When country-specific localisms are called for, advertisers routinely use field tests in the target market to gain feedback. Lionbridge Technologies, Inc. (Waltham, Massachusetts), the world’s largest localization company, suggests this route for marketing messages that have an informal tone and that try for emotional resonance; when the budget cannot cover many regional variations and support, they recommend localization projects be split into US Hispanic, Puerto Rican, and Mexican markets; another for the River Plate region, incorporating the pronoun vos, and a third for the other Latin American Hispanophone countries, relying on Colombian, Ecuadorian or Costa Rican Spanish inflections, as they argue, these are considered to be broadly understood (Kutchera 2011, 102). Drop-down menu options on websites are beginning to include “United States (español)” and the es-US/ extension web address, e.g. www.fisher-price.com/es_ES/index.html or preceding the trade name, e.g. https:// es.usps.com, the United States Postal Service’s site. Significantly, companies can optimize the most heavily trafficked content, or as one company counsels, customize the 20% that drives 80% of the value; the majority of the average website will stay invariable (104). Brand name failures are particularly sensitive and costly, and need the most testing and global brand analysis. Consider that there is a skin-care product on the market in the US called ‘Sarna’ (‘mange’), an edible menu product is named ‘Calzone’ (‘drawers’), and cars have been marketed as the Ford Corrida, the Ford Marea, and the Mazda Laputa. Before launching in Latin America, Federal Express might have avoided the perception its corporate name evokes in that population – that their company is a government entity, which brought with it associations of ineptitude and slow service. Regardless of sociodialectical issues of prestige and preferred forms of language, the Plain Language or Plain English movement has influenced both source authoring and translation in the US markedly, perhaps even extending a democratic ethos of readability to an emerging “Plain Spanish” (for discussion of the latter see Toledo Báez 2011). Translators, editors, and project managers working with Spanish in North America ought to 96

Spanish translation in the US and Canada

tread cautiously, given the many potential pitfalls, and might heed Singh’s advice on expanding into web globalization only incrementally:  . . . US companies may first think of adding some web pages in Spanish, or even create localized Spanish sites for Hispanics in the country. Once the company gains experience in terms of localizing its content and website for the local Hispanic population, it can then leverage its knowledge to create more extensive sites for other Spanish-speaking countries. (Singh 2012, 43) Legitimacy of process can also be contentious, as in the case of crowdsourcing. Facebook, the American online social networking service, translated its site into Spanish via crowd labour in only 24 hours. While still controversial, this approach overcomes problems of scale, reach, and cost, and limits expense mostly to quality assurance testing by experts. The process involves glossary-building, the upvoting and downvoting of drafts, verification, quality assurance, and release of the translated interface to the user public (Kutchera 2011, 107). The question of quality still remains, however, despite claims that those actually involved in the content creation and consumption provide a richer pool of ‘natural translators’. The issue of whether sites such as LinkedIn can legitimately rely on volunteer labour in the same way that charitable organizations do has been a contentious one, shows little sign of resolution, and, despite having defenders, has been called unprofessional and legally risky by individuals and translator organizations in the US (American Translators Association 2009).

Spanish translation’s role in equity, access, and due process: community (public service) translation Community translation and interpreting have involved Spanish more than any other language in the United States in recent years, and a proportionally greater number of service providers in this area are interpreter-translators, relative to other languages. Health education and benefits enrolment, public health surveys, addiction and chemical dependency treatment, refugee resettlement, and many other public services constitute a large part of the translation workload. Disaster relief translation often draws on language banks of translators in the case of such organizations as the Red Cross, which assists “non-profit social service agencies [. . .] such as grassroots community organizations, food banks, homeless and domestic violence shelters” (“American Red Cross Language Bank”). Spanish translation and interpreting for educational purposes are in high demand, and include school closing notification system scripts, financial aid web pages and forms, career interest inventories, and even support for library services for Latinos, such as Library of Congress subject headings databases. Faith-based translation and interpreting is also quite common as non-professional channels of the profession, and often operates in tandem with outreach and legal services, family services, and asylum. Language services in such cases often fundraise for religious organizations’ projects for community empowerment and access, such as the arrangement that Catholic Charities often has with its providers. Ministry abroad and medical missions originating in North America often depend on linguistic support from volunteers accompanying medical, dental or surgical teams, including providers, students, teachers, and other stakeholders. Challenges in community translation include low levels of literacy and health literacy; the need to bridge biomedical models of care and traditional, complementary, and alternative medicines; and the dearth of self-advocacy in many Latino communities, in addition to structural barriers to care. Many local branches of 97

Kelly Washbourne

a national service organization, moreover, often suffer a lack of terminology harmonization, thus creating redundant effort for translators. Organizations such as Hablamos Juntos have worked to improve translation and interpreting for Latino LEP patients on several fronts, at least in the medical domain: translation processes, assessment, training programmes, hospital signage, and language policy.

Translation and ideology at the ballot box Minority-language accommodation and language accessibility have been facilitated in the wake of the Civil Rights movements of the 1960s in America. The 1975 Language Minority Provisions Amendment to the Voting Rights Act, for example, provided for bilingual ballots; the original 1965 Voting Rights Act prevented linguistic discrimination against Puerto Ricans who had been educated in Spanish, and who therefore could not fully participate in the electoral process without translation, making of the ballot a de facto English-language literacy test (Reilly 2015, 2–3). Non-translation is a form of immigrant disenfranchisement having a long history in the US, until the practice was constitutionally challenged. Section 203 of the 1975 legislation calls for jurisdictions to provide voting materials where 5% of a given population, or more than 10,000 voting-eligible citizens, speak a minority language (Tucker 2009, 4). States have their own – often confused – policies for translation services in this domain, and much of the work falls to the local level (4). Functional inequalities have been found in translated materials (Perez 2009), among other problems such as cost, quality control, dialectical differences, discrepancies between English and the target Spanish’s relative reading ease, and a lack of outreach to inform language minority communities of available translated resources in their language (Reilly 2015, 35–36, 44, 110). However, evidence shows that the official translations are used, and that they promote assimilation and prevent fraud (Tucker 2008, 511, as quoted in Reilly 2015, 44). Community advocacy groups, minority participation in governance, effectiveness of translation processes and policies, glossary-building, and other supports and peripheral factors affect Spanish translation’s role in securing language rights and inclusion in the voting process (Reilly 93–112).

Future directions Spanish translation in North America, within its countries and region and with the rest of the world, stands to grow exponentially. A rise in healthcare translation is certain, for example, due to large numbers of new, Limited English Proficient enrolees in insurance programmes, and the attendant need to make translations comply with HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996). Research remains to be conducted into questions such as how Spanish translation assists democratic processes and human services, and into the interrelationship of the multiple roles and divisions of labour within language service provision in today’s industrialized and ‘gig’ economy, and into the career paths of translation graduates in Spanish translation. The impact of Spanish translation on mobile outreach in particular is relevant to Spanish-speaking populations in North America, as the cell phone is a ubiquitous technology. The tremendous amounts of cross-cultural adaptation and validation of such translated instruments as diagnostic interviews, self-management profiles, and personality questionnaires conducted in North America would benefit from more interdisciplinary collaboration with translation scholars in Spanish and other languages. A dearth of ESEN studies in financial/commercial translation and accompanying pedagogies has been perennial. The maturity of human resources translation in North America, both at the local and federal 98

Spanish translation in the US and Canada

levels, is evidenced in such initiatives as the creation of the Spanish-Language Compliance Assistance Resources at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), which features e-correspondence, dictionaries, publications and web pages in Spanish, and video training materials. This subfield now deserves researchers’ attention with respect to practices in North American institutions, including for academic contexts. Studies of translation in organizations have tended, similarly, to centre on other geographic realities, particularly Europe. Both the professionalization and volunteerization of Spanish translation appear to be in robust health, aided by new translation environment tools and technologies, and by training responsive to processes, products, and people, and vocationally oriented education such as Spanish for Specific Purposes and Spanish for the Professions. Spanish translation remains one of the most dynamic and burgeoning fields in this region for facilitating intercultural exchange, economic commerce, and social justice.

Recommended reading Allen, Esther. 2013. “The Will to Translate: Four Episodes in a Local History of Global Cultural Exchange.” In Translation: Translators on Their Work and What It Means, edited by Esther Allen and Susan Bernofsky, 82–104. New York: Columbia University Press. Cameos of intrahistoria from the early days of U.S. publishing of Spanish-language works in English translation: Juan Facundo Quiroga, José Martí, and essential Spanish-English translators such as Harriet de Onís. Brickhouse, Anna. 2015. The Unsettlement of America: Translation, Interpretation, and the Story of Don Luis de Velasco, 1560–1945. New York: Oxford University Press. Spanish translation, manipulation and the role of language in the exploration and colonization of present-day United States and its transatlantic encounters. Constanza Guzmán, María. 2010. Gregory Rabassa’s Latin American Literature: A Translator’s Visible Legacy. Lewisburg: Bucknell University Press. Significant for its contribution to the genre of the translator biography; the work also considers authortranslator interaction, critical and popular reception, and the translator’s role in creating an image of a literary region. Rostagno, Irene. 1997. Searching for Recognition: The Promotion of Latin American Literature in the United States. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. A standard reference for understanding the translational and cultural background of the Boom literary movement.

References Abel, Laura K. 2013. “Language Access in the Federal Courts.” National Center for Access to Justice. http://ncforaj.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/abel-ncaj-language-access-federal-courts.pdf. “American Red Cross Language Bank: A Resource Guide for Nonprofit Partners.” American Red Cross. www.redcross.org/images/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m27940129_language_bank_resource_ guide.pdf. American Translators Association. 2009. “Head of Largest Professional Translators’ Organization Blasts LinkedIn CEO for ‘Thoroughly Unprofessional Practices’.” www.atanet.org/pressroom/ linkedIn_2009.pdf. California Department of Consumer Affairs. 2012. “Foreign Language Translation of Consumer Contracts: Legal Guide K-4.” www.dca.ca.gov/publications/legal_guides/k-4.shtml. Cohn, Deborah N. 2012. The Latin American Literary Boom and U.S. Nationalism During the Cold War. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press. Colombi, Cecilia. 2012. Multimodal Texts from Around the World. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

99

Kelly Washbourne Dávila, Arlene. 2012. Latinos Inc.: The Marketing and Making of a People. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Davis, Kathy. 2007. The Making of Our Bodies, Ourselves: How Feminism Travels Across Borders. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Department of Labor. 2010. “Encuesta nacional de trabajadores del campo.” http://docplayer.es/13793511Encuesta-nacional-de-trabajadores-del-campo-2010-naws.html. “Engaging the U.S. Latino Market.” 2014. Smartling. http://qrd6d3f2ilk3ofs6f44pp1o1.wpengine. netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Smartling_eBook_EngagingTheUSLatinoMarket.pdf. “Executive Order 13166.” 2015. The United States Department of Justice. www.justice.gov/crt/ executive-order-13166. Food and Drug Administration. 2013. “A Food Labeling Guide: Guidance for Industry.” https://clients. ohiosbdc.ohio.gov/DocumentMaster.aspx?doc=4461. Foster, David William. 2005. “La política de las traducciones del español en los Estados Unidos.” In Traducción como cultura, edited by Lisa Bradford, 141–54. Castelló de la Plana: Publicaciones de la Universidad Jaume I. Gentzler, Edwin. 2008. Translation and Identity in the Americas: New Directions in Translation Theory. London: Routledge. Gill, Rosalind, and María Constanza Guzmán. 2011. “Teaching Translation for Social Awareness in Toronto.” Ethics and the Curriculum: Critical Perspectives. Special issue of The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 5 (1): 93–108. Grant, Pamela, and Kathy Mezei. 2007. “Establishing an Online Bibliographic Database for Canadian Literary Translation Studies.” In Doubts and Directions in Translation Studies: Selected Contributions from the EST Conference, Lisbon 2004, edited by Yves Gambier, Miriam Shlesinger, and Radegundis Stolze, 73–84. Amsterdam: John Benjamin Publication Company. Grossman, Edith. 2010. Why Translation Matters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Hamilton, Grant. 2010. “Translation in Canada.” The ATA Chronicle 39 (10): 12–15. doi:http://acjt.ca/ medias/63/Translation_in_Canada_Grant_Hamilton.pdf. Hazelton, Hugh. 2007. Latinocanadá: A Critical Study of Ten Latin American Writers of Canada. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press. ———. 2014. “11 September 1973: Latin America Comes to Canada.” In Translation Effects: The Shaping of Contemporary Canadian Culture, edited by Kathy Mezei, Sherry Simon, and Luise von Flotow, 182–96. Kingston: McGill- Queen’s University. “Healthy Eating Plate Translations.” 2017. The Harvard School of Public Health. www.hsph.harvard. edu/nutritionsource/healthy-eating-plate/translations/. “Hispanics Have Highest Tablet Adoption.” 2011. eMarketer. www.emarketer.com/Article/ Hispanics-Have-Highest-Tablet-Adoption/1008524. Huntington, Samuel P. 2004. Who Are We? The Challenges to America’s National Identity.New York; London: Simon & Schuster. Jackson, Linda, and Evelyn Toro. 2015. “Spanish Translation for the US.” MultiLingual 26 (5): 30–31. Jiménez-Crespo, Miguel A. 2010. “Web Internationalization Strategies and Translation Quality: Researching the Case of ‘International’ Spanish.” The International Journal of Localization 9 (1): 13–25. Kutchera, Joe. 2011. Latino Link: Building Brands Online with Latino Communities and Content. Ithaca, NY: Paramount Market Publishing. Legal Information Institute. 1991. Hernandez v. New York [89–7645], 500 U.S. 352, 362 [1991]) (U.S. Supreme Court Decision No. 89–7645). Ithaca: Cornell University Law School. www.law.cornell.edu/ supct/html/89-7645.ZS.html. Lomas, Laura. 2008. Translating Empire: José Martí, Migrant Latino Subjects, and American Modernities. Durham: Duke University Press. Longo, Teresa. 2002. Pablo Neruda and the U.S. Culture Industry at the Turn of the Century. New York: Routledge. Lowe, Elizabeth, and Earl E. Fitz. 2007. Translation and the Rise of Inter-American Literature. Gainsville, FL: University Press of Florida. Mayhew, Jonathan. 2009. Apocryphal Lorca: Translation, Parody, Kitsch. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. McCormack, Stuart C., ed. 2010. Intellectual Property Law of Canada. 2nd ed. Huntington, NY: Juris. Miller, Joshua L. 2010. “American Languages.” In A Concise Companion to American Studies, edited by John Carlos Rowe, 124–50. Chichester, West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

100

Spanish translation in the US and Canada National Archives. 2004. “Title VI, Prohibition Against National Origin Discrimination Affecting Limited English Proficient Persons.” www.archives.gov/eeo/laws/title-vi.html. Perea, Juan. 2011. “American Languages, Cultural Pluralism, and Official English.” In The Latino/a Condition: A Critical Reader. 2nd ed., edited by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic, 566–73. New York: New York University Press. Perez, E. O. 2009. “Lost in Translation? Item Validity in Bilingual Political Surveys.” Journal of Politics 41 (4): 1530–48. Pym, Anthony, François Grin, Claudio Sfreddo, and Andy L. J. Chan. 2013. The Status of the Translation Profession in the European Union. London: Anthem Press. Ray, Rebecca, and Natalie Kelly. 2010. “Reaching New Markets Through Transcreation: When Translation Just Isn’t Enough.” Common Sense Advisory. http://www.commonsenseadvisory.com/Portals/_ default/Knowledgebase/ArticleImages/100331_R_Transcreation_Preview.pdf. Reilly, Shauna. 2015. Language Assistance Under the Voting Rights Act: Are Voters Lost in Translation? Lanham, MD: Lexington Books. Rodríguez, América. 1999. Making Latino News: Race, Class, Language. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Ruiz Zafón, Carlos. 2004. The Shadow of the Wind. Translated by Lucia Graves. New York: The Penguin Press. Sánchez, Marta E. 2009. “Para Español Oprima el Número Dos: Transnational Translation and U.S. Latino/a Literature.” In Imagined Transnationalism: U.S. Latino/a Literature, Culture, and Identity, edited by Kevin Concannon, Francisco A. Lomelí, and Marc Priewe. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Sargent, Benjamin B. 2015. “Adopting Regional Strategies for Spanish-Speaking Audiences.” Multilingual 26 (5): 40–42. Silva Gruesz, Kirsten. 2002. Ambassadors of Culture: The Transamerican Origins of Latino Writing. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Simon, Sherry. 2010. “Translating in the Multilingual City: Montreal as a City of the Americas.” In Canada and Its Americas: Transnational Navigations, edited by Winfried Siemerling and Sarah Phillips Casteel, 171–85. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press. Singh, Nitish. 2012. Localization Strategies for Global E-Business. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Somacarrera, Pilar, ed. 2013. Made in Canada, Read in Spain: Essays on the Translation and Circulation of English-Canadian Literature. London: Versita. “Spanish Style Guide.” 2011. Microsoft. download.microsoft.com/download/c/8/0/c80371fa-bc89. . . / spa-esp-StyleGuide.pdf. Stavans, Ilan. 2009. “Bilingual Nation: Spanish-Language Books in the United States Since the 1960s.” In A History of the Book in America: Volume 5: The Enduring Book: Print Culture in Postwar America, edited by David Paul Nord, 389–408. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press. Toledo Báez, María Cristina. 2011. “Existe el ‘Plain Spanish’? La modernización del discurso jurídicoadministrativo y la influencia en la traducción juridical.” Hikma: Estudios de traducción 10: 175–94. Tucker, James Thomas. 2008. “The Battle over Bilingual Ballots Shifts to the Courts: A  Post-Boerne Assessment of Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act.” Harvard Journal on Legislation 45 (2): 508–80. ———. 2009. The Battle over Bilingual Ballots: Language Minorities and Political Access Under the Voting Rights Act. Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate. “Using Languages in National Security.” 2015. Language Testing International. www.languagetesting. com/government/using-languages-in-national-security. Valero-Garcés, Carmen. 2002. “Translation and Stereotypes as Cultural Facts: A Case Study, AIDS, and the Latino Community in the USA.” Babel 48 (4): 289–304. Wilson, William E. 1946. “A Note on ‘Pochismo’.” The Modern Language Journal 30 (6): 345–6. Zarcadoolas, Christina, and Mercedes Blanco. 2000. “Lost in Translation: Each Word Accurate, Yet. . . .” Managed Care 9 (8): 22A–22F. http:www.managedcaremag.com/archives/0008/0008.translate.html. Zavalia, Juliana de. 2000. “The Impact of Spanish American Literature in Translation on U.S. Latino Literature.” In Changing the Terms: Translating in the Postcolonial Era, edited by Sherry Simon, 187–206. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.

101

6 TRANSLATION AND GENDER1 Pilar Godayol

Introduction: historical and theoretical origins First, what is ‘happening’ in the field of translation studies now that ‘woman’ and ‘translation’ are associated explicitly? Second, does their interaction result in areas of overlap or collision? Does ‘woman’ affect ‘translation’? Does ‘translation’ affect ‘woman’? Third, and the question arose as I  worked with each of the two, how might intersections of feminist issues and translation issues occasion work that might be considered subversive? (Maier 1994, 29)

In 1994, when the academic world first began to pay attention to the binomial “gender and translation”, the North American translator and translation theoretician Carol Maier posed the above questions in the pioneering article “Women in translation: current intersections, theory, and practice”. Over the last twenty-five years the theory and practice of translation from a gender perspective have given rise to varied and fruitful research. As is well-known, the feminist works of some Canadian literary translators in the 1980s led translation theoreticians and translators of this same country (Luise von Flotow, Barbara Godard, Susanne de Lotbinière-Harwood, Sherry Simon, etc.) to reflect on and analyse their strategies at the beginning of the 1990s. At the same time, in the United States, writers such as Lori Chamberlain, Carol Maier or Gayatri Ch. Spivak were also speculating on the role of women in translation practice. At this time, also, interest in this subject was growing in European countries such as Spain, Italy, Austria and England. Researchers in Spain were probably the first to reflect on the problematics involved in the intersection of gender and translation. In 1998, África Vidal Claramonte included a pioneering chapter, “Teorías feministas de la traducción” (Feminist theories of translation) in her book El futuro de la traducción (The future of translation), in which she delved deeply into the praxis of the Canadian feminists and identified pros and cons. In that same year, Pilar Godayol defended the first thesis in Spain on gender and translation at the Autonomous University of Barcelona under the supervision of Seán Golden. In 2000, this was published in Catalan under the title Espais de frontera. Gènere i traducció (Borderlands. Gender and translation) and, in 2002, it was translated into Italian by Annarita Taronna (Spazi di frontiera. Genere e traduzione). 102

Translation and gender

With the change of century came the first congresses and publications. In October, 2002, the First International Seminar on Gender and Language (The Gender of Translation–The Translation of Gender) was held at the University of Valencia (Santaemilia 2003, 2005). In 2005, the University of Vic coordinated the 1st International Colloquium on Gender and Translation (Godayol 2006). Five years later, in 2010, the University of Málaga organized the 1st International Congress on Women and Translation (Postigo and Martínez 2014). In 2011, the 1st International Congress on Gender, Development and Textuality at the University of Vic, concerned with bringing to light the texts that revolutionized views on women, devoted one of the three axes to translation (Godayol 2012). In 2015 and 2016, the University of Cantabria organized the 1st and 2nd International Conference on Translation, Ideology and Gender (Camus, Gómez Castro, and Williams 2017). In 2016, the University of Valencia coordinated the 1st edition of the Valencia/Napoli Colloquium on Gender and Translation to Translation for Sexual Equality (Santaemilia 2017a) and, in 2017, the 1st International Conference on Translation and Censorship in Literature and the Media (Zaragoza et al. 2018). Outside Spain, at the beginning of 2015, there was the 1st International Colloquium on Translation and Gender in the Romance Languages held at the University Erlangen-Nürnberg (Pagni and Keilhauer 2017). The frequency of the Spanish congresses demonstrates the interest of various university research groups, as well as individual researchers, in the intersection “gender and translation” and in those of “ideology and translation” and “postcolonialism and translation” (among others, Autonomous University of Barcelona, University of Alcalá, University of Basque Country, University of Cantabria, University of Granada, University of Jaume I, University of León, University of Málaga, University of Oviedo, University of Salamanca, University of Santiago de Compostela, University of Valencia, University of Vic–Central University of Catalonia, University of Vigo, etc.). It is also worth mentioning the support of the institutions that promote the research of these groups, since most of them have been funded by Spain’s Ministry of Economy and Competitivity. Other indicators show that this avenue of research enjoys good health. One of the most important is the proliferation of doctoral theses on the subject, such as that by Nuria Brufau, defended at the University of Salamanca in 2009 under the supervision of África Vidal Claramonte (Traducción y género: propuestas para nuevas éticas de la traducción en la era del feminismo transnacional) (Translation and gender: proposals for new ethics of translation in the era of transnational feminism), and the one by Olga Castro at the University of Vigo in 2010 supervised by Belén Martín and Burghard Baltrush (Traducción, xénero, nación: cara a una teoría e práctica da traducción feminista) (Translation, gender, nation: towards a theory and practice of feminist translation). Since then, more theses have been read on the subject of translation and gender and also on the triplet, translation, gender and postcolonialism. The University of Salamanca is outstanding in the production of theses on intercultural translation from a gender perspective. Many of these, under the supervision of África Vidal Claramonte, have been published in book form and are integrated into the critical literature of our discipline (among others, López Ponz 2009; Brufau 2010; Rodríguez Murphy 2016). We highlight the study by Brufau (2010), as well as those by Vidal Claramonte (2007, 2010, 2012, 2017, 2018a), which deal with the problems and contradictions of some Chicana authors translated into peninsular Spanish. As regards publications, credit must be given to some specialized journals for being welldisposed towards publishing monographs or dossiers on the subject, such as Quaderns. Revista de Traducció (no. 13, Godayol 2006; no. 19, Godayol 2012), DeSignis (Patrizia and Godayol 2008), MonTI (no. 3, Santaemilia and von Flotow 2011) and Quaderns de Filologia. Estudis 103

Pilar Godayol

Literaris (no. 20, Godayol 2015). Spain also has feminist collections, though limited in number (“Feminismos” of Cátedra, “Historia y feminismo AEIHM” de Icaria, “Capsa de Pandora” of Eumo Editorial, “As Letras das Mulleres” of Sotelo Blanco Edicións, etc.) and feminist publishing houses that work to retrieve texts and women writers that have been rendered invisible by the dominant discourses. In particular, the Madrid feminist publishing house, horas y HORAS, has a collection entitled “La Cosecha de Nuestras Madres” (Our mothers’ harvest), which includes feminist translations of feminist texts. An eloquent example of this practice is the translation of Virginia Woolf’s A room of one’s own (Un cuarto propio) (2003) by María Milagros Rivera Garretas. In these cases, academia and the reading public share a magnificent opportunity for vindication. The connection between the university and the publishing world has been reinforced in 2016 by the creation of the Premios Alma Mater, an initiative of the Escuela Alma Máter of Ávila, the publishers Cuadernos del Laberinto and the research group TRADIC of the University of Salamanca. The main aim of the three awards (Premio Alma Máter de Ávila for Poetry, Premio Alma Máter de Ávila for Translation and Premio Alma Máter de Ávila for Communication) is to promote real equality between men and women through language. In this chapter, using an interdisciplinary methodology, our aim is to carry out a genealogical investigation of the intersection “gender and translation” in our country. We have divided the text into the following sections, which I have baptized with the following titles: (1) “Introduction: Historical and theoretical origins”, which presents a historical introduction to the studies of gender and translation in Spain; (2) “Main lines of research”, which offers a survey of the two main lines of investigation developed by researchers in Spain: “ ‘Grandmothers’: Feminine and feminist historiography of translation” and “Feminist translating theories and practices”; and (3) “Looking to the future: “ ‘We should all be feminists’ ”, which details the new proposals that seem to be emerging. More than two decades after Carol Maier posed her questions (Does ‘woman’ affect ‘translation’? Does ‘translation’ affect ‘woman’?), we can state that the concepts of woman and translation are not only intensely interrelated in Spanish but also extensively (see the panoramic studies of Martín Ruano 2008; Castro 2009a; Brufau 2010, 2011; Santaemilia 2011, 2013; Godayol 2011, 2013a), since many works have already appeared that are continually interrogating and re-interrogating in order to avoid essentialisms.

Main lines of research “Grandmothers”: feminine and feminist historiography of translation Eliminate your mother, then your two grandmothers, then your four great-grandmothers. Go back more generations and hundreds, then thousands disappear. Mothers vanish, and the fathers and mothers of those mothers. Ever more lives disappear as if unlived until you have narrowed a forest down to a tree, a web down to a line. This is what it takes to construct a linear narrative of blood or influence or meaning. [. . .] Those excluded influences I call the grandmothers. (Solnit 2014, 72)

In “Grandmother Spider” (2014), Rebecca Solnit, like dozens of feminist authors before her, insists on the need to fight against the vertical patriarchal lines of culture and the invisibility that we have always been condemned to, while at the same time urging us to go on building a feminine lineage, broad, complex, intertextual and interconnected, continuing the task that one 104

Translation and gender

of the great “mothers” of feminism, Virginia Woolf, began in her manifesto A room of one’s own (1929). Although eighty-five years apart, Woolf and Solnit encourage us to continue the archaeological work of retrieval and visibilization of the “grandmothers” (symbolic grandmothers, mothers, sisters and cousins), all of them authors that we need to help us “to spin the web and not be caught in it” (Solnit 2014, 82). Since cultural genealogy has always been masculine, with the incursion of some women alibi, legitimized by the power, the third wave of feminisms, like those of the second wave, advocate contesting our chronic cultural lack of mothers by retrieving and revaluing feminine and feminist protagonists, and recognizing their leadership and influence (Vidal Claramonte 2002, 2003). In this section, we wished to underline the need to be able to count on ideological figures and complex feminine genealogical networks in order to make visible the role of women in the development of the cultural polysystem, while at the same time constructing an egalitarian cultural genealogy. Over the last two decades in Spain, many researchers and research groups have worked in this historiographic area of feminine and feminist retrieval of translation. With the aim of forefronting translation (considered a subaltern discipline in the literary canon) and women translators (considered subaltern literary figures in the translating canon), the studies that we will now comment on vindicate the memory of women in the history of Spanish translation: firstly, by retrieving translators, translations and their paratexts (prefaces, introductions, notes, correspondence between women, etc.); and secondly by retrieving translations that had been rendered invisible by the dominant context, mainly of feminist texts and authors. We will present chronologically some of the most representative works of historical retrieval of women translators and translations that have been published in recent years in Spain, while being conscious of the fact that we cannot be exhaustive or just with all the contributions, merely for reasons of space. The research groups GETCC (Research Group on Contemporary Catalan Translation) of the Autonomous University of Barcelona and GETLIHC (Gender Studies Research Group: Translation, Literature, History and Communication) of the University of Vic – Central University of Catalonia have been responsible for various initiatives (congresses, exhibitions, monographs and articles in specialized journals, etc.) aimed at retrieving and rendering visible Catalan women translators, their translations, and their paratexts (see, among others, Bacardí and Godayol 2006, 2011, 2013, 2014, 2016). The archaeological base for all this retrieval of invisible feminine (and masculine) translating voices was created in the context of the preparation of the Diccionari de la traducció catalana (Dictionary of Catalan Translation), directed by Montserrat Bacardí and Pilar Godayol. The Diccionari contains 1,000 entries and is a compilation of translators of all times – up to those born in 1950 – who translated from any language into Catalan, with, obviously, a greater emphasis on literary translation, this being the most cultivated over the centuries. This can now be consulted in its free-access digital form, and the intention is to enlarge it with more entries.2 It should be pointed out that one of the principle objectives of the directors from the very beginning was the retrieval of feminine figures. However, of the 1,000 entries in the dictionary, which covers eight centuries, only 85 are women (8.5%) and they are of the twentieth century, with some minimum exceptions from the nineteenth century of translations of a handful of poems. The first translation of a book into Catalan by a man is from the thirteenth century, when the language was born, and by a woman, from the twentieth century. The first, dated 1910, is a translation by Eulàlia Capdevila, from Esperanto into Catalan, of Un retrat (A portrait) by Nadina Kolorrat, and the second, also from 1910, that of María Antonia Salvà from Provençal into Catalan, of Les illes d’or (The golden isles) by Frederic Mistral. 105

Pilar Godayol

From then on, other names come timidly forward presenting themselves as translators, normally connected to academic institutions. Before the Spanish Civil War, a fair number of translators appear who take on the translation of leading authors, both men and women. But the effects of the Civil War (1936–1939) and the subsequent Francoist dictatorship (1939–1975) were devastating for translation. Until the passing of the Press and Printing Law of 1966, no texts that were not in tune with the regime could be translated into Spanish and nothing could be translated into Catalan, Galician and Basque except religious books, poetry or local monographs. The situation was equally disastrous for the “feminization” of translation since many women writers and translators went into exile or, if they remained in the country, silenced their work. With the relative liberalization of the censorship in the 1960s, some women translators appear who have a certain level of professionalism. It is not until the 1970s and 1980s that we can really speak of the professionalization of translation: there is a greater demand for translations from the publishing houses and consequently the number of professional translators increases, in more or less equal proportions of men and women. Nowadays, men and women translators compete on equal terms in a market that is always fluctuating and not too prosperous for publishers in general. This brief summary of the evolution of the “feminization of translation”, as Lori Chamberlain would say (1992 [1988]), in Catalonia, based on data from the Diccionari de la traducció catalana is more or less extrapolable to the progress of the “feminization of translation” of the other languages in the country. We know of Western women translators, such as Margaret Tyler, Catherine Fowler Philips, Aphra Behn, Sarah Austin or Margaret Fuller, who, during the sixteenth, seventeenth, eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, worked in the profession, though on tiptoe and behind masks and disguises. Nevertheless, whether it be England, France or Spain, a real “feminization” of translation does not take place until the twentieth century, and to be more precise, until the last three decades of the twentieth century, when, amongst other social, political and publishing factors, an interest in translation and gender studies propitiates a new way of understanding the profession, free, though not entirely, from the dominant patriarchal discourses and more conscious of the historical memory of translation and the need to retrieve women authors and abandoned texts. However, there is no doubt that the future is bright: in Spanish translation faculties today, 90% are women. In this same field of feminist historiographic retrieval, we should mention other works from different geographical areas. On the one hand, in 2011, Olga Castro, in the article “Traductoras gallegas del siglo XX: Reescribiendo la historia de la traducción desde el género y la nación” (Galician women translators of the XX century: Rewriting the history of translation from the perspective of gender and the nation), presented an overview of the contribution of women translators in the history of Galician translation of the twentieth century. Her aim was to give recognition to Galician women translators, offering brief examples of their work, and also to analyse the power relations present in their translating in the light of the discourse of gender and of the nation. Recently, Ana Luna published “O papel da tradutora no campo literario galego” (2017), with the objective to highlight the role played by women responsible for literary translations after the democratic period. On the other hand, in 2016, Dolores Romero López, of the Complutense University of Madrid, edited Retratos de traductoras en la Edad de Plata (Portraits of women translators in the Silver Age), evoking the mythical Portraits des traductrices, edited by Jean Deslile in 2002. Written by various specialists, it is a collection of nine biographies of women translators (Carmen de Burgos, Zenobia Camprubí, Ernestina de Champourcin, María de Maeztu, María Martínez Sierra, María Luz Morales, Isabel Oyarzábal, Emilia Pardo Bazán 106

Translation and gender

and Matilde Ras) who acted as cultural mediators during the Silver Age of Spanish literature (1868–1936). These literary figures extended their intellectual activities translating outstanding authors of European literatures. This study is the first to gather the work of these translators in the same monograph. Other studies of individual cases of women translators and the reception of translated women authors have also been carried out (among others, see, Sánchez 2011, 2013, 2014; Godayol 2014, 2017a, 2017b; Zaragoza 2017; Julio 2017; Vidal Claramonte 2018b). In spite of these publications, which have laid the foundations of “the city of the translating ladies”, evoking the title of the book La cité des dames (1405) by Christine de Pisan, work must be done in the future to trace an Iberian map of women translators of all times. This genealogical network of translators would help us to extend the literary landscape of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries in Spain, and to establish connections and influences amongst its literatures and cultural agents (patrons, publishers, writers, translators, critics, etc.). This way we would see clearly how the feminine literary models of the period were socially active in spite of the many difficulties and setbacks. Like that of all the other intellectual activities in the country, the history of Spanish feminine translation in the twentieth century is marked by the forty years of the Francoist dictatorship. On the one hand, it interrupted the task that the translators of the beginning of the century had begun, and on the other, from the 1960s onwards, with the liberalization brought about by the Press and Printing Law of 1966, known as the Fraga Law, translation work became available and many women writers took advantage of it in order to complement their income. At this time also, translations of authors who had been censored during the first decades of the regime were published. These works had been included in the list of books prohibited by the Church (e.g. texts by Simone de Beauvoir, Antonio Gramsci, Ernest Hemingway, Herbert Marcuse, Karl Marx and Jean-Paul Sartre), which was finally abolished in 1966 after the II Vatican Council. In relation to this, a sample of the research being carried out at present is the recent book Tres escritoras censuradas. Simone de Beauvoir, Betty Friedan y Mary McCarthy (Three censored women writers) (2017a) in which Godayol analyzes the censorship and reception of three feminist works during the second period of the Francoist regime: Le deuxième sexe, The feminine mystique and The group. In spite of the many obstacles imposed by the censors, the first two translations, being specialized texts for a specific readership, were permitted, whereas the third was not. The group was a bestseller addressed to a wider readership and was, therefore, considered more dangerous because it projected an image of women that clashed with the principles of the so-called National Catholicism of the period. Before that, other works on the reception of The second sex, by Beauvoir, were published in Spain (see, among others, Castro 2008; Sánchez 2013; Godayol 2013b). In 2015, Gora Zaragoza Ninet, Juan José Martínez Sierra and José Javier Ávila-Cabrera edited a special issue of Quaderns de Filologia. Estudis Literaris, devoted to “Translation and censorship”, which included a section on “Translation, gender and censorship” consisting of three articles: “Simone de Beauvoir bajo la dictadura franquista: las traducciones al catalán” (“Simone de Beauvoir under Franco’s dictatorship: the Catalan translations”), by Pilar Godayol (2015); “En terreno vedado: género, traducción y censura. El caso de Brokeback Mountain” (“In fenced ground: gender, translation and censorship. The Brokeback Mountain Case”), by Cristina Gómez Castro and María Pérez L. de Heredia (2015); and “La identidad censurada: representación y manipulación de la homosexualidad en la obra Té y simpatía” (“The censored identity: representation and manipulation of homosexuality in the work Té y simpatía”), by Antonio J. Martínez Pleguezuelos and J. David González-Iglesias González (2015). All three texts pointed to new directions in the research into gender and translation 107

Pilar Godayol

in Spain: the first opened up the examination of the censors’ dossiers on the translations of foreign feminist writers during the Francoist regime; the second approached the analysis of translations into Spanish and their film adaptations, taking into account gender stereotypes; and the third studied the censorship and self-censorship in literature and the theatre with regard to the treatment of homosexuality under the dictatorship. Related to translation, gender and censorship, more studies have been published recently (see, among others, Camus, Gómez Castro, and Willians 2017; Godayol 2018b, 2019; Godayol and Taronna 2018; Gómez Castro 2017; Zaragoza 2017; Zaragoza et al. 2018). Last but not least, it should be emphasized that comparative studies on feminist historiography and translation between Spanish-speaking countries should be strengthened in the future. Due to Franco’s censorship and the Latin American publishing boom, in the 1950s and 1960s several works by ideological authors were first translated into Argentinian and Mexican Spanish. Specifically, the entire work of Simone de Beauvoir was translated into Argentinian Spanish. For example, El segundo sexo was translated by the Argentinian playwright Pablo Palant in 1954 and, by Alicia Martorell, into peninsular Spanish, three decades later, in 1998. Nowadays, bearing in mind that not all of Beauvoir’s works have been retranslated, it is said that her Spanish translations “are still read today with a Buenos Aires accent” (Cagnolati et al. 2010, 13).

Feminist translating theories and practices Human beings translate because they are finite beings but with infinite desires; They translate because they have, at the same time, a specific and mobile place (space and time) and freedom; they translate because, in spite of the constant presence of death, they are possessed by the inextinguishable desire to always begin again: to translate is to be born again; it is, as the rabi Nahman de Braslav wished, a rotund refusal to be old. (Duch 2002, 197)

Most translation theoreticians of the second half of the twentieth century and the first decades of the twenty-first (among others, Rosemary Arrojo, Susan Bassnett, Heraldo de Campos, Ovidi Carbonell, Andrew Chesterman, Lluís Duch, Luise von Flotow, Barbara Godard, Edwin Gentler, André Lefevere, Sherry Simon, Maria Tymoczko, África Vidal Claramonte and Michaela Wolf  ) consider that it is not possible to explain translation in a universal way. On the contrary, it needs to be understood as part of a changing, heterogeneous and nomadic world such as ours, and, therefore, we should accept that its representations are temporary and that we need to constantly redefine them according to the contingency of each “space and time” (Duch 2002, 197). In this situation, as there is no essence nor origin, and the translation “is everything” (2012, 3), in the words of Vidal Claramonte, the translator is not marginal: she is, and wishes to be, completely visible. In Quebec, as we have already mentioned, at the end of the 1970s and beginning of the 1980s, the intersection between feminist literature and translation studies gave rise to a movement that proposed a new role for the woman literary translator, which involved making the feminine visible. The best-known strategies were the use of prefaces and introductions, linguistic interventions (graphic and of meaning in the target language) and the appropriation of the text for didactic purposes (see von Flotow 1991). This Canadian literary and translational wealth, along with other parallel or later theoretical proposals, was the basis, at the end of last century, for the study and theoretical reflection on what feminist 108

Translation and gender

translation was, and what textual implications it could have in different contexts. In Spain, as in other parts of the world (e.g., Austria, Canada, England, Italy and the United States), the Canadian school of feminist translation promoted (and continues to promote) dialogues and observations (see, among others, Vidal 1998, 2005, 2007; Godayol 2000, 2005, 2013a; Martín Ruano 2005a, 2008; Castro 2009a; Brufau 2010, 2011; Santaemilia 2011; Bengoechea 2014; Palacios 2014). In spite of the originality of the textual interventions used to fight the social repression of femininity, the Canadian feminist translations of the 1980s and 1990s were the expression of a specific and unique experience, in social, cultural, political and identity terms. As Lluís Duch puts it, it belongs to “a specific and mobile place” (2002, 197). Realizing that these could not become a standard, universal model for all feminist translation practices, other collectives vindicated other feminine subjectivities in translation and made them visible in different ways. For example, when interviewed in 1995 and 1996, Carol Maier, the translator of María Zambrano and Ana Castillo, insisted on her preference for the term “woman-identified translator” over “feminist translator”: I would think that a ‘woman-identified translator’ would first of all identify him or herself affirmatively with ‘woman’ in some way and that she would make many of her decisions as translator on the basis of that identification. [. . .] Probably the most important thing is not so much how one identifies oneself with respect to gender, and maybe not even how the writer is identified with respect to gender, as the translator’s method or approach, in other words, the extent to which the translator makes decisions in the context of gender, and which decisions are made in that context. (Maier in Godayol 1998, 161) Along these lines, Godayol has introduced other terms and stated that “the practice of translation as/like a woman [. . .] must be based on a permanent criticism of the subject itself ” (Godayol 2005, 13). And this implies that, as in all political translation, “feminist translation can only aim for permanent reflection and self-criticism in its representations, its methods, applications, focalizations, textual processes and provisional tactical decisions” (Godayol 2005, 14). That is to say, it is a question of constantly interrogating the texts and ourselves in order to understand how all (re)writing in the feminine and its reception are closely bound to uncountable and uncontrollable practices of power, whether social, political or cultural. We should also remember that we ourselves form part of the same system that provides our subjectivity for writing, translating or theorizing. To summarize, our main objective as investigators of feminist translating practices (or “woman-identified”, as/like a woman, etc.) should be, as Martín Ruano argues, “the request to constantly reinterpret our concepts and strategies relationally” (2005a, 37). Taking into account that feminist translation should be a continuous dynamic of self-criticism and reflection, some Spanish researchers have recently revived the debate on the theory and practice of feminist translation. Two works that are indicative of a constant evolution are worth mentioning here, both published in 2014 in the special issue entitled “Rethinking women and translation in the Third Millenium” of the journal Women’s Studies International Forum (Postigo and Martínez 2014). Firstly, in “Feminist translation? No way! Spanish specialised translators’ disinterest in feminist translation” (2014), Mercedes Bengoechea analyzes why professional specialized 109

Pilar Godayol

translation in Spain has shown no interest in feminist translation. The reasons she provides are as follows: Firstly, Spanish translatology has generally treated feminist translation as an exclusively literary, foreign, totally subversive, manipulative and radical phenomenon not suitable for incorporation in mainstream teaching or professional practice. Therefore, students and professionals either lack feminist translation models to apply or flee from feminist translation. Secondly, specialised practice bases its everyday work on dictionaries, terminology databases and internet, which are electronic resources governed by androcentrism, sexism and dominion of the majoritarian. (Bengoechea 2014, 101) Bengoechea insists particularly on the fact that feminist translation in Spain has been related, mainly in the textbooks of the translation faculties, to Canadian literary translation and is, therefore, considered to be “creative, metatextual, elitist and sterile, in the best case producing resistant, non-fluid difficult-to-read texts where the translator highlights her presence to egocentric levels” (2014, 98). Obviously, this restrictive reading has meant that feminist translation has been of no interest to translation professionals who work pressurized by publishers, in addition to constantly using electronic documentation in which the gender discourses are still very androcentric and often sexist (dictionaries, glossaries, translation reports, etc.). The majority of the large publishing houses are also conservative with regard to language norms and seek support “behind what has been accepted and standardized, [. . .], behind what has been idolized as correct, and raised to the category of norm” (Martín Ruano 2005b, 89). Thus, feminist translations, like all politically engaged translations, require the opposite: subversion, imagination, and audacity in their approaches to the text. Commercial imperatives and economic questions are anything but helpful in the negotiations of translators with publishers when the former wish to complement translations with paratextual elements such as prefaces, introductions and footnotes, or to introduce textual markings or linguistic interventions. Most of the feminist translations that have been carried out in Spain have been the work of academics (Olga Castro, Pilar Godayol, Manuela Palacios, Simon Palmer, María Reimóndez, Caterina Riba, Milagros Rivera Garretas, Dora Sales, África Vidal Claramonte, etc.), who usually agree on the product with the publisher before. Of special importance is Dora Sales, who translates feminine transcultural literature of contemporary India, and at the same time reflects on her own practices (see Sales 2006, 2013). Nevertheless, the “gap between theory and practice” in feminist translation is still an open debate (Martín Ruano 2008; Castro 2013; Castro and Ergun 2017). Secondly, Manuela Palacios, in “Translation in the feminine: Theory, commitment and (good) praxis” (2014), offers a survey of this practice in the context of translation into Galician and presents a frustrated case of feminist translation which ended in the law-courts and the press. The Galician feminist writer and translator María Reimóndez translated from English into Galician Mark Haddon’s book The curious incident of the dog in the night-time (2003) for the publishing house Rinoceronte (see Reimóndez 2009; Castro 2009b; Palacios 2014). Palacios explains that in 2004 Reimóndez came to a verbal agreement with the publishing house Xerais to translate Mark Haddon’s book. But when she handed in the translation to Xerais in 2007, another Galician publisher, Rinoceronte, had previously bought the rights. The two publishers finally reached an agreement and Reimóndez handed over her translation to Rinoceronte. When she received the first proofs, the translator realized that there were substantial changes with regard to the feminist approach that she had given the translation. Owing to 110

Translation and gender

the many conceptual and linguistic disagreements, the publisher, Moisés R. Barcia, cancelled the contract, did not pay the translator and published the text with a translation attributed to himself. There are many general aspects of this situation worthy of comment (the importance of signing written contracts, the ethical relationship between publisher and translator, the limits of the publisher’s intervention in the translator’s decisions, the limits of the translator’s intervention with regard to the original and the author’s interpretation, etc.) but surely one of the most important has to do with what Bengoechea put forward in her article: that feminist translation today in Spain is considered “as being interpretative-interventionist (or openly manipulative)” and “exclusively practised by women and only interests them” (2014, 98). Finally, other academics have worked in the area of the linguistic representation of gender in translation (see, among others, Santaemilia 2005, 2014, 2017a, 2017b; Martín Ruano 2006; Bengoechea 2011; Tubau 2013). José Santaemilia’s research has focussed on sexual identity in translation, the translation of sexist and misogynous texts, and the translation of sex-related texts. For example, in “Sex and translation: On women, men and identity” (2014), Santaemilia studies the treatment of love and sex in the translations of John Cleland’s work into Spanish and of texts by Almudena Grandes and Mario Vargas Llosa into English. He argues that translating the language of love and sex is a “political act” with important rhetorical and ideological implications, “fully indicative of the translator’s attitude towards existing conceptualisations of gender/sexual identities” (Santaemilia 2014, 104). In his conclusions he calls for more case studies on the relationship between sex and translation in different texts and languages: Through the translation of sex, we are able to analyse and bring to the light the complexities of the configuration of gender/sexual identities, of the social contradictions and prejudices over women (or men), of the subordination of women in/through language and translation, of the mechanisms of gender discrimination – and, ultimately, of how all these factors are transmitted (or challenged) when travelling into other cultures. (Santaemilia 2014, 110)

Future directions: “We should all be feminists” Culture does not make people. People make culture. [. . .] My great-grandmother, from stories I’ve heard, was a feminist. She ran away from the house of the man she did not want to marry and married the man of her choice. She refused, protested, spoke up whenever she felt she was being deprived of land and access because she was female. She did not know the word feminist. But it doesn’t mean she wasn’t one. [. . .] My own definition of a feminist is a man or a woman who says, ‘Yes, there’s a problem with gender as it is today and we must fix it, we must do better’. All of us, women and men, must do better. (Adichie 2014, 48)

These words come at the end of Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s book We should all be feminists (2014), translated into various languages including Spanish (Todos deberíamos ser feministas, 2016). As in her novels, here Adichie puts the reader in a situation of persistent cultural questioning that tests and provokes. In this essay, the Nigerian writer invites both men and women “to be feminists”, because “culture does not make people. People make culture” (2014, 46), and therefore we can change attitudes, motivations, visions and discourses. 111

Pilar Godayol

In the article from which the quotation heading this chapter is taken, Carol Maier paraphrased Sherry Simon and stated that feminism is “a framework rather than a method of translation” (1994, 33). Over the last twenty-five years, the study of the intersection of translation and gender in Spain has made us all, men and women, more feminist because it has stimulated: (1) the retrieval of women translators, texts and paratexts, made invisible by the dominant discourses; (2) questioning, criticism and self-criticism of the theories and practices of feminist translation at home and abroad; (3) reflection on the ethics and the responsibility of feminist translators and the publishers who publish their texts; (4) the study of linguistic representation of gender in translation; (5) the linguistic analysis of feminist and sexist translations; (6) the promotion of metaphors and myths in the feminine to supplant the androcentrist discourse that has prevailed for so long in translation theory; etc. However, as with any discipline that is subject to intellectual and technological changes, there are important challenges to be met. In the first place, with regard to historiographic research, although a good number of translators, texts and paratexts have been retrieved, we must now systematize data collection of more names and works, and then go on to a second stage of historiographic study, the realization of a history of Spanish women translators and, if possible and feasible, of a history of Spanish-speaking women translators (taking into consideration the Latin American countries) (see Álvarez et al. 2014; Sánchez 2017). Secondly, we must continue to reflect on the theories of feminist translation in order to be able to apply them (or not) to practice. We must reduce the distance between theory and practice, between academia and professional practice. Thirdly, we must widen the horizons of our research in order to be even more interdisciplinary. Without losing sight of written media, audiovisual communication media (cinema, television, video games and so on) also need to be considered. Although some studies of audiovisual translation have been published in Spain, most of them recently (see De Marco 2012; Pérez L. de Heredia 2016, 2017, 2018; Corrius, Espasa, and De Marco 2017; Gómez Castro 2017; Zaragoza et al. 2018), more work needs to be done to include gender in the research agenda. Fourthly, we must involve professional practice in the feminist reflection on texts. Feminist translation should not be restricted to literary translation, and needs to embrace the experience of specialized translation as well (be it legal, technical or scientific) (see Martín Ruano 2009). At last, attention must be paid to the need to work on new studies linking the Spanish-speaking countries because, as far as the history of translation and feminism is concerned, they have shared and actually share many contexts and practices. Finally, we must never cease to question ourselves and our theories and practices. The intersection of translation and gender will always pose new questions for the lovers of translation and its challenges, as Carol Maier (1994): What does it mean today to translate from a gender perspective? What is a feminist translation in the twenty-first century? What responsibilities does it entail for publishers and translators? What new strategies and textual options can we use to render visible the feminine and invisible sexism and androcentrism? What must feminist translation ethics consist of?

Recommended reading Vidal Claramonte, María Carmen África. 1998. “La traducción feminista canadiense.” In El futuro de la traducción, edited by Vidal Claramonte, María Carmen África, 101–20. Valencia: Diputación de Valencia /Institució Alfons el Magnànim. The chapter “La traducción feminista canadiense”, from the book El futuro de la traducción, is the first general survey written in Spain on the theories and practices of Canadian feminist translation. It

112

Translation and gender presents the authors that were translated, the translators and their strategies, and evaluates their work within as a whole. Godayol, Pilar. 2000. Espais de frontera. Gènere i traducció. Vic: Eumo Editorial (Spazi di frontiera: Genere e traduzione. Translated by Annarita Taronna. Bari: Palomar). Espais de frontera is a study of the interaction between gender and translation, and of the intervening cultural spaces. In addition to reflecting on the frontier experience of “translating as/like a woman”, this monograph theorizes on the translation of hybrid languages and texts and centres on practical examples taken from the emerging Chicana literature. Santaemilia, José, and Luise von Flotow, eds. 2011. Special Issue “Woman and Translation: Geographies, Voices and Identities/Mujer y Traducción: Geografías, voces e identidades.” MonTI (Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación) 3: 1–470. The special issue “Woman and translation: Geographies, Voices and Identities/ Mujer y Traducción: Geografías, voces e identidades”, of MonTI, is a panoramic monograph which takes stock of the situation of studies on gender and translation on an international level. Of the sixteen articles, six, written by Spanish women authors (Brufau, Buján and Nogueira, Camps, Camus, Castro and Godayol) present a general survey, by geographies and languages of Spain, of that have concentrated their research on the fields of identities and gender over the last two decades. Postigo, Encarnación, and Adela Martínez, eds. 2014. Special issue “Rethinking Women and Translation in the Third Millenium.” Women’s Studies International Forum 42: 1–128. The special issue “Rethinking women and translation in the Third Millenium”, of Women’s Studies International Forum, includes seven articles by Spanish authors (Bengoechea, Godayol, Palacios, Postigo, Sánchez, Santaemilia, Taillefer de Haya and Muñoz-Luna), that present the different lines of research on gender and translation that are being developed in Spain today. Zaragoza, G., Martínez Sierra, J.; Cerezo, B. and Richart M., eds. 2018. Traducción, género y censura en la literatura y en los medios de comunicación. Granada: Comares. The twenty chapters included in this panoramic monograph (Aja Sánchez; Bosch; Calvo; Carcenac & Ugarte; Dot; Estany; Fernández Gil; Godayol; Gómez Castro; Julio; Kurasova; Meseguer; Panchón; Pérez L. de Heredia; Riba & Sanmartí; Sanz-Moreno; Santaemilia; Seruya; Williams; Zaragoza, Martínez Sierra, Cerezo & Richart) present a general survey of the research on the field of gender, translation and censorship over the last few years.

Related topics Translation and gender, women and translation, feminist translation, feminist historiography in translation.

Notes 1 This chapter is the result of work by the consolidated research group “Gender Studies Research Group: Translation, Literature, History and Communication” (GETLIHC) (2017, SGR 136) of the University of Vic–Central University of Catalonia (UVic-UCC) (C. de la Laura, 13, 08500, Vic, Spain), and the R&D project “Traducción y censura: género e ideología (1939–2000)” (ref. FFI2014-52989-C2-2-P), financed by the Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad. Author’s ORCID number: 0000-00032513-5334. Email: [email protected]. Translation of the article by Sheila Waldeck. 2 Visat: Accessed 20 February, 2019. www.visat.cat/diccionari/cat.html

References Adichie, Chimamanda Ngozi. 2014. We Should All Be Feminists. London. Fourth Estate. ______. 2016. Todos deberíamos ser feministas. Barcelona: Random House. Álvarez, Sonia E. et al. 2014. Translocalities/Translocalidades. Durham: Duke University Press.

113

Pilar Godayol Bacardí, Montserrat, and Pilar Godayol. 2006. Traductores. Vic: Universitat de Vic. ———, eds. 2011. Diccionari de la traducció catalana. Vic: Eumo. ———. 2013. Les traductores i la tradició. 20 pròlegs del segle XX. Lleida: Punctum. ———. 2014. “Catalan Women Translators: An Introductory Overview.” The Translator 20 (2): 144–61. ———. 2016. “Four-Fold Subalterns: Catalan, Women, Translators and Theorists.” Journal of Iberian and Latin American Studies 22 (3): 215–27. Bengoechea, Mercedes. 2011. “Who Are You, Who Are We in A Room of One’s Own? The Difference that Sexual Difference Makes in Borges’ and Rivera-Garretas’ Translations of Virginia Woolf’s Essay.” European Journal of Women’s Studies 18 (4): 411–26. ———. 2014. “Feminist Translation? No Way! Spanish Specialised Translators’ Disinterest in Feminist Translation.” Special issue “Rethinking Women and Translation in the Third Millenium.” Women’s Studies International Forum 42: 94–103. Brufau Alvira, Nuria. 2010. Las teorías de la traducción a examen: Destilaciones para el siglo XXI. Granada: Comares. ———. 2011. “Traducción y género: El estado de la cuestión en España.” In Santaemilia, José, and Luise von Flotow, coords. Special issue “Women and Translation: Geographies, Voices and Identities.” MonTI 3: 181–207. Cagnolati, Beatriz et al. 2010. “De la Argentina al mundo hispanoamericano: las traducciones con acento porteño de la obra de Simone de Beauvoir.” In Simone de Beauvoir: Las encrucijadas de “el otro sexo”, edited by Beatriz Cagnolati and María Luisa Femenías, 13–18. La Plata: Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Calefato, Patrizia, and Pilar Godayol, coords. 2008. “Traducción/Género/Poscolonialismo.” DeSignis 12. Camus Camus, Carmen, Cristina Gómez Castro, and Julia Williams Camus. 2017. Translation, Ideology and Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Castro, Olga. 2008. “(Para)Translated Ideologies en Simone de Beauvoir’s Le deuxième sexe: The (Para)Translator’s Role.” In Translation ans Censorship in Different Times and Landscapes, edited by Teresa Seruya and Maria Lin Moniz, 130–46. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. ———. 2009a. “(Re)examinando horizontes en los estudios feministas de traducción: ¿hacia una tercera ola?” MonTI 1: 59–86. ———. 2009b. “El género (para)traducido: pugna ideológica en la traducción y paratraducción de O curioso incidente do can á media noite.” Quaderns. Revista de traducció 16: 251–64. ———. 2010. “Tradución, xénero, nación: cara a unha teoría e práctica da tradución feminista.” Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Universidade de Vigo, Vigo. ———. 2011. “Traductoras gallegas del siglo XX: Reescribiendo la historia de la traducción desde el género y la nación.” In Santaemilia, José, and Luise von Flotow, coords. Special issue “Women and translation: Geographies, Voices and Identities.” MonTI 3: 107–30. ———. 2013. “Talking at Cross-Purposes? The Missing Link Between Feminist Linguistics and Translation Studies.” Gender and Language 7 (1): 35–58. Castro, Olga, and Emek Ergun. 2017. Feminist Translation Studies: Local and Transnational Perspectives. London: Routledge. Chamberlain, Lori. 1992 [1988]. “Gender and the Metaphorics of Translation.” In Rethinking Translation, edited by Lawrence Venuti, 57–74. London: Routledge. Corrius, Montse, Eva Espasa, and Marcella De Marco. 2017. “Balancing Gender Awareness and Professional Priorities in Advertising and Audiovisual Translation: An Overview.” In Traducir para la igualdad sexual, edited by José Santaemilia, 109–21. Granada: Comares. De Marco, Marcella. 2012. Translation Through a Gender Lens. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Duch, Lluís. 2002. La substància de l’efímer: Assaigs d’antropologia. Barcelona: Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. Flotow, Luise von. 1991. “Feminist Transltion: Contexts, Practices and Theories”. TTR 4 (2): 69–84. Godayol, Pilar. 1998. “Interviewing Carol Maier: A Woman in Translation.” Quaderns. Revista de traducció 2: 155–62. ———. 2000. Espais de frontera: Gènere i traducció. Vic: Eumo. (2002. Spazi di frontiera. Genere e traduzione. Translated by Annarita Taronna. Bari: Palomar). ———. 2005. “Frontera Spaces: Translating as/Like a Woman.” In Gender, Sex and Translation: The Manipulation of Identities, edited by José Santaemilia, 9–14. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing. ———, coord. 2006. “Dossier ‘Género y Traducción’.” Quaderns. Revista de Traducció 13: 9–103.

114

Translation and gender ———. 2011. “Gender and Translation in Catalan: Archaeological Groundwork for Assessing the State of Affairs.” In Santaemilia, José, and Luise von Flotow, coords. Special issue “Women and Translation: Geographies, Voices and Identities.” MonTI 3: 53–74. ———, coord. 2012. “Dossier ‘La traducción y los estudios de género’.” Quaderns. Revista de Traducció 19: 125–259. ———. 2013a. “Gender and Translation.” In Routledge Handbook of Translation Studies, edited by Carmen Millán and Francesca Bartrina, 173–85. Londres: Routledge. ———. 2013b. “Censure, féminisme et traduction: Le Deuxième sexe de Simone de Beauvoir en Catalan.” Nouvelles Questions Féministes 32 (2): 74–89. ———. 2014. “Three Feminist Classics in Catalan, Galician and Spanish: Charlotte Perkins Gilman, Virginia Woolf and Betty Friedan.” Special issue “Rethinking Women and Translation in the Third Millenium.” Women’s Studies International Forum 42: 77–86. ———. 2015. “Simone de Beauvoir bajo la dictadura franquista: las traducciones al catalán.” Quaderns de Filologia. Estudis Literaris 20: 17–34. ———. 2017a. Tres escritoras censuradas. Simone de Beauvoir, Betty Friedan y Mary McCarthy. Translated by Pilar Godayol. Granada: Comares. (2016. Tres escriptores censurades: Simone de Beauvoir, Betty Friedan & Mary McCarthy. Lleida: Punctum). ———. 2017b. “Hacia un canon literario igualitario postfranquista: laSal, primera editorial feminista.” In Traducir para la igualdad sexual, edited by José Santaemilia, 49–62. Granada: Comares. ———. 2018a. “Feminismo, traducción y censura en el postfranquismo: ‘La Educación Sentimental’, de Anagrama.” In Traducción, género y censura en la literatura y en los medios de comunicación, edited by Gora Zaragoza, Juan José Martínez Sierra, Beatriz Cerezo, and Mabel Richart. Granada: Comares. ———. 2018b. “Translating Simone de Beauvoir before the “voluntary consultation”. In Foreign Women Authors under Fascism and Francoism. Gender, translation and censorship, edited by Pilar Godayol and Annarita Taronna, 168-193. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. ______. 2019. “Mary McCarthy: Censorship and Reception under Francoism”. In Translation and Conflict: Narratives of the Spanish Civil War and the Dictatorship, edited by Alicia Castillo and Lucía Pintado, 91–111. Cham: Palgrave. Godayol, Pilar, and Annarita Taronna, eds. 2018. Foreign Women Authors Under Fascism and Francoism: Gender, Translation and Censorship. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Gómez Castro, Cristina. 2017. “Hombre Rico, Mujer Pobre: género y moral sexual en traducción bajo censura.” In Traducir para la igualdad sexual, edited by José Santaemilia, 95–108. Granada: Comares. Gómez Castro, Cristina, and María Pérez L. de Heredia. 2015. “En terreno vedado: género, traducción y censura. El caso de Brokeback Mountain.” Quaderns de Filologia. Estudis Literaris 20: 35–52. Haddon, Mark. 2003. The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time. London: Jonathan Cape. Julio, Teresa. 2017. “María Luz Morales, traductora: estado de la cuestión y perspectivas de investigación.” Confluenze 2: 55–68. López Ponz, María. 2009. Traducción y literatura chicana: Nuevas perspectivas desde la hibridación. Granada: Comares. Luna Alonso, Ana. 2017. “O papel da tradutora no campo literario galego.” Madrygal 20: 147–56. Maier, Carol. 1994. “Women in Translation: Current Intersections, Theory and Practice.” Delos 5 (2): 29–39. Martín Ruano, Rosario. 2005a. “Gender(ing) Theory: Rethinking the Targets of Translation Studies in Parallel with Recent Developments in Feminism.” In Gender, Sex and Translation: The Manipulation of Identities, edited by José Santaemilia, 27–38. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing. ———. 2005b. “Los caveats a la panacea: El papel de la documentación en la traducción al trasluz.” In La Biblioteca de Babel: Documentarse para traducir, edited by Dora Sales Salvador, 123–46. Granada: Comares. ———. 2006. “Gramática, ideología y traducción: problemas de la transferencia asociados al género gramatical.” In Gramática y traducción, edited by Pilar Elena and Josse de Kock, 205–38. Salamanca: Universidad de Salamanca. ———. 2008. “La resistencia al trasluz: la traducción feminista en examen.” DeSignis 12: 49–56. ———. 2009. “La neutralidad a examen: nuevos asideros para el ejercicio de la traducción jurídica.” In Reflexiones sobre la traducción jurídica/Reflections on Legal Translation, edited by Jesús Baigorri Jalón and Helen Capbell, 73–89. Granada: Comares.

115

Pilar Godayol Martínez Pleguezuelos, Antonio, and J. David González-Iglesias González. 2015. “La identidad censurada: representación y manipulación de la homosexualidad en la obra Té y simpatia.” Quaderns de Filologia. Estudis Literaris 20: 53–67. Pagni, Andrea, and Annette Keilhauer, eds. 2017. Refracciones/Refractions: Traducción y género en las literaturas románicas/Traduction et genre dans les literatures romanes. Viena: LIT Verlag. Palacios, Manuela. 2014. “Translation in the Feminine: Theory, Commitment and (Good) Praxis.” Special issue “Rethinking Women and Translation in the Third Millenium.” Women’s Studies International Forum 42: 87–93. Pérez L. de Heredia, María. 2016. “Reescritura divergente y traducción de estereotipos de género en televisión: el caso de Orange is the New Black.” In Traducción, medios de comunicación, opinion pública, edited by Rosario Martín Ruano and África Vidal Claramointe, 193–208. Granada: Comares. ———. 2017. “Del universo doméstico al espacio público: traducciones y adaptacions de la identidad femenina en la ficción televisiva.” In Traducir para la igualdad sexual, edited by José Santaemilia, 123–36. Granada: Comares. ———. 2018. “Traducción, adaptación, tradaptación: proximidad cultural y diálogos intertextuales de la literatura y los medios audiovisuales.” In Traducción, género y censura en la literatura y en los medios de comunicación, edited by Gora Zaragoza, Juan José Martínez Sierra, Beatriz Cerezo, and Mabel Richart. Granada: Comares. Postigo, Encarnación, and Adela Martínez, eds. 2014. Special issue “Rethinking Women and Translation in the Third Millenium.” Women’s Studies International Forum 42: 1–128. Reimóndez, María. 2009. “The Curious Incident of Feminist Translation in Galicia: Courtcases, Lies and Gendern@tions.” Galicia 21 (A): 68–69. Rodríguez Murphy, Elena. 2016. Traducción y literatura africana: multilingüismo y transculturación en la literatura nigeriana de expresión inglesa. Granada: Comares. Romero López, Dolores, ed. 2016. Retratos de traductoras en la Edad de Plata. Madrid: Escolar y Mayo. Sales, Dora. 2006. “Traducció, género y poscolonialismo: compromiso traductológico como mediación y affidamento femenino.” Quaderns. Revista de traducció 13: 21–30. ———. 2013. “La más inesperada travesía: Algunas reflexiones desde la práctica como traductora de literatura transcultural.” Eu-topías: revista de interculturalidad, comunicación y estudios europeos 5: 77–88. Sánchez, Dolores. 2011. “Translating Science: Contexts and Contests. On the Translation of a Misogynist Scientific Treatise in Early Twentieth-Century Spain.” The Translator 17 (1): 325–48. ———. 2013. “Sur les pas du Deuxième sexe en Espagne: historiographie féministe et traduction.” La main de Thôt. Théories, enjeux et pratiques de la traduction 1. Accessed July 18, 2016. http://hdl. handle.net/10481/38749. ———. 2014. “Productive Paradoxes of a Feminist Translator: Carmen de Burgos and Her Translation of Möbius’ Treatise, The Mental Inferiority of Woman (Spain, 1904).” Women’s Studies International Forum 42: 68–76. ———. 2017. “Translation and the Circuits of Globalization: In Search of More Fruitful Feminist Dialogues in Contemporary Spain.” In Feminist Translation Studies: Local and Transnational Perspectives, edited by Olga Castro and Emek Ergun, 56–69. London: Routledge. Santaemilia, José, ed. 2003. Género, lenguaje y traducción. Valencia: Generalitat Valenciana. ———, ed. 2005. Gender, Sex and Translation. The Manipulation of Identities. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing. ———. 2011. “Introduction.” In Santaemilia, José, and Luise von Flotow, coords. Special issue “Women and Translation: Geographies, Voices and Identities.” MonTI 3: 9–49. ———. 2013. “Gender and Translation: A  New European Tradition?” In Bridging the Gap Between Theory and Practice in Translation and Gender Studies, edited by Eleonora Federici and Vanessa Leonardi, 4–14. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. ———. 2014. “Sex and Translation: On Women, Men and Identities.” Special issue “Rethinking Women and Translation in the Third Millenium.” Women’s Studies International Forum 42: 104–10. ———, ed. 2017a. Traducir para la igualdad sexual/Translating for Sexual Equality. Granada: Comares. ———. 2017b. “A  Corpus-based Analysis of Terminology in Gender and Translation Research: The Case of Feminist Translation.” In Feminist Translation Studies: Local and Transnational Perspectives, edited by Olga Castro and Emek Ergun, 15–28. London: Routledge. Santaemilia, José, and Luise von Flotow, coords. 2011. Special issue “Woman and Translation: Geographies, Voices and Identities/Mujer y Traducción: Geografías, voces e identidades.” MonTI (Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación) 3: 1–470.

116

Translation and gender Solnit, Rebecca. 2014. Men Explain Things to Me: And Other Essays. Londres: Granta. Tubau, Susagna. 2013. “Rivera Garretas’s Translation of Virginia Woolf’s A Room of One’s Own. To What Extent Does Practice Meet Theory?” In Bridging the Gap Between Theory and Practice in Translation and Gender Studies, edited by Eleonora Federici and Vanessa Leonardi, 52–62. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholar Publishing House. Vidal Claramonte, Maria Carmen África. 1998. El futuro de la traducción. Valencia: Diputación de Valencia/Institució Alfons el Magnànim. ———. 2002. La feminización de la cultura: una aproximación interdisciplinar. Salamanca: Centro de Arte Contemporáneo. ———. 2003. La magia de lo efímero: representaciones de la mujer en el arte y la literatura actuales. Castellón: Servicio de Publicaciones. ———. 2005. En los límites de la traducción. Granada: Editorial Comares. ———. 2007. Traducir entre culturas: poderes, diferencias, identidades. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. ———. 2010. Traducción y asimetría. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. ———. 2012. La traducción y los espacios: viajes, mapas, fronteras. Granada: Comares. ———. 2017. “Dile que le he escrito un blues”: Del texto como partitura a la partitura como traducción en la literatura latinoamericana. Madrid: Vervuert. ———. 2018a. “Translating las mestizas: From Anzaldúa’s nos/otras to Moraga’s labios.” In Hybrid Englishes and the Challenge of/for Translation: Identity, Mobility and Language Change, edited by Karen Bennett and Rita Queiroz de Barros, XX. London: Routledge. ———. 2018b. “Desde ese extraño espejo de la escritura.” In Literatura española de migrantes: el caso de Najat El Hachmi y su recepción en Italia, edited by Maria Carreras. Viagrande: Algra. Woolf, Virginia. 2003. Un cuarto propio. Translated by María Milagros Rivera Garretas. Madrid: horas y HORAS. Zaragoza Ninet, Gora. 2017. “Gender, Translation, and Censorship: The Well of Loneliness (1928) in Spain as an Example of Translation in Cultural Evolution.” In Redefining Translation and Interpretation in Cultural Evolution, edited by Olaf Immanuel Seel, 42–66. Hershey: Information Science Reference. Zaragoza Ninet, Gora, Juan José Martínez Sierra, and José Javier Ávila-Cabrera, eds. 2015. Special issue “Traducción y censura: nuevas perspectivas.” Quaderns de Filologia. Estudis Literaris 20: 1–257. Zaragoza Ninet, Gora, Juan José Martínez Sierra, Beatriz Cerezo, and Mabel Richart, eds. 2018. Traducción, género y censura en la literatura y en los medios de comunicación. Granada: Comares.

117

7 TRANSLATION AND IDEOLOGY Spanish perspectives1 Ovidi Carbonell i Cortés

Durante los procesos judiciales desencadenados en España por los atentados del 11-S y del 11-M el mundo de la traducción y de la interpretación del árabe cobró un relieve periodístico y social sin precedentes. Muchas y muy distintas fueron las preguntas que a la sazón se hizo la sociedad española. Esta obra pretende ofrecer al lector elementos de juicio suficientes para responder a algunas. [During the court proceedings that took place in Spain as a result of the September  11th and March  11th attacks, the world of Arabic-language translation and interpreting rose unprecedented journalistic and social prominence. The questions that Spanish society asked itself at the time were many and varied. This book aims to give readers sufficient evidence to answer some of them.] Arias and Feria, Los traductores de árabe del Estado español, 2013 Lo que complica las cosas, pero a la vez convierte esta profesión en apasionante, es que no existe una definición definitiva, inclusiva y única de la traducción porque no es una actividad ni neutra ni objetiva; es más, en realidad, en vez de esforzarse por definirlo, es mucho más útil hacerse constantemente preguntas sobre el acto de traducir: qué tipo de textos se traducen en determinadas culturas y en determinadas épocas, quién y por qué decide qué traducir y qué no, quién traduce, qué ideología tiene quien traduce y por qué se ha elegido a esa persona en concreto, y otras muchas cuestiones fundamentales que acaban definiendo cuál será el resultado final. [What both complicates and makes the profession more thrilling is the fact that there is no definitive, inclusive or unique definition of translation because, as an activity, it is neither neutral nor objective. In fact, instead of striving to define it, it is much more useful to constantly examine the act of translation: Which type of texts are translated in certain cultures and during which periods? Who decides what is and is not translated and why? Who is translating? What ideology does the person who translates have, and why have they been chosen? These and many other essential questions end up defining what the final result will be.] Vidal Claramonte, La traducción y los espacios (2013, 1) 118

Translation and ideology

Translation and ideology in Spanish academia has followed the main trends in Translation Studies at large, and has also contributed by establishing some of its own. Over the past thirty years, there has been a steady increase in the interest in translation and ideology, an interest that has developed from the “Cultural Turn” that opened up Translation Studies to contextual factors and the importance of cultural issues beyond the contrastive linguistic approaches that had characterized the early establishment of the discipline. There are several reasons for this “ideology turn”: (1) a “shift of a pendulum” back towards the text and the way cultural aspects are indeed transmitted and created through language; (2) the need to study in an accurate and reliable way the issues of representation, manipulation, and intervention that were a consequence of cultural approaches to translation; (3) a growing interest in the role played by translation in the wake of transcultural, mediation and conflict situations at a global level, and the development of a ‘conflict school’ of TS that has ideology as one of its central tenets. There are, however, several difficulties in the task of trying to define the scope of ideological approaches within Translation Studies. There will be an inevitable overlap with other general approaches that have ideological components, such as sociocultural aspects of translation, descriptive TS, critical discourse analysis, or other specialized areas like gender studies, ethics, media translation or postcolonial translation. In this sense, approaches to translation and ideology need to be transversal and cross-disciplinary. Keeping in line with most theoretical studies on the field, ideology is closely related with identity. What we refer to by the ambiguous term “ideology” is the mindset, or the narratives, that make consistent the beliefs of one group as opposed to others. These beliefs may be positive or negative, beneficial or not, but what they have in common is the creation of one group whose shared beliefs and goals are positively emphasized, against other or others whose beliefs (or the former’s ideas about their beliefs) are underrated (van Dijk 1998). Although we may refer to individual ideologies, these are socially constructed as shared beliefs. In this chapter I shall limit myself to this generic definition, which comprises common conceptualizations of ideology as a political movement, as a social representation (including ideologies of exclusion or inclusion, racism or equality, etc.) or more complex doctrinal bodies such as nationalism and nationhood, empiricism and science, creed and religion, ethics, etc. The location of the Iberian peninsula as a historical crossroads, the relationship with the North of Africa, America’s multi-layered history rife with colonialism, decolonization, multilinguism, migrancy and exile; stories of power, censorship, resistance and activism; and hybridization, space and diaspora, censorship, and activism have provided countless opportunities for research on translation and ideology, and an account of all of them is well beyond the scope of a short chapter. Besides, it remains very difficult to locate academic practices ascribing geographical (or cultural-geographical) labels to them. Perhaps it is worth pointing out that there is also an ideological framing we cannot avoid. When giving an account of Spanish Translation Studies, are we thinking of Spain as a linguistic area? What about the rich TS literature in Catalan or Galician? If we refer to Spain as a political entity, how do Latin American approaches fit into the picture? Therefore, in this chapter I  will refer to Spanish translation studies as a macro-entity beyond political and linguistic frontiers and focus on university departments and research groups that are based in Spanish-speaking countries, or departments of Spanish studies elsewhere  – emphasizing all the more the transfer of ideas across epistemological borders and layers. The contents of this chapter are organized along broad thematic lines: (1) the adoption of critical linguistic perspectives to the study of ideology in translation; (2) the issue of translation and censorship; (3) sociolinguistic perspectives on translation and power, especially in relation to Spain’s cultural diversity; (4) epistemological and identity approaches; (5) colonial, postcolonial and political ideological approaches; 119

Ovidi Carbonell i Cortés

Spanish-language publicaons on Translaon and Ideology 25 20 15 10 5 0

Figure 7.1 Spanish-language publications on translation and ideology according to data extracted from the BITRA database (University of Alicante)

(6) missionary linguistics and translation; (7) translation and ideology in intercultural contact with the Islamic world, including court translation and interpreting; and (8) translation, political engagement and activism.

***

To a large extent, research on translation is a study on transcultural ideology. Contemporary Translation Studies understand translation as a change of context from a source communicative situation to a new one, where there is often a change of linguistic code (language) and the action of an agent, or agents, who provide the new codification and the necessary intervention to suit the new context. From the moment the analyst takes into account that the context implies changes – and that these changes (or their absence) are determined by socially shared beliefs, representations, intentions or motivations – ideology comes into play as a sort of social coding beyond grammar and lexicon. But ideology is not a code in the archival sense of a collection of ready-made categories. It escapes categorization. Although some definitions of ideology may be rather clear-cut, particularly those pertaining to the realm of politics or religion, as general tendencies where some meanings are privileged and others excluded, ideological positioning is constructed, more than codified, through discursive mechanisms. Discourse analysis and critical linguistics may provide some of the tools to identify them.

Critical linguistics The first study on ideology and translation from a critical linguistic perspective was Basil Hatim and Ian Mason’s 1991 handbook Discourse and the Translator. In this seminal work, the authors approach translation drawing on text linguistics and on the discursive perspective developed in Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), derived from the work of linguists Roger Fowler, Teun A. van Dijk, Gunther Cress, Malcolm Coulthard, Ruth Wodak and Norman Fairclough, among others. 120

Translation and ideology

One of the first studies of ideology in translation proper was Ian Mason’s “Discourse, Ideology and Translation” (1994). This pioneering article addressed the issue of ideology from a discourse analysis perspective, and it is one of the first applications of CDA to Translation Studies, aiming to provide a model of analysis that could be applied to any text. In this article Mason compares, exploring framing, lexical choices, thematic progression and other discursive devices, how a text published in the UNESCO Courier magazine in Spanish and in English varies considerably to the effect that the message conveyed is substantially altered. María Calzada Pérez produced the first comprehensive study of a discourse-based aspect of ideology in translation in her PhD dissertation (1997, later published as a book in 2007). Calzada has also explored ideology as a key dimension in translation analysis in Calzada 2001. Later, her edited volume Apropos of Ideology (2003) was the first volume dedicated entirely to the subject of translation and ideology, from different perspectives. The overall approach of the volume adopts the functional school’s definition of ideology (Fowler 1991; van Dijk 1998), but the heterogeneity of their approaches makes “ideology” rather a portmanteau term for many ideas ranging from manipulation and intervention, to positioning, contextual conditioning, or power and agency. It stands out as the first attempt at putting together these perspectives, most of which would later be also similarly grouped by Mona Baker in her essential Critical Readings in Translation Studies (2010). In the late 1990s, ideology gradually acquired importance as Translation Studies accepted as a basic principle that translation, far from being an exercise in imitation and reproduction, was rather an actor whose intervention – which allowed agency and power, and which was grounded on ideological principles – was not only inevitable, but also necessary. What was left were, on the one hand, a full-fledged incorporation of critical analytical linguistic tools to account objectively for the ways in which ideology was exercised in translation; and, on the other, a systematization of general concepts and processes such as power, selection, fabrication, intervention, subversion, positioning, etc., as well as a comprehensive synthesis of case studies along specific fields of inquiry. These are the lines along which scholarship on translation and ideology would develop, especially from 2001 onwards, in parallel with a global interest in issues of conflict, terrorism, and intercultural communication. Critical Discourse Analysis approaches to translation were included with an overall consideration of translation as an ideology-driven operation in Carbonell 1999. Translation and media is a particular rich field of case studies. Roberto Valdeón’s 2007 essay analyzes the ideological differences in accounts of the 2003 Madrid terror attacks in the Spanish editions of BBC World and CNN. Later (2011), he would study cases of selective appropriation in news translation (2008), the discursive construction of terrorism in Spain (2009), and how the Falklands/ Malvinas conflict was transmitted in British and Spanish media (2011). He has later edited a volume on translation and the press specifically focused on the issue of ideology (Translating Information, Universidad de Oviedo, 2010b), and a special issue of Meta on news translation. Carbonell (2004) touched questions of the ideology of representation in literary translation from Arabic into Spanish and English, while Jeremy Munday (2007) draws on Mason for his analysis of speeches of Latin-American political leaders (such as Cuban leader Fidel Castro, Venezuelan leader Hugo Chávez and Mexican self-styled rebel Marcos) from Spanish into English, showing a lack of correspondence that, for example, produces “the effect of making Chávez speak with the voice of the enemy” (Munday 2007, 208).

History and memory of censorship in Spain Censorship has been one of the most fertile areas for Translation Studies and ideology. Almost half of the literature indexed in the BITRA database on translation and ideology in the Spanish 121

Ovidi Carbonell i Cortés

language (133 out of 287) deals with censorship, mostly about the translation of foreign literature into Spanish during Franco’s dictatorship (1939–1975). This tendency can be explained by the success with which Descriptive Translation Studies has been adopted in several university departments in Spain, providing the theoretical and methodological framework to approach the complex reality of literary translation practice especially during that period (Gutiérrez Lanza 2004). Among the different scholars who have approached censorship in Spain, it stands out the research by the group TRACE (Traducción y Censura) at the universities of León (Rabadán 2000a, 2000b; Gutiérrez Lanza 2004, 2005) and the Basque Country (Merino Álvarez 2001, 2007a, 2007b, 2009; Uribarri 2007, 2012). The aim of these research projects (very much influenced by Bourdieu’s sociological theories) is to compile a comprehensive corpus of translated literature subject to censorship procedures, and to identify (‘map’) translation practices in the light of stateinduced intervention. Among the aspects studied, as an extreme case of domestication, it is worth mentioning the case of pseudotranslation (Rabadán 2000b), where North American models “previously settled and naturalized in the Spanish context thanks to translated cinema were transferred to the written mode by means of an extremely productive process of ‘textual cloning’, tolerated and even encouraged by official censorship” (2000b, 19). Catalan research on translation and censorship starts in the 1990s with Gallofré i Virgili’s attention to translation in the 1991 volume L’edició catalana i la censura franquista [Catalan publishing and Francoist censorship]. This is followed by the publications by Jordi Arbonès i Montull (1995), Pijoan Vallverdú (2005) on the Catalan translator Jordi Arbonés, Cornellà (2010), Carné (2015), and Godayol (2015). Particularly relevant are the special issue of the journal Quaderns. Revista de Traducció (2013) devoted to translation and censorship, edited by Montserrat Bacardí; the special issue of the new journal Represura. Revista de Historia Contemporánea española en torno a la represión y la censura aplicadas al libro (2015) devoted to censorship and Catalan literature and language during the Franco period, edited by Enric Gallén; and the essay by Laura Vilardell (2016) on translation and censorship under Franco.2 To these, we may add the special issue of the journal Quaderns de Filologia. Estudis Literaris edited by Gora Zaragoza, Juan José Martínez and José Javier ÁvilaCabrera, Traducción y censura: nuevas perspectivas (2015), Pilar Godayol’s 2017 essay on women writers and censorship, and the edited volume by Godayol and Bacardí Traducció i franquisme (2017).

Language ideologies: sociolinguistic perspectives on translation and power The Hispanic world is a multilingual universe. The coexistence of several official languages in Spain and Latin America, and many other non-official languages, has also generated interest among scholars about questions of power and status and the role played by translation. Already in 1994 the late Galician literary critic and professor of Romance Languages at City University of New York Xoán González Millán (1994, English translation 1996) defined translation as “an unequal cultural dialogue between different linguistic systems” (1994, 63), reflecting on the “multiple controls” (linguistic, cultural, economic, institutional and political) that intervene in the act of translation. He pointed out at the power relations between languages in Galicia, in what was arguably one of the first applications of contemporary theories of translation and power in the Iberian peninsula. 122

Translation and ideology

The Galician and the Valencian contexts have made rich contributions to questions of ideology and translation related to linguistic planning and language models. Díaz Fouces, García González and Costa Carreras 2002 was a pioneer monograph in this field; scholars like Oscar Díaz Fouces (University of Vigo) and Esther Monzó (Jaume I University) have paved the way towards a sociology of translation where ideological issues are at the heart of translative communication.3 In fact, the collective volume edited by Díaz Fouces and Monzó 2010 present a panorama of translation as social action whose framing is, in most instances, determined by ideology, if we understand it broadly as the narrative structure that supports objective-determined courses of action. Hence, questions of power and policy; standardization and variation; action, actors and community engagement; value and hierarchy, etc., seem to conform a coherent emerging field of research that corresponds to the interpersonal dimension of communication, steeped in sociological theories like Bourdieu’s. These approaches are being applied to particular sub-areas such as Valero Garcés’ (2012) call to integrate concepts like field, habitus, symbolic capital and illusion into the training of translators and interpreters for public services, “favouring a shift from training translators and interpreters for the market – as practiced in the great majority of established departments of Translation Studies – to training them for society”, which would imply “a series of profound transformations in existing curricula, with a particular focus on the inclusion of issues related to politics, ideology and sociology, among others, issues which pertain to any transcultural activity” (2012, 33).

The critical drive Very close to the sociological drive in Translation Studies (and to a great extent coincidental, but more informed by hermeneutic and epistemological perspectives) is the approach to the rise and use of texts as a means of establishing power relations that create ideologically induced patterns of knowledge. This theoretical paradigm, which we could term critical translation, is driven by the philosophy of Michel Foucault and his concepts of episteme and discourse, and it focuses on the role of translation in their construction. Perhaps the most active research on translation and ideology from a Foucaltian sociocultural and philosophical perspective has been the research group Traducción, Ideología y Cultura [Translation, Ideology and Culture] (TRADIC) at the University of Salamanca, led by África Vidal Claramonte. Also a member of the TRADIC group, Martín Ruano’s exploration of different types of rewriting in literature, law and political discourse (2001, 2003, 2009, 2012; Ruano and Vidal 2016) is an indispensable point of reference. A closely related ideological dimension explored by many scholars is the relationship between identity construction and translation. On this complex topic, it is particularly relevant the work by Godayol 2000 (in Catalan), Carbonell (2001), Martín Ruano, House, and Baumgarten (2005), the volumes edited by Muñoz, Buesa Gómez, and Ruiz Moneva (2008), Salama-Carr and Carbonell (2009), as well as the collection by Garbarini (2010) on the interethnic, pluricultural and plurilinguistic environment of the Araucanía. More recently, a key collection on identity in the Americas is the special issue of the journal Mutatis Mutandis (2015) dedicated to translation, gender and identity edited by Paula Andrea Montoya Arango, and published by the University of Antioquía, Colombia.4 In fact, in the Latin American context, geopolitical studies of translation, and translation and identity are growing at a rapid pace and it is difficult to offer a comprehensive picture of the plethora of studies that are being currently produced. The volume edited by Andrea Pagni, Gertrudis Payàs and Patricia Willson, Traductores y traductores en la historia cultural de 123

Ovidi Carbonell i Cortés

América Latina (2011) places emphasis in the socio-historical (often ideological) aspects of translation, driven by representations and discourse: El traductor no es en primer término un sujeto que efectúa elecciones individuales, sino que es portavoz de un grupo que se ha forjado un sistema de representaciones sobre cuestiones bien precisas: la cultura extranjera, las relaciones entre ésta y la cultura nacional, la configuración de una lengua de traducción, el grado de inteligibilidad que las referencias foráneas tienen para el lector. En el producto de esa práctica es posible leer las marcas que esas representaciones han dejado. Reconocer la historicidad de la traducción y su vinculación con un discurso social contribuye a una visión no esencialista de esta práctica. De allí la necesidad de explorar el campo en el que se generan y se han generado las traducciones: entorno político y social, políticas editoriales, mecenazgos y exilios, entre otras condicionantes. (2011, 7) [The translator is not, first and foremost, a subject who makes individual decisions, but rather the spokesperson for a group that has built a system of representations on specific issues: foreign culture, the relations between that culture and the national one, the configuration of a language of translation, the degree of understandability that foreign references [should? ought to?] have for the reader. Looking at the product of this practice, it becomes possible to read the traces left by those representations. To acknowledge the historicity of translation and its links with a social discourse allows for a non-essentialist picture of this practice. Hence the need to explore the field in which translations are and have been generated: the social and political discourse, publishing policies, patronages and exiles, among other conditioning factors.] (2011, 7) Similarly, Pagni, Payàs and Willson (2011) explore how translation was subordinated to the political project of educating the working class in Argentina in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries – in the form of a ‘moralised and muffled’ translation (moralizada y amortiguada), as they put it.

Colonialism, postcolonialism and political ideologies The ‘postcolonial trend’ in Spanish TS was initiated by a series of scholars preoccupied with the issues of cultural representation and the imprint of power in transcultural processes, especially in the context of literature, where traditional descriptive approaches could be complemented with the rich theoretical and conceptual background from Postcolonial Studies since the early 1990s. Carbonell (1996, 1997) and Rodríguez Monroy (1997) followed the steps of theorists such as Tejaswini Niranjana, Gayatri C. Spivak, Edward W. Said and Robert J. C. Young, and introduced Bhabha’s ideas of hybridization and ambivalence; the translation scholar and translator of postcolonial literature Dora Sales Salvador studied Spivak’s theories in her 2006 article. It is worth mentioning that Spanish explorations of ideology, genre, and ethnicity are not only relevant theoretically, but have also contributed to changing trends in practice. Scholars such as Sales Salvador and Godayol are also renowned translators of postcolonial literature, an indication that publishing houses are gradually acknowledging the importance of choosing appropriate translators for specific works. 124

Translation and ideology

In the Latin American context, the importance of translation as a means to establish a counter narrative to colonial accounts can be traced back to Miguel León-Portilla and Ángel María Garibay’s Visión de los vencidos. Relaciones indígenas de la conquista (1961), a study and anthology of Nahuatl texts; more clearly linked to translation studies, Val Julián (1998) and Scharlau (2002, 2003) have contributed to mapping translation in Latin America as an essential vehicle in colonial and anticolonial discourse. It is also necessary to mention the research by Nayelli Castro on the translation of philosophy in Mexico (Castro 2012, 2013b, 2014, 2018) and, especially, her edited volume on translation, identity and nationalism (2013a). The role of translation in the independence movements of the Spanish colonies has also been explored by Bastin, Echeverri, and Campo (2010), who “define Latin American translation as the practice of appropriation” (ap. Cifuentes-Goodbody 2017, 5). In fact, Georges L. Bastin leads the research group HISTAL Historia de la Traducción en América Latina (History of Translation in Latin America) at the University of Montreal: issues of identity and power are essential in their research projects (see their web page: www.histal.ca/es/projets/). Moreover, political ideology is closely related to space. Vidal Claramonte’s La traducción y los espacios (2013) is a provocative and engaging study that leads the reader through the spatial dimension of translation and power relations: a space of stabilization and dislocation, where the local and the global compete, and the translator “becomes a highly relevant figure because he/she can tip the balance towards any direction”. Thus, translation can be construed as a space that needs to be acknowledged as “political”, and always “under construction” (2013, 10–11). Also related to space, it is worth mentioning Nicholas Cifuentes-Goodbody’s (2017) account of how Martín Luis Guzmán’s Memorias de Pancho Villa is “translated” and appropriated in order to produce an institutional conception of the Revolution that has a spatial counterpart in the “monumental architecture in Mexico City” (2017, 5).

Missionary linguistics and translation The term missionary linguistics refers to a recent interdisciplinary area of research that explores the work of Catholic or Protestant missionaries when describing and systematizing the languages of the peoples they aimed to Christianize. These activities were intimately related to the European colonial conquest, which was an “intellectual conquest” often subject to Eurocentric assumptions about the natives, but the missionaries also provided the first descriptions of those languages and sometimes “went against the specific objectives of the official administration” (Zimmermann and Kellermeier-Rehbein 2015). This missionary work had translation as one of its most important activities, and this was not disregarded by socalled postcolonial translation studies (Rafael 1988; García Ruiz 1992). In the particular field of missionary linguistics, translation practices have been explored notably in the collection edited by Otto Zwartjes, Klaus Zimmermann and Martina Schrader-Kniffki (2014), the fifth volume of the Missionary Linguistics/Lingüística Misionera series, subtitled Translation Theories and Practices.5 Issues of ideology play a prominent role in this volume: Zimmerman’s study of Sahagún as a translator focuses on the ideological interventions in his Colloquios, where Aztec gods are referred to as diablos “devils” (2014, 92). Schrader-Kniffi and Yannakakis draw attention to the central role that the idea of ‘truth’ played in Spanish colonial ideologies of translation (2014, 173),6 and the difficulties of translating highly connotative concepts with no equivalent in Zapotec cosmology such as pecado [sin], and how a Christian ideological framework was used in the production of Zapotec criminal records.7 Sueiro Justel, for his part, applies a postcolonial translation approach to Andrés López’s Arte de la lengua Pangasinan (1690) as a cultural mediator. On the other hand, and informed by cognitive and 125

Ovidi Carbonell i Cortés

epistemological framings that may be interpreted ideologically, volume IV of the series (on lexicography) also has interesting implications for the analysis of ideology and translation in colonial settings, such as Fernández Rodríguez’s article (2009), much in the line with Rafael (1988)’s seminal essay, and Arzápalo Marín’s acknowledgement that Mayan religious terms were soon abandoned in favour of Spanish loanwords to avoid ideological interference in the translations by missionaries (2009, 89). This phenomenon is termed translingualization by Zimmermann in his description of Spanish terms in Sahagún’s Nahuatl discourse (2014, 92). Similarly, Sueiro Justel (2014, 317) worked on the Philippine case. In fact, the Franciscan friar and ethnographer avant la lettre Bernardino de Sahagún has been studied from a Translation Studies perspective by Victoria Ríos Castaño (2009, 2011, 2014a, 2014b), Zimmermann (2014) and Valdeón (2014). More than an “ethnographer”, he is considered a cultural mediator (Zimmermann 2014)8 or a cultural translator (Ríos Castaño 2014a, 246–7; Moore and Ríos Castaño 2018, 328–9). In El revés del tapiz: Traducción y discurso de identidad en la Nueva España (1521–1821), Gertrudis Payàs Puigarnau (2010a) examines the ways translation was a key instrument in the creation and negotiation of a discourse of identity that not only defined the Other, but that, in the process, contributed to defining the representation of the self. Payàs, a professor at the Universidad Católica de Temuco (Chile), one of the first universities to offer specialized translation training in Latin America, is also a member of the research group Alfaqueque based at the University of Salamanca (Spain). This international group has been particularly active in topics related to interpreting, identity negotiation and conflict, especially in their collections Los límites de Babel (Grupo Alfaqueque 2010) and Traducción y representaciones del conflicto en España y América (Alonso Araguás, Rodríguez, and Sastre 2015). Also recently, Roberto A. Valdeón’s comprehensive Translation and the Spanish Empire in the Americas (2014) examines the connections between translation and the Spanish empire in the Americas, as well as how the conquest and the Spanish rule have been disseminated and reinterpreted through translation, including the negative representation of the country through the so-called “Black Legend”, “invented precisely to rule Spain out of imperial contention” (Mignolo 2002; apud Valdeón 2014, x).9 In fact, Spanish-speaking scholars have worked in similar areas as Rafael, Clendinnen, and Cheyfitz, but their research tends to receive less international attention. For example, the translation of religious terms, in particular the name of God (Dios) into American indigenous has been studied by López Parada (2013). She postulates that the linguistic vernacularization (nativización idiomática) of the Catholic doctrine in the Indies was soon considered a transcultural operation that entailed a good deal of doctrinal dangers, and that therefore such practices needed to be carefully controlled: se habla claramente de evangelizar en quechua o en náhuatl pero con fórmulas de apoyo, con manuales orientativos consensuados que impidan el libre albedrío traductor o el azar idiomático, todo lo cual sirve para informarnos de la naturaleza sospechosa con que la traducción es observada en el Nuevo Mundo en cuanto actividad tan fluida y enmascarable como para estimular su vigilancia (133) [there is clear mention of evangelization in Quechua or Nahuatl but within the bounds of specific guidelines and agreed-upon handbooks that serve to limit translative free will and naturally occurring linguistic variation. All this underlies the suspicion with 126

Translation and ideology

which translation is viewed in the New World as a fluid and deceitful activity that must be kept under surveillance.] (133) Curiously enough, as a by-product of colonization, this controlled environment also resulted in the official standardization of the indigenous languages.

Out of North Africa: orientalism, colonialism and translation A recent area of study is the relationship between translation and interpreting practice and Spanish colonial rule in North Africa. This line of research stems fundamentally from two relevant doctoral dissertations defended in 2002: Feria (University of Granada) and Zarrouk (Madrid Autonomous University). Mourad Zarrouk’s Los traductores de España en Marruecos [1859–1939] (2009), based on his PhD dissertation, has an interest in the figure of the translator as a political agent, both as a mediator and also as a necessary political instrument. In Zarrouk’s account, translators played an essential role as facilitators of colonial discourse when the Moroccan intellectual elites started undermining the ideological foundations of the Protectorate: Para mantener una política que contrarrestara el ideal nacionalista había que controlar las ideas de este nacionalismo, su discurso y sus maniobras. Había que anticiparse a los militantes nacionalistas que luchaban con las mismas armas y sabían movilizar a sus compatriotas. En este contexto, la obtención de información política, la atracción de los indígenas, la censura de la prensa marroquí, especialmente en árabe, y el control de los movimientos de los marroquíes sospechosos adquirieron una importancia vital para los colonizadores. El traductor estaba llamado a desempeñar un papel decisivo en el largo proceso de dominación del colonizado. (2009, 196) [In order to maintain a political status quo that would neutralize nationalist tendencies, it was necessary to control the ideas of this nationalism, both its discourse and practices. It was necessary to preempt nationalistic militants who fought with the same weapons and knew how to mobilize their fellow compatriots. In this context, the pursuit of political information, attracting natives to the cause, the censorship of Moroccan press (especially in Arabic) and controlling the movements of suspect Moroccans were of critical importance for the colonizers. The translator was called on to play a decisive role in the long process of dominating the colonized subject.] (2009, 196) Of particular relevance is the case of the translators who translated personal letters between nationalists, or even love letters to avoid mixed marriages (2009, 230). This study is furthered by Arias and Feria’s 2013 Los traductores de árabe del Estado español. Del Protectorado hasta nuestros días, and the PhD dissertation by Manuel Feria, La traducción fehaciente del árabe (2002), a true encyclopaedia of translation and interpreting practices in an Arabic-Spanish legal context. Manuel Feria has continued working on this line of research, providing acute and novel reflections on professional ethics and positioning in interpreting practice (2003); the figure of the official translator in the versioning of the old Granadan documentation from Arabic into 127

Ovidi Carbonell i Cortés

Spanish (Arias and Feria 2004); the writing of diplomatic treatises and their disagreements (notably the 1779 Moroccan-Spanish treaty of Friendship and Commerce [Feria 2005]), and other explorations into areas where political and colonial power exert a decisive influence over cultural representations and their writing. A noteworthy characteristic of Feria’s research is the study of judicial, historical and sociological materials through the lens of Translation Studies. A case in point is the existence of Arabic language marriage certificates legally translated into Spanish, after the legalization of Islamic marriage in Spain (Feria 2002, 76). His analysis points to the adaptation of Moroccan models “destined to a multicultural society in which textual contacts are becoming current”, a parallel situation to that encountered in medieval and Renaissance Spain. Feria’s acute examination of his case studies sometimes reveals the perhaps unconscious influence of Catholic terminology and ideological framing in the choice of words by one given translator, but also a conscious attempt to produce genuinely Islamic texts in the Spanish language. As Feria remarks, “these documents are very interesting for the study of the translation from Arabic of legal texts in an emerging multicultural society, which seems to be the destiny of European society in this century, and in which Islam will necessarily play a key role” (2002, 78). In addition, how the Spanish language was altered or rather developed to embed Islamic terms from a very different phonemic system is a matter of great interest. This was also the concern of many sixteenth-century Morisco10 writers: Y, sin embargo, encontramos en estas traducciones contemporáneas la misma tendencia a la sacralización de la lengua árabe que en las traducciones islámicas medievales, aunque su sentido es opuesto: mientras que estos últimos parecen momificar su habla para reforzarla en su papel de signo de identidad, los musulmanes actuales parecen exotizarla con la idea de crear un aparato lingüístico ritual. [. . .] En cualquier caso, estas traducciones, que no dudo en calificar igualmente de “islámicas”, desempeñan el mismo papel que desempeñaron otrora las que antes he analizado; son, pues, un ejemplo magnífico de aquellos casos en los que la traducción se constituye en el principal motor de la construcción de una identidad, esto es, como elemento generador de ideología de primer orden. (79–80) [However, we find in these contemporary translations the same tendency to sacralise the Arabic language that we see in Medieval Islamic translations, albeit towards opposite ends: while the latter seem to mummify their speech to reinforce its role as a sign of identity, contemporary Muslims seem to exoticize it with the aim of creating a ritual linguistic instrument. [. . .] In any case, these [contemporary] translations – which I cannot but equally describe as “Islamic” – play the same role of the Medieval translations I previously discussed. They are, therefore, a great example of translation as the driving force in the creation of identity, that is, as a central element in the creation of ideology.] (79–80) Similar lines of research have stressed the relationship (or lack thereof ) of an established academic Arabism in the colonial enterprises in Morocco. The volume edited by Manzano, Fernández, and Feria (2000), Mourad Zarrouk’s dissertation (2009) and his seminal article “Arabismo, traducción y colonialismo: El caso de Marruecos” (2001–5),11 the research by Anna Gil Bardají on Andalusian historiography in translation (2009)12 and Luis Miguel Pérez 128

Translation and ideology

Cañada’s dissertation on the translation activity of the eminent Arabist Emilio García Gómez (2005) help cover the gaps in Edward W. Said’s Orientalism (1977) – who surprisingly overlooked the whole of Spanish and German orientalism – from a much-needed Translation Studies perspective. These serve to complement more culturally oriented approaches such as those by Goytisolo (1981), Manzano (2000), González Alcantud (2006), and Velasco de Castro (2009).13 Spanish translation scholars have also made outstanding contributions to the ideological implications of the translation of the Qur’ān.14 Juan Pablo Arias Torres (1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2007) has published relevant analyses of ideological representations in Spanish translations. Other essential works worth mentioning include the volume dedicated to the Arabist and translator Julio Cortés (Hernando de Larramendi and Peña Martín 2008), the book by the late Míkel de Epalza El Corán y sus traducciones (2008) and his own revolutionary translation of the Qur’an into Catalan, followed by five essays (2001; see also de Epalza 2002), which allows several simultaneous layers of semantic (and ideological) interpretation, can be regarded in itself as a wonderful piece of applied research contributing to interreligious understanding.

Towards a translation and conflict paradigm: terrorism, media and translation On March  11, 2004, Madrid was stricken with the second worst terrorist attack in Europe after the Lockerbie plane bombing. This terrible event, exactly two and a half years after the September 11 attacks, was key in triggering a critical rethinking of communication. All of a sudden, intercultural relations lost much of their idealized patina of yore, and the crude problems of access to an unknown other, the construction of fundamentalist ideologies – and also of national security – were out in the limelight.15 Ideologically related essays on the issue of terrorism and translation include a new focus on the figure of the translator and interpreter. In the pre-Google Translate era, what were the means of access to the communications held by presumed terrorists? Robles Torres (2007) briefly discussed the situation in the US and Spain, and the predicament of defence organizations to rely upon proficient and trustworthy translators. In his brief account Robles Torres mentions some of the translation blunders in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks and during the Iraqi war, and the hasty hiring of underpaid, often incompetent translators, and points towards fundamental ideology-related questions: the fact that untrained translators were often scapegoats of an inadequate system that paid little attention to cultural specificities or even to translation as a complex, specialized professional activity.16 Thus, the lack of professional qualifications or licences in hired translators and interpreters, the absence of official professional bodies (colegios profesionales) or codes of ethics (Ortega Herráez and Foulquié Rubio 2008; Martin and Taibi 2010; Taibi and Martin 2012) have, as a consequence, a “total lack of guarantee as regards the quality of the service offered” (Martin and Taibi 2010, 217). In the case of Spain, Martin and Taibi point at the fact that the increase of the demand for translators and interpreters in national security forces shortly after the Madrid bombings led to outsourcing translation and interpreting services to a private security company that did not require previous training and paid a pittance to unqualified collaborators. The loosening of control over the translation process, or its lack altogether, led to serious police and judicial errors attributed to wrong ideological framing in the translation of the texts and conversations used as supporting evidence. Martin and Taibi (2010) apply discursive and narrative criticism based on Baker 2006 to analyse how innocent texts were used as incriminating (and later dismissed) evidence in the trial of Al-Jazeera journalist Tayser Allouny, which 129

Ovidi Carbonell i Cortés

took place in 2005. However, we need to point out that it was precisely the work of qualified experts that disclosed the errors made by amateur or unskilled translators; as Martin and Taibi (2010) highlight, they notice a positive evolution that started with the trial of Islamist militants purportedly responsible for the Madrid attacks in 2007, considered even as “a milestone in court Translation/Interpreting in Spain” (2010, 217).17 Similar cases of judicial sentences influenced by distorted narratives due to the influence of ideological assumptions, that “contribute to building a poetic structure that is absent from the original Spanish oral discourse” have also been explored in the case of Japanese-Spanish interpreting by Rika Yoshida (2012), and more recently in the PhD dissertation by the same author (2014).

A zone of engagement: translation, political engagement and activism A closely related area of research focuses, rather than on manipulation or ideological intervention, on the sociopolitical relevance of the translated texts from an ideological point of view. Translation, in these studies, is part of the process of dissemination of activist discourses and plays an essential role in their international awareness. Their translation is conceptualized in critical terms, as a tool for social and political engagement or “intervenience”. In the Spanish TI theory panorama, we cannot fail to mention the International Forum on Translation/Interpreting and Social Activism held at the University of Granada in 2007, whose proceedings were published by Julie Boéri and Carol Maier in 2009. Katjia Torres Calzada (Pablo de Olavide University, Seville) has focused on the translation of Moroccan activist authors who give accounts of government repression in the so-called ‘Lead Years’ of recent Moroccan history: Torres Calzada 2006 (on Malika Oukfir) and 2014 (on Fatna El Bouih). Also worthy of mention is Tlaxcala, the international network of translators for linguistic diversity.18 In a context of activism and engagement, translation is more and more considered epistemologically a pro-active and committed operation that has an essential role in challenging excluding discourse and as a constructor of interculturalness (Limón Aguirre 2013). One of the first applications of this will be found in intercultural public service interpreting (see Martín Ruano 2017); for example, El Madkouri 2014 explores the translation of sexual references in health interpreting while Faddi 2015 analyzes multimodality in the translation of awareness campaigns by the Spanish government addressed to Moroccan immigrants, from the ideological point of view of use of metaphors, euphemisms, visual discourse, text directionality, cultural connotations and iconic translation.

Future directions By way of conclusion, we can say that ideology is one of the prime subjects of interest in contemporary Spanish translation studies, and a dimension that has helped shape the discipline as a whole. Given the vast extension of the Spanish-speaking lands, the confluence of different languages, and the status of Spanish as one of the main international languages, the Spanish world is a treasure trove of case studies where ideology is an essential dimension in the strategies for linguistic mediation. Furthermore, ideological perspectives of translation are starting to shed light on many historical contexts characterized by dynamism and complex, often conflictive relations. The 2015 Berlin Conference on Narratives on Translation19 had a powerful Spanish presence; translation studies perspectives may offer new insights in Morisco studies or the historical presence of the Spanish and Portuguese in the Far East, an area to date less studied than the American context. The challenges of communication in a multicultural 130

Translation and ideology

society have barely started to address fundamental issues regarding translation and freedom of access in public services;20 translation as an agent in political contexts; or inclusiveness as a progressive goal. Moreover, the systematization of translation scholarship about ideology and representation may even challenge the conceptions that are current about such an ambivalent concept as ideology seems to be in contemporary theory – there is no doubt that Spanish perspectives are contributing in this line.

Notes 1 I would like to thank my colleagues Nicholas Cifuentes-Goodbody (Hamad Bin Khalifa University, Doha, Qatar) and Nayelli Castro-Ramírez (University of Massachussetts, Boston) for their advice and valuable comments. 2 A good literature review on the subject is Coromina Pou 2016. 3 To which we should add the outstanding work by the well-known researcher Anthony Pym, professor at the Rovira and Virgili University in Tarragona, Spain. The volume Sociocultural Aspects of Translating and Interpreting (Pym, Shlesinger, and Jettmarova 2006) is also an indispensable reference in the field of ideology. Esther Monzó’s research focuses on legal translation. 4 An essential reference book, tackling the issue of the relationship between translation and identity formation in the American continent is also Erwin Gentzler (2008), focusing on multiculturalism in the United States, feminist and theatre translation in Québec, the cannibalistic Brazilian theory of translation, Latin American narrative, and the hybrid and frontier literatures of the Caribbean and the Mexican-US border. 5 Missionary Linguistics / Lingüística Misionera V: Translation Theories and Practices. Selected Papers from the Seventh International Conference on Missionary Linguistics, Bremen, 28 February– 2 March 2012 (Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins). This is the fifth volume of a series of conference proceedings that started with the Oslo 2003 conference in Missionary Linguistics, then followed by Mérida 2007 (Yucatán, Mexico) (Lexicography), Macau 2006 and Valladolid, Spain 2006 (Morphology and Syntax), and Bremen 2012 (Translation). 6 In their analysis of Pacheco’s Doctrina en lengua zapoteca nexitza (1689): “As the clergy translated the ‘Doctrina’ into Amerindian languages, they found themselves torn between adherence to the truth of the original text on the one hand (an explicit translation norm), and exegesis and adjustment to the cognitive conditions of the target language and culture on the other (an implicit translation norm)”. 7 “By using expressions with xihui and tzahui, Zapotec cabildo officers mobilized Zapotec-Christian rhetorical tools in their ‘memorias’ in order to communicate moral judgments about the comportment of their fellow villagers. In practice, the comportment of these individuals occurred in the context of contact between Zapotec and Christian moral codes. The rhetoric of the ‘memorias’ in which the ‘law of the ancient Zapotecs’ and ‘the law of God’ were juxtaposed explicitly, and in which Christian and Zapotec matters of conscience were juxtaposed implicitly (as in the use of metaphors with lachi, ‘corazón/alma’ [heart/soul]) makes clear that these moral codes existed in a colonial hierarchy and were not coeval”. (Schrader-Kniffki and Yannakakis 2014, 192). 8 “This fieldwork, in which the Franciscan scholar participates, also includes the reconstitution of texts, making use of recollections of informants. It is fair to consider Sahagún as a cultural mediator, still, with a very particular goal and thus a biased mediator, who has an interested and unilateral position. But there is also a counterpart: the translations of the Spanish texts into Nahuatl. Applying current theories for the translation of literary texts to Sahagún’s work, does not facilitate an understanding of the complex situation in which the scholar found himself, nor the function that he assigns to his translations. The ideological role of the translation in the colonial and missionary context of the 16th century was peculiar [And it is still present in contemporary missionary contexts (cf. Nida 1968).]” (Zimmermann 2014, 106). 9 See also Díaz Peralta, Piñero, and García Domínguez 2008 on the ideology in the Spanish translations of Prescott’s History of the Conquest of Mexico. 10 Moriscos [Moorish] or cristianos nuevos de moro [Moorish new Christians] are the terms used to refer to Muslims forcibly converted into Christianity after the royal decree (Pragmática) issued by the Catholic Monarchs Ferdinand and Isabella in 1502. Prior to that date, Muslims under Christian

131

Ovidi Carbonell i Cortés rule in Spain, often bilingual and bicultural, are referred to as mudéjares (from Arabic mudajjan, “subjected”). 11 Soto Aranda and El Madkouri 2001 also include cultural aspects of interpreting during the Spanish Protectorate. 12 Anna Gil Bardají’s PhD dissertation (2008) was recently published as a monograph Traducir alAndalus: el discurso del otro en el arabismo español (de Conde a García Gómez) [Translating AlAndalus: the discourse of the other in Spanish Arabism (From Conde to García Gómez)]. 13 See also the astute essay by Gonzalo Fernández Parrilla. “Disoriented Postcolonialities: Edward Said in (the labyrinth of ) Al-Andalus”, presented at the conference “Postcolonial Studies and Modern Arabic Literature” (New York University in Abu Dhabi, April 18–19, 2016) and recently published (Fernández Parrilla 2018). 14 A comprehensive bibliography up to 2007 can be found in Arias 2007. 15 Examples of essays aimed at explaining ideologically and translatively the textual dimension of terrorism are Carbonell and Madouri 2005 (a ‘thick translation’ of some of Bin Laden’s statements); Valdeón 2007 (on media coverage of the Madrid attacks) and 2009 (on Spanish and English discursive constructions of ETA’s terrorism); and Zarrouk 2011 (which includes powerful reflections on ‘islamist hermeneutics’ as well as on the selective character of translated information). 16 “En círculos policiales y judiciales no se suele reconocer a la T/I como actividades profesionales especializadas, de una gran complejidad cognitiva, que requieren una formación específica. Cuando los operadores judiciales tienen una opinión formada, suele consistir en caracterizar la T/I como una operación mecánica y automática que se debería realizar en forma literal” [T[ranslation] / I[nterpreting] is not generally recognized in police and legal circles as professional, specialized activities involving a great cognitive complexity and requiring a specific training. When judicial actors have an opinion at all, it generally consists in characterizing T/I as a mechanical and automatic operation that should be carried out in a literal fashion]. (Martin and Taibi, 217). 17 An English language version of their 2010 article was published in 2012 in the journal Translation & Interpreting (Taibi and Martin 2012). 18 www.tlaxcala-int.org/ 19 Convened by Sonja Brentjes, MPIWG, Berlin and José Luis Mancha, Universidad de Sevilla, Max Planck Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, Berlin, November 2015; followed by a workshop at the University of Barcelona on September 2016. 20 Recently, the International Conference on Translation, Ideology and Gender: “In sickness and in health”, held in Santander (Spain) in 2016, dealt with issues of translation, ideology, and gender in the field of the health sciences.

References Alonso Araguás, Icíar, Alba Páez Rodríguez, and Mario Samaniego Sastre. 2015. Traducción y representaciones del conflicto en España y América. Salamanca/Temuco: Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca/Universidad Católica de Temuco. Arbonès i Montull, Jordi. 1995. “La censura sobre les traduccions a l’època franquista.” Revista de Catalunya 97: 87–96. Arias Torres, Juan Pablo. 1997. “Traductor, confeso y mártir: ocho versiones del ‘Corán’ en español.” In El papel del traductor, edited by Esther Morillas García and J. P. Arias Torres, 371–386. Salamanca: Almar. ———. 1998. “Apuntes para una historia de la traducción del Corán al español.” Trans 2: 173–6. ———. 1999. “Apuntes para una historia de la traducción del Corán al español (II).” Trans 3: 131–2. ———. 2000. “Imágenes del texto sagrado.” In Orientalismo, exotismo y traducción, edited by Eduardo Manzano Moreno, Gonzalo Fernández Parrilla, and Manuel C. Feria García, 181–90. Cuenca: Universidad de Castilla–La Mancha. ———. 2007. “Bibliografía sobre las traducciones del Alcorán en el ámbito hispano.” Trans 11: 261–72. Arias Torres, Juan Pablo, and Manuel C. Feria García. 2013. Los traductores de árabe del Estado español. Del Protectorado a nuestros. Bellaterra: Edicions Bellaterra. ———. 2004. “Escrituras árabes granadinas romanceadas: una mina a cielo abierto para la historia de la traducción y la traductología.” Trans 8: 179–86.

132

Translation and ideology Arzápalo Marín, Ramón. 2009. “Las aportaciones del Calepino de Motul y su tránsito por la lexicografía computacional.” In Selected Papers from the Fifth International Conference on Missionary Linguistics, Mérida, Yucatán, 14–17 March 2007, edited by Otto Zwartjes, Ramón Arzápalo, and Thomas C. Smith-Stark, 83–105. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Bacardí, Montserrat, ed. 2013. “Traducció i censura.” Special issue: Quaderns. Revista de Traducció 20. Baker, Mona, ed. 2010. Critical Readings in Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge. Bastin, Georges L., Álvaro Echeverri, and Ángela Campo 2010. “Translation and the Emancipation of Hispanic America.” In Translation, Resistance, Activism, edited by Maria Tymoczko, 42–64. University of Massachussetts Press. Boéri, Julie, and Carol Maier. 2009. Compromiso social y traducción/interpretación = Translation/Interpreting and Social Activism. Granada: ECOS. Calzada Pérez, María. 2001. “A Three-level Methodology for Descriptive-Explanatory Translation Studies”, Target 13 (2): 203–39. ———. ed. 2003. A Propos of Ideology: Translation Studies on Ideology – Ideologies in Translation Studies. Manchester: St Jerome. ———. 2007. Transitivity in Translating: The Interdependence of Texture and Context. A Contrastive Study of Original and Translated Speeches in English and Spanish from the European Parliament. Bern: Peter Lang. Carbonell i Cortés, Ovidi. 1996. “The Exotic Space of Cultural Translation.” In Translation, Power, Subversion, edited by Román Alvarez and M. Carmen África Vidal, 79–98. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. ———. 1997. Traducir al otro. Traducción, exotismo. Cuenca: Universidad de Castilla–La Mancha, Colección Escuela de Traductores de Toledo. ———. 1999. Traducción y cultura: de la ideología al texto. Salamanca: Colegio de España. ———. 2001. “Identity in Translation.” In Últimas corrientes teóricas en los estudios de traducción y sus aplicaciones, edited by Anne Barr, Jesús Torres del Rey, and María del Rosario Martín Ruano, 109–21. Salamanca: Universidad de Salamanca. ———. 2004. “Exoticism, Identity and Representation in Western Translations from Arabic.” In Cultural Encounters in Translation from Arabic, edited by Said Faiq, 26–39. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Carbonell i Cortés, Ovidi, and Khadija Madouri. 2005. “Las huellas de la ideología. Terrorismo e Islam en los medios de comunicación.” In La traducción periodística, edited by Carmen Cortés Zaborras and M. José Hernández Guerrero, 199–235. Cuenca: Ediciones de la Universidad de Castilla–La Mancha. Carné, Maria Elena. 2015. “Un cas de doble traducció per raons de censura: Jordi Arbonès i Primavera negra de Henry Miller.” In Proceedings of the VI Congreso Internacional de la AIETI (Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, January 23–25, 2013), edited by Jorge Amigo Extremera, 245–50. Las Palmas de Gran Canaria: Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. Castro Ramírez, Nayelli, ed. 2012. “Los traductores de la red filosófica mexicana.” In Aspectos de la traducción en Hispanoamérica: Autores, traducciones y traductores, edited by Francisco Lafarga and Luis Pegenaute. Vigo: Academia del Hispanismo. ———, ed. 2013a. Traducción, identidad y nacionalismo en Latinoamérica. Cuernavaca: Bonilla Artigas Editores. ———. 2013b. “La filosofía antigua en el México posrevolucionario: traductores, traducciones y redes intelectuales.” In Traducción, identidad y nacionalismo en Latinoamérica, edited by Nayelli Castro. Cuernavaca: Bonilla Artigas Editores. ———. 2014. “Merging the Narratives: A  Historical Study of Translated Philosophy in Mexico (1940s–1950s).” The Translator 20 (1): 81–94. ———. 2018. Hacerse de palabras. Traducción y filosofía en México (1940–1970). Cuernavaca: Bonilla Artigas Editores. Cifuentes-Goodbody, Nicholas. 2017. “Translation, Space, and Power in Martín Luis Guzmán’s Memorias de Pancho Villa.” The Translator 23 (3): 1–13. Cornellà Detrell, Jordi. 2010. “Traducció i censura en la represa cultural dels anys 1960.” L’Avenç 359: 44–51. Coromina Pou. 2016. “Traducció i censura (ressenyes).” Anuari TRILCAT: estudis de traducció, recepció i literatura catalana contemporània 6: 147–151. de Epalza Ferrer, Míkel. 2001. L’Alcorà, Traducció de l’àrab al català, introducció i cinc estudis alcorànics. Barcelona: Proa.

133

Ovidi Carbonell i Cortés ———. 2002. “Traducciones del Corán al español. El corán (Qur’ān, Ālcoran) en sus traducciones españolas, desde la Edad Media hasta el presente.” In Morada de la palabra: homenaje a Luce y Mercedes López-Baralt, edited by William Mejías López, 538–560. Puerto Rico: UPR. ———. 2008. El Corán y sus traducciones. Alicante: Universidad de Alicante. Díaz Fouces, Oscar, Marta García González, and Joan Costa Carreras, eds. 2002. Traducció i dinàmica sociolingüística. Barcelona: Llibres de l’Índex. Díaz Fouces, Oscar, and Esther Monzó, eds. 2010. “Applied Sociology in Translation Studies / Sociologia aplicada a la traducció.” Special issue of MonTI: Monografías de traducción e interpretación 2. Díaz Peralta, Marina, Gracia Piñero Piñero, and María J. García Domínguez. 2008. “Ideología y selección lingüística en los textos históricos: Las traducciones españolas de History of the Conquest of Mexico de W. H. Prescott.” Babel 54 (3): 251–267. El Madkouri Maataoui, Mohammed. 2014. “Implicaciones culturales en la interpretación de referencias sexuales en el ámbito social.” Estudios de Traducción 4: 181–98. Faddi, Hicham. 2015. “Traducir para la inmigración. La multimodalidad en campañas de sensibilización dirigidas a inmigrantes marroquíes.” PhD diss., University of Salamanca. Feria García, Manuel C. 2002. “La traducción fehaciente del árabe al español. Fundamentos históricos, jurídicos y metodológicos.” PhD diss., University of Málaga. ———. 2003. “Traducción jurada, literalidad, ética profesional y unidad de traducción. Un ejemplo.” In Traducción e interpretación en los servicios públicos. Contextualización, actualidad y future, edited by Carmen Valero Garcés, 137–45. Granada: Editorial Comares. ———. 2005. “El tratado hispano-marroquí de amistad y comercio de 1767 en el punto de mira del traductor (1). Contextualización histórica: encuentro y desencuentros.” Sendebar 16: 3–26. Fernández Parrilla, Gonzalo. 2018. “Disoriented Postcolonialities: With Edward Said in (the labyrinth of ) Al-Andalus.” Interventions: International Journal of Postcolonial Studies 20: 229–242. Fernández Rodríguez, Rebeca. 2009. “El Calepino Ilocano (c.1797) del P. Vivar: Innovaciones lexicográficas y política traductora.” In Selected Papers from the Fifth International Conference on Missionary Linguistics, Mérida, Yucatán, 14–17 March  2007, edited by Otto Zwartjes, Ramón Arzápalo, and Thomas C. Smith-Stark, 249–72. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Fowler, Roger. 1991. Language in the News: Discourse and Ideology in the Press. London/New York: Routledge. Gallén, Enric, ed. 2015. “La censura franquista y la literatura y la cultura en lengua catalana.” Special issue: Represura. Revista de Historia Contemporánea española en torno a la represión y la censura aplicadas al libro 1. Gallofré i Virgili, Maria Josepa. 1991. L’edició catalana i la censura franquista (1939–1951). Barcelona: Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. Garbarini, Carmen Gloria. 2010. “Reflexiones en torno a la traducción en un contexto interétnico.” Special issue of Mutatis Mutandis 3 (1): 116–24. García Ruiz, Jesús. 1992. “El misionero, las lenguas mayas y la traducción. Nominalismo, Tomismo y etnolingüística en Guatemala.” Archives de Sciences Sociales des Religions 77: 83–110. Gentzler, Edwin. 2008. Translation and Identity in the Americas: New Directions in Translation Theory. London/New York: Routledge. Gil Bardají, Anna. 2009. Traducir Al-Andalus: el discurso del otro en el arabismo español (de Conde a García Gómez). Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen. Godayol i Nogué, Pilar. 2000. Espais de frontera. Gènere i traducció. VIC: EUMO. ———. 2015. “Simone de Beauvoir bajo la dictadura franquista: las traducciones al catalán.” In Zaragoza Ninet, Gora et al., 17–34. ———. 2017. Tres escritoras censuradas, Simone de Beauvoir, Betty Friedan y Mary McCarthy. Granada: Comares. Godayol i Nogué, Pilar, and Montserrat Bacardí, eds. 2017. Traducció i franquisme. Lleida: Punctum. González Alcantud, J. A. 2006. El orientalismo desde el Sur. Barcelona: Antrophos. González Millán, Xoán. 1994. “Cara a unha teoría da tradución para sistemas literarios ‘marxinais’. A situación galega.” Viceversa 1: 63–72. ———. 1996. “Towards a Theory of Translation for ‘Marginal’ Literary Systems: The Galician Situation.” In The Knowledges of the Translator: From Literary Interpretation to Machine Classification, edited by Malcolm Coulthard and Patricia A. Odber de Baubeta, 279–90. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen.

134

Translation and ideology Goytisolo, Juan. 1981. Crónicas sarracinas. Barcelona: Alfaguara. Grupo Alfaqueque. 2010. Los límites de Babel: ensayos sobre la comunicación entre lenguas y culturas. Madrid: Iberoamericana. Gutiérrez Lanza, María del Camino. 2004. “Herramientas de investigación en EDTAV: la Ficha y el Catálogo TRACEc.” In Panorama actual de la investigación en traducción e interpretación, edited by Emilio Ortega Arjonilla, 447–55. Granada: Atrio. ———. 2005. “La labor del equipo TRACE: metodología descriptiva de la censura en traducción.” In Trasvases culturales: literatura, cine, traducción 4, edited by Raquel Merino Álvarez, J-Miguel Santamaría López, and Eterio Pajares Infante, 55–64. Vitoria-Gasteiz: Universidad del País Vasco. Hatim, Basil, and Ian Mason. 1991. Discourse and the Translator. London: Longman. Hernando de Larramendi, Miguel, and Salvador Peña Martín, Salvador. 2008. El Corán ayer y hoy: perspectivas actuales sobre el islam: estudios en honor al profesor Julio Cortés. Córdoba: Berenice. León-Portilla, Miguel, and Ángel Garibay, eds. 1961. Visión de los vencidos. Relaciones indígenas de la conquista. México, DF: UNAM. Published in English as The Broken Spears: The Aztec Account of the Conquest of Mexico. Translated by Lysander Kemp and Foreword by J. Jorge Klor de Alva. Boston: Beacon Press, 1962; updated and expanded ed., 1992. Limón Aguirre, Fernando. 2013. “Por una traducción constructora de identidad en contextos indígenas.” In Poder y traducción coloniales: El nombre de dios en lengua de indios, edited by Esperanza López Parada. Special issue of Revista chilena de literatura 85: 129–56. López Parada, Esperanza. 2013. “Poder y traducción coloniales: El nombre de dios en lengua de indios”. Special issue of Revista chilena de literatura 85. Manzano Moreno, Eduardo. 2000. “La creación de un esencialismo: la historia de al-Andalus en la visión del arabismo español.” Revista chilena de literatura 85: 23–38. Manzano Moreno, Eduardo, Gonzalo Fernández Parrilla, and Manuel C. Feria García. 2000. Orientalismo, exotismo y traducción. Cuenca: Universidad de Castilla La Mancha/Escuela de Traductores de Toledo. Martin, Anne, and Mustapha Taibi. 2010. “Traducción e interpretación policial en contextos politizados: el caso de Taysir Allouny.” In Compromiso Social y Traducción/Interpretación = Translation/ Interpreting and Social Activism, edited by Julie Boéri and Carol Maier, 214–25. Granada: Comares. Martín Ruano, María Rosario. 2001. “El reto de la de la investigación intercultural: la traducción de lo políticamente correcto.” Hermeneus 3: 193–209. ———. 2003. “Érase otra vez . . . La traducción de las reescrituras posmodernas de la literatura infantil clásica.” In Traducción y literatura infantil, edited by Isabel Pascua Febles, Elisa Ramón Molina, Ángeles Perera Santana, and Gisela Marcelo Wirnitzer, 373–84. Las Palmas de Gran Canaria: Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. ———. 2009. “La neutralidad a examen: nuevos asideros para el ejercicio de la traducción jurídica.” In Reflexiones sobre la traducción jurídica/Reflections on Legal Translation, edited by Jesús Baigorri Jalón and Helen Campbell, 72–89. Granada: Comares. ———. 2012. “Traducción institucional e identidad(es): asimetrías, conflictos, posibilidades.” In Ensayos Sobre Traduccion Juridica e Institucional. Proceedings of the IV Seminario de Traducción Jurídica en Organizaciones Internacionales, edited by Iciar Alonso Araguas and Jesús Baigorri Jalon, and Helen L. Campbell, 43–68. Granada: Comares. ———. 2017. “Developing Public Service Translation and Interpreting Under the Paradigm of Recognition: Towards Diversity-Sensitive Discourses on Ethics in PSIT.” In Ideology, Ethics and Policy Development in Public Service Interpreting and Translation, edited by Carmen Valero Garcés and Rebecca Tipton, 21–37. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Martín Ruano, Rosario, and África Vidal Claramonte. 2016. Traducción, medios de comunicación, opinión pública. Granada: Comares. Martín Ruano, Rosario, Juliane House, and Nicole Baumgarten. 2005. Translation and the Construction of Identity. Seoul: IATIS. Mason, Ian. 1994. “Discourse, Ideology and Translation.” In Language, Discourse and Translation in the West and Middle-East, edited by Robert de Beaugrande, Abdullah Shunnaq, and Mohamed H. Heliel, 23–34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Merino Álvarez, Raquel. 2001. “Presentación de la base de datos TRACE (Traducciones Censuradas Inglés Español).” In Trasvases culturales: literatura, cine, traducción – 3, edited by Eterio Pajares

135

Ovidi Carbonell i Cortés Infante, Raquel Merino Alvarez, and J. Miguel Santamaría López, 287–296. Vitoria-Gasteiz: Universidad del País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibersitatea. ———, ed. 2007a. Traducción y censura en España (1939–1985). Estudios sobre corpus TRACE: cine, narrativa, teatro. Vitoria-Gasteiz: Universidad del País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibersitatea. ———. 2007b. “La homosexualidad censurada: estudio sobre corpus de teatro TRACEti inglés-español (desde 1960).” In Traducción y censura en España (1939–1985). Estudios sobre corpus TRACE: cine, narrativa, teatro, edited by Raquel Merino Álvarez, 243–86. Vitoria-Gasteiz: Universidad del País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibersitatea. ———. 2009. “Traducciones (censuradas) de teatro inglés en la España de Franco: TRACE: una perspectiva histórica.” In Actas del II Congreso Internacional AIETI – Formación, Investigación y Profesión, edited by M. Luisa Romana García, 891–98. Madrid: Universidad Pontificia de Comillas. Montoya Arango, Paula Andrea. 2015. “Traducción, género e identidad.” Mutatis Mutandis 8 (2): 295–98. Moore, David, and Ríos Castaño, Victoria. 2018. “Indigenous Cultures in Translation”, In Routledge Handbook of Translation and Culture, edited by Sue-Ann Harding and Ovidi Carbonell Cortés, 327– 46. London: Routledge. Munday, Jeremy. 2007. “Translation and Ideology: A Textual Approach.” The Translator 13: 195–217. Muñoz, Micaela, M. Del Carmen Buesa Gómez, and M. Ángeles Ruiz Moneva, eds. 2008. New Trends in Translation and Cultural Identity. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars. Ortega Herráez, Juan Miguel, and Ana Isabel Foulquié Rubio. 2008. “Interpreting in Police Settings in Spain: Service Providers’ and Interpreters’ Perspectives.” In Crossing Borders in Community Interpreting: Definitions and Dilemmas, edited by Carmen Valero Garcés and Anne Martin, 123–46. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Pagni, Andrea, Gertrudis Payàs, and Patricia Willson, eds. 2011. Traductores y traducciones en la historia cultural de América Latina. México, DF: UNAM. Payàs Puigarnau, Gertrudis. 2010a. El revés del tapiz: Traducción y discurso de identidad en la Nueva España (1521–1821). Madrid: Iberoamericana. ———. 2010b. “Tras la huella del intérprete en la historia colonial hispanoamericana.” In Los límites de Babel. Ensayos sobre la comunicación entre lenguas y culturas, edited by Grupo Alfaqueque, 77–99. Madrid: Iberoamericana, Vervuert. Pérez Cañada, Luis Miguel. 2005. “Emilio García Gómez, traductor.” Unpublished PhD diss., University of Málaga. Pijoan Vallverdú, Alba. 2005. “Aproximaciò a l’obra assagística de Jordi Arbonès sobre la traducció.” Quaderns. Revista de Traducció 12: 33–40. Pym, Anthony, Miriam Shlesinger, and Zuzana Jettmarova, eds. 2006. Sociocultural Aspects of Translating and Interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Rabadán Alvarez, Rosa. 2000a. “Con orden y concierto: La censura franquista y las traducciones inglésespañol 1939–1985.” In Traducción y censura inglés-español, 1939–1985. Estudio preliminar, edited by Rosa Rabadán Alvarez, 13–22. León: Universidad de León. ———, ed. 2000b. Traducción y censura inglés-español, 1939–1985. Estudio preliminar. León: Universidad de León. Rafael, Vicente L. 1988. Contracting Colonialism: Translation and Christian Conversion in Tagalog Society Under Early Spanish Rule. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Ríos Castaño, Victoria. 2009. “Domesticating the Nahuas: Sahagún’s Cultural Translation of Nahua Gods and Ceremonies in Book I  of Historia universal de las cosas de Nueva España.” Journal of Romance Studies 27: 211–22. ———. 2011. “Translating the Nahuas: Fray Bernardino de Sahagún’s Parallel Texts in the Construction of Universal History of the Things of New Spain.” Special issue: Bulletin of Latin American Research 30: 28–37. ———. 2014a. Translation as Conquest: Sahagún and Universal History of the Things of New Spain. Madrid: Iberoamericana/Vervuert. ———. 2014b. “Translation Purposes and Target Audiences in Sahagún’s Libro de la Rethorica (c.1577).” In Missionary Linguistics V/Lingüística Misionera V. Selected Papers from the Seventh International Conference on Missionary Linguistics, Bremen, 28 February–2 March 2012, edited by Otto Zwartjes, Klaus Zimmermann, and Martina Schrader-Kniffki, 53–84. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Robles Torres, Francisco Jesús. 2007. “El problema de los traductores en la guerra global contra el terrorismo.” Special issue of Puentes 8: 33–40.

136

Translation and ideology Rodríguez Monroy, Amalia. 1997. “De la traducción como mestizaje: hacia una descolonización del texto cultural.” In Actes del II Congrés Internacional sobre Traducció, abril 1994, edited by Montserrat Bacardí Tomàs, 645–62. Bellaterra: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Salama-Carr, Myriam, and Ovidi Carbonell Cortés, eds. 2009. “Ideology and Cross-Cultural ­Encounters – Research and Methodology in Translation and Interpreting.” Special issue of Forum 7. Sales Salvador, Dora. 2006. “Traducción, género y poscolonialismo Compromiso traductológico como mediación y affidamento femenino.” Quaderns. Revista de traducció 13: 21–30. Scharlau, Birgit. 2003. “Repensar la Colonia: las relaciones interculturales y la traducción.” Iberoamericana III (12): 97–110. ———, ed. 2002. Übersetzen in Lateinamerika. Tübingen: Narr. Schrader-Kniffki, Martina, and Yann Yannakakis. 2014. “Sins and Crimes: Zapotec-Spanish Translation in Catholic Evangelization and Colonial Law in Oaxaca, New Spain.” In Missionary Linguistics V/ Lingüística Misionera V. Selected Papers from the Seventh International Conference on Missionary Linguistics, Bremen, 28 February–2 March 2012, edited by Otto Zwartjes, Klaus Zimmermann, and Martina Schrader-Kniffki, 161–200. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Soto Aranda, Beatriz, and Mohamed El-Madkouri Maataoui. 2001. “Traducción e inmigración: la función de la traducción en las relaciones hispanomarroquíes poscoloniales.” In Últimas Corrientes Teóricas en los Estudios de Traducción y sus Aplicaciones, edited by Anne Barr, Rosario Martín Ruano, and Jesús Torres del Rey, 776–85. Salamanca: Universidad de Salamanca. Sueiro Justel, Joaquín. 2014. “Algo más que construyendo identidades: Fray Andrés López (1690) y la traducción en la lingüística misionero-colonial Filipina.” In Missionary Linguistics V/Lingüística Misionera V. Selected Papers from the Seventh International Conference on Missionary Linguistics, Bremen, 28 February–2 March 2012, edited by Otto Zwartjes, Klaus Zimmermann, and Martina Schrader-Kniffki, 295–336. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Taibi, Mustapha, and Anne Martin. 2012. “Court Translation and Interpreting in Times of ‘the War on Terror’: The Case of Taysir Alony.” Translation & Interpreting 4: 77–98. Torres Calzada, Katjia. 2006. “La prisonnière: El harén de Hassan II según la mirada de Malika Oufkir y la pluma de Michèle Fitoussi.” In Mujeres, espacio & poder, edited by M. Arriaga, 716–31. Sevilla: ArCiBel. ———. 2014. “El papel de la traducción en la reescritura de la historia reciente de Marruecos. La literatura de testimonio escrita en árabe: Hadiz al-’atma de Fatna El Bouih.” Estudios de Traducción 4: 57–70. Uribarri Zenekorta, Ibon. 2007. “Estudio preliminar sobre traducción, filosofía y censura. El caso de Immanuel Kant.” In Traducción y censura en España (1939–1985). Estudios sobre corpus TRACE: cine, narrativa, teatro, edited by Raquel Merino Álvarez, 151–91. Vitoria-Gasteiz: Universidad del País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibersitatea. ———. 2012. “Filosofía alemana traducida y censurada en España. Cuestiones metodológicas.” In Übersetzen als Performanz. Translation und Translationswissenschaft in performativem Licht, edited by Heike van Lawick and Brigitte E. Jirku, 207–22. Vienna/Berlin: LIT. Valdeón, Roberto A. 2007. “Ideological Independence or Negative Mediation: BBC Mundo and CNNenEspañol’s (Translated) Reporting of Madrid’s Terrorist Attacks.” In Translating and Interpreting Conflict, edited by Myriam Salama-Carr, 99–118. Amsterdam: Rodopi. ———. 2008. “Anomalous News Translation: Selective Appropriation of Themes and Texts in the Internet.” Babel 54 (4): 299–326. ———. 2009. “Discursive Constructions of Terrorism in Spain: Anglophone and Spanish Media Representations of ETA.” International Journal of Applied Linguistics 19 (1): 66–83. ———. 2010a. “Schemata, Scripts and the Gay Issue in Contemporary Dubbed Sitcoms.” Target 22 (1): 71–93. ———. 2010b. Translating Information. Oviedo: Ediciones de la Universidad de Oviedo. ———. 2011. “Embedding Anglocentric Perceptions of the World: The Falklands/ Malvinas Binomial in the News.” Meta 56 (1): 63–80. ———. 2014. Translation and the Spanish Empire in the Americas. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Valero Garcés, Carmen. 2012. “A Sociological Perspective on TIPS: Explorations into the Translator’s/ Interpreter’s (In)visibility in Translation and Interpreting in Public Services.” The Interpreters’ Newsletter 17: 13–37.

137

Ovidi Carbonell i Cortés Val Julián, Carmen. 1998. “Traduire au Nouveau Monde.” In Traduire et adapter à la Renaissance, edited by Dominique de Courcelles, 65–88. Paris: Ecole de Chartres. van Dijk, Teun A. 1998. Ideology – A Multidisciplinary Approach. London: Sage. Velasco de Castro, Rocío. 2009. “Poder y traducción coloniales: el nombre de Dios en lengua de indios.” Revista chilena de literatura 85: 129–56. Vidal Claramonte, María del Carmen África. 2013. La traducción y los espacios. Viajes, mapas, fronteras. Granada: Comares. Vilardell, Laura. 2016. Traducció i censura en el franquisme. Barcelona: Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. Yoshida, Rika. 2012. “Práctica, ideología y función poética: juicios penales con intérprete(s) en el nuevo sistema de jurado en Japón.” In Ensayos Sobre Traduccion Juridica e Institucional, edited by Iciar Alonso Araguas, Jesús Baigorri Jalón, and Helen L. Campbell, 123–32. Granada: Comares. ———. 2014. “Court Interpreting and Linguistic Ideology: Anthropological Linguistic Analysis of Court Discourse Mediated by an Interpreter.” PhD diss., Rikkyo University. Zaragoza Ninet, Gora, J. José Martínez, and José Javier Ávila-Cabrera, eds. 2015. “Traducción y censura: nuevas perspectivas.” Special issue of Quaderns de Filologia. Estudis Literaris 20. Zarrouk, Murad. 2001. “Arabismo, traducción y colonialismo: El caso de Marruecos.” Awrāq. Estudios sobre el mundo árabe e islámico contemporáneo 22: 425–58. ———. 2002. “España y sus traductores en Marruecos (1859–1936): contribución a la historia de la traducción.” PhD diss., Universidad Autónoma de Madrid. ———. 2009. Los traductores de España en Marruecos (1859–1939]. Bellaterra: Edicions Bellaterra. ———. 2011. “Orígenes del terrorismo global: Una propuesta de análisis.” Revista de Relaciones Internacionales, Estrategia y Seguridad 6 (1): 13–46. Zimmermann, Klaus. 2014. “Translation for Colonization and Christianization: The Practice of the Bilingual Edition of Bernardino de Sahagún.” In Missionary Linguistics V/Lingüística Misionera V. Selected Papers from the Seventh International Conference on Missionary Linguistics, Bremen, 28 February–2 March 2012, edited by Otto Zwartjes, Klaus Zimmermann, and Martina SchraderKniffki, 85–112. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Zimmermann, Klaus, and Birte Kellermeier-Rehbein. 2015. Colonialism and Missionary Linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Zwartjes, Otto, Klaus Zimmermann, and Martina Schrader-Kniffki, eds. 2014. Missionary Linguistics V/ Lingüística Misionera V: Translation Theories and Practices. Selected Papers from the Seventh International Conference on Missionary Linguistics, Bremen, 28 February–2 March 2012. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

138

8 TRANSLATION AND HUMOUR Marta Mateo and Patrick Zabalbeascoa

A case for humour translation studies (HTS) The paradox that exists in humour translation studies (HTS) is that while few dispute its importance and its complexity, there is a woeful lack of awareness and research in this area. A popular metaphor in Translation Studies is invisibility, at various levels within translation practice and theory (e.g. the translator’s invisibility, hidden agendas, degrees of manipulation). Thus, we are forced to ask the question of why HTS is still in the shadows given its academic importance as well as its much greater visibility (and enjoyment) in actual texts and their translations. As argued elsewhere (Zabalbeascoa 2005), part of the answer lies in the problems and shortcomings of Translation Studies and Humour Studies, despite the social, cultural, communicative and historical importance of both humour and translating practices. An important consideration is that translation practice and its theorization have historically evolved by looking almost exclusively at serious texts and their salient features, especially the Bible, in Europe and many of its Christianized former colonies; the main concern being on lexical meaning and an idea of a single meaning conveyed through words and a notion of equivalence as a guarantee of success and acceptability, achieved by being faithful (notice the faith in faithful). Another likely factor is an interest in machine translation, which can deal much better with straightforward informative texts than with tongue-in-cheek, innuendo, allusion, nonsense, wordplay and all the stuff that humour is made up of. The final factor is a prevalence of linguistic research into verbal communication rather than a holistic semiotic approach to communication (monolingual, monosemiotic or otherwise). This surely explains why humour is such a latecomer in translation studies, once all the serious texts (legal, trade, poetic, technical and scientific) had been gone through, and after it was obvious that the presence of humour within communication, popular culture and society at large (without disregarding elitist humour) especially in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, was too pervasive (television, comic books, film, advertising, internet, comic literature) to ignore any more. Both translation and humour share the complication within their respective fields of study that they are deceptively simple to define, initially, but as one wades deeper and deeper into the respective swamplands, they become quite frustrating and elusive. This might be why many researchers see them as quicksand and prefer to tackle them separately or at least take on the 139

Marta Mateo and Patrick Zabalbeascoa

challenge while holding onto some safe vine with one end wrapped around a sturdy tree. One tends to find studies of a translation of a given author (Shaw, Carroll, Wilde, Allen) or genre (diaries, plays or essays) or a linguistic unit within them (idioms, names, swearing, linguistic variation, etc.). Or linguistic (monolingual or comparative) studies of humour, or even psychological or social studies, leaving translation on the fringe of any theory, expecting it to be ‘applied’ rather than integrated at the theoretical level. Humour is easily defined as what makes you laugh. But this is immediately complicated by the realization that not all humour can make you laugh (physically), it can make you smile, sometimes only inwardly, and you can laugh for reasons unrelated to humour (e.g. nervous laughter). Humour is fun but fun can be got by other means of entertainment (e.g. sport), too. Humour is further complicated by being (a 6th or an nth) sense, a sense that is often regarded as almost exclusive to human beings within the animal kingdom. This sense can vary considerably from one person to the next, just as some people have a better sense of balance, and it can most probably also be trained or educated, starting from how gifted one is from the start, somewhat like the sense of smell. In this respect humour is like language, although the latter is not a sense (it is sometimes referred to as an instinct). A key factor here is the dual nature of humour, having a productive side and a receptive side, enabling us to produce humour as well as appreciate it (like music). This means that there must be a research for humour production and a (possibly different but complementary) research for humour perception and appreciation. In turn, this is key for translators who are expected to be both on the perception end (ST) and the production end (TT). Some genres are defined by the requirement to include a minimum amount of humoristic elements, i.e. various types of comedy, such as limericks and sitcoms, parody and satire. Having said that, it is also true that humour can appear in almost any genre (advertising, novels, textbooks, songs, journalism, children’s literature), except when explicitly forbidden or implicitly taboo or without precedent (not including parodies of these cases), e.g. laws and rules. Moreover, we might add that “humour is in the eye of the beholder” (understandably, as it is a sense) so some people can see humour where others cannot. It is culturally determined as well as socially, historically, politically, linguistically, cognitively and by individual innate characteristics, personal taste, experience and values. It is already difficult to research into much more tangible elements of communication and social interaction; moreover, there is the fact that humour is also a matter of degree and quality, things can be more or less humorous and, independently, more or less bad or good. So, researchers tend to favour something like studying Shakespeare’s puns or Wilde’s witticisms, or Carroll’s allusions, or even more vaguely, children’s literature or comic books (and their translations), rather than the translation of Shakespeare’s humour, or Wilde’s, or humour for children, or whatever. This is because puns and other forms of wordplay can be isolated and analysed formally. Many of these studies go into lengthy discussions about formal linguistic, discursive, textual and cultural aspects, where humour is mistaken for the sum of certain ingredients. This leads us to study the translation of comedy (and humorous elements in other genres) by the same methods as serious texts and elements, for example cutting a text up into parts of speech, and also applying traditional concepts of translational equivalents and shifts, such as literal translation, compensation and modulation, in the hope that counting the number of literal translations as opposed to the number of modulations for a given text will shed some sort of light on how equivalent the result is in terms of humour. This is the case of Nord’s (2003) study of the translation of proper nouns for foreign-language versions of Alice in Wonderland. We are presented with all sorts of statistical data on formal features of the Proper Nouns in the various versions, but little is said about the factor of humour. 140

Translation and humour

The difficulty of translating humour and researching its translations lies in all of the factors mentioned above, which entail that a translator must have a sense of humour, or substitutory skills to recognize and produce humour (or, at least, show a humorous intention); it may also require that researchers be able to detect humour either through their own senses or through formal training, since humour might be produced from people who swear they are not trying to be funny, and likewise, failed humour is not the same as being serious, just as a bad translation is not the same as non-translation. The elusiveness of humour, then, is its main challenge. It requires therefore a materialization of some sort; the prime candidate would be the joke, in its broadest sense. A joke can be defined as any concrete instance of humour produced (or assumed to be produced) by human design. This definition distinguishes jokes from amusing accidents or funny cats, etc. Of course, a joke can be textual (verbal or visual gags) or non-textual (e.g. a practical joke), and textual jokes can be verbal, non-verbal or semiotically complex and multimodal, involving words and other sign systems or paralinguistic or performance (delivery) features. Thus, a joke can constitute a unit for analysis, can be described according to certain features, and jokes can be labelled and classified – hopefully, according to humour-specific parameters and variables, and not only typologies based on linguistic units or features, e.g. lexical, grammatical, stylistic or pragmatic. On the other hand, in a completely different attempt to distinguish jokes from humour, and in terms of translation, Gillies (1997) establishes a personal distinction between jokes and humour whereby translating a joke would require ‘getting it right’ at the first reaction while translating humour would rather depend on the cumulative effect of a series of wise choices (in Martínez Sierra 2008, 125). The preceding explains why so many translational studies of comic authors, texts and their translations do not really develop insight into the nature of humour translation. Conversely, titles like “A study of So-and-so’s work as a translator” or “A study of 19th century literature in translation” may hide, for those of us interested in humour translation, rich nuggets of valuable research in our topic. Unfortunately, this implies that the search for HTS is often arduous work, for the subject of humour is frequently not made visible in titles; it may simply constitute a more or less important component in the study of another topic: e.g. the translation of a particular work, writer, genre or field; of a particular translation modality like subtitling or dubbing; or of certain features, like proper nouns, idioms, ambiguity, irony, etc.

Historical review Despite the fact that humour has travelled across linguistic boundaries in various textual forms throughout the centuries, it is, only quite recently that the subject of humour translation has started to receive the attention it deserves. This has been the case both in Spain and elsewhere: as Chiaro describes, “the area of humour and translation has not always been so popular in academia. Before the mid-nineties academic literature on the subject was scarce and often more anecdotal than scholarly in nature” (2010a, 2). Indeed, only the odd article could then be traced on the subject.1 Apart from the factors mentioned in the previous section, this scant attention may also have to do with the fact that humour, like poetry, puns or metaphor, has often been considered among the greatest challenges facing translators (Vandaele 2001, 30). In fact, the issue of its (un)translatability was often the focus of those early isolated studies. A well-known example in Spain is Santoyo (1987), which considered comedies as essentially untranslatable due to the difficult combination of linguistic and cultural elements which is typical of these texts. 141

Marta Mateo and Patrick Zabalbeascoa

True, as Vandaele puts it (2010, 150), “[t]he specific trouble with humor translation [.  .  .] is that humor has a clear penchant for (socio)linguistic particularities [. . .] and for metalinguistic communication”, two aspects which are often associated with cultural and linguistic untranslatability – not just in the realm of humour. The problem with this type of approach was that it failed to explain, objectively and systematically, the processes and contexts in which humour did travel. Nevertheless, from the mid-nineties, and particularly in the present century, the translation of humour has attracted growing attention from researchers, evidenced by the publication of international monographs both within translation studies and humour studies, some of which include articles by Spanish researchers or about translated Spanish humour. For instance, Chiaro’s latest two-volume compendium (2010b) has contributions from four researchers from Spain (Fuentes Luque, Mateo, Valdeón and Zabalbeascoa). The increase in the pieces of research focusing on the topic has brought about a broadening of the approaches, topics and translation modalities studied in relation to humour. The following paragraphs will present a brief historical review of how research and attention paid to humour translation in the Spanish-language context have evolved. Del Corral (1988) already introduced some systematization and relativism in the issue of the (un)translatability of humour. Claiming that “we need not offhandedly abandon the translation of humor simply because we have traditionally dismissed it as untranslatable” (1988, 27), she identifies some broad categories of humour – universal, national and literary – in order to observe which of them defy and which permit successful translation (1988, 25). Some key concepts are introduced in this study, like the role of the translator – who needs to gauge “how much humor will be lost, how much retained, and how much understood in a different way” (1988, 27) – and a culture’s perception of, and a receptor’s predisposition to, humour, to which we will go back in the text to follow. Along these lines, Mateo (1995a) (the published version of the author’s 1992 doctoral dissertation) stands as one of the first thorough studies on humour translation adopting a Descriptive Translation Studies approach. Analyzing a series of English comedies from different periods, and their various translations into Spanish, the author goes beyond evaluating whether the humour has or has not been retained in each case or prescribing what translators should have done, so as to observe the solutions actually found by translators and the factors involved in the decision-taking process. Considering the various elements involved in comedy  – for which she draws concepts from Humour Studies, Theatre Studies and Pragmatics  – Mateo looks at the translation strategies taken for different aspects, assessing their role in comedic humour and in the complex process of its translation: titles, wordplay, irony, the reversal of expectations, and the cultural component. Another doctoral dissertation of the time, Zabalbeascoa (1993), was the first to focus on audiovisual texts, thus initiating a series of studies on audiovisual humour translation (from now on, AVHT). Adopting a systematic theoretical2 approach, the author arranges the diverse priorities that humour may have in different types of text: high (as in jokes or television comedies), medium (in love stories with a happy end, for instance) and low (when used as a pedagogical device). Zabalbeascoa also discusses the restrictions which will operate in humour translation, mostly dependent on the audiovisual modality in question, besides other factors deriving from culture; and he suggests considering what type of humour (or joke) is exportable and why. (Cultural issues in television humour and how exportable they are were also the object of Sopeña-Balordi 1993). Zabalbeascoa (1996a) expands on this by presenting a classification of jokes according to “the way jokes lend themselves to translation” (1996a, 251) and the different translational solutions associated with each type. The author distinguishes between international or binational jokes, national-culture-and-institutions jokes, 142

Translation and humour

national-sense-of-humor jokes, language-dependent jokes, visual jokes and complex jokes (1996a, 251–5). This classification has been used as a point of departure for other analyses, both within Spain (for instance, Martínez Sierra 2008 – presented in the following) and abroad (e.g. Ptaszynski 2004, which discusses the (un)translatability of jokes, analyzing Polish jokes and their translation into English with Zabalbeascoa’s typology). Zabalbeascoa (1996a) introduces other, more practical, issues, which reflect the functional approach that  – together with DTS  – was then clearly making its way into the analysis of humour translation and which are crucial to its understanding in an audiovisual context: for instance, the issue of time – how the commonly tight deadlines affect quality in AVT – and consumers’ expectations about translators’ ability to convey humour across linguistic and cultural borders – often, either naïvely high or excessively low (1996a, 236). With the boom in AVT research, very noticeable in Spain, more and more studies on humour translation came from that field in the 1990s and at the turn of the century, eventually proving that AVHT could in fact become a specialized practice (Martínez Sierra 2008, 235). The combination of, on the one hand, the linguistic and cultural difficulties generally involved in humour translation and, on the other, the technical constraints imposed by AVT modalities like dubbing and subtitling, made this topic a particularly challenging but highly interesting one to investigate. As could be expected in a dubbing country, the first studies were devoted to humour in this translation mode, in which the challenge is probably greater than in other modes “since the target audience is supposed to laugh at exactly the same moment when the source audience’s laughter is expected, as Zabalbeascoa suggests (1993, 237), particularly when the programme makes use of canned laughter” (Martínez Sierra 2008, 132) (our translation). Zabalbeascoa’s studies (1993, 1994, 1996a, 1996b) can be said to have laid the theoretical basis for research on dubbed humour. Another important early contribution was Fuentes (2000), whose doctoral dissertation was the first reception study on translated humour, comparing the Spanish dubbed and subtitled versions of a film by the Marx Brothers. Fuentes presents a taxonomy of humour, distinguishing between verbal, gestural, visual, graphic and audiovisual humour, and also identifies other categories based on situational criteria – humour of the absurd, dark humour or US humour, for instance (2000, 14–17). The author also quotes a list of restrictions which can affect the translation of humour and of cultural references in an audiovisual text: image, noise, diachrony (the different situational and sociocultural contexts of source and target texts), the text title and taboo language (2000, 43–56). Another set of limitations was proposed at the time by Díaz-Cintas, whose seminal research on subtitling also paid some attention to humour, mostly focusing on the semiotic and cultural aspects of comedy in AVT (2001a, 2001b). The translation of humour in comics and animated cartoons gradually started to attract researchers’ attention too: two early articles on the former genre are Sopeña-Balordi (1985), in the French-Spanish context, and Campos Pardillo (1992), focusing on a French comic, Astérix, and its English and Spanish translations, and concluding that humour can not only go across cultural and linguistic borders successfully but it can even improve along the journey, as happens in some instances of the English version of this French masterpiece. Animated films and cartoons took a little while to arouse academic interest, but they finally became the object of an exhaustive piece of research in Spain, Martínez Sierra 2008, which analyzes the success of The Simpsons in translation from a descriptivist and pragmatic point of view (see the Research issues and methods section). With the arrival of the new millennium research has incorporated a greater variety of issues which reflect the complexity of humour translation, comprising diverse text types, kinds/ aspects of humour and translation modalities. It is only natural, then, that scholars should now 143

Marta Mateo and Patrick Zabalbeascoa

often refer to the interdisciplinary nature of this field. An emphasis on functional criteria to analyse humorous source and target texts as well as the translation process is another basic tenet today (see section 3b). Other contextual parameters, such as the speaker’s intentionality, the receiver’s interpretation, presuppositions, or the value systems of the cultures involved, are commonly present in both practical and theoretical accounts of humour translation, showing the relevance of Pragmatics to both Translation Studies and Humour Studies. These various issues and methodologies will be presented in more detail in the next section.

Research issues and methods Issues A selection of the main issues will now be given, with a few relevant pieces of research from the Spanish-language context.

Factors determining the creation of humour and its translation Like researchers elsewhere, after those initial stages academics within the Spanish context have continued to look into the different elements and aspects of humour, in order to better understand its complex mechanism as well as the diverse aspects involved in its (successful) translation. A good representative is Zabalbeascoa (2005), which identifies important parameters for the translator of humour to develop joke typologies, and suggests two complementary procedures: ‘mapping’, i.e. locating instances of humour according to relevant classifications, and ‘prioritizing’, or “establishing what is important for each case (in the context of translating), and how important each item and aspect is, in order to have clear set of criteria for shaping the translation in one way rather than another” (2005, 187). In this regard, Zabalbeascoa states that we should not simplistically presume that humour will be equally important in the source and the target texts, concluding “that sameness, or similarity, may have little to do with funniness” (2005, 185). Mateo (2010a) examines well-studied concepts from Humour Studies and Pragmatics – such as incongruity, logical thinking, superiority, social signification (which includes the social group’s degree of inhibition), good mood, cuing, function, text and context – in order to show that they “can be of use not just to the translation scholar but also to the translator, that is, not only for the analysis and understanding of translated humour but for the actual process of translating it” (Mateo 2010a, 71). The role of the translator in the linguistic and cultural transplantation of humour is in fact an issue which researchers on humour translation insist cannot be ignored, since his/her understanding of the source-text comedy never constitutes a passive type of reception, while the production of a humorous target text usually calls for a special sensitivity towards comedy as well as a high degree of biculturalism, not to mention a good deal of skill, creativity and imagination (see Martínez Sierra 2008; Mateo 1995a, 2010a; Zabalbeascoa 1996b, 2005). As Zabalbeascoa has put it, “[i]n the real world, each translator has different strengths and weaknesses that play a significant role in the end result [. . .]. The translator is a variable in the process” (2005, 205), and this seems particularly noticeable when humour is at stake.

Verbal humour It is generally agreed that verbal humour – arising from the particular language used to convey it, as opposed to referential humour, in which a certain meaning or extralinguistic reality 144

Translation and humour

is the source of comedy – is the harder to translate. Nevertheless, the line that divides these two broad classes of humour is a fine one, underlining the previously mentioned complexity of definition which marks this aspect of human behaviour: “[h]umorous texts well exemplify extreme lingua-cultural specificity”, as Chiaro points out (2010a, 8), rightly concluding that “[w]hile it is evident that heavily language-oriented word play does indeed create peculiar difficulties in translation [. . .], it appears to be a question of type of difficulty rather than degree of difficulty” (1992, 95). Verbal humour (or Verbally Expressed Humour, in Chiaro’s terms 2005) has been present in the studies of researchers focusing on general or other aspects of humour. Let us see a few examples in the Spanish-language context. Díaz Pérez (2004) discusses the translation of wordplay in various fields, such as literature, advertising and films, while Martínez Tejerina (2008) studies the polysemic nature of language and how it may affect the dubbing process. Rojo López (2009) puts forward an approach to the translation of humorous texts based on Cognitive Linguistics, focusing on the concept of ‘frames’ (from Fillmore’s Frame Semantics) – knowledge structures activated in the text – and on the phenomenon of metonymy as a conceptual and cognitive process pervading our way of thinking (Rojo 2009, 66). Analyzing several types of metonymy (of the partwhole, cause-effect . . . patterns) in various English-language novels, and showing how they are commonly exploited in the creation of humour, Rojo argues that this model provides us with deeper understanding of the production and inference of humour (2009, 63), so it can be a useful guide for translators, “assisting them in adjusting the comprehension mechanisms of both audiences and elaborating a translation that leads to the activation of the relevant frames necessary to achieve a humorous effect” (2009, 79). Mateo (2010a) illustrates the factors mentioned in the preceding subsection with the verbal distortions used as humour generators and effective means of characterization in an eighteenth-century epistolary English novel, analyzing the difficulties of translating English verbal humour (based on its own phonetics, morphology, spelling system, dialectal and diachronic variants, social connotations attached to certain pronunciations, malapropisms, etc.) into twenty-first century Spanish (with its own linguistic resources and stylistic conventions). The author suggests that the soundest approach is probably “to base our translation decisions on the mechanism and the function of each humorous item in the whole text, rather than on its specific form” and to consider each instance of verbal humour “as an integral part of the letters rather than in isolation” (Mateo 2010a, 184, 181). Mateo (2010b) resorts to Oscar Wilde’s comedies to show the pragmatic play verbal humour often relies on, constantly subverting the audience’s discursive, semantic and sociocultural expectations and common logic, by exploiting linguistic contrasts, incongruity, surprise and paradox. After examining some Spanish translations of Wilde’s pieces, the study concludes that most of the comic instances based on the reversal of expectations have been successfully conveyed in the target language; it is only when they also include wordplay or irony that translators seem to have encountered difficulties, either in grasping them in the source text or in transplanting them to the target context. Irony appears problematic, except in cases of dramatic irony or clear sarcasm (Mateo 2010b, 330).

The translation of irony The study of humour-related textual constituents, such as irony, must no doubt form part of a list of issues interesting researchers on humour translation. In an early study, Mateo (1995b) presented a taxonomy of translation strategies for irony, and in an article published in 1998 this author focused on non-verbal components frequently used in the communication of irony, which are therefore crucial to its translation. More recently, Hirsch (2011) examines the 145

Marta Mateo and Patrick Zabalbeascoa

differences in explicitation strategies between translating irony and humour, illustrating them with several literary works originally written in Spanish (including South American ones, such as two novels by Vargas Llosa) and their English and Hebrew translations. The analysis shows that the translations of irony show more explicitations while strategies for humour yield more non-explicitation shifts. This may indicate, according to the author, that, “while the explicitation of humour can override its function altogether, the explicitation of irony does not necessarily do so, since the implied criticism is not cancelled” (2011, 201). These findings, however, seem to clash with discussions on the translation of audiovisual irony, like Zabalbeascoa (2000a, 2010b), which, from the analysis of the films Annie Hall and Trainspotting, maintain that translation choices enhancing subtleness are precisely the ones that work better in the case of irony.

The issue of culture in humour translation However difficult verbally expressed humour often proves to be, “the translation of humour is only very partially an interlingual problem, it really is above all an intercultural one” (Chiaro 2010a, 21). To make one another laugh, the members of a speech community rely heavily on implicit knowledge, which may involve important differences between groups regarding “what or whom can be targeted in social play” (Vandaele 2010, 150). Indeed, the cultural nature of humour and its impact on translation has been extensively researched, both within and outside Spain. In her early article on the subject, Del Corral (1988) already highlighted the vital role of culture-specificity and perception, rightly reminding us that “[o]ur sense of humor is not innate. It is acquired imperceptibly” and that a culture’s perception of humour reflects the group’s special frames of reference, relating to its history, literature, religion, or politics (1988, 25). As Zabalbeascoa puts it (1993, 234–6), we share our humour with those who have shared our history and understand our way of interpreting experience. (A good example of this is intertextuality, often present in humorous texts, which calls for the reader’s identification of the literary/historical/artistic/audiovisual source). Along these lines, Gillies (1997) suggests that language is the mirror of culture, and claims that, in literary translation and simultaneous interpreting, proverbs and humour constitute the main problems, as they rely on shared knowledge between sender and receiver (in Martínez Sierra 2008, 122). This common ground often includes the particular group’s prejudices against other cultures or groups, or feelings about certain registers, dialects, sociolects or idiolects – language varieties with strong social ties to the speech community, all of them often constituting a rich source of humour. This raises the issue of ‘culture bumps’, “culture-specific items of interpersonal communication and social dynamics” (Zabalbeascoa 2005, 190) imposing restrictions on the translator, who must gauge the relative importance of humour in the different contexts; for, as this researcher observes, “what do we do if humor is detrimental to the author’s goals in the new environment of the translated version?” (2005, 188). In this sense, Martínez Sierra (2008) – examining humour in AVT – believes that the possible loss of a cultural reference in the dubbed version of an audiovisual text may be deemed a lesser evil, since replacing a source-culture reference with one specific to the target culture may provoke stronger disapproval from audiences than their not noticing or understanding a source reference which has been transferred in the dubbing process (2008, 238). In any case, preserving certain source-culture allusions will require greater pragmatic effort from the target audience, which will not necessarily entail a greater reward (in the form of cognitive effects) (Martínez Sierra 2008, 241). This study highlights the cultural side of both humour and translation, underlining the translator’s role 146

Translation and humour

as an intercultural mediator. Rojo López (2002) also acknowledges humour as a complex cultural phenomenon. Humorists like David Lodge – whom this researcher resorts to in order to illustrate her points – often distort their readers’ cognitive frames, create new ones or make a character activate an erroneous one with humorous purposes. Rojo López therefore argues that an approach which presents the relationship between language, mind and culture will provide a “unified, coherent and structured explanation of the translation problems which appear when two different languages and cultures come into contact” (Rojo López 2002, 68).

Reception The issue of culture is inextricably linked to that of reception, which has gradually attracted research attention in humour translation. The social aspect of humour is unquestionable, which implies, on the one hand, that the group or individuals involved must be ready to play. Taking this to a translation context, it means that “jokes are translatable if and only if the respective cultures are interested and available” (Raphaleson-West 1989, 140) (see the ‘good mood’ variable in Mateo 2010a, mentioned previously). On the other hand, as has already been stated, humour relies heavily on the receiver’s identification of the implicit knowledge the joke/comedy is based on; and it is precisely the success in the inference that produces the pleasure. As Gillies rightly observes, “el chiste no tolera explicaciones” (1997, 356, in Martínez Sierra 2008, 160; meaning a joke should not have to be footnoted or explained), and, in Rojo López’s words (2009, 68), “a joke or humorous comment is always funnier if, instead of being directly communicated, receptors manage to decipher it themselves”. A researcher in the Spanish-language context who has devoted his attention to the reception of translated humour is Fuentes Luque, focusing on audiovisual texts both in his previously mentioned doctoral dissertation (2000) and in Fuentes (2001), where he presents an empirical study of the issue. A very interesting question regarding reception is described by Martínez Sierra (2008, 240), who explains that, while The Simpsons’ audience in the US is mostly composed of adult viewers, in Spain it seems to be made up largely of twelve-year-olds, the reason probably lying in the translation strategies taken for the dubbing: since the series contains highly specific cultural referents, the dubbed version has changed its humorous potential to more mundane allusions and to visual, paralinguistic or purely sonorous play, thus getting closer to a pattern which is more appealing to children, in line with Zabalbeascoa’s (2000b) observation regarding Disney translations. This may be related to the conclusions reached by Del Corral in that earlier study on (literary) humour translation (1988). After comparing the effect produced by the parodies written by the Mexican writer Jorge Ibargüengoitia (1928– 1983) about the Mexican revolution and the succeeding upheaval on the Mexican reader and on the receiver of the English translations, this researcher makes two interesting observations regarding the perception of this culture-specific type of humour: “While the native understands the book’s national humor, the foreigner perceives its literary humor”, so “both may take pleasure in the same detail for entirely different reasons” (1988, 26). A second conclusion, which Del Corral herself describes as surprising, but no doubt tenable, is that [t]he different perspective and perceptions of the two readers have absolutely no effect on the translation process itself. Universal and literary humour present no special problem. As for national humour, [. . .] it is available to those who are prepared to understand it, imperceptible to those who are not”. (Del Corral 1988, 26) 147

Marta Mateo and Patrick Zabalbeascoa

Ideological issues in humour translation In connection with culture and reception, the question of ideology is present in various studies on humour translation. Thus, Vandaele (2002) focuses on (self-)censorship and humour in Franco’s Spain, making two interesting observations: in relation to the key theoretical translation question whether meaning, as the effect of language, can really be predicted, Vandaele suggests that it must certainly be predictable “with greater or lesser accuracy. Otherwise, indeed, the type of self-censorship exerted by Francoist translators [. . .] would be difficult to imagine” (2002, 164). In relation to the issue of ethics, this researcher considers that the Francoist censorship of humour was certainly not a good thing, either for the humour or its message (Vandaele 2002, 166). Regarding the critical side of humour (notably present in parodies and particularly in satire), Zabalbeascoa (2005) suggests that the translator will have to decide whether humour is the most effective way of producing the same type of criticism in the target context and what is more important in the text in question, the humour or the criticism, since the funniness of the text may actually be “more important than any criticism it might hold” (Zabalbeascoa 2005, 198). For his part, Valdeón (2010a, 2010b) examines how the discourse of the two gay characters in the American sitcom Will and Grace has experienced some changes in the Spanish-dubbed version, their portrayal thus becoming less politically correct than in the original, something which should probably be considered in relation to the respective standards of political correctness in each culture.

Humour in audiovisual texts AV texts can be said to have taken centre stage in the study of humour translation from the end of the twentieth century onwards. As may have already been noticed, they are frequently present in pieces of research on various aspects of comedy, but more and more studies have focused specifically on AVHT. Three of the Spanish contributors to Chiaro’s special monograph on the translation of humour (2010b), for instance, focus on cinema and television (Fuentes Luque, Valdeón and Zabalbeascoa). The editor of this compendium remarks on the Anglo-centricity noticeable in most of its studies, which is however quite understandable since “the sheer amount of translated products from the USA on TV provide researchers of languages other than English with plenty of material to study”, as Chiaro herself observes (2010a, 25). A study which has paid attention to audiovisual texts produced outside the Anglophone world is Mogorrón Huerta (2010), examining how the humour of three French films has been conveyed in the Spanish dubbing. Apart from those given previously, we can mention other representative studies. Díaz-Cintas (1998) analysed the subtitling and dubbing of a specific piece, Woody Allen’s comic thriller Manhattan Murder Mystery, while the monograph on subtitling he coedited (Díaz-Cintas and Remael 2007) devoted a whole section to humour. Lorenzo and Pereira (2003) examine The Simpsons, a series which would later be the research topic for Martínez Sierra (2008), which will be described in the following. Mendiluce and Hernández (2004, 2005) deal with the issues of function and quality in AVHT (mostly focusing on animated films); while digital animated films, such as Antz and Shrek, have been the object of study in González Vera (2010). Venuti’s dichotomy between foreignization and domestication provides the basis for the studies by Botella Tejera (2006) and Martínez Sierra (2006). Díaz Pérez has devoted at least two studies (2008, 2014) to analyzing the translation of wordplay in English film titles, a particularly thorny issue, considering, in the first one, the fondness for punning in English-language literatures and cultures, frequently observed in literary works, advertisements and films – as the 148

Translation and humour

author rightly points out – and, in the second, the twofold function served by puns in titles, since they are an effective appealing device for viewers and can encapsulate at least two meanings relevant for the film (Díaz Pérez 2008, 55). In order to examine their translations into Spanish, the author adopts a non-evaluative description-oriented approach in (2008) and a Relevance Theory standpoint in (2014). Martínez Sierra’s volume (2008) also applies Pragmatics’ Relevance theory to the study of translated humour, focusing on the The Simpsons, the American animated TV series which has been shown in about seventy countries, among them Spain. The author presents a taxonomy of elements which generate humour, illustrating them with a selection of comic instances from the series; with the analysis of the translation strategies adopted for them in the Spanish version, he tries to systematize some translational tendencies for TV dubbings of a type of humour which is strongly culturally marked. An interesting distinction made by this researcher is between translatability on a macrotextual and a microtextual level, concluding that it is only on the latter that some jokes can be deemed as untranslatable, while the series as such works well in its target version, preserving its potential for humour; i.e., it fulfils its main function, which is essentially to provoke laughter3 (Martínez Sierra 2008, 233–5). This leads the author to conclude that the approach taken by the Spanish translators of the The Simpsons is a functional one, and mostly foreignizing regarding cultural references, despite the high number of source-culture references which are thus transplanted to the target context (2008, 235). In connection with this issue, a keen observation made by Martínez Sierra is that the visual components of the TV series, far from constraining the translation, often help to facilitate the understanding of the target text, which should prompt us to question the concept of image as a constraining factor in AVHT (2008, 239). Research on AVHT is incorporating new modalities in AVT, such as audio description, which is the object of another study by Martínez Sierra (2009).

The translation of specific humorous genres/texts/authors Humour interacts with the specific conventions of the genre that the translated text belongs to. “Different genres generate different schemes of normality to be transgressed”, and these differences may be rather subtle (Vandaele 2002, 168–9), so translators will have to bear in mind the schemes operating for each genre – a comedy, a joke, etc. – in each of the two contexts involved in the intercultural and interlinguistic process of translation. Mateo (1995a), for instance, studied the specificity of theatre humour, in which all the semiotic codes can be exploited for the creation of comedy as well as to solve translation difficulties – i.e. a verbal problem may be overcome by resorting to the non-verbal signs in the performance (1995a, 283). The performability of the text, the immediacy that characterizes a play’s reception in a theatre, and the need to recreate the humorous effect in the target text often imply that the exact semantic content of a source comedy will somehow be sacrificed. Non-verbal elements – in this case, image – and text are also closely linked in comics, as Muñoz-Calvo and Buesa-Gómez have studied, focusing on the translation of Astérix (2010). Comics have their own conventions – e.g. concise and precise language, recurring visual metaphors and onomatopoeia, etc. – and each particular text is characterized by a particular linguistic and iconic discourse which will constrain translation decisions. For instance, in their thorough analysis of Astérix, Muñoz-Calvo and Buesa-Gómez (2010) discuss the constant wordplay and cultural references that create much of the humour in the French canonical text, and they address the thorny issue of how to translate multilingualism when the alien language in the source text happens to be the target language in a translation process: English syntax 149

Marta Mateo and Patrick Zabalbeascoa

and word order are often parodied in the original Astérix, a difficulty the translators into this language have solved by making the Breton characters speak English with Scottish or Welsh dialect forms. These researchers include an exhaustive and useful list of studies published in Spain which are centred on the translation of comics (2010, 429): e.g. the specific problems the translation of this genre entails, the translation of the texts’ typical onomatopoeia and wordplay, and the (Spanish) translation of Astérix or of other popular comics – either originally Spanish or from other literary systems, such as Mortadelo y Filemón, Mafalda and Tin-Tin. The humour of specific authors belonging to different genres has been examined in various studies: to mention but a few examples centred on Spanish creators and the translation of their work into other languages, Spanish playwrights from the Golden Age have attracted the attention of scholars both in Spain and abroad, as will be seen next; and Pedro Almodóvar’s films have been the object of study in Rox Barasoain’s PhD dissertation (2008), which focuses on their translation and reception in the US, and in an end-of-degree project examining their subtitling in Greek (Roussou 2003, mentioned in Martínez Sierra 2008, 268).

Translating the classics An important study in the Spanish-language context is Braga (2009a and 2009b, with an English and a Spanish version published in the same year), devoted to the transplantation of Spanish Golden Age comedies to England and their influence on British playwrights. The author first analyzes situation comedy, observing that English translators showed great interest in this type of humour, in some aspects keeping very close to the Spanish originals – as in the humorous use of stage space, characters’ movements, night scenes or the figure of the fool –, at other times slightly adapting the situational elements of the ST, like gestures, paralinguistic features or hairstyle and costumes. English translators also exploited certain resources practically inexistent in the Spanish written versions of the plays, such as songs and music, and they introduced some other ridiculous figures that would be familiar to the intended TT public (Braga 2009a, 273–4). The translators showed more freedom in verbal humour, such as that created through wordplay, comic neologisms, repartees, parodies of Latin expressions, double entendres and asides, either by omitting many of these ST elements or opting for creativity; they introduced elements of the same type in order to exploit their comic potential in English (Braga 2009a, 295). Apart from its thorough analysis of these Spanish comedies and their various English translations, which are placed in their respective cultural, historic and theatrical contexts, an interesting contribution of this study is the exhaustive bibliography provided, which shows the strong attraction this period of Spanish drama has held for playwrights and researchers elsewhere. The list includes studies about the translation and adaptation of Calderón’s plays into English, French, Italian and Polish; about this playwright’s influence on English writers such as Dryden; his reception in Germany, and throughout Europe in various periods; comparative studies between Calderón in Madrid and in London, or between Renaissance English and Spanish drama; about the translation into English of other writers, such as Lope the Vega or Hurtado de Mendoza; or about Spanish comedy in France, Holland, Italy, Poland and Englishspeaking countries, or in seventeenth-century Europe; and bibliographies of English translations of Spanish comedies (see Braga 2009a, 324–32).

Translating into languages other than Castilian Spanish Researchers in Spain have also studied the translation of humour into official languages other than Spanish. Thus, Espasa Borrás (1995) deals with Joe Orton’s humour in Catalan 150

Translation and humour

and Valencian versions; the same researcher devotes part of her 2001 book to the analysis of comedy in The Merry Wives of Windsor and As You Like it, examining, for instance, how the humour created by some characters’ accents in those Shakespearean comedies has fared in the translations into Catalan. Díaz Pérez (1999) analyzes the translation of wordplay in Lewis Carroll’s work into Galician (and Spanish).

Methods Research methods within HTS need not be different on the whole from other aspects of translation, especially the ones included under translation problems, according to Holmes’s 1988 “map”, along with other problems like metaphors, allusions and politeness. Indeed, part of the challenge in studying translated humour is how to separate or combine overlapping textual features like humorous metaphor, or humour in the context of politeness, etc. Due to space constraints we outline very briefly here fruitful research methodology, already carried by authors mentioned previously but also still demanding of further work, particularly in Spain. •

•

•

•

•

Linguistics, semiotics, communication studies. The tools of linguistic science are not to be disdained at all, but they should be put at the service of the particular goal of humour translation, to further develop the area of verbally expressed humour, while acknowledging the importance of non-verbal and audiovisual humour. One very interesting area is that of comparing professionally scripted humour (the one that is typically scripted and published) to humour produced by all other people. Pragmatics and reception studies. This methodology involves studying texts with the tools of pragmatics to focus on reactions pursued and achieved by the presence of humour. This is probably why AVT is so prominent in this field, because of the presence of telling pragmatic markers such as the laugh track and fictional characters’ laughter. Scholarly work of this kind includes Díaz Pérez (2014) and Mateo (2010b). Descriptive reception and social studies. Like the important work carried out by Fuentes Luque, humour translation can be studied by looking at audience responses, which can be done through questionnaires or direct observation of reactions (typically, but not exclusively, laughter). Eye-tracking research is gaining importance in this respect, combined with studies of heartrate or other indicators of responses to specific stimuli, such as humour (e.g. eye-tracking studies as carried out, outside Spain, by Kruger, Szarkowska, and Krejtz 2015). Corpus studies. One area that has not grown as much for humour translation studies as in other areas is the collection of texts and/or instances of (translated) jokes and humoristic elements. It is very useful, not to say essential, to have a large body (database) of samples of instances and examples of types of humour. Theoretical studies are needed to complement all of the above, because theory is where explanations and typologies are proposed. Insights and hypotheses help to guide descriptive studies, provide structure for corpora and databases, and advance pragmatic and hermeneutic studies of texts. For example, there have been many publications that have used Zabalbeascoa’s (1996a, 2005) theory of types of translation-oriented humour for their research, coupled with Zabalbeascoa’s model of priorities and restrictions (1996b), showing how one of the variables of humour (in translation) is its importance in the context of every other textual feature. Another much-cited case, both within Spain and beyond, is Delabastita’s (1996) theoretical account of how wordplay is and can be translated. 151

Marta Mateo and Patrick Zabalbeascoa

Future directions There are still plenty of topics to study and research lines to open. To start with, more collaboration between Humour Studies and Translation Studies is needed since, as Vandaele clearly puts it, “la traduction [. . .] se présente clairement comme un test culturel et linguistique ultime des ‘frontières communautaires’ dans les présuppositions qu’exploite l’humour” (“translation [.  .  .] has clearly proved to be a definitive cultural and linguistic test of ‘national borders’ within the presuppositions which humour plays with”; our translation), and the absence and presence of the latter can be interpreted as an unmistakable signal of those borders (Vandaele 2001, 40, 29). Chiaro (2005, 143) calls for more empirical studies to establish the link between funniness and ST-TT similarity, following Zabalbeascoa’s previously mentioned claim that they may have little to do with each other (2005, 185). Spanish researchers could contribute to confirming this. The area of reception also deserves fuller investigation, focusing on translated humorous texts of different genres and/or conveyed through various translation modes. It would be useful to find out, for instance, “whether culture-specific senses of humor actually do exist” and “how far language transfer influences the triadic behavioural, physiological and emotional response in individuals from different cultural backgrounds” (Chiaro 2005, 139–40). This should be particularly relevant for AVHT, in which another interesting topic could be the examination of global marketing strategies in the production of screen series and how they affect, or are affected by, translation (Chiaro 2005, 139). Other subjects of relevance in today’s world are: the translation challenges presented by new technological media – audio(-visual), electronic and digital – in relation to humour; translating humour in different textual/translation modalities: e.g. video games, advertising, musical texts (e.g. in songs, opera or musicals), and even live interpreting; or fansubs and fandubs as leisure translating activities. More concrete topics are how to tackle humorous multilingualism in texts to be translated, or the issue of accessibility in relation to AVHT. As regards methodological issues, descriptive studies, which may yield tendencies and norms of translation strategies for humorous texts – either foreign (audiovisual/written) texts translated in Spain or Spanish texts received abroad –, will no doubt be enlightening for the field too. It is important not to mix up or confuse research methods and interests, as outlined earlier, with theoretical frameworks, although they might be said to be part of the researcher’s toolbox. Thus, there are linguistic theories such as functional linguistics or pragmatic-linguistic theories such as Relevance Theory (Sperber and Wilson 1995) or Grice’s (1975) Cooperative Principle. Then there are translation-studies specific theories, such as norm theory (Toury 1980) or Skopos theory (Reiss and Vermeer 1984), and then, of course, there are theories that come out of humour studies, that may then be applied to translation (e.g. Attardo 2002; Raskin 1985; Nash 1985). The interesting case of humour as a challenge for AVT has been amply dealt with here, and basically implies that any theory for AVT will have to be tested and validated against the case of humour, regardless of whether humour turns out to be a sense or a function or a device or a mood or an elusive quality. A final word must be said in favour of integrating humour translation studies (HTS) in with a better general understanding of translational phenomena. We must strive for increased visibility of humour in Spanish Translation Studies, both in general theoretical studies and in works focusing on AVT. Work for the future includes convincing scholars that a greater awareness of humour must be included in mainstream translation studies to provide fruitful dialogue between TS and HTS. The belittling of humoristic and comic issues in TS will surely change in 152

Translation and humour

the near future. We hope that just as AVT was belittled for too long but came out into the light, so too will humour translation come out of the shadows of special cases and into the limelight of core translation studies given its ubiquity and universality in every order: textually, socially, linguistically, culturally, semiotically, cognitively, and politically. We hope we can eventually witness the dawn of a full-fledged HTS picking up and joining the strands of work carried out internationally, like Chiaro’s (2010b) and Delabastita’s (1996), and largely in Spain, too, or by Spanish scholars, with humour becoming more and more visible in the titles, such as those of Mateo (1995a), Díaz-Pérez (2004), Fuentes (2000), Martínez Sierra (2008) and MartínezTejerina (2016).

Recommended reading Attardo, Salvatore, ed. 2017. The Routledge Handbook of Language and Humor. London: Routledge. A fundamental introduction to Humour Studies and verbally expressed humour, whose author is a major reference in the field. Martínez Sierra, Juan José, and Patrick Zabalbeascoa, eds. 2017. “The Translation of Humour/La traducción del humor.” MonTI 9. It includes state of the art research in the field of HTS, and although its scope and contributions are clearly international there is an important number of studies by Spanish scholars about Spanishlanguage case studies, and some of them are written in Spanish. Zabalbeascoa, Patrick. 2005. “Humor and Translation – an Interdiscipline.” Humor 18 (2): 185–207. A much-cited article that makes a clear case in favour of Humour Studies and Translation Studies working for each other, both to exchange insights and to help gain visibility and prestige in academia.

Notes 1 An important development in the mid-nineties that helps to understand historical milestones in HTS is the sudden growth in the number of Spanish universities offering degrees in translator training. The effect this had on research was to create an alternative centre of gravity and to influence the research agenda, changing the sole presence of Spain’s traditional philological departments by adding the newly created departments of translation. 2 The dissertation presents a theoretical model for accounting for translations based on distributing translational factors according to whether they can best be seen as priorities or restrictions. Arrangements of priorities and restrictions are variable and context sensitive, potentially unique for some translations, while accepting that certain arrangements might be recurrent for a large number of cases. 3 Martínez Sierra entertains serious doubts about the social satire in The Simpsons, since the series seems to reproduce the same system, American society, which it appears to criticise, thus showing a two-faced attitude that this researcher relates to commercial reasons – the purpose being to attract as large an audience as possible not just in the US but abroad (2008, 126, 191).

Works cited Attardo, Salvatore. 2002. “Translation and Humour.” The Translator 8 (2): 173–94. Botella Tejera, Carla M. 2006. “La naturalización del humor en TAV: ¿Traducción o adaptación? El caso de los doblajes de Gomaespuma: Ali G Indahouse.” Tonos Digital 12. Braga Riera, Jorge. 2009a. La traducción al inglés de las comedias del Siglo de Oro. Madrid: Editorial Fundamentos, Colección Arte. ———. 2009b. Classical Spanish Drama in Restoration English (1600–1700). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Campos Pardillo, Miguel Ángel. 1992. “Las dificultades de traducir el humor: Astérix le Gaulois/Asterix the Gaul/Asterix el Galo.” Babel Afial: Aspectos de filología inglesa y alemana 1: 102–23. Chiaro, Delia. 1992. The Language of Jokes: Analysing Verbal Play. London: Routledge.

153

Marta Mateo and Patrick Zabalbeascoa ———. 2005. “Foreword. Verbally Expressed Humor and Translation: An Overview of a Neglected Field.” Humor 18 (2): 135–45. ———. 2010a. “Translation and Humour, Humour and Translation.” In Translation, Humour and Literature, edited by Delia Chiaro, 1–29. London: Continuum. ———, ed. 2010b. Translation, Humour and the Media. London: Continuum. Corral, Irene del. 1988. “Humor: When Do We Lose It?” Translation Review 27: 25–7. Davies, Christie. 1990. Ethnic Humour Around the World. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Delabastita, Dirk, ed. 1996. Wordplay and Translation: Special Issue of ‘The Translator’ 2 (2). Manchester: St Jerome. Díaz-Cintas, Jorge. 1998. “The Dubbing and Subtitling into Spanish of Woody Allen’s Manhattan Murder Mystery.” Linguistica Antverpiensia 32: 55–71. ———. 2001a. “The Value of the Semiotic Dimension in the Subtitling of Humour.” In Aspects of Specialised Translation, edited by Lucile Desblache, 181–91. Paris: La Maison du Dictionnaire. ———. 2001b. “Aspectos semióticos en la subtitulación de situaciones cómicas.” In Trasvases culturales: literatura, cine, traducción 3, edited by Eterio Pajares, Raquel Merino, and José M. Santamaría, 119–30. Vitoria-Gasteiz: Universidad del País Vasco. ———. 2003. Teoría y práctica de la subtitulación. Barcelona: Ariel. Díaz-Cintas, Jorge, and Aline Remael. 2007. Audiovisual Translation: Subtitling. Manchester: St Jerome. Díaz Pérez, Francisco Javier. 1999. “Translating Wordplay: Lewis Carroll in Galician and Spanish.” In Translation and teh (Re)location of Meaning, edited by Jeroen Vandaele, 357–73. Leuven: CETRA. ———. 2004. “Playing with Words in Translation: Translating English Puns into Spanish.” In A World of English, a World of Translation, edited by Francisco J. Díaz Pérez and A. M. Ortega Cebreros, 47–67. Jaén: Universidad de Jaén. ———. 2008. “Wordplay in Film Titles: Translating English Puns into Spanish.” Babel 54 (1): 36–58. ———. 2014. “Relevance Theory and Translation: Translating Puns in Spanish Film Titles into English.” Journal of Pragmatics 70: 108–29. Espasa Borrás, Eva. 1995. “Humour in Translation: Joe Orton’s the Ruffian on the Stair and Its Catalan and Valencian Versions.” In Translation and the Manipulation of Discourse, edited by Peter Jansen, 39–54. Leuven: CETRA. ———. 2001. La traducció dalt de l’escenari. Vic: Eumo Editorial, Biblioteca de Traducció i Interpretació, 6. Fuentes Luque, Adrián. 2000. “La recepción del humor audiovisual traducido: estudio comparativo de fragmentos de las versiones doblada y subtitulada de la película Duck Soup, de los hermanos Marx.” PhD diss., Universidad de Granada. ———. 2001. “Estudio empírico sobre la recepción del humor audiovisual.” In Traducción subordinada (II): El subtitulado, edited by Lourdes Lorenzo and Ana M. Pereira, 69–84. Vigo: Publicacións da Universidade de Vigo. ———. 2010. “On the (Mis/Over/Under) Translation of the Marx Brothers’ Humour.” In Translation, Humour and the Media, edited by Delia Chiaro, 175–92. London: Continuum. Gillies, Eva. 1997. “¿El humor es traducible?” Alba de América: Revista Literaria 15: 352–9. González Vera, Pilar. 2010. “The Translation of Recent Digital Animated Movies: The Case of DreamWorks’ Films Antz, Shrek and Shrek 2 and Shark Tale.” PhD diss., Universidad de Zaragoza. Grice, H. Paul. 1975. “Logic and Conversation.” Syntax and Semantics 3, Speech Acts 41–58. Hirsch, Galia. 2011. “Explicitations and Other Types of Shifts in the Translation of Irony and Humour.” Target 23 (2): 178–205. Holmes, James. 1988. “The Name and Nature of Translation Studies.” In Translated! Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies, edited by J. S. Holmes, 67–80. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Kruger, Jan-Louis, and Agnieszka Szarkowska and Izabela Krejtz. 2015. “Subtitles on the moving image: an overview of eye tracking studies.” Refractory: A Journal of Entertainment Media, 25: 1–14. Lorenzo, Lourdes, and Ana María Pereira, eds. 2003. Traducción subordinada (II): El subtitulado. Vigo: Publicacións da Universidade de Vigo. Martínez Sierra, Juan José. 2006. “La manipulación del texto: sobre la dualidad extranjerización/familiarización en la traducción del humor en textos audiovisuales.” Sendebar 17: 219–31. ———. 2008. Humor y traducción. Los Simpson cruzan la frontera. Castelló: Universitat Jaume I. ———. 2009. “The Relevance of Humour in Audio Description.” inTRAlinea. Online Translation Journal 11. www.intralinea.org/archive/article/The_Relevance_of_Humour_in_Audio_Description.

154

Translation and humour Martínez Tejerina, Anjana. 2008. “La traducción para el doblaje del humor basado en la polisemia.” PhD diss., Universidad de Alicante. ———. 2016. El doblaje de los juegos de palabras. Barcelona: UOC. Mateo, Marta. 1995a. La traducción del humor. Las comedias inglesas en español. Oviedo: Universidad de Oviedo. ———. 1995b. “The Translation of Irony.” META, Journal de traducteurs/Translators’ Journal, 40e anniversaire 40 (1): 171–8. ———. 1998. “Communicating and Translating Irony: The Relevance of Non-Verbal Elements.” Linguistica Antverpiensia XXXII: 113–28. ———. 2010a. “Translating Humphry Clinker’s Verbal Humour.” In Translation, Humour and Literature, edited by Delia Chiaro, 171–95. London: Continuum. ———. 2010b. “El juego pragmático como eje del humor de Oscar Wilde en inglés y en español.” In Lengua, traducción, recepción: en honor de Julio César Santoyo/Language, Translation, Reception: To Honour Julio César Santoyo, edited by Rosa Rabadán, Trinidad Guzmán, and Marisa Fernández, 323–56. León: Universidad de León, Área de Publicaciones. Mendiluce, Gustavo, and Ana I. Hernández. 2004. “Este traductor no es un gallina: El trasvase del humor audiovisual en Chicken Run.” Translation Journal 8 (3). http://translationjournal.net/journal/29audio. htm. ———. 2005. “Hacia una imagen más seria de la traducción del humor audiovisual.” In Calidad y traducción. Perspectivas académicas y profesionales, edited by Maria Elena García, Antonio González, Claudia Kunschak, and Patricia Scarampi. Madrid: Universidad Europea (CD-rom sin paginar). Mogorrón Huerta, Pedro. 2010. “Traduire l’humour dans des films français doublés en espagnol.” Meta 55 (1): 71–87. Muñoz Calvo, Micaela, and Carmina Buesa-Gómez. 2010. “Ils son fous ces traducteurs! La traducción del humor en cómics de Astérix.” In Lengua, traducción, recepción: en honor de Julio César Santoyo/ Language, Translation, Reception: To Honour Julio César Santoyo, edited by Rosa Rabadán, Trinidad Guzmán, and Marisa Fernández, 419–76. Leon: Universidad de León, Área de Publicaciones. Nash, Walter. 1985. The Language of Humour: Style and Technique in Comic Discourse. London: Longman. Nord, Christiane. 2003. “Proper Names in Translations for Children: Alice in Wonderland as a Case in Point.” Meta 48 (1–2): 182–96. Ptaszynski, Marcin. 2004. “On the (un)Translatability of Jokes.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 12 (3): 176–93. Raphaleson-West, Debra S. 1989. “On the Feasibility and Strategies of Translating Humor.” Meta 34 (1): 128–41. Raskin, Victor. 1985. Semantic Mechanisms of Humor. Dordrecht: D. Reidel. Reiss, Katarina, and Hans Vermeer. 1984. Groundwork for a General Theory of Translation. Tubingen: Niemeyer. Rojo López, Ana. 2002. “Frame Semantics and the Translation of Humour.” Babel 48 (1): 34–77. ———. 2009. “A  Cognitive Approach to the Translation of Metonymy-based Humor.” Across Languages and Cultures 10 (1): 63–83. Rox Barasoain, María. 2008. “The Films of Pedro Almodóvar: Translation and Reception in the United States.” PhD diss., Universidad de León. Santoyo, Julio César. 1987. “Translatable and Untranslatable Comedy: The Case of English and Spanish.” Estudios Humanísticos. Filología 9: 11–18. Sopeña-Balordi, Amalia. 1985. “Bretecher ‘a la española’ ou le rejet d’une homéogreffe.” Contrastes. Revue International de Linguistique Contrastive (décember): 237–53. ———. 1993. “Les composantes culturelles de l’humour à la télévision sont-elles exportables?” Contrastes. Revue International de Linguistique Contrastive, mai 26: 121–30. Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. 1995. Relevance: Communication and Cognition, Second Edition. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Toury, Gideon. 1980. In Search of a Theory of Translation. Tel Aviv: The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics, Tel Aviv University. Valdeón, Roberto. 2010a. “Dynamic Versus Static Discourse: Will & Grace and Its Spanish Dubbed Version.” In Translation, Humour and the Media, edited by Delia Chiaro, 238–49. London: Continuum. ———. 2010b. “Schemata, Scripts and the Gay Issue in Contemporary Dubbed Sitcoms.” Target 22 (1): 71–93.

155

Marta Mateo and Patrick Zabalbeascoa Vandaele, Jeroen. 2001. “Si sérieux s’abstenir: Le discours sur l’humour traduit.” Target 13 (1): 29–44. ———. 2002. “Introduction. (Re-)Constructing Humour: Meanings and Means.” The Translator 8 (2): 149–72. ———. 2010. “Humor in Translation.” In vol. 1 of Handbook of Translation Studies, edited by Y. Gambier and Van Doorslaer, 147–52. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ———. 2015. Estados de Gracia: Billy Wilder y la censura franquista (1946–1975). Leiden: Brill/ Rodopi. Zabalbeascoa, Patrick. 1993. “Developing Translation Studies to Better Account for Audiovisual Texts and Other New Forms of Text Production.” PhD diss., Universitat de Lleida. ———. 1994. “Factors in Dubbing Television Comedy.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 1: 89–99. ———. 1996a.“Translating Jokes for Dubbed Television Situation Comedies.” The Translator 2 (2): 235–57. ———. 1996b. “La traducción de la comedia televisiva: implicaciones teóricas.” In A Spectrum of Translation Studies, edited by Jose M. Bravo and Purificación Fernández Nistal, 173–201. Valladolid: Universidad de Valladolid. ———. 2000a. “La traducción del humor de Woody Allen o el arte de dominar la sutileza y la ironía.” Traducción subordinada (i) El doblaje (inglés-español/gallego), edited by Lourdes Lorenzo and Ana M. Pereira, 115–26. Vigo: Universidad de Vigo. ———. 2000b. “Contenidos para adultos en el género infantil: el caso del doblaje de Walt Disney.” Literatura infantil y juvenil: tendencias actuales en investigación. edited by Lourdes Lorenzo and Ana M. Pereira, 19–30. Vigo: Universidad de Vigo. ———. 2005. “Humor and Translation – an Interdiscipline.” Humor 18 (2): 185–207. ———. 2010a. “Woody Allen’s Themes Through His Films, and His Films Through Their Translations.” In Translation, Humour and the Media, edited by Delia Chiaro, 153–75. London: Continuum. ———. 2010b. “La oralidad perdida: o cuando el texto escrito es más oral que el audiovisual. El caso de Trainspotting.” In Construir, deconstruir y reconstruir: mímesis y traducción de la oralidad y la afectividad, edited by Gemma Andújar and Jenny Brumme, 98–115. Berlin: Frank & Timme.

156

9 PEDAGOGY OF TRANSLATION Dorothy Kelly

Introduction Recently, Zanettin, Saldanha and Harding (2015), in a bibliographic study on the evolution of shifts in research interests and foci over the years, claim that translator and interpreter training as a research category is in decline, although still an important area of work in our field. In another bibliometric study, in contrast, Yan, Pan and Wang (2015) offer data indicating an underlying increase, albeit uneven, in the number of articles published on translator and interpreting training between 2000 and 2012; the field represents 323 of a total of 2274 papers in the ten journals they studied, that is, 14%. The birth in 2007 of a journal devoted exclusively to the field, the Interpreter and Translator Trainer, at St Jerome and since 2014 at Routledge, would also tend to indicate that interest and activity has not waned to any great extent. This is especially the case in Spain, which is quoted in Yan, Pan and Wang’s paper as the most productive country in the field, with 18.36% of their entire database (only of journal articles), and with four of the top ten institutions in production also being Spanish: the Autonomous University of Barcelona, the University of Granada, Jaume I University (Castellón) and Rovira I Virgili University (Tarragona) in first, second, third and tenth positions respectively. Translator training, education or pedagogy is still therefore very much on the agenda of Translation Studies in Spain in particular. In this article I shall attempt to address what has made Spanish institutions and their research groups world leaders in research productivity in this field, starting from a review of the beginnings of translator education in Spain, of the underlying assumptions on which it has been based, and how the field has grown from there into a consolidated discipline. Mention will also be made of the situation in other Spanishspeaking countries, where the discipline has been much slower to take root.

A brief terminological consideration This article is entitled “pedagogy of translation”, only one of the terms used to designate the study of how people become translators in structured, normally university-based, programmes. The terms which most appear in Zanettin, Saldahna and Harding’s study mentioned previously as categories or as keywords are pedagogy (used by BITRA),1 training (used in TSA),2 teaching, education, and related terms such as translation or translator competence. 157

Dorothy Kelly

Behind this diversity in terms lie ideological differences in approach, together with influence from other languages. In Spain, the favoured term has long been didáctica de la traducción, although it has been questioned over the past fifteen or twenty years with the rise of socioconstructive theories rejecting teacher-centred approaches such as those which may be implied by the term didáctica (see e.g. Kiraly 2000). In English translator training may be considered the preferred term, although again those closest to the socio-constructivist school of thought prefer translator education, since training is seen as a transmissionist approach, centred on the teacher and leaving only a passive role for the learner. Let us understand pedagogy as an umbrella term, although in this chapter, training and education will also be used, to reflect schools of thought and for ease of expression.

Translator education programmes at Spanish-speaking universities: a brief history The study of how translators are educated has had an enormous importance in our field, for many reasons. There can be little doubt that the huge weight of research into training in Translation Studies has been due to a large extent to the growth of the translation market in the second half of the twentieth century and the subsequent need for professionals qualified to cover the increasingly specialized need for international multilingual communication. ­Lagging somewhat behind the appearance of the demand – as tends to happen in academic institutions – a plethora of new centres, schools, departments and programmes devoted to the training of translators and interpreters has appeared since the 1960s, although the oldest recorded university degree programmes date back to the 1930s (Moscow, Heidelberg, Geneva. . .) (Caminade and Pym 1998; Kelly and Martin 2009). Today, the Observatory kept by the Intercultural Studies research group at Rovira i Virgili University for EST (www.est-translationstudies.org/ resources/tti/tti.htm), even though not fully updated, has in excess of 400 entries in its databases of schools and programmes. In contrast, at the recent launch of the World Interpreter and Translator Training Association (WITTA: http://english.gdufs.edu.cn/Item/88579.aspx) it was commented that in China alone, there are now over 300 Master’s level programmes and over 250 Bachelor’s level programmes. It is interesting to follow the evolution of the setting up of new programmes in each national context, and to observe how waves of programmes come into being often due to political events or decisions at national level. This is clearly the case in Spain, currently with thirty-two entries in the Observatory, where initial interest in training translators arose around the country’s entry in 1986 into the then European Economic Community, today European Union. Until then, only three programmes had existed at Spanish universities, all of them outside the mainstream of the five-year undergraduate degree programmes (licenciaturas) of the time. The Complutense University of Madrid set up a one-year postgraduate programme in Translation in 1972, at a time when Spanish universities did not have official Master’s programmes. The Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona set up a three-year undergraduate Diploma programme in the same year, which took several years to receive official recognition, and the University of Granada converted its Language Centre into a School for Translators and Interpreters, also with a three-year Diploma, in 1979, receiving official recognition one year later. No further programmes were set up until 1988, when the University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria established a third School for Translators and Interpreters at Diploma level. Recruitment of professionals for the European institutions required a full five-year undergraduate licenciatura, meaning that those Diplomates who had received specialized training were unable to apply, and the posts were filled on the whole by Licenciates in Modern Languages or other disciplines with no specialized training. The 158

Pedagogy of translation

European institutions have come up against this problem time and again when recruiting new translators for newly acceding countries, to the extent that after the enormous problems they encountered post the 2004 enlargement from fifteen to twenty-five (later twenty-seven and then twenty-eight) members, the Directorate-General for Translation launched the European Master’s in Translation project with the aim of ensuring sufficient numbers of appropriately trained professionals in all EU and candidate countries. The implementation in the early 1990s of the full undergraduate Licenciatura en Traducción e Interpretación was a major step forward for Spanish translating and interpreting programmes, although not without its drawbacks, which we shall now analyze in some detail,3 as the structure and presuppositions on which it was based have had a profound impact on academic thinking regarding translator education, and are for the most part reproduced quite unquestioningly still today after the (on paper) full implementation of European Higher Education Area as a result of the Bologna Process to which we will return later.

The context The Spanish university system has historically been highly centralized, following the French tradition. In the 1990s, this implied the existence of a national ‘catalogue’ of recognized undergraduate degree courses; for each of these the Ministry centrally established core content (usually around 40%) which had to be present in all courses run by Spanish universities offering each particular degree. Individual programme structures, based on this core content, required ministerial approval in order to run. The system was traditionally content (declarative knowledge)-based, with no requirement for objectives to be made explicit, or for other kinds of competences to be developed by university courses. The system used credits as a measuring unit but, unlike other credit-based systems, at the time the Spanish credit was counted exclusively in terms of face-to-face class contact time, and defined as 10 hours’ teaching, with only limited potential to account for other activities. This conviction that learning essentially only took place while in a traditional frontal teaching situation meant that the average 300-credit programme (in the case of Translation normally taught over four years with only few exceptions taking five) was subdivided into seventyfive credits per year; students were in face-to-face classroom teaching situations on average twenty-five hours per week, leaving little time for individual work, practice translation, background reading, group work and other learning activities. It is also pertinent to indicate as part of this contextualization that the only degrees offered at the time in Spain relating to languages were traditional five-year Philology (language and literature) programmes, three-year primary teacher-training diplomas for future primary teachers specializing in language teaching, a two-year second cycle degree in Linguistics, and this full four-year programme in Translating and Interpreting. This situation meant that the onus of non-traditional or applied language training in general was tacitly (never explicitly) laid on the discipline of Translation, which inevitably had to deal with an enormous demand from students who did not necessarily want to become translators or interpreters, but rather sought preparation for professional applications of languages in general (in other countries, Applied Languages and similar degrees). It became clear that not taking this factor into account in the design of the core curriculum was (is) problematic, leading to over-specialization which many universities offering Translation degrees were (are) loath to admit. The core curriculum of the time merits analysis as it reflects the often unspoken givens in the collective national understanding of what Translation and Interpreting are, the relation between the two, what the professions demand and how academia should meet those demands. 159

Dorothy Kelly

Core curriculum 1st cycle Documentary Research for Translation

4 credits (40 hours)

Language A (official institutional language/s)

8 credits (80 hours)

Language B (first foreign language, taken from an advanced level)

12 credits (120 hours)

Language C (second foreign language, taken from scratch in many cases)

12 credits (120 hours)

Linguistics Applied to Translation

6 credits (60 hours)

Theory and Practice of Translation

6 credits (60 hours)

2nd cycle Computing Applied to Translation

4 credits (40 hours)

Techniques for Consecutive Interpreting

8 credits (80 hours)

Techniques for Simultaneous Interpreting

8 credits (80 hours)

Terminology

8 credits (80 hours)

Specialized Translation

20 credits (200 hours)

General Translation C-A

10 credits (100 hours)

Total compulsory core elements 48 + 58 = 106 (35% of 300 credits) Figure 9.1  Core curriculum for Translating and Interpreting degrees in Spain 1993

The core curriculum established in the early 1990s constituted the compulsory elements for all degrees in Translating and Interpreting and still today reflects to a large extent the underlying structure of Translating and Interpreting programmes around the country. The underlying assumptions of this structure are many and varied and have an inevitable impact on how translators are still being trained today in Spain. Given their importance, a brief summary of these is listed here. (See Pym 2000; Mayoral Asensio 2001a for alternative comment on this training model.) Languages: it is assumed that students require two working languages other than their “mother tongue” (see Kelly et al. 2003 for a discussion of the complexity of this concept in translator education). Mayoral Asensio (ibid.) comments that this is probably a leftover from the time when most professional translators trained to work in international organizations, where requirements were for at least two foreign languages. This assumption is very probably not relevant to much of today’s professional translation where English occupies up to 80% of the market in some contexts (see e.g. Common Sense Advisory www.commonsenseadvisory. com) and where only a minimal proportion of graduates will ever work in an international organization. 160

Pedagogy of translation

The languages were classified according to the AIIC A-B-C scale (whereby A  refers to native language/s, B active acquired language/s, and C passive acquired language/s), but applied here to the institution, not to individual students, thus giving rise to complex linguistic combinations for a growing body of both home and international students. In bilingual regions, such as Catalonia, Valencia, the Basque Country or Galicia, two A languages were and still are offered, but nowhere has a foreign language been offered as A (following practice in European schools such as Geneva in Switzerland or Germersheim in Germany), despite the enormous demand from, for example, Arabic-speaking students in Spain for this kind of option. These students simply had – and still have – to fit into the fiction that Spanish, or Catalan, Basque or Galician, is their A language. In the Spanish secondary school system, normally only one language is taught to any degree of proficiency, and the languages on offer are limited essentially to English and French; this means that C languages at the time and still today must normally be learnt from scratch, thus necessitating simultaneous acquisition of language and translation competence. This may also be said often to be the case of B languages, in which many students entering courses had and have only intermediate levels, particularly in those (few) cases where languages other than English and French are offered as B. Theoretical content: the core curriculum obliged all universities to include theoretical content in both Linguistics and Translation Studies at an early stage of training, with no obligation to return to theory later on in the course, after practical translation experience had been acquired. This reflects the widespread belief in Spanish academia in the deductive approach that learning begins with theory which is then applied to practice. Much educational research today would question this (see, e.g. Biggs 2011), suggesting that inductive approaches are more efficient, something which is not reflected on the whole in Spanish study programmes. Recent, and very welcome, reconciliation between Linguistics and Translation as disciplines has meant that the original debate over whether or not Linguistics should be included on programmes has now all but disappeared, although discussion continues between departments as to which aspects of the broad and complex discipline of Linguistics should be included, with linguists often defending subdisciplines such as Phonetics, as opposed to Translation Studies preferences for Text Linguistics or Pragmatics. Translating and/or Interpreting: probably the most controversial aspect of this core curriculum was the joint nature of the degree, not only imposing at least basic training in Interpreting for all, but also calling the degree “Translating and Interpreting”. This was felt to be excessive and unnecessary by much of the TI community in Spain, and in particular by Interpreting specialists, especially because the two areas of Interpreting included in the core (consecutive and simultaneous) were highly specialized and did not coincide with what could be considered basic oral skills for professional translators. General and specialized translation: distinction was made between general and specialized translation without further definition of what “general” meant, or how specialized translation skills should be. The underlying assumption was (is) that general translation is easier than specialized translation, an unproven assumption many professional translators would question, if by “general texts” or “general translation” we mean the translation of literary or media texts, as is often the case. I have argued elsewhere (Kelly 2005, 62, 122–7) that even highly specialized texts from fields such as medicine or engineering may be easier to translate than highly culture-bound, expressive texts, often referred to as “general”. There is some consensus regarding the kinds of text best used in the initial stages of translator training (highly conventionalized or standardized, short, and meaningful to the learner, for example; see Kelly 2000b), 161

Dorothy Kelly

and “general” is definitely not the best description that can be found for them. (See Hurtado Albir 1996b for further comment.) Instrumental competences: the core was highly innovative in its day in including instrumental skills at the time infrequent on translation courses in other countries, although today much more commonplace. Most specialists were in strong agreement with their presence; disagreement arose, however, with regard to how that presence should be organized and in which order. Computing was surprisingly placed in the second cycle, for example, despite the obvious need for computing skills in any modern documentary research process in translation, skills which were situated in the first cycle. Documentary Research was separated from Terminology, despite the fact that much documentary research carried out by translators is essentially terminological in its purpose. In most universities, there was no link established among these three areas or between them and practical translation and interpreting activities. This was often due to academic organizational structures assigning course units to different departments, in a system with little or no tradition of intra-, let alone inter-departmental coordination. Directionality: The detailed descriptors of the curriculum established that translation between A and B languages had to be bi-directional. It is not clear on which assumption this requirement was based: it may have been tacit recognition of the need for translation into B languages on the professional market, although in the light of attitudes to directionality in Spain, it is more likely to have been a reflection of the traditional belief that translating into a foreign language is a good way of improving language skills. Whatever the reason, all students were thus required to reach a certain level in A-B translation. In some universities, this was extended to C languages also (probably further indication that A-B/C translation was included essentially as a language acquisition exercise, if we remember that C languages were learnt from scratch, or if we return to the AIIC definition of C languages as purely passive in professional practice). The result, however, is that training included at least two translational directions, probably rendering it richer and more complete. The decline in demand for traditional language and literature programmes in Spain and the lack of alternative applied approaches to the study of languages in academia meant that the new licenciatura became instantly attractive to university management, often as a means to ensure student demand and to re-deploy teaching staff in language departments with too few students to be viable; thus by the mid-1990s there were some twenty-five full degree programmes running with an estimated 7,000 to 8,000 students at any given time, a figure far above the national market’s capacity to absorb professionals (Pym 2000) and thus leading to a counterproductive de-professionalization of programmes (Calvo 2009). The implementation of the Bologna Process in Spain (which took place later than in most European countries) was accompanied by the disappearance of the national catalogue of degree programmes and of compulsory core content at national level, a measure of freedom for universities which could have led to profound rethinking of programme design. During early preparation for the implementation of the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) in the early 2000s, the paradoxical situation of Translation programmes described previously, perhaps aptly summed up by the Spanish expression morir de éxito (to die of success), was debated at length by the Spanish Standing Conference of Translation and Interpreting Departments and Faculties (CCDUTI) and the committee charged with the drafting of a ‘white paper’ for the new undergraduate programme (Libro Blanco del Título de Grado en Traducción e Interpretación, Muñoz Raya 2004). Despite some heated discussion during the process, the outcome was a unanimous vote to maintain a four-year programme in ‘general translation skills’, including basic interpreting skills, and avoiding any major re-design in relation to the critical points mentioned previously (Calvo Encinas et al. 2008; Morón Martín 2009); what is 162

Pedagogy of translation

more, the professional profiles of graduates included that of language teacher. In parallel, the committee charged with studying language programmes in general concluded that graduates of general Language, Literature, Culture and Civilization study programmes should also be able to work as translators and language mediators. In short, the huge opportunity for renewal and enhancement of the academic offer in the broad field of languages in Spain after a loosening up of centralized regulation4 met with a strong conservative reaction and ended up maintaining the status quo. There continues to be a profound rift between language and Translation programmes, a huge gap in the academic offer in applied language skills, and the risk of overqualification and hence under-employment of graduates in Translation has not been addressed (see also Pym 2000; Pym et al. 2013). Undergraduate (Grado) programmes co-exist with an increasing number of Master’s level programmes which attempt to fulfil the dual objective of offering training in advanced Translation skills for graduates of Translation and Interpreting programmes and basic training in translation or – less often – interpreting skills for graduates in other fields. Of course, some of the aspects of the core curriculum outlined here have been reformed within the framework of the European Higher Education Area: courses are defined in terms of core competences, derived from objectives, and approaches are at least nominally more student/learner-orientated. For further analysis see Kelly (2017). From a curricular perspective, if we turn to the two ‘quality seals’ existing for degree programmes, at European level four Spanish Master’s programmes currently belong to the European Master’s in Translation network set up under the auspices of the European Commission to promote quality training programmes at advanced level in Europe. At international level, in the Conférence Internationale Permanente d’Instituts Universitaires de Traducteurs et d’Interprètes (CIUTI), surprisingly only three Spanish-speaking institutions, all of them from Spain, appear amongst its members. In the midst of this rather conservative institutional context, however, it is important to note that many members of the teaching staff have managed to design very innovative syllabuses and to situate themselves at the forefront of educational innovation in our discipline; indeed, much of the most advanced work on translator training in recent years has been produced in Spain as a result of intensive research into the acquisition of translator competence. I shall return to these nuclei of research into translation pedagogy in the following. There is no doubt that national reforms and the existence of this centralized system led to much debate in academia, and hence probably lie at the heart of the leading role played by Spanish institutions and researchers in this field. In the next two sections, an overview is offered of the work carried out by the major research centres around Spain. After this fairly detailed analysis of the situation in Spain, as the country with the most university programmes in the field, let us turn to Spanish-speaking America, where Translation and Interpreting programmes are – with notable exceptions such as the Colegio de México or the National University of Córdoba in Argentina – more recent and less common on the university scene. In fact, the EST Observatory mentioned previously includes only forty-seven programmes in nine countries, compared to the thirty-two entries for Spain alone. Argentina and Colombia have sixteen and fourteen entries respectively, Chile six, Mexico five, Guatemala two, and Costa Rica, Cuba, Uruguay and Venezuela one each. Whilst recognizing the need to update the resource (and the huge and complex effort it involves), the data are indicative of an enormous diversity in approaches to translator education in the Latin American context, with one-, two-, three-, four- and five-year undergraduate programmes and one-year, three-semester and two-year postgraduate level, and a strong emphasis on training for sworn or certified translation (traductorado público). Although the older programmes have a long 163

Dorothy Kelly

tradition, for example, in the case of the degree of Traductor Público at the School of Law of the University of Uruguay (today Universidad de la República, Montevideo) going back to 1855, the majority of programmes have arisen in the 1990s and 2000s.

Publications on and for training The number of publications in translator and interpreter training has grown over recent years and the participation of Spanish authors has been considerable. Publications include monographs, conference proceedings, collective volumes, journal articles, but also what is often referred to as “grey literature”. This last category is unfortunately often difficult to access, but extremely rich in reflections on teaching and learning in our field. The procedures in place for the promotion of teaching staff in the Spanish university system have led to an enormous effort to produce teaching projects and materials, the vast majority of which are not publicly available. Fortunately, this is not always the case, and authors such as Díaz Fouces (1999) have published handbooks and textbooks based on them. Spanish publishers such as Ariel, Cátedra, Comares or Atrio have specialized collections in Translation including textbooks and research monographs on training. With no presumption of exhaustiveness, textbooks of interest are those published over the years by Elena García (University of Salamanca 2001a, 2001b), Tricás Preckler (Universitat Pompeu Fabra 2009), Zaro Vera and Truman (University of Málaga 2008), Pascua Febles et al. (University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria 2003), San Ginés Aguilar and Ortega Arjonilla (Universities of Granada and Málaga 1997), Borja Albí (Universitat Jaume I 2000), Jiménez Serrano (University of Granada 2016), Orozco Jutorán (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona 2012), and Roiss (University of Salamanca 2008), covering a wide range of types of translation and levels from introductory courses to specialized courses in legal, scientific or technical translation. The Translation Practices series at St  Jerome, a collection of practical guides for use in formal and non-formal learning situations, is a testimony to the wealth of work in pedagogy carried out in Spain, as it includes titles on legal translation, medical translation, audiovisual translation and trainer training authored by researchers at Spanish universities or Spanish researchers in the diaspora. See in particular Alcaraz Varo and Hughes (2001), Mayoral Asensio (2003), Kelly (2005), Montalt Resurrección and González Davies (2006), Díaz Cintas and Remael (2007), Romero Fresco (2011) and Chaume Varela (2012). Spanish journals such as Sendebar, Trans, Hermeneus, Quaderns, and Puentes, published by the Universities of Granada, Málaga, Valladolid, Autònoma de Barcelona and Granada, respectively, have published quite extensively on training issues. For some time María José Varela of the University of Málaga edited an online journal devoted to training, Redit. Authors affiliated to Spanish institutions and Spanish researchers working abroad frequently publish in the only indexed journal devoted entirely to training issues, the Interpreter and Translator Trainer originally edited by Catherine Way and Dorothy Kelly (both at Granada) at St Jerome and now co-edited by Dorothy Kelly and María González Davies (Ramón Llull, Barcelona) at Routledge, a further indication of the strength of the field in Spain.

Pedagogical approaches and research It is, of course, natural that research and academic debate should inform pedagogical approaches, and this has indeed been the case over the years, with an important presence of Spanish researchers especially from the late 1980s on. In this section Spanish authors working in major international trends are identified and a brief outline is offered of the output of 164

Pedagogy of translation

the main research groups. Given the enormous number of publications and the tremendous diversity in subjects addressed under the very broad heading of pedagogy, I make no claim to exhaustive coverage in terms of authors or their work. Only illustrative references are given here in an attempt to present the wealth of work produced and ongoing. Readers are encouraged to refer to further works by the researchers identified in each approach or thematic area. One of the first authors to propose the application of modern pedagogical principles to translator training was Jean Delisle (1980, 1993, 1998), trained in the théorie du sens tradition; his work in France and Canada centres on the concept of teaching objectives, a forerunner after a fashion of the outcomes- or competence-based approach adopted by many university systems worldwide today, most recently by the European Bologna Process. In Spain, Delisle’s approach was very influential in early work by Amparo Hurtado Albir (1996a), then at the Universitat Jaume I in Castellón de la Plana and Allison Beeby (1996) at the Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona. Hurtado went on to found the PACTE research group at the Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona, one of the most productive of all those working in the field of translation pedagogy internationally and the most cited of the Spanish groups (Yan, Pan, and Wang 2015). The members of the group, under her leadership, have published extensively, both collectively and individually, on a wide range of issues relating to translator training: directionality, assessment, ICT, the use of introspection as a learning tool and so on.5 But in particular, the group has been devoted for almost two decades to a large-scale empirical-experimental investigation into the acquisition of translation competence, typifying its subcomponents, studying the relation between them, understanding the way in which the competence develops, and designing teaching materials and methods, the results of which have very recently been published in Hurtado (2017), and previously in, e.g. PACTE (2000, 2003, 2008). The group, currently composed of Allison Beeby, Olivia Fox, Anabel Galán Mañas, Gabriele Grauwinkel, Anna Kuznik (now at Wrocław in Poland), Gisela Massana-Roselló, Wilhelm Neunzig, Christian Olalla-Soler, Patricia Rodríguez-Inés, Lupe Romero and Stefanie Wimmer, is working on a first draft proposal for much-needed level descriptors following a methodology similar to the Common European Framework for Languages. The group has also organized a two-yearly international conference on translator pedagogy, didTRAD, since 2012 (http://grupsderecerca.uab.cat/pacte/es/content/didtrad-35). In particular, PACTE is well known for its model of translation competence, which has evolved over the years, and is understood as follows: the underlying system of knowledge necessary to translate. It is defined as an expert knowledge, and is above all procedural, that is not declarative, in nature; it is composed of several inter-related sub-competences and includes a strategic component which is of central importance. The competence is made up of five sub-competences: bilingual, extra-linguistic, knowledge about translation, instrumental and strategic, alongside psycho-physiological elements. (Rodríguez Inés 2013, my translation) This model has been used as the basis for much work on translator education both nationally and internationally. The empirical-experimental approach adopted by PACTE is shared by other members, both national and international, of the TREC thematic network for empirical and experimental research, a set of research groups who take an empirical and cognitive approach to research into translation, and who have been meeting on a regular basis at the initiative of PACTE for 165

Dorothy Kelly

some years now. In the Spanish-speaking world, the Gentt (Textual Genres for Translation) research group at the Universitat Jaume I de Castellón, the Petra (Pericia y Entorno en Traducción) research group at the University of Las Palmas, researchers at the University of Murcia and the Escuela Superior de Lenguas at the University of Aconcagua (Argentina) are members. The work of the Gentt (Textual Genres for Translation) research group based at the Universitat Jaume I de Castellón centres on the application of the concept of textual genre to the analysis of specialized communication from a multilingual perspective. The ten current members of the team, directed by Isabel García Izquierdo, are: Anabel Borja Albí, Pilar Civera, Pilar Ezpeleta, Silvia Gamero, Cristina García de Toro, Vicent Montalt Resurrección, Ana Muñoz, Teresa Molés Cases and Pilar Ordóñez López. Although this group’s major area of research is not translation pedagogy, amongst its objectives we find the application of the textual approach to teaching and its members have almost all published in the field, incorporating their textual approach to classroom activities, often in various areas of specialized translation, such as legal translation (Borja Albí 2000; Ordóñez López 2015), technical translation (Gamero 2001) and medical translation (Montalt and María González Davies 2006). The Universitat Jaume I de Castellón publishes a book series on pedagogy, entitled Aprender a traducir. Alongside the Gentt research group other authors such as Josep Marco Borillo (2004), Esther Monzó (2015), Amparo Alcina Caudet (2009), María Calzada Pérez (2007), and Amparo Jiménez Ivars (2012) have published on different approaches to and aspects of translator and interpreter education. The Petra Research Group was founded in 2001, and is currently based at the University of Las Palmas, where the principal investigator is Ricardo Muñoz. It aims to “contribute to track the behaviour of subjects when translating and to cross-reference it with their products”, and cites as one of the main threads of its activities “Empirical research of different aspects and phases of translation processes carried out by laypeople, trainees, professionals and experts, in order to grasp similarities and differences in their real ways, conditions, and results” [My emphasis]. See for example Muñoz Martín (2006) for their approach to pedagogy. Other researchers working within TREC in the Spanish-speaking world are Ana Rojo López (2015) at the University of Murcia, and Mónica Giozza and María del Mar Gatti (2009) at the University of Aconcagua (Argentina), all three of whom have published on cognitive processes in trainee translators. Functionalism and skopos theory born in Germany and Finland have informed much of the work by authors at the University of Granada, the second major centre for research into translation pedagogy in Spain. One of the most cited authors in the field from Granada is Roberto Mayoral Asensio (1999, 2001a, 2001b, 2003), who has published extensively on curricular design and the training of legal translators in particular. Similarly highly cited is the work of Dorothy Kelly, especially her Handbook for Translator Trainers (2005), where she adopts a curricular approach to translation pedagogy. Her model of translator competence (1999) derives from a critical analysis of pre-existing models, including PACTE’s and professional standards in various countries. It is a multi-componential model, but unlike PACTE’s, was developed specifically to serve as the basis for curricular design. As such, it has seven major components: communicative and textual competence, cultural and intercultural competence, professional and instrumental competence, thematic competence, pyscho-physiological components, interpersonal competence, all of which are governed by strategic competence. As well as curricular design, Kelly has also published extensively on intercultural competence and its development, in particular in international settings; directionality in translation pedagogy; assessment of learning; and trainer profiles and training, the latter forming the basis of

166

Pedagogy of translation

the document later developed by the European Master’s in Translation network, for which she was a member of the original expert group from 2006 to 2009. Kelly is the founder of the Avanti research group, which is today directed by Catherine Way. This research group has published extensively on translation pedagogy from various different perspectives: translator competence (Kelly 1999, 2002, 2005, 2007; Way 1997; Calvo Encinas and Morón Martín 2006); curricular design (Calvo Encinas 2009, 2011; Ilhami 2016; Gregorio Cano 2014; Kelly 2007); teaching specialized translation (Sánchez 1997, 2003; Soriano Barabino 2009, 2013, 2016; Vigier Moreno 2010; Way 2016); teaching translation into B (Kelly 2000a, Kelly et  al. 2003, 2006); situated learning (Calvo Encinas 2015); student self-confidence (Haro Soler Forthcoming); assessment (Nobs Federer 1997; Kelly 2005; Way 2006; Huertas Barros and Vine 2015); interculturality and the multicultural classroom (Mayoral Asensio and Kelly 1997; Tsokaktsidu 2003, 2005; Soriano García 2007, 2010; Morón Martín 2009; Morón Martín and Soriano Barabino 2005, 2015); student mobility (Soriano Barabino and Soriano García 2005; Kelly 2008a; Morón Martín 2009) and employability (Calvo Encinas, Morón Martín, and Kelly 2007; Vigier Moreno et al. 2007; Calvo Encinas et al. 2008). This group’s members are now active in various Spanish universities: Pablo de Olavide, Alcalá de Henares, and Málaga, as well as outside Spain: Thessaloniki, Texas, Beijing and Westminster. Also at the University of Granada the Greti research group has researched interpreter training under the leadership of Presentación Padilla and Anne Martin, with particular interest in public service interpreting (Abril Martí 2006) and information and communication technologies (ICT) in interpreter training (De Manuel Jerez 2006, De Manuel Jerez and Sandrelli 2007). A third group of researchers in Granada led by Dolores Olvera Lobo, including Bryan Robinson, Eva Muñoz Raya and more recently Juncal Gutiérrez Artacho, working at times in collaboration with members of Petra, has published on documentary research competence, professional approaches to pedagogy, use of ICT and collaborative learning. See for example Olvera Lobo et al. (2005, 2007, 2008, 2009). María González Davies at the University of Vic and later the Ramón Llull University (Barcelona) adopts a task-based approach to translator education based on communicative, humanistic and socio-constructivist principles. Of particular impact are her Multiple Voices in the Translation Classroom (2004), and her Step-by-Step Guide to Medical Translation (2006, co-authored with Vicent Montalt). Under her supervision, we find doctoral dissertations from a socio-constructive perspective such as that of Marcella La Rocca (2007), currently at the University of Salamanca. Finally, at Universitat Rovira I Virgili, the Intercultural Studies Group founded by Anthony Pym (currently at the University of Melbourne) is especially active in ICT, in trainer training and employability. The university has run a highly successful international doctoral programme which has produced a large number of doctoral dissertations on various aspects of translation pedagogy, including the description of a skills set to improve staff selection at international organizations (LaFeber 2012), or collaborative learning (Pavlovic 2007). Much as translation quality assessment in general continues to be a complex and controversial area of our discipline (House 1997; Maier 2000), so the assessment of student learning is underdeveloped in relation to other aspects of teaching and learning design. In Spain pioneering work in this area has been carried out by Waddingon (1999) at the Universidad Pontificia de Comillas, by Huertas Barros, Kelly and Way in Granada (see above), by Galán Mañas and Hurtado Albir in Barcelona (2015).

167

Dorothy Kelly

Similarly, although the object of increased interest in initial and continuing staff development, there is much to be done in the area of trainer training from very varied backgrounds and experiences. Early seminars were run in Granada by Mayoral Asensio, Kelly, Hurtado Albir and Delisle amongst others in the 1990s to meet demand from universities setting up new programmes at the time; Kelly (2005, 2008b) in Granada has later published on the issue (giving rise to the EMT paper on the subject) and the Consortium for Training Translation Teachers (http://isg.urv.es/cttt/cttt/cttt.html) coordinated by Anthony Pym while still at Tarragona ran seminars and a certificate programme from 2000 at various European universities, including his own and Granada in Spain. González Davies also ran the trainer seminars jointly with Kiraly in Barcelona for several years. And the Ibn Tibbon/Emuni international doctoral summer school on Translation Studies, with participation of the University of Granada, has included a section on translator education precisely with this aim in mind since 2012 (www. prevajalstvo.net/doctoral-summer-school). Reference should also be made to resources for training and in particular digital technologies, which are transversal to the various approaches mentioned. Interesting research has been carried out precisely into the innovative application of digital technologies to teaching and learning, rather than to translation practice (e.g. Bolaños Medina 2002; Bolaños Medina and Isern González 2012 at Las Palmas, Pym et al. 2003 at Tarragona, Rodríguez Inés 2008 or Galán Mañas 2009). Other universities with publications in the field of pedagogy are the University of Salamanca, with work by Roiss (1998, 2008), Weatherby (1998), Martín Ruano et al. (2013), Vidal Claramonte (2005) and Elena García (2001a, 2001b), mostly in the field of specialized (legal) translation and translation into B. University of Málaga researchers have published on training legal and medical translators (San Ginés Aguilar and Ortega Arjonilla 1997), and textbooks for introductory translation courses (Zaro Vera and Truman 2008). At the Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Zabalbeascoa has published on translator competence (1999). The University of Alcalá has specialized in the field of public service interpreting and translation under the leadership of Carmen Valero (see e.g. Valero Garcés and Toledano Buendía 2010). In conclusion, the existence of twenty-five undergraduate programmes and the recent growth in the number of postgraduate programmes around the country, and the concomitant need to develop pedagogical approaches which adapt well to the context, have clearly had a strong impact on the research interests in the field of Translating and, to a lesser extent, Interpreting at Spanish universities. It is to be hoped that the increase in the number of empirical studies being carried out to examine the results (learning outcomes) of the proposals made over the years will allow further enhancement of teaching methods, better educated professionals and, indirectly, higher status for professionals in an ever-evolving and ever more complex sector.

Notes 1 The Bibliografía de Interpretación y Traducción, managed by the University of Alicante. Available at: https://aplicacionesua.cpd.ua.es/tra_int/usu/buscar.asp 2 Translation Studies Abstracts, managed by St  Jerome until 2015, when it merged with Translation Studies Bibliography (TSB) at John Benjamins. 3 In this section I draw on previous work published in the Handbook for Translator Trainers (Kelly 2005) 4 Some regional governments, however, rapidly intervened to restrict university freedom in curricular design at regional level. 5 A full list of their publications is available at: http://grupsderecerca.uab.cat/pacte/.

168

Pedagogy of translation

References Abril Martí, María Isabel. 2006. “La Interpretación en los Servicios Públicos: Caracterización como género, contextualización y modelos de formación. Hacia unas bases para el diseño curricular.” Doctoral thesis, University of Granada. Alcaraz Varo, Enrique, and Brian Hughes. 2001. Legal Translation Explained. Manchester: St Jerome. Alcina Caudet, Amparo. 2009. “Teaching and Learning Terminology: New Strategies and Methods.” Terminology: International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Issues in Specialized Communication 15 (1): 1–9. Beeby, Allison. 1996. Teaching Translation from Spanish to English. Ottawa: University of Ottawa. Biggs, John. 2011. Teaching for Quality Learning at University: What the Student Does. 4th ed. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Bolaños Medina, Alicia. 2002. “Diseño y aplicación de un modelo didáctico innovador para la traducción de géneros digitales.” Doctoral thesis, University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. Bolaños Medina, Alicia, and Josep Isern González. 2012. “La actitud de los estudiantes hacia las herramientas de traducción asistida por ordenador y su influencia en el rendimiento.” Paper presented at I Congreso Internacional sobre investigación en didáctica de la traducción (didTRAD, PACTE) [Ist International Conference on Research into the Didactics of Translation (didTRAD, PACTE)]. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, June 21–22. Borja Albí, Anabel. 2000. El texto jurídico inglés y su traducción al español. Barcelona: Ariel. Calvo Encinas, Elisa. 2009. “Análisis curricular de los estudios de Traducción e Interpretación en España: la perspectiva del estudiantado.” Doctoral thesis, University of Granada. ———. 2011. “Translation and/or Translator Skills as Organising Principles for Curriculum Development Practice.” Jostrans: The Journal of Specialised Translation 16: 5–25. ———. 2015. “Scaffolding Translation Skills Through Situated Training Approaches: Progressive and Reflective Methods.” Interpreter and Translator Trainer 9 (3): 306–22. Calvo Encinas, Elisa, and Marián Morón Martín. 2006. “What Do Translation Students Expect of Their Training in Spain?” Current Trends in Translation Teaching and Learning 1: 105–18. Calvo Encinas, Elisa, Marián Morón Martín, and Dorothy Kelly. 2007. “A Project to Boost and Improve Employability Chances among Translation and Interpreting Graduates in Spain.” Paper presented at Newcastle University Translating and Interpreting 10th Anniversary Conference the Teaching and Testing of Translating and Interpreting, September 9–10. Calvo Encinas, Elisa et al. 2008. “Diseño curricular en TI: reflexiones a la luz de los datos de inserción laboral.” In La traducción: balance del pasado y retos del futuro, edited by Fernando Navarro et al., 137–48. Alicante: Aguaclara. Calzada Pérez, María. 2007. El espejo traductológico: Teorías y didácticas para la formación del traductor. Barcelona: Octaedro. Caminade, Monique, and Anthony Pym. 1998. “Translator-Training Institutions.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, edited by Mona Baker, 280–5. London: Routledge. Chaume Varela, Frederic. 2012. Audiovisual Translation: Dubbing. Manchester: St Jerome. Delisle, Jean. 1980. L’analyse du discours comme méthode de traduction: Initiation à la traduction française de textes pragmatiques anglais, théorie et pratique. Ottawa: Presses de l’Université d’Ottawa. ———. 1993. La traduction raisonnée. Manuel d’initiation à la traduction professionnelle de l’anglais vers le français. Ottawa: Université d’Ottawa. ———. 1998. “Définition, rédaction et utilité des objectifs d’apprentissage en enseignement de la traduction.” In Los estudios de traducción: un reto didáctico, edited by Isabel García Izquierdo and Joan Verdegal, 13–44. Castellón: Universitat Jaume I. De Manuel Jerez, Jesús. 2006. “La incorporación de la realidad profesional a la formación de intérpretes de conferencias mediante las nuevas tecnologías y la investigación-acción.” Doctoral thesis, University of Granada. De Manuel Jerez, Jesús, and Annalisa Sandrelli. 2007. “The Impact of Information and Communication Technology on Interpreter Training: State-of-the-Art and Future Prospects.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 1 (2): 269–304. Díaz Cintas, Jorge, and Aline Remael. 2007. Audiovisual Translation: Subtitling. Manchester: St Jerome. Díaz Fouces, Óscar. 1999. Didáctica de la Traducción (portugués – español). Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. Elena García, Pilar. 2001a. El traductor y el texto. Barcelona: Ariel.

169

Dorothy Kelly ———. 2001b. La traducción de documentos alemanes. Granada: Comares. Galán Mañas, Anabel. 2009. “La enseñanza de la Traducción en modalidad semipresencial.” Doctoral thesis, University of Barcelona. Galán Mañas, Anabel, and Amparo Hurtado Albir. 2015. “Competence Assessment Procedures in Translator Training.” Interpreter and Translator Trainer 9 (1): 63–82. Gamero Pérez, Silvia. 2001. La traducción de textos técnicos: descripción y análisis de textos (alemánespañol). Barcelona: Ariel. Giozza Mónica, and María del Mar Gatti. 2009. “La secuencia del proceso traductor en alumnos de la carrera del traductorado.” Revista Digilenguas 3: 305–13. González Davies, María. 2004. Multiple Voices in the Translation Classroom. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Gregorio Cano, Ana. 2014. “La adquisición de la competencia estratégica en la formación de traductores.” Doctoral thesis, University of Granada. Haro Soler, María del Mar. Forthcoming. “Self-Confidence and its Role in Translator Training: The Students’ Perspective.” In New Directions in Cognitive and Empirical Translation Process Research, edited by Isabel La Cruz and Riitta Jääskeläinen. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. House, Juliane. 1997. Translation Quality Assessment. A Model Revisited. Tübingen: Narr. Huertas Barros, Elsa, and Juliette Vine. 2015. “Assessing the Situation: Closing the Gap in Translation Assessment.” The Linguist 54 (4): 22–4. Hurtado Albir, Amparo, ed. 1996a. La enseñanza de la traducción. Castellón: Universitat Jaume I. ———. 1996b. “La enseñanza de la traducción directa ‘general’. Objetivos de aprendizaje y metodología.” In La enseñanza de la traducción, edited by Amparo Hurtado Albir, 31–56. Castellón: Universitat Jaume I. ———, ed. 2017. Researching Translation Competence by PACTE Group. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Ilhami, Naima. 2016. “La formación de traductores e intérpretes para la combinación árabe-español: adecuación del diseño curricular a las necesidades sociales y del mercado profesional.” Doctoral thesis, University of Granada. Jiménez Ivars, Amparo. 2012. Primeros pasos hacia la interpretación Inglés-Español. Castellón de la Plana: Universitat Jaume I. Jiménez Serrano, Óscar. 2016. La traducción técnica inglés-español: Didáctica y mundo profesional. Granada: Comares. Kelly, Dorothy. 1999. Proyecto docente e investigador. Granada: Universidad de Granada. ———. 2000a. “Diversity in Unity: Translator into Non-Mother Tongues in Translator Training in Spain.” In Translation into Non-Mother Tongues in Professional Practice and Training, edited by Meta Grosman et al., 185–92. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. ———. 2000b. “Text Selection for Developing Translator Competence: Why Texts from the Tourist Sector Constitute Suitable Material.” In Developing Translation Competence, edited by Christina Schäffner and Beverly Adab, 157–70. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ———. 2002. “Un modelo de competencia traductora: bases para el diseño curricular.” Puentes. Hacia nuevas investigaciones en la mediación intercultural 1: 9–32. ———. 2005. A Handbook for Translator Trainers: A  Guide to Reflective Practice. Manchester: St Jerome. ———. 2007. “Translator Competence Contextualized: Translator Training in the Framework of Higher Education Reform: In Search of Alignment in Curricular Design.” In Across Boundaries: International Perspectives on Translation Studies, edited by Dorothy Kenny and Kyongjoo Ryou, 128–42. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. ———. 2008a. “Mobility Programmes as a Learning Experience for Translation Students: Development and Assessment of Specific Translation and Transferable Generic Competences in Study Abroad Contexts.” In Translator and Interpreter Training: Issues, Methods and Debates, edited by John Kearns, 66–87. London: Continuum. ———. 2008b. “Training the Trainers: Towards a Description of Translator Trainer Competence and Training Needs Analysis.” TTR. Journal of the Canadian Association for Translation Studies CATS 21 (1): 99–126. ———. 2017. “Translator Education in Higher Education Today: The EHEA and Other Major Trends. Convergence, Divergence, Paradoxes and Tensions.” In Translationslehre und Bologna-Prozess: Unterwegs zwischen Einheit und Vielfalt/Translation/Interpreting Teaching and the Bologna Process:

170

Pedagogy of translation Pathways Between Unity and Diversity, edited by Susanne Hagemann, Julia Neu, and Stephan Walter, 29–50. Berlin: Frank & Timme. Kelly, Dorothy, and Anne Martin. 2009. “Translator and Interpreter Training/Education.” In The Routledge Encyclopaedia of Translation Studies, edited by Mona Baker and Gabriela Saldanha, 294–300. London: Routledge. Kelly, Dorothy, Anne Martin, Marie-Louise Nobs Federer, Dolores Sánchez, and Catherine Way, eds. 2003. La direccionalidad en Traducción e Interpretación. Granada: Atrio. Kelly, Dorothy, Marie-Louise Nobs Federer, Dolores Sánchez, and Catherine Way. 2006. “Reflections on Directionality in Translator Training.” Forum 4 (1): 57–81. Kiraly, Donald. 2000. A Social Constructivist Approach to Translator Education: Empowerment from Theory to Practice. Manchester: St Jerome. Lafeber, Anne. 2012. “Translation at Inter-Governmental Organizations: The Set of Skills and Knowledge Required and the Implications for Recruitment Testing.” Doctoral thesis, University Rovira i Virgili. La Rocca, Marcella. 2007. “El taller de traducción: una metodología didáctica integradora para la enseñanza universitaria de la traducción.” Doctoral thesis, University of Vic. Maier, Carol. 2000. “Evaluation and Translation.” Special Issue of The Translator 6 (2). Marco Borillo, Josep. 2004. “¿Tareas o proyectos? ¿Senderos que se bifurcan en el desarrollo de la competencia traductora?” Trans 8: 75–88. Martín Ruano, Mª del Rosario, Daniel Peter Linder Molin, Fernando Toda Iglesia, and Jorge Juan Sánchez Iglesias. 2013. “Aproximaciones a la especialización en la formación de postgrado en Traducción.” In Puntos de encuentro: los primeros 20 años de la Facultad de Traducción y Documentación de la Universidad de Salamanca, edited by María Belén Santana López and Críspulo Travieso Rodríguez, 99–117. Salamanca: Universidad de Salamanca. Mayoral Asensio, Roberto. 1999. Proyecto docente. Granada: Universidad de Granada. ———. 2001a. “Por una renovación en la formación de traductores e intérpretes: revisión de algunos de los conceptos sobre los que se basa el actual sistema, su estructura y contenidos.” Sendebar 12: 311–36. ———. 2001b. Aspectos Epistemológicos de la Traducción. Castellón: Universitat Jaume I. ———. 2003. Translating Official Documents. Manchester: St Jerome. Mayoral Asensio, Roberto, and Dorothy Kelly. 1997. “Implications of Multilingualism in the European Union: Translator Training in Spain.” In The Changing Scene in World Languages: ATA Scholarly Monograph Series Volume IX, edited by Marian Labrum, 19–34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Montalt Resurrección, Vicent, and María González Davies. 2006. Medical Translation Step by Step. Manchester: St Jerome. Monzó Nebot, Esther, ed. 2015. “Training Legal Interpreters and Translators.” Special issue of Interpreter and Translator Trainer 9 (2). Morón Martín, Marián. 2009. “El impacto de la movilidad en los estudios de Traducción: análisis de las experiencias formativas de los graduados del programa de triple titulación Lenguas Aplicadas Europa (LAE).” Doctoral thesis, University of Granada. Morón Martín, Marián, and Guadalupe Soriano Barabino. 2005. “Designing the Training Module: Guidelines, Development, Validation and Plans for the Future.” In Teaching in the Multicultural Classroom at University: The Temcu Project, edited by David Atkinson, Marián Morón, and Dorothy Kelly, 189–204. Granada: Atrio. ———. 2015. “Teaching in Diversity and Training from Diversity: A Transnational Approach.” Journal of the European Higher Education Area 3. Muñoz Martín, Ricardo. 2006. “Actualización de parámetros en la enseñanza de la traducción o de cómo Polifemo aprendió a usar el caleidoscopio.” In Estudios sobre traducción: teoría, didáctica, profesión, edited by J. Yuste and A. Álvarez, 85–96. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. Muñoz Raya, Eva, ed. 2004. Libro Blanco sobre el Título de Grado en Traducción e Interpretación. Madrid: Aneca. www.aneca.es/media/150288/libroblanco_traduc_def.pdf. Nobs Federer, Marie-Louise. 1997. “Für eine ‘positive Übersetzungskorrektur’ als Mittel zur Erhöhung der translatorischen Kompetenz der Studierenden.” Paper presented at Translation into Non-mother Tongues Conference, University of Ljubljana. Olvera Lobo, María Dolores, María Rosa Castro Prieto, Enrique Quero Gervilla, Ricardo Muñoz Martín, Eva Muñoz Raya, Miguel Murillo Melero, Bryan Robinson et al. 2008. “Encouraging Collaborative

171

Dorothy Kelly Work Training in Higher Education.” In Encyclopedia of Networked and Virtual Organizations. Hershey: Idea Group Inc. Olvera Lobo, María Dolores, María Rosa Castro Prieto, Ricardo Muñoz Martín, Eva Muñoz Raya, Miguel Murillo Melero, Enrique Quero Gervilla, Bryan Robinson et al. 2005. “Translator Training and Modern Market Demands.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 13 (2): 132–42. Olvera Lobo, María Dolores, Bryan Robinson, Rosa Castro Prieto, Enrique Quero Gervilla, Ricardo Muñoz Martín, Miguel Murillo Melero, José Antonio Senso Ruiz et  al. 2007. “A  Professional Approach to Translator Training (PATT).” Meta: journal des traducteurs 52 (3): 517–28. Olvera Lobo, María Dolores, Bryan Robinson, José A. Senso Ruiz, Ricardo Muñoz Martín, Eva Muñoz Raya, Miguel Murillo Melero, Enrique Quero Gervilla et al. 2009. “Teleworking and Collaborative Work Environments in Translation Training.” Babel 55 (2): 165–80. Ordóñez López, Pilar. 2015. “A Critical Account of the Concept of ‘Basic Legal Knowledge’: Theory and Practice.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 9 (2): 156–72. Orozco Jutorán, Mariana. 2012. Metodología de la traducción directa del inglés al español: materiales didácticos para la traducción general y especializada. Granada: Comares. PACTE. 2000. “Acquiring Translation Competence: ‘Hypotheses and Methodological Problems of a Research Project’.” In Investigating Translation, edited by Allison Beeby et al., 99–106. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ———. 2003. “Building a Translation Competence Model.” In Triangulating Translation: Perspectives in Process Oriented Research, edited by Favio Alves, 43–66. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ———. 2008. “First Results of a Translation Competence Experiment: ‘Knowledge of Translation’ and ‘Efficacy of the Translation Process’.” In Translator and Interpreter Training. Issues, Methods and Debates, edited by John Kearns, 104–26. London: Continuum. Pascua Febles, Isabel, Virgilio Moya, Sonia Bravo, Karina Socorro, and Alicia Bolaños Medina. 2003. Teoría, Didáctica y Práctica de la traducción. A Coruña: Netbiblo. Pavlovic, Natasa. 2007. “Directionality in Collaborative Translation Processes: A Study of Novice Translators.” Doctoral thesis, University Rovira i Virgili. http://isg.urv.es/publicity/doctorate/research/ theses/Pavlovic_thesis_finalversion.pdf. Pym, Anthony. 2000. Negotiating the Frontier. Manchester: St Jerome. Pym, Anthony, Carmina Fallada, José Ramón Biau, and Jill Orenstein, eds. 2003. Innovation and E-Learning in Translator Training. Tarragona: Universitat Rovira i Virgili. www.fut.es/~apym/symp/ intro.html and in N° 1 of the journal Across Languages and Cultures. Pym, Anthony, François Grin, Claudio Sfreddo, and Andy L. J. Chan. 2013. The Status of the Translation Profession in the European Union. London: Anthem Press. Rodríguez Inés, Patricia. 2008. “Uso de corpus electrónicos en la formación de traductores.” Doctoral thesis, Autonomous University of Barcelona. ———. 2013. “¿Cómo traducen traductores y profesores de idiomas? Estudio de corpus.” Meta 58 (1): 165–90. Roiss, Silvia. 1998. “Didaktische Überlegungen zur Verbesserung der Methodik in der Hin-Übersetzung Spanisch AS-Deutsch ZS.” Doctoral thesis, University of Salamanca. ———. 2008. Desarrollo de la competencia traductora: Teoría y práctica del aprendizaje constructivo. Granada: Comares. Rojo López, Ana María. 2015. “Fomentando la creatividad: una propuesta didáctica para el aula de traducción.” Quaderns. Revista de Tradució 22: 255–71. Romero Fresco, Pablo. 2011. Subtitling Through Speech Recognition. Manchester: St Jerome. Sánchez, Dolores. 1997. “La traducción especializada: un enfoque didáctico para los textos científicos (español-francés).” In La palabra vertida. Investigaciones en torno a la traducción, edited by Miguel Ángel Vega Cernuda and Rafael Martín Gaitero, 457–62. Madrid: Universidad Complutense. ———. 2003. “Documentación y competencia traductora en la clase de traducción de textos científicos.” In Panorama actual de la investigación en Traducción e Interpretación, edited by Emilio Ortega Arjonilla, 349–56. Granada: Atrio. San Ginés Aguilar, Pedro, and Emilio Ortega Arjonilla. 1997. Introducción a la Traducción Jurídica y Jurada. Granada: Comares. Soriano Barabino, Guadalupe. 2009. “Legal Curriculum for Training Legal Translators.” In Curriculum, Multilingualism and the Law, edited by L. Socanac, C. Goddard, and L. Kremer. Zagreb: Nakladni zavod Globus.

172

Pedagogy of translation ———. 2013. “La competencia temática en la formación de traductores de textos jurídicos en la combinación lingüística francés/español.” Estudios de Traducción (3): 45–56. ———. 2016. Comparative Law for Legal Translators. Berlin: Peter Lang. Soriano Barabino, Guadalupe, and Inmaculada Soriano García. 2005. “The Erasmus Student Experience: Motivations, Preparation, Adaptation and Difficulties.” In Teaching in the Multicultural Classroom at University: The Temcu Project, edited by David Atkinson, Marián Morón, and Dorothy Kelly, 53–72. Granada: Atrio. Soriano García, Inmaculada. 2007. “Evaluación de un programa de movilidad en la formación de traductores: expectativas, experiencias y grado de satisfacción de los participantes, profesores y gestores del intercambio MGLU-UGR-ULPGC.” Doctoral thesis, University of Granada. ———. 2010. “La movilidad estudiantil y sus implicaciones en la formación de futuros traductores. Un estudio de caso.” Puentes 9: 19–28. Tricàs Preckler, Mercedes. 2009. Manual de Traducción Francés – Castellano. Barcelona: Gedisa. Tsokaktsidu, Dimitra. 2003. “Los estudiantes de intercambio en el aula de Traducción. Implicaciones para la didáctica de la Traducción.” In La direccionalidad en Traducción e Interpretación, edited by Dorothy Kelly, Anne Martin, Marie-Louise Nobs, Dolores Sánchez, and Catherine Way, 259–66. Granada: Atrio. ———. 2005. “El aula de Traducción multilingüe y multicultural: implicaciones para la didáctica de la Traducción.” Doctoral thesis, University of Granada. Valero Garcés, Carmen, and Carmen Toledano Buendía. 2010. “Revisión y valoración de la formación actual en Traducción e Interpretación para los servicios públicos.” In Modos y formas de la comunicación humana, edited by María Rosario Caballero Rodríguez, and María Jesús Pinar Sanz, 1369–74. Cuenca: Ediciones de la Universidad de Castilla–La Mancha. Vidal Claramonte, María del Carmen. 2005. “El futuro de la enseñanza de la traducción y la pedagogía desconstructivista.” In Estudios sobre traducción: teoría, didáctica, profesión, edited by José Yuste and Alberto Álvarez, 35–42. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. Vigier Moreno, Francisco Javier. 2010. “El nombramiento de traductores-intérpretes jurados de inglés mediante acreditación académica: descripción de la formación específica y del grado de satisfacción de los egresados.” Doctoral thesis, University of Granada. Vigier Moreno, Francisco Javier, Naima Ilhami, Ana Gregorio Cano, and Dorothy Kelly. 2007. “Enhancing Career Opportunities for Translation and Interpreting Students Through Professional Realism.” Paper presented at Newcastle University Translating and Interpreting 10th Anniversary Conference the Teaching and Testing of Translating and Interpreting, September 9–10. Waddington, Christopher. 1999. “Estudio comparativo de diferentes métodos de evaluación de traducción general (inglés-español).” Doctoral thesis, University Pontificia Comillas. Way, Catherine. 1997. “Cómo estructurar un curso de traducción especializada: premisas básicas.” In La palabra vertida. Investigaciones en torno a la traducción, edited by Miguel Ángel Vega and Rafael Martín Gaitero, 485–90. Madrid: Universidad Complutense. ———. 2006. “Evaluación efectiva: el talón de Aquiles.” In Estudios de traducción: Perspectivas. Zinaida Lvóvskaya, In memoriam, edited by Sonia Bravo Utrera and Rosario García López, 755–62. Berlin: Peter Lang. ———. 2016. “The Challenges and Opportunities of Legal Translation and Translator Training in the 21st Century.” International Journal of Communication 10: 1009–29. Weatherby, Joanna. 1998. “Teaching Translation into L2: A TT-Oriented Approach.” In Translation and Language Teaching. Language Teaching and Translation, edited by Kirsten Malmkjaer, 21–38. Manchester: St Jerome. Yan, Jackie Xiu, Jun Pan, and Honghua Wang. 2015. “Studies on Translator and Interpreter Training: A Data-Driven Review of Journal Articles.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 9 (3): 263–86. Zabalbeascoa, Patrick. 1999. “La didáctica de la traducción: desarrollo de la competencia traductora.” In Aproximaciones a la Traducción, edited by Antonio Gil de Carrasco and Leo Hickey, 22–40. Madrid: Instituto Cervantes. Zanettin, Federico, Gabriela Saldanha, and Sue-Ann Harding. 2015. “Sketching Landscapes in Translation Studies: A Bibliographic Sudy.” Perspectives 23 (2): 161–82. Zaro Vera, Juan Jesús, and Michael Truman. 2008. Manual de traducción: textos españoles e ingleses, traducidos y comentados. Madrid: SGEL.

173

Dorothy Kelly

Websites Association Internationale d’Interprètes de Conférence (AIIC): www.aiic.org Bibliografía de Interpretación y Traducción, managed by the University of Alicante: https://aplicacionesua. cpd.ua.es/tra_int/usu/buscar.asp Common Sense Adivsory: www.commonsenseadvisory.com Conférence Internationale Permanente d’Instituts Universitaires de Traducteurs et d’Interprètes (CIUTI): www.ciuti.org Consortium for Training Translation Teachers (CTTT): http://isg.urv.es/cttt/cttt/members.html Espacio Europeo de Educación Superior: www.eees.es European Master in Translation: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/translation/programmes/emt/index_en.htm European Society for Translation Studies (EST): www.est-translationstudies.org GENTT (Textual Genres for Translation): www.gentt.uji.es/ Ibn Tibbon/Emuni Doctoral Summer School: www.prevajalstvo.net/doctoral-summer-school Intercultural Studies Group: http://isg.urv.es Observatory of Translator Training Programmes: www.est-translationstudies.org/resources/tti/tti.htm PACTE Research Group: http://grupsderecerca.uab.cat/pacte/ PETRA (Pericia y Entorno de la Traducción) Research Group: www.cogtrans.net/ Translation Studies Bibliography: https://benjamins.com/online/tsb/ TREC (Thematic Network on Empirical and Experimental Research on Translation): http://pagines.uab. cat/trec/ World Interpreter and Translator Training Association (WITTA): http://english.gdufs.edu.cn/Item/88579. aspx

174

10 COGNITIVE APPROACHES Amparo Hurtado Albir Translated from Spanish by Roland Pearson

Introduction Research into cognitive aspects of translation began at the end of the 1960s with the pioneering Interpretive Theory of Translation (ITT), also known as the Theory of Sense, developed at the Paris School of Interpreters and Translators, ESIT, which marks the beginning of interest in the cognitive processes involved in translation. From the 1990s onwards there was a major surge in research into this area, which basically focused on three aspects: the cognitive processes involved in translation, the necessary skills to develop them correctly (translation competence) and the process of acquiring these skills (translation competence acquisition). Various models have been put forward in accordance with these dimensions – see Hurtado 2011 [2001], 31–408, 2017a for a review of these models. Moreover, as of the mid-1980s, there has been an important development in empiricalexperimental research. This began with Think-aloud Protocols (TAPs) and has evolved towards a multi-methodological approach, triangulating data, incorporating technologies for data gathering and analysis (e.g. keylogging, eye tracking), as well as statistical analysis. See Hurtado and Alves 2009; Alves and Hurtado 2010, 2017, for further information on the evolution of research and the methodology used. In 2011 TREC (Translation, Research, Empiricism, Cognition) was set up: a network of translation scholars and research groups united by their joint interest in empiricism and research into the human translation process, especially with respect to cognition. This was an initiative set up by the PACTE research group with the aim of encouraging mutual collaboration among researchers and improving the quality of research.

Research in the Hispanic domain1 Pioneer studies The first studies in the Hispanic domain to analyse cognitive aspects of translation and interpreting worked along the lines of ESIT’s Interpretive Theory of Translation, namely García Landa’s doctoral dissertation (1978),2 which dealt with deliberate deviations from literalness in conference interpreting, and the doctoral dissertation by Hurtado in 1986 on the notion of 175

Amparo Hurtado Albir

faithfulness in translation (published in 1990). Both dissertations were supervised by Danica Seleskovitch.

Research by the PACTE group on translation competence and translation competence acquisition The PACTE group (initials for Proceso de Adquisición de la Competencia Traductora y ­Evaluación – Process of Translation Competence Acquisition and Evaluation) at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (Spain) was set up in 1997 to carry out research into translation acquisition competence in written translation. Since then, PACTE has carried out joint research into translation competence and translation competence acquisition. The founding members were Allison Beeby, Doris Ensinger, Olivia Fox, Amparo Hurtado, Nicole Martínez, Wilhelm Neunzig, Mariana Orozco and Marisa Presas, which later increased to include Laura Berenguer, Mònica Fernández, Gabriele Grauwinkel, Inna Kozlova and Stefanie Wimmer.3 In January 2017, the group comprised Allison Beeby, Olivia Fox, Anabel Galán-Mañas, Amparo Hurtado, Anna Kuznik,4 Wilhelm Neunzig, Christian Olalla-Soler, Patricia Rodríguez-Inés and Lupe Romero. The principal researcher is Amparo Hurtado.

Goals The final aim of PACTE research is to enhance curriculum design for training translators, particularly setting out the necessary competences, progression in their acquisition and assessment. To this end, research was structured into four stages, each with its own objectives: translation competence (TC), translation competence acquisition (TCA), establishing levels of competences in translation and assessing competences. Of these, the first two stages have already been completed, and in 2015 the group began to carry out research into establishing levels for competences which, in turn, will lead to designing assessment procedures for each level.

Conceptual and methodological framework PACTE works from within a three-sided framework: cognitive and experimental research into translation, research into translator training and technology applied to research into translation. Research on TC and TCA has been of an experimental nature and carried out from two complementary perspectives: the translation process and the translation product. As regards the former, Proxy and Camtasia software have been used for data gathering: templates for direct observation and different types of questionnaires. For the study of translated texts, research has focused on prototypical translation problems (known as rich points), which have been analysed by establishing categories of problems and acceptability criteria. Digital corpora methodology has also been used to analyse translations. PACTE research has employed a multi-methodological approach, using qualitative and quantitative methods. Particularly noteworthy is the work by Neunzig on methodology for empirical research, which has been the basis for PACTE’s experimental research (Neunzig 2002, 2011; Neunzig and Tanqueiro 2007).

Research on translation competence PACTE has accrued thirteen publications which reflect partial results of its research into TC, and all the research carried out to date has been published in book format (Hurtado 2017b). 176

Cognitive approaches

According to PACTE, TC is the underlying system of knowledge, abilities and attitudes required to be able to translate and involves declarative and predominantly procedural knowledge. It comprises five sub-competences: Bilingual, Extralinguistic, Knowledge of Translation, Instrumental and Strategic and activates a series of psycho-physiological components (PACTE 2000, 2003). To study TC, data concerning the knowledge and behaviour of professional translators was compared with that of foreign-language teachers with no experience in translation. After exploratory studies in 2000–2001 and a pilot study in 2004 (PACTE 2002, 2005), an experiment was carried out in 2005–2006 with thirty-five professional translators and twenty-four foreign-language teachers (PACTE 2008, 2009, 2011a, 2011b, Hurtado 2017b). The ensuing results validated the TC model and confirmed that: TC comprises various interrelated sub-competences; specific sub-competences are Knowledge of Translation, Instrumental Competence and Strategic Competence; and the fundamental sub-competence is Strategic Competence. The results corroborate the distinguishing features of TC (Hurtado 2017b, 295): • • • • • •

Solving translation problems with acceptable solutions (Strategic sub-competence). Having a dynamic and coherent concept of translation (declarative knowledge) (Knowledge of translation sub-competence). Having a dynamic approach to translation (procedural knowledge) (Strategic subcompetence). Combining the use of cognitive (internal support) and different types of documentary resources (external support) in an efficient manner (Strategic sub-competence and Instrumental sub-competence). Combining automatized and non-automatized cognitive resources (internal support) in an efficient manner (Strategic sub-competence and Knowledge of Translation sub-competence). Using instrumental resources in an efficient manner (Instrumental sub-competence).

In addition, specific characteristics have been identified according to the directionality (direct/inverse translation).

Research on translation competence acquisition After research into TC, in 2010 PACTE began research on TCA. PACTE conceives of TCA in terms of a spiral, and a non-linear process in which novice knowledge (Pre-translation Competence) evolves into TC, involving the development of sub-competences and learning strategies. During the process, both declarative and procedural types of knowledge are integrated, developed and restructured (PACTE 2000, 2014, 2015). To study TCA a pilot study was carried out in 2011, followed by an experiment with 130 translation students (PACTE 2014, 2015). In this experiment data was gathered from cohorts of first-year, second-year, third-year and fourth-year students, and recently graduated students. The results were then compared with the group of translators from the TC experiment. The results obtained (PACTE 2014, 2015, in press a; Hurtado submitted) show that: 1

TCA is a dynamic, non-linear, spiral process. Analysis of the data has led to identifying four types of evolution: •

Non-evolution: there is no difference in the values between successive groups between the first year and the end of training. 177

Amparo Hurtado Albir

• • •

Rising evolution: values rise between the first year and the end of training, with each value between successive groups being higher than or equal to the previous one. Falling evolution: values fall between the first year and the end of training, with each value between successive groups being lower than or equal to the previous one. Mixed evolution: a combination of rising and falling evolution between the first year and the end of training.

The frequent cases of mixed evolution confirm that TCA is a non-linear and spiral process. The few cases of non-evolution in turn confirm that TCA involves an evolution. 2

TCA is a process in which the sub-competences of TC are developed and restructured. The results confirm that in TCA: • • •

3 4

the development of the Strategic, Instrumental, and Knowledge of Translation subcompetences is particularly important; the development of procedural knowledge – and, consequently, of the Strategic subcompetence – is essential; not all sub-competences develop in parallel, i.e. at the same time and at the same rate.

TCA is dependent upon directionality (direct/inverse translation). TCA is dependent upon the learning environment.

Establishing levels of competences After having completed the TCA data analysis, the next step, which began in 2015, was research into establishing a framework for competence levels in translation, that is, establishing different degrees of TCA. This is ongoing research, aimed at describing levels of performance in translation (PACTE 2018, in press b). Translation lacks a common description of competence levels, unlike other disciplines; language teaching, for example, has the CEFR, the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. Such a description would provide a common framework for use in translator training and professional translation, facilitating comparisons between different grading systems and serving as a basis for progression and assessment design. The research involved in the project is based on results obtained in PACTE’s previous experimental investigations into TC and TCA. This project involves the participation of actors from the translation academic and professional arenas. The aim is to follow a three-level scale with corresponding sub-level: • • •

Translation level C: Competences corresponding to each professional profile. Translation level B: Basic specialized translation competences. Translation level A: Basic translation competences.

Five categories are used to describe each level: linguistic competence; cultural, world knowledge and thematic competence; instrumental competence; translation service competence; and translation problem solving competence.

Assessing competences Later, PACTE hopes to apply these results to research on TCA assessment: assessment indicators, instruments and tasks. 178

Cognitive approaches

It should be noted, however, that some of the research group members have already been researching assessment – see the publications by Orozco 2000; Martínez 2001; Martínez and Hurtado 2001; Orozco and Hurtado 2002; Rodríguez-Inés 2009; Rodríguez-Inés and Hurtado 2012; Galán-Mañas and Hurtado 2015; Hurtado 2015; Galán-Mañas 2016; Hurtado and Olalla-Soler 2016; Hurtado and Pavani 2018.

The works of PETRA research group: towards a cognitive translatology Ricardo Muñoz founded the group “Expertise & Environment in Translation” (PETRA, Spanish acronym of Pericia y Entorno de la TRAducción) in 2000, with some PhD students of the University of Granada (Spain). As of January 2017, the members comprising this group are Jorge Amigo, Matthias Apfelthaler, José Cardona, Tomás Conde, Susana Cruces, Álvaro Marín, Celia Martín, Ricardo Muñoz, J. Ignacio Perea, Marisa Presas, Marina Ramos and Ana Rojo.

Goals PETRA is a loose group of like-minded researchers who share two basic assumptions: • •

Second-generation Cognitive Science is the optimal framework to develop translatological theories focused on mental processes. Empirical research is the touchstone for any translatological endeavour.

They also shared a steadfast commitment to make all their work cohere. Their research topics are many and quite different from each other because 1) PETRA members keep independent lines of work, depending on their personal interests; 2) they are linked through a common theoretical framework and their commitment to a common and consistent theoretical framework.

Conceptual and methodological framework The group focuses on theoretically informed empirical research on translation in order to develop a cognitive translatology: a conceptual framework based on current cognitive paradigms (embodied, embedded, enacted, extended and affective cognition). PETRA departed from linguistic views based on embodied cognition, and devoted a decade to gaining direct insights into both translation process research and extant theoretical frameworks. PETRA set out to study different translation subtasks within a unified perspective, such as reading and comprehension, information search and retrieval, problem solving, drafting, creativity, self-correcting and assessment. They mistrusted introspection as a way to access mental processes and adopted keylogging. They soon realized they needed to move more towards cognitive psychology (see Muñoz 2012a, 2013). They decided to focus on topics such as problem solving, time pressure, and memory, and studied translatological functionalism while they tested existing cognitive and psycholinguistic approaches to translation and interpreting based on the information-processing paradigm (see Muñoz 2016a).

Evolution of their works At the beginning, PETRA recruited young researchers mainly from the PhD programme “Translation  & Interpreting Processes” at the University of Granada and the University of 179

Amparo Hurtado Albir

Leipzig’s IALT. By the time the first group of PhD students graduated, PETRA had already enlarged its theoretical framework to include situated cognition. They had also concluded that they needed to gather data that their preferential key logger (Translog) could not collect and started to combine it with another key logger, KGBSpy. The first material results came out in 2003 in the form of three PhD dissertations on: problem solving (Lachat), time pressure in the translation process (Rooze) and the flaws of functionalism from a cognitive perspective (Martín). Martín has collaborated in the development of PETRA’s theoretical framework, in particular with her critical study of functionalism, where she suggested broadening the scope of functionalist approaches by adopting the framework of second-generation cognitive science (Martín 2008). She later studied the contributions of different cognitive models of meaning to translation (Martín 2013) and the role of mental representations in translation studies (Martín 2017). By 2003, PETRA had become intrigued by the interface between bilinguals and professional translators, and started studying the notion of natural translation (see Muñoz 2011, 2015). Between 2003 and 2006, Gómez carried out a PhD project to contrast translation behaviour and results in advanced trainees and bilinguals (see Gómez 2007). The comparative trials of bilinguals and translation trainees led to (1) focusing on translation quality and assessment, and (2) exploring how to profile experimental texts and subjects. PETRA members started using several WAIS-III subtests to check subjects’ working memory and processing speed. Cruces (2005) then sustained that translation didactics needs to seek its foundations in cognition because translating boils down to expertise, expert knowledge and a compound cognitive ability. PETRA thus became also concerned with applying their results to professional and training environments – mainly by linking situated cognition to (socio-)constructivist approaches. In 2005, Blasco used WAIS-III to profile her subjects in her PhD dissertation on listening comprehension in trainee interpreters. By then it was obvious that Western professional translation was always computerassisted, and PETRA expanded its theoretical base with extended cognition, and suspected that cognitive tasks were modified and blended in particular ways in translation and interpreting. Castro carried out a pilot study comparing different kinds of reading with eye tracking (e.g., Castro 2008a, 2008b). PETRA members focused more on what professionalism entails and enlarged data collection with text analyses, since it was concluded that texts can be regarded as fossilized behaviour. PETRA felt the need to expand its theoretical base further with distributed cognition, because team translating is a growing tendency among professional translators in the West and simultaneous interpreters work in couples to support each other. In 2008, PETRA moved the group headquarters from the University of Granada to the University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. Presas joined the team, expanding the loose group to more universities. In 2009, Conde finished his PhD dissertation on the behaviour and results of different types of translation assessors. Several later papers (e.g. Conde 2016) focus on translation quality and assessment, where he addresses subjectivity, linguistic vs. translation errors, the behaviour of lenient vs. demanding evaluators, the confluence of holistic and analytical methods, and the impact of quantitative and qualitative issues on assessment. Conde has recently studied the cognitive aspects of textual genres (Conde 2014a, 2014b). In 2010, Perea finished his dissertation on computer-assisted revision and released two applications, which are freely available on the web and have been actively developed to date: petraREV, a tool for computer-assisted revision of translations, and petraTAG, a tool for analyzing texts. Both use an open-sourced POS-tagger, which has also been ported to Android 180

Cognitive approaches

and can be used in a variety of NLP applications, such as creating conversational agents (see Perea 2007). By 2010, PETRA started looking for appropriate parameters for a cognitive theory of translation and ways to study them. Muñoz (2010a, 2010b, 2014a) outlined the historical and conceptual development of cognitive approaches to translation and interpreting from the perspective of their own current standpoint and focused on streamlining some methodological aspects of empirical research constructs (2012b, 2014b) and methods (2009a). His research interests, however, seem closer to the epistemology of cognitive translatologies (e.g., 2016a, 2016b, 2017) and to attentional processes in translation (2009b). The third wave of PhD students also spread across the globe. In Las Palmas, Amigo started his PhD in 2012 working on the operationalization of culture in cognitive-oriented empirical research on translation and interpreting (e.g., Amigo 2015). At the University of Graz, Apfelthaler started his PhD project in 2013 on perspective taking and target audience orientation in the translation process and product, drawing on insights from psychology and social cognition literature (Apfelthaler 2014). Another topic addressed by Apfelthaler (in press) is translation and interpreting directionality, including a process perspective. Also in 2013, Marín started his PhD work at Kent State on epistemological pluralism as a basis for Cognitive Translation Studies. As part of his interest in translation expertise, Marín has investigated the perceptions of translation expertise in the workplace from an emic perspective (Angelone and Marín 2017). Klimant started her PhD Project in 2015 on mental stress and strain in translation. In a pilot study, Klimant (2016) set out to study the effects of mental fatigue on translation quality with keystroke logging, surveys and translation quality assessment, and raised some questions about how to operationalize these factors. The latest PhD student to get on board thus far, Cardona, is focusing on processes attention and control in translating. Meanwhile, Martín and Presas (2011, 2014) started research on the role of implicit theories in the translation process of novice translators, focusing on the analysis of conceptual metaphors. Their results show that implicit theories may affect the length of text-production segments and the kinds and the complexity of corrections. Presas (2017) explores how to apply these findings to translator training. At the same time, PETRA’s members were involved in a funded research project to study the ways to characterize the difficulty of texts reasonably from the perspective of translation. This was CÓDIGO (Spanish acronym), and they developed an online tool that they use to compare both originals and translations in their empirical research projects. They switched to Inputlog as the preferential key logger, although they are still missing a tool dedicated to translation research. PETRA also welcomed new members, Rojo and Ramos, who opened up the field of affective cognition for the group. They have investigated the role of emotions in the translation process from four different angles: (1) as the result of the translator’s appraisal of the source text (Rojo and Ramos 2014); (2) as an incidental affect state induced by the surrounding context (Rojo and Ramos 2016, 2018); (3) as the result of the audience’s appraisal of the target text (Rojo, Ramos, and Valenzuela 2014); and (4), as a feeling that can be regulated by the translator’s own personal and professional experience (Rojo and Ramos 2016, 2018). Their work has provided evidence for the impact of emotions on creativity in translation processes and on the reception of audio description (Ramos and Rojo 2014; Ramos 2015, 2016). Rojo (2017a, 2017b) provides a general review of research on emotions and creativity in the empirical research of translation processes. 181

Amparo Hurtado Albir

Rojo’s work (e.g., 2015) also shows that the combined work of disciplines from Cognitive Science may be influential, not only in defining the factors that underpin the translation process and the translator’s work, but also in describing the potential impact that translation research has on communication and language processing. Rojo (e.g., 2002a, 2002b; Rojo and Ibarretxe 2013; Valenzuela and Rojo 2016) argues that Cognitive Linguistics can help describe translation as a cognitive process by integrating linguistic aspects with other aspects of cognition. Rojo and Valenzuela’s (2013) eye-tracking experiment illustrates how Construction Grammar may contribute to enriching our understanding of the translation process. After fifteen years of work, the group has settled for the common tenets of 4EA cognition (embodied, embedded, enacted, extended, affective) as referential framework and now seeks to find empirical support to develop a cognitive translatology. The current research topics are epistemology of cognitive translation studies, improving and standardizing research methods, experimental text and subject profiling, research tools, text mining, metaphor, mental simulations, implicit beliefs, attention and control, metacognition, perspective taking, emotions in translation, mental fatigue and mental load.

Research into the translation process in translation students María del Mar Gatti and Mónica Giozza, Universidad del Aconcagua (Argentina), began their research into the translation process in 2006. It has centred on translation students, collected qualitative and quantitative data on direct translation by means of Translog and guided retrospective verbalization and is aimed at practical applications. They have completed three research projects and are currently engaged in a fourth. The first (2006–2008) focused on studying the sequences in the translation process (Giozza and Gatti 2009), which validated the methods chosen to observe this process, as well as identify the sequences in this process followed by students and measure the time spent at each stage of the process. The second project (2008–2010) was concerned with the translation difficulties which arise from subjectivity markers (Giozza and Gatti 2012, 2015). The results reflect a general tendency to neutralize subjectivity markers in the text. The following were detected as the main causes which generated problems: interference from the student’s own subjectivity, lack of expressivity in L1, inadequate documenting strategies (invariably linked to bilingual dictionaries), and decoding meaning only at the propositional level. Given these results, two research projects were set up to further explore the causes that had been identified. First (2011–2013), documenting strategies were identified which lead to making lexical choices based on the concept of instrumental competence proposed by PACTE (Giozza and Gatti 2014). The programme Camtasia was added to the tools already being used. The results revealed a huge disparity in the time students spent carrying out searches and also reflected an excessive tendency to use bilingual dictionaries and adopt the option given without factoring in textual and contextual considerations. Second, in 2015 a project (ongoing) was begun which works from the hypothesis that some of the errors and difficulties in the translations of subjectivity markers begin at the comprehension stage. The aim of this research is to analyse how subjectivity is tackled in text-analysis models oriented towards translation, design a suitable model and apply it with trainee students to observe their performance. In other studies, Giozza (2013, 2016, 2017) presents translatology research on the translation process and the methods used. 182

Cognitive approaches

Translation and neurocognition Adolfo M. García, Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience (INCyT, Argentina), has focused his research on the neurocognitive bases of translation. In his book Traductología y Neurocognición (2012), García studies how the linguistic system of the translator is organized. This study attempts to determine the components which make up this system, which memory system each is linked to, its approximate neuroanatomical location and what the critical areas of the brain are for translation according to the unit type in question (words, sentences, complex texts). His study is based on clinical study data and neuro-image experiments. It presents two neuro-architecture models of the expert translator and the novice translator (MoNATs) and describes the corresponding neuro-functional differences. In other studies he has researched the brain activity required to translate words and sentences (García 2013) and has compared the mechanisms which support direct and inverse translation (García 2015a). For the purposes of this comparison, in García (2015a) he reviews cases of translation disorders in bilingual aphasics. The data shows three translation neuropathologies in the subjects: 1 2 3

Translation incapability: they find it difficult or impossible to translate in one or both directions, even when they can express themselves in and understand each language separately. Paradoxical translation behaviour: they can translate into L1 or L2 while unable to express themselves spontaneously in either, and they are unable to translate into a language in which they can express themselves spontaneously. Translation without understanding: they can translate words and phrases correctly and without hesitation, but they are unaware of the meaning of the translated expressions.

According to García, the clinical data allows us to understand how neurocognitive paths involved in translation are organized. The data suggest that there are independent neurofunctional paths for translation and single language production, and for direct and inverse translation. García, Mikulan and Ibañez (2016) document the first data for functional connectivity (statistical measurement based on neurophysiological data) during translation tasks. The beta frequencies show that in direct translation there was a greater exchange of information in temporal occipital networks (which handle primary and automatic processes). In contrast, in inverse translation there is a predominance of frontal temporal connections (related with bilingual executive control), which suggests a greater access and lexical choice effort. A second experiment based on intra-cranial registers confirmed these general tendencies. García et  al. (2014) underlines the role of translation competence in processes used by beginner and advanced translation students and professional translators when reading and translating words. The measurements of reaction times revealed that response times for advanced students and professional translators were significantly shorter than for beginners. García (2014) analyzes whether the cognitive skills developed by professional interpreters have an impact on more efficient linguistic and executive abilities. It reviews the studies whose data suggest that experience in interpreting enhances aspects of semantic processing, working memory and cognitive flexibility. Other studies review the contributions from the field of psycholinguistics to the study of translation, and propose tools to analyse the biological aspects which characterize it. García 183

Amparo Hurtado Albir

(2015b) assesses psycholinguistic research on lexical translation equivalents, tracing its development and summarising the methodological implications for empirical research on cognitive aspects of translation. García, Mikulan and Ibañez (2016), propose a neuroscientific toolkit to explore the biological embeddedness of translation and interpreting: neuroimaging (positron emission tomography, functional magnetic resonance imaging) and electromagnetic techniques (electroencephalography, direct electrostimulation).

Translation process research and post-editing The work of Isabel Lacruz, Kent State University (US), is focused on three different, although related, areas. One aspect of her work is the development of experimentally testable models of translation processes, with particular emphasis on the post-editing process (Shreve and Lacruz 2014, 2017; Lacruz 2018). Distinct stages of post-editing processing were identified by comparing and contrasting reaction time and pause metrics associated with different experimental paradigms (translation verification task and keystroke logging). A major part of her work has been the study of cognitive effort in translation and postediting, participating in a number of studies (e.g. Lacruz, Shreve, and Angelone 2012; Lacruz and Shreve 2014; Lacruz, Denkowski, and Lavie 2014). Her early work used eye-tracking methodologies to assess the impact of the syntactic complexity of the source text on cognitive effort in sight translation. Later work focuses on identifying measures of cognitive effort and cognitive demand in post-editing. In monolingual research, pauses are associated with higher levels of cognitive effort. Early efforts to link pauses in the keystroke log with cognitive effort in post-editing were unsuccessful. However, with the co-authors, she introduced novel keystroke pause metrics: the average pause ratio and the pause to word ratio, which did correlate with cognitive effort assessed through predictions from linguistic analysis, user reports and eye-tracking metrics. Applications include assessment of the utility of adaptive machine translation programmes when compared with static programmes, the influence of interface features (e.g. alignment between source and target text) on machine translation utility and the study of how particular features of a source text affect machine translation utility. A third aspect of his research has revolved around the differences between mental processes in translators and those in non-translating bilinguals (Lacruz 2014). She conducted reaction time experiments (lexical decision task) and found that translators’ and non-translators’ automatic processing of cognates (homographs that have similar meanings in two languages) are different. This could be taken as an indication that translators develop different mental representations for their languages than non-translating bilinguals.

Cognitive research in interpreting Research of a cognitive nature has also been developed in the area of interpreting.

Pioneer studies: University of Granada group At the Universidad de Granada, cognitive research on interpreting dates back to the beginning of the 1990s, and it has adopted an interdisciplinary approach (related in particular to Psycholinguistics and Cognitive Psychology) and experimental methodology. The starting point was in 1992, when Presentación Padilla began her doctoral dissertation, supervised by Teresa Bajo and José Cañas from the Department of Experimental Psychology 184

Cognitive approaches

and Physiology of Behaviour at the Universidad de Granada. The aim of this dissertation (finished in 1995) was an experimental study into memory and attention processes in simultaneous interpreting. A financed research project began in 1993, Representación del conocimiento y rutas de acceso léxico en sujetos españoles, ingleses e intérpretes profesionales (Representation of knowledge and lexical access routes in Spanish and English subjects, and professional interpreters) which marked a fruitful beginning of empirical and interdisciplinary research in this field. Since then, a number of subsequent research projects have been carried out both at a national level within Spain and internationally. Research has focused on various aspects, namely: • • • • •

Memory and attention processes in simultaneous interpreting (Padilla 1994; Padilla, Bajo, and Padilla 1995; Padilla 1998, 2002). Comprehension processes in simultaneous interpreting (Bajo, Padilla, and Padilla 2000). Processing information in oral comprehension tasks (Padilla, Macizo, and Bajo 2008). The implication of language combinations and directionality in simultaneous interpreting (Padilla 2005). Cognitive skills and personality traits which are potentially necessary for learning sign language interpreting (López et al. 2007).

There has also been research into developing a cognitive theory of interpreting (Padilla, Bajo, and Padilla 2000; Padilla 2003; Padilla, Macizo, and Bajo 2007). These studies analyse models and empirical methods in the cognitive sciences (Psychology, Cognitive Psychology, Neurolinguistics) which can be applied to research into interpreting (simultaneous and consecutive). Padilla, Macizo and Bajo (2007) propose a comprehensive cognitive theory for translation and interpreting based on Psycholinguistics and Cognitive Psychology, and underline the common and differentiating features between translation and interpreting. There are also various doctoral dissertations, with Padilla as the principal supervisor, which focus on different aspects of interpreting, in particular: problems and strategies in consecutive interpreting (Abuin, in 2005); processing information in simultaneous interpreting (Alonso, in 2007); ambiguity and strategies in simultaneous interpreting (Morelli, in 2008); the influence of previous knowledge in simultaneous interpreting (Díaz-Galaz, in 2012); and bilingual requirements for training in interpreting (Martín-Ruel, in 2012).

Studies on sight translation and aptitudes specific to interpreting Amparo Jiménez Ivars, Universitat Jaume I (Spain), has carried out research into the aptitudes and specific strategies employed in sight translation (Jiménez 1998, 1999, 2008), illustrating differences compared to written translation. In other studies, she has focused on aspects directly related to aptitudes in order to interpret, fundamentally attention, memory and anxiety (Jiménez and Pinazo 2001, 2002, 2013). These are experimental studies with interpreting students in which a relationship was observed between these cognitive capabilities (and affective in the case of anxiety) and performance in interpreting. These revealed that attention has a much greater influence on interpreting performance than memory or anxiety. They propose developing mindfulness (conscious techniques to maintain attention) as a method to improve students’ performance when interpreting, as these techniques have proved more effective in the experimental studies than relaxation. 185

Amparo Hurtado Albir

Mental operations involved in simultaneous interpreting Luis Alonso Bacigalupe, Universidade de Vigo (Spain), since the first of his published studies in 1999, began to apply the experimental paradigm to the study of simultaneous interpreting (Alonso 1999a, 1999b). The main aim of his research has been to better understand the principles which govern the workings of interpreters’ brains during simultaneous interpreting (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2013). Along these lines, he has studied the mental processes and operations that make it possible to efficiently perform complex cognitive tasks, as in simultaneous interpreting, and how to manage and coordinate them effectively. Towards this end, he has carried out a number of experiments with both professional interpreters as well as trainee interpreters. Based on his research, he has formulated an information processing model during simultaneous interpreting (Alonso 2009, 2010, 2013). According to his results, this model describes three systems used by interpreters to manage discourse: (1) at a superficial level, a word-byword translation, which is the most efficient in terms of time and cognitive effort, but often provides poor or even incorrect translation solutions; (2) an intermediate system, an automatic and direct exchange of solutions which have been successfully tried out on previous occasions, albeit less efficient in terms of time; and (3) a upper level system for processing the meaning of the enunciations, which is the least efficient in terms of time but the most effective in terms of the quality of the final product, and essential for handling enunciations with complex meanings. The final aim of this model is to apply this empirical knowledge to training students for conference interpreting. In other studies he has researched the current situation and perspectives in empiricalexperimental research into interpreting (Alonso 2003a, 2003b).

Development of L2 listening comprehension in interpreter training The research by María Jesús Blasco Mayor, Universitat Jaume I (Spain), has focused on developing L2 listening comprehension in interpreter training (Blasco 2007a). Her research essentially centres on contributions concerning language processing, Psycholinguistics, bilingualism and second-language acquisition. In her experimental study she used validated tests to measure the level of development of oral competence in L1 (WAIS-III) and L2 (TOEFL). The results confirm that L2 listening comprehension training increases performance in consecutive interpreting and serves as a basis for establishing minimum L2 linguistic competence from which one should begin training: approximately B2 on the CEFR scale. Blasco (2015) has updated her work in this area and focused on the value of validated tests to measure the L2 level as an aptitude predictor for interpreting. In other published studies, Blasco has formulated pedagogical applications based on these results (2007b, 2009), and in Blasco (2008) she explores the cognitive component of bilateral interpreting.

Previous preparation and analysis of the comprehension process in interpreting Stephanie Díaz-Galaz, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso (Chile), in her doctoral dissertation (Díaz-Galaz 2012), carried out an experimental study on the effect of the previous preparation of interpreters in the process and product of simultaneous interpreting of specialized discourses (see also Díaz-Galaz, Padilla, and Bajo 2015). The results show that prior

186

Cognitive approaches

preparation reduced the time lag and improved the product; it was also observed that different techniques were used in interpreting depending on this preparation. In other studies she has analysed the comprehension process in interpreting, explored retrospective techniques to describe it and has established a link between L2 comprehension and comprehension in interpreting (Díaz-Galaz 2014; Díaz-Galaz and López 2016).

Research issues and methods Objects of study Although the majority of the studies have centred on written translation, research has also been developed in interpreting – mainly simultaneous – but also in consecutive interpreting, bilateral and sign language interpreting, and sight translation. To this we can also add research into cognitive processes in specific tasks, such as post-editing. The subjects under study vary according to each case: professional translators and interpreters, translation and interpreting students or bilingual subjects who have no experience in translation. Turning to the objects of these studies, they are many and varied, covering a wide range of subjects. In some cases research has focused on the competences necessary to translate and interpret, the processes involved in acquiring these competences, performance levels and questions related to assessment. In other cases, the focus has been more on the translation process, studying the range of aspects involved in developing it, in particular: comprehension, revising, problem solving, using documenting strategies, processing information, cognitive effort, creativity, memory and attention. The impact of certain factors on the translation process has also been studied: for example, time pressure, language combination, directionality, tiredness, mental stress, emotions, and implicit theories. Observations have been made of cognitive functioning when resolving certain translation problems: translating subjectivity markers, conceptual metaphors, cognates, etc. Much of the research revolves around the process-product interface and triangulating data from the translation/interpreting process and product. Other research draws comparisons between subjects who are bilingual and professional translators. Research based on neurocognition is particularly worth noting, with its attempts to analyse the biological aspects which characterize translation. In addition, there have been epistemological contributions aimed at building a conceptual and methodological framework of cognitive research in Translation Studies. Along these lines, studies have centred on the evolution of research, models developed and the methodology used; models have been proposed for translation competence and the translation process, as well as reconsidering methodology. Studies have also been made on the relationship between research on cognitive aspects of translation/interpreting and other disciplines. Proposals have been accordingly put forward which signify advances in drawing up a cognitive theory of translation and interpreting. Finally, it should be noted that some of the research has had pedagogical goals for improving translator and interpreter training.

Methods The range of objects under study stands in contrast to affinity as regards methodology in research: the kind of studies carried out are empirical and, in most cases, experimental, using

187

Amparo Hurtado Albir

a variety of techniques and instruments for data collection (questionnaires, tests, prototypical texts, direct observation charts, recordings, etc.). Various kinds of technological tools have been employed, such as screen recording, keylogging, and eye-tracking, sometimes used in conjunction. Statistical tests have also been used for analyzing data. Along these lines, research carried out in the Hispanic sphere has made a major methodological contribution to cognitive research in Translation Studies, as data-collection instruments have been designed that can be used by other researchers. Furthermore, advances have been made in resolving methodological problems, for example, how to select texts and subjects, which tests to use to establish profiles for subjects, how to draw up questionnaires, how to combine technological tools to improve data collection and how to use statistical tests for data analysis. Another noteworthy point that should be stressed is the interdisciplinary nature of the research, mainly linked to research in Cognitive Science, Psycholinguistics and Neuroscience, although the paradigms used vary depending on the researcher and have been changing as research has evolved.

Future directions Cognitive research carried out in the Hispanic sphere shares the problems and challenges posed by this type of research in Translation Studies. The challenges which research has to confront are varied (see Alves and Hurtado 2017). First, solving data-collection problems derived from the intrinsic complexity of the object of study itself, given that translation and interpreting are highly complex cognitive activities, requiring multiple mechanisms and processes which cannot be observed directly. Second, responding to the lack of a tradition in empirical research – comparable to what has been the case in disciplines such as Cognitive Science or Psycholinguistics – which has an impact on the lack of tailored validated instruments. Third, and related to the previous point, resolving the difficulties in research designs, especially: (1) guaranteeing the ecological validity of the experiments that would allow one to reproduce real translation/ interpreting situations without interfering in data gathering; (2) using a representative and wide range of samples (with different subject profiles and language combinations) as a basis for greater generalization; (3) validating specific instruments for data collection; (4) making advances in developing technological tools to collect data on the translation/interpreting process and product; (5) making advances in the rigorous use of statistical analysis; and (6) encouraging replication between researchers.

Recommended reading Muñoz Martín, Ricardo. 2017. “Looking toward the Future of Cognitive Translation Studies.” In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition, edited by John W. Schwieter and Aline Ferreira, 555–72. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. The author argues that the wide array of approaches in cognitive translation studies should be simplified into computational vs. 4EA approaches (embodied, embedded, enacted, extended, affective), and that disciplinary progress rests upon the capacity of researchers to clarify their position with respect to both in each research project. Padilla, Presentación, Pedro Macizo, and Teresa Bajo. 2007. Tareas de traducción e interpretación desde una perspectiva cognitiva. Una propuesta integradora [Translation and Interpreting Tasks from a Cognitive Perspective: An Integrated Proposal]. Granada: Atrio.

188

Cognitive approaches This book puts forward a cognitive theory for translation and interpreting, underlining differing and common elements. It maps out and interdisciplinary framework, applying paradigms from Psycholinguistics and Cognitive Psychology.

Notes 1 This section is the result of collaboration with the following scholars, who have provided information about their own research: L. Alonso, M.J. Blasco, S. Díaz-Galaz, A. García, M. Giozza, A. Jiménez, I. Lacruz, R. Muñoz, P. Padilla and A. Rojo. 2 See also García Landa 1981, 1985. 3 Also members of this group were the PhD students Luis Castillo, Margherita Taffarel and Gisela Massana. 4 At Uniwersytet Wrocławski (Poland) since 2011.

References Alonso Bacigalupe, Luis. 1999a. “Visual Contact in Simultaneous Interpreting: Results of an Experimental Study.” In Anovar/Anosar: estudios de tradución e interpretación, vol. 1, edited by Alberto Álvarez Lugrís and Anxo Fernández Ocampo, 123–38. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. ———. 1999b. “Sobre la doble recepción del mensaje y la preparación del texto: resultados de un estudio experimental en IS.” In Anovar/Anosar: estudios de tradución e Interpretación, vol. 2, edited by Albert Álvarez Lugrís and Anxo Fernández Ocampo, 10–26. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. ———. 2003a. “Investigación empírica en interpretación: progresos recientes y perspectivas futuras.” In Panorama actual de la investigación en traducción e interpretación, vol. 1, edited by Emilio Ortega Arjonilla, 357–98. Granada: Atrio. ———, ed. 2003b. Investigación experimental en interpretación de linguas. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. ———. 2007. “Cara unha nova visión do procesamento da información en interpretación simultánea: resultados experimentais.” Viceversa 13: 55–77. ———. 2008. “Sobre fases y modelos: hacia una propuesta explicativa del procesamiento de la información durante la interpretación simultánea.” Sendebar 19: 257–88. ———. 2009. El procesamiento de la información durante la interpretación simultánea: un modelo en tres niveles. Granada: Atrio. ———. 2010. “Information Processing During Simultaneous Interpreting: A Three-Tier Approach.” Perspectives 18: 39–58. ———. 2013. “Interpretation. Quality: From Cognitive Constraints to Market Limitations.” In Quality in Interpreting: Widening the Scope, vol. 2, edited by Rafael Barranco-Droege, Macarena Pradas, and Olalla García, 9–33. Granada: Comares. Alves, Fabio, and Amparo Hurtado Albir. 2010. “Cognitive Approaches to Translation.” In Handbook of Translation Studies, edited by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer, 28–35. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ———. 2017. “Evolution, Challenges, and Perspectives for Research on Cognitive Aspects of Translation.” In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition, edited by John W. Schwieter and Aline Ferreira, 537–54. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Amigo Extremera, José J. 2015. “Fitting Culture into Translation Process Research.” Translation & Interpreting 7 (1): 26–46. Angelone, Erik B., and Álvaro Marín García. 2017. “Expertise Acquisition Through Deliberate Practice.” Translation Spaces 6 (1): 122–58. Apfelthaler, Matthias. 2014. “Stepping into Others’ Shoes: A Cognitive Perspective on Target Audience Orientation in Written Translation.” MonTI. Monografías de traducción e interpretación Special Issue 1: 303–30. ———. In press. “Directionality.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. 3rd ed., edited by Mona Baker and Gabriela Saldanha. London: Routledge. Bajo, Teresa, Francisca Padilla, and Presentación Padilla. 2000. “Comprehension Processes in Simultaneous Interpreting.” In Translation in Context, edited by Andrew Chesterman, Natividad Gallardo, and Yves Gambier, 127–42. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

189

Amparo Hurtado Albir Blasco Mayor, María J. 2007a. La comprensión oral en el desarrollo de la pericia de la interpretación de conferencias. Granada: Comares. ———. 2007b. “Language Labs and Beyond: Enhancing L2 Automatization in Interpreter Training.” In Proceedings of the International Technology, Education and Development Conference, edited by Luis Gómez Chova, David Martí Belenguer, and Ignacio Candel Torres. Valencia: International Association of Technology, Education and Development. [CD-Rom]. ———. 2008. “Aproximación cognitiva moderna a la formación en interpretación: plan de acción para la L2.” In Actas del III Congreso internacional de AIETI, vol. 2, edited by Luis Pegenaute, Janet DeCesaris, Mercedes Tricás, and Elisenda Bernal, 479–90. Barcelona: AIETI and PPU. ———. 2009. “CALL-Enhanced L2 Listening Skills – Aiming for Automatization in a Multimedia Environment.” Indian Journal of Applied Linguistics 35: 107–20. ———. 2015. “L2 as Predictor of Aptitude for Interpreting: An Empirical Study.” Translation and Interpreting Studies 10 (1): 108–32. Castro Arce, María. 2008a. “Lost in Reading, Lost in Translation – Experimento piloto sobre los procesos de lectura y comprensión al traducir.” In Actas del III Congreso internacional de AIETI, vol. 2, edited by Luis Pegenaute, Janet DeCesaris, Mercedes Tricás, and Elisenda Bernal, 27–31. Barcelona: AIETI and PPU. ———. 2008b. “Procesos de lectura y traducción al traducir.” In Aproximaciones cognitivas al estudio de la traducción y la interpretación, edited by María M. Fernández and Ricardo Muñoz, 31–54. Granada: Comares. Conde Ruano, Tomás. 2014a. “Traducción, géneros textuales y enfoques cognitivos.” Hermeneus 16: 85–106. ———. 2014b. “Los géneros textuales y la pericia en traducción.” Cadernos de Traduçao 34 (2): 167–85. ———. 2016. “Positive Feedback in Translation Assessment.” In From the Lab to the Classroom and Back Again, edited by Celia Martín and Víctor González, 155–80. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Cruces Colado, Susana. 2005. “Théories de la traduction et théories de l’apprentissage.” In On the Relationships Between Translation Theory and Translation Practice, edited by Jean Peeters, 189–95. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Díaz-Galaz, Stephanie. 2012. “La influencia del conocimiento previo en la interpretación simultánea de discursos especializados: un estudio empírico.” PhD diss., University of Granada. ———. 2014. “Individual Factors of Listening Comprehension in a Second Language: Implications for Interpreter Training.” Synergies 10: 31–40. Díaz-Galaz, Stephanie, Presentación Padilla, and Teresa Bajo. 2015. “Interpreting: A Comparison of Professional Interpreters and Interpreting Students. The Role of Advance Preparation in Simultaneous.” Interpreting 17 (1): 1–25. Díaz-Galaz, Stephanie, and Constanza López Portuguez. 2016. “La omisión en interpretación simultánea: ¿fallo involuntario o estrategia comunicativa?” Onomázein 33: 427–55. Galán-Mañas, Anabel. 2016. “Learning Portfolio in Translator Training.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 10 (2): 161–82. Galán-Mañas, Anabel, and Amparo Hurtado Albir. 2015. “Competence Assessment Procedures in Translator Training.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 9 (1): 63–82. García, Adolfo M. 2012. Traductología y neurocognición: Cómo se organiza el sistema lingüístico del traductor. Córdoba: Facultad de Lenguas de la UNC. ———. 2013. “Brain Activity During Translation: A Review of the Neuroimaging Evidence as a Testing Ground for Clinically-based Hypotheses.” Journal of Neurolinguistics 26 (3): 370–83. ———. 2014. “The Interpreter Advantage Hypothesis: Preliminary Data Patterns and Empirically Motivated Questions.” Translation and Interpreting Studies 9 (2): 219–38. ———. 2015a. “Translating with an Injured Brain: Neurofunctional and Neuroanatomical Aspects of Interlingual Reformulation as Revealed by Bilinguals with Cerebral Lesions.” Meta 60 (1): 112–34. ———. 2015b. “Psycholinguistic Explorations of Lexical Translation Equivalents: Thirty Years of Research and Their Implications for Cognitive Translatology.” Translation Spaces 4 (1): 9–28. García, Adolfo M., Agustín Ibáñez, David Huepe, Alexander L. Houck, Maëva Michon, Carlos G. Lezama, Sumeer Chadha and Álvaro Rivera-Rei. 2014. “Word Reading and Word Translation in Bilinguals: The Role of Formal and Informal Translation Expertise.” Frontiers in Psychology: Cognitive Science 5: 1302. García, Adolfo M., Ezequiel Mikulan, and Agustín Ibáñez. 2016. “A Neuroscientific Toolkit for Translation Studies.” In Re-Embedding Translation Process Research, edited by Ricardo Muñoz, 21–46. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

190

Cognitive approaches García Landa, Mariano. 1978. “Les deviations délibérées de la littéralité en interprétation de conférence.” PhD diss., Université Sorbonne Nouvelle. ———. 1981. “La ‘théorie du sens’, théorie de la traduction et base de son enseignement.” In L’enseignement de l’interprétation et de la traduction, edited by Jean Delisle, 113–29. Ottawa: Editions de l’Université d’Ottawa. ———. 1985. “La teoría de la traducción y la psicología experimental de los procesos de percepción del lenguaje.” Estudios de Psicología 19–20: 173–93. Giozza, Mónica. 2013. “La investigación en traducción orientada al proceso.” LyCE Estudios 16: 93–117. ———. 2016. “El proceso traductor como objeto de estudio. ¿Qué está sucediendo más allá de Argentina?” Interpares 3: 125–43. ———. 2017. “TPR, investigación orientada al proceso traductor: una fuente inagotable de información.” In Actas del IV Congreso Nacional en Lingüística y Traducción, 270–78. Universidad Nacional del Comahue. Giozza, Mónica, and Mar Gatti. 2009. “La secuencia del proceso traductor en alumnos de la carrera del traductorado.” Digilenguas 3: 305–13. ———. 2012. “Dificultades traslativas en marcas de subjetividad.” Actas de las décimas jornadas anuales de investigación del Universidad del Aconcagua [CD-Rom]. ———. 2014. “La subcompetencia instrumental y la traducción de marcas de subjetividad: ¿una relación casual o causal?” Actas de las decimosegundas jornadas anuales de investigación del CIUDA [Proceedings from the CIUDA Twelfth Annual Research Conference], Universidad del Aconcagua [CD Rom]. ———. 2015. “On the Difficulties Posed by the Translation of Subjectivity Markers: A Case Study.” Translation Spaces 4 (1): 75–97. Gómez Hurtado, Maribel. 2007. “Traducir: ¿capacidad innata o destreza adquirible?” Quaderns 14: 139–53. Hurtado Albir, Amparo. 1990. La notion de fidélité en traduction. Paris: Didier Éruditon. ———. 2011 [2001]. Traducción y Traductología. 5th ed. rev. Madrid: Cátedra. ———. 2015. “The Acquisition of Translation Competence. Competences, Tasks, and Assessment in Translator Training.” Meta 60 (2): 256–80. ———. 2017a. “Translation and Translation Competence.” In Researching Translation Competence by PACTE Group, edited by Amparo Hurtado Albir, 3–33. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ———, ed. 2017b. Researching Translation Competence by PACTE Group. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ———, ed. Submitted. Researching translation competence acquisition: Design and results of the PACTE group’s experimental research. Hurtado Albir, Amparo, and Fabio Alves. 2009. “Translation as a Cognitive Activity.” In The Routledge Companion to Translation Studies, edited by Jeremy Munday, 54–73. London: Routledge. Hurtado Albir, Amparo, and Christian Olalla-Soler. 2016. “Procedures for Assessing the Acquisition of Cultural Competence in Translator Training.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 10 (3): 318–42. Hurtado Albir, Amparo, and Stefano Pavani. 2018. “An Empirical Study on Multidimensional Summative Assessment in Translation Teaching.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 12 (1): 25–47. Jiménez Ivars, Amparo. 1998. “La traducción a la vista como estrategia para desarrollar las competencias en interpretación.” In Nuevas tendencias y aplicaciones de la traducción, edited by Carmen Valero Garcés, 245–52. Alcalá de Henares: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Alcalá. ———. 1999. “Estudio descriptivo de la traducción a la vista.” PhD diss., University Jaume I. ———. 2008. “Sight Translation and Written Translation. A Comparative Analysis of Causes of Problems, Strategies and Translation Errors Within the PACTE Translation Competence Model.” Forum 6 (2): 79–104. Jiménez Ivars, Amparo, and Daniel Pinazo Calatayud. 2001. “I Failed Because I Got Very Nervous. Public Speaking Fear, Anxiety and Performance in Interpreting Trainees.” The Interpreters’ Newsletter 11: 105–18. ———. 2002. “Aptitudes necesarias en la formación de intérpretes. Un estudio exploratorio.” Quaderns 8: 77–97. ———. 2013. “Mindfulness Training for Interpreting Students.” Lebende Sprachen 58 (2): 341–65. Klimant, Petra. 2016. “Translation Evaluation Upside Down: Phenomena Instead of Errors.” In From the Lab to the Classroom and Back Again, edited by Celia Martín and Victor González, 181–220. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.

191

Amparo Hurtado Albir Lacruz, Isabel. 2014. “Cognates as a Window into the Translator’s Mind.” In The Development of Translation Competence, edited by John Schwieter and Aline Ferreira, 287–314. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. ———. 2018. “An Experimental Investigation of Stages of Processing in Post-Editing.” In Innovation and Expansion in Translation Process Research, edited by Isabel Lacruz and Riitta Jääskeläinen, 217–40. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, ATA series. Lacruz, Isabel, Michael Denkowski, and Alon Lavie. 2014. “Cognitive Effort and Cognitive Demand in Post-Editing.” In Proceedings of the AMTA 2014. Third Workshop on Post-Editing Technology and Practice, edited by Sharon O’Brien, Michel Simard, and Lucia Specia, 73–84. Association for Machine Translation in the Americas. Lacruz, Isabel, and Gregory M. Shreve. 2014. “Pauses and Cognitive Effort in Post-Editing.” In PostEditing: Processes, Technology and Applications, edited by Sharon O’Brien, Laura Balling, Michael Carl, Michel Simard, and Lucia Specia, 246–72. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Lacruz, Isabel, Gregory M. Shreve, and Erik Angelone. 2012. “Average Pause Ratio as an Indicator of Cognitive Effort in Post-Editing.” In Proceedings of the AMTA 2012. Workshop on Post-Editing Technology and Practice, edited by Sharon O’Brien, Michel Simard, and Lucia Specia, 21–30. Association for Machine Translation in the Americas. López, María J., Presentación Padilla, Teresa Bajo, and Julio Santiago de Torres. 2007. “Predicting Proficiency in Sign Language Interpreting: a Preliminary Study.” Interpreting 9: 71–93. Martín de León, Celia. 2008. “Skopos and Beyond: A Critical Study of Functionalism.” Target 20 (1): 1–28. ———. 2013. “Who Cares If the Cat Is on the Mat? Contributions of Cognitive Models of Meaning to Translation.” In Cognitive Linguistics and Translation, edited by Ana Rojo and Iraide Ibarretxe, 99–122. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. ———. 2017. “Mental Representations.” In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition, edited by John W. Schwieter and Aline Ferreira, 106–26. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Martín de León, Celia, and Marisa Presas Corbella. 2011. “Metaphern als Ausdruck subjektiver Theorien zum Übersetzen: Eine empirische Untersuchung zur konzeptuell-strukturierenden Funktion von Metaphernmodellen bei Studienanfängern.” Target 23 (2): 272–310. ———. 2014. “The Evolution of Translation Trainees’ Subjective Theories: An Empirical Study of Metaphors about Translation.” In Metaphor and Intercultural Communication, edited by Andreas Musolff, Fiona MacArthur, and Giulio Pagani, 19–33. London: Bloomsbury. Martínez Melis, Nicole. 2001. “Évaluation et didactique de la traduction: Le cas de la traduction dans la langue étrangère.” PhD diss., Autonomous University of Barcelona. Martínez Melis, Nicole, and Amparo Hurtado Albir. 2001. “Assessment in Translation Studies: Research Needs.” Meta 46 (2): 272–87. Muñoz Martín, Ricardo. 2009a. “The Way They Were: Subject Profiling in Translation Process Research.” In Methodology, Technology and Innovation in Translation Process Research, edited by Inger M. Mees, Fabio Alves, and Susanne Göpferich, 87–108. Copenhaguen: Samfundslitteratur Press. ———. 2009b. “Typos & Co.” In Behind the Mind: Methods, Models and Results in the Translation Process Research, edited by Susanne Göpferich, Arnt L. Jakobsen, and Inger M. Mees, 167–89. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur Press. ———. 2010a. “Leave No Stone Unturned: On the Development of Cognitive Translatology.” Translation and Interpreting Studies 5 (2): 145–62. ———. 2010b. “On Paradigms and Cognitive Translatology.” In Translation and Cognition, edited by Gregory M. Shreve and Erik Angelone, 169–87. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ———. 2011. “Nomen Mihi Legio Est: A Cognitive Approach to Natural Translation.” In Interpreting Naturally, edited by María J. Blasco and Amparo Jiménez, 35–66. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. ———. 2012a. “Cognitive and Psycholinguistic Approaches.” In Routledge Handbook of Translation Studies, edited by Carmen Millán and Francesca Bartrina, 252–67. London: Routledge. ———. 2012b. “Just a Matter of Scope: Mental Load in Translation Process Research.” Translation Spaces 1: 169–88. ———. 2013. “More Than a Way with Words. The Interface Between Cognitive Linguistics and Cognitive Translatology.” In Cognitive Linguistics and Translation, edited by Ana Rojo and Iraide Ibarretxe, 75–94. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

192

Cognitive approaches ———. 2014a. “A  Blurred Snapshot of Advances in Translation Process Research.” MonTI. Monografías de traducción e interpretación Special Issue 1: 49–84. ———. 2014b. “Situating Translation Expertise: A Review with a Sketch of a Construct.” In The Development of Translation Competence, edited by John W. Schwieter and Aline Ferreira, 2–56. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars. ———. 2015. “Natural Translation/Interpreting.” In The Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, edited by Franz Pöchhacker, 269–70. London: Routledge. ———. 2016a. “Of Minds and Men – Computers and Translators.” Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 52 (2): 351–81. ———. 2016b. “Processes of What Models? On the Cognitive Indivisibility of Translation Acts and Events.” Translation Spaces 5 (1): 145–61. ———. 2017. “Looking Toward the Future of Cognitive Translation Studies.” In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition, edited by John W. Schwieter and Aline Ferreira, 555–72. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Neunzig, Wilhelm. 2002. “Estudios empíricos en Traducción: apuntes metodológicos.” Cadernos de Tradução 10: 75–96. ———. 2011. “Empirical Studies in Translation: Methodological and Epistemological Questions.” Traduction, Terminologie, Rédaction 24 (2): 15–40. Neunzig, Wilhelm, and Helena Tanqueiro. 2007. Estudios empíricos en traducción: enfoques y métodos. Girona: Documenta Universitaria. Orozco, Mariana. 2000. “Instrumentos de medida de la adquisición de la competencia traductora: Construcción y validación.” PhD diss., Autonomous University of Barcelona. Orozco, Mariana, and Amparo Hurtado Albir. 2002. “Measuring Translation Competence Acquisition.” Meta 47 (3): 375–402. PACTE. 2000. “Acquiring Translation Competence: Hypotheses and Methodological Problems in a Research Project.” In Investigating Translation, edited by Allison Beeby, Doris Ensinger, and Marisa Presas, 99–106. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ———. 2002. “Exploratory Tests in a Study of Translation Competence.” Conference Interpretation and Translation 4 (2): 41–69. ———. 2003. “Building a Translation Competence Model.” In Triangulating Translation: Perspectives in Process Oriented Research, edited by Fabio Alves, 43–66. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ———. 2005. “Investigating Translation Competence: Conceptual and Methodological Issues.” Meta 50 (2): 609–19. ———. 2008. “First Results of a Translation Competence Experiment: ‘Knowledge of Translation’ and ‘Efficacy of the Translation Process’.” In Translator and Interpreter Training. Issues, Methods and Debates, edited by John Kearns, 104–26. London: Continuum. ———. 2009. “Results of the Validation of the PACTE Translation Competence Model: Acceptability and Decision Making.” Across Languages and Cultures 10 (2): 207–30. ———. 2011a. “Results of the Validation of the PACTE Translation Competence Model: Translation Project and Dynamic Translation Index.” In Cognitive Explorations of Translation, edited by Sharon O’Brien, 30–53. London/New York: Continuum. ———. 2011b. “Results of the Validation of the PACTE Translation Competence Model: Translation Problems and Translation Competence.” In Methods and Strategies of Process Research, edited by Cecilia Alvstad, Adelina Hild, and Elisabet Tiselius, 317–43. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ———. 2014. “First Results of PACTE Group’s Experimental Research on Translation Competence Acquisition: The Acquisition of Declarative Knowledge of Translation.” MonTI. Monografías de traducción e interpretación Special Issue 1: 85–115. ———. 2015. “Results of PACTE’s Experimental Research on the Acquisition of Translation Competence: The Acquisition of Declarative and Procedural Knowledge in Translation.” Translation Spaces 4 (1): 29–35. ———. 2018. “Competence Levels in Translation: Working Towards a European Framework.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 12 (2): 111–131. ———. In press a. “Evolution of the Efficacy of the Translation Process in Translation Competence Acquisition. Results of the PACTE Group’s Experimental Research.” Meta 64 (1). ———. In press b. “Establecimiento de niveles de competencias en traducción: Primeros resultados del proyecto NACT.” Onomazein 43.

193

Amparo Hurtado Albir Padilla, Presentación. 1994. “Procesos de memoria y atención: hacia una teoría cognitiva de la interpretación de conferencias.” Sendebar 5: 55–66. ———. 1998. “Hacia un modelo de memoria y atención en interpretación simultánea.” Quaderns 2: 107–17. ———. 2002. “Divided Attention in Simultaneous Interpreting: A  Proposal for a Cognitive Training Method.” In Translation Studies: An International Forum of Translatology, edited by Panchanan Mohanty, 139–68. Vijayawada: Vyasa Offset. ———. 2003. “Aportación de las ciencias cognitivas a la investigación sobre interpretación.” In Panorama actual de la investigación en traducción e interpretación, edited by Emilio Ortega Arjonilla, 415–28. Granada: Atrio. ———. 2005. “Cognitive Implications of the English-Spanish Direction for the Quality and the Training of Simultaneous Interpreting.” Communication & Cognition. Special issue Directionality in Interpreting 47–62. Padilla, Presentación, Teresa Bajo, and Francisca Padilla. 1995. “Cognitive Processes of Memory in Simultaneous Interpretation.” In Topics in Interpreting Research, edited by J. Tommola, 61–71. Turku: University of Turku. ———. 2000. “Proposal for a Cognitive Theory of Translation and Interpreting: A  Methodology for Future Empirical Research.” The Interpreters Newsletter 9: 61–78. ———. 2007. Tareas de traducción e interpretación desde una perspectiva cognitiva. Una propuesta integradora. Granada: Atrio. ———. 2008. “Procesamiento de la información en tareas de comprensión oral: cuando la interpretación marca la diferencia.” Sendebar 18: 159–91. Perea Sardón, José I. 2007. “Petra Tag I. Un etiquetador para la traducción.” In Aproximaciones cognitivas al estudio de la traducción y la interpretación, edited by María M. Fernández and Ricardo Muñoz, 101–22. Granada: Comares. Presas, Marisa. 2017. “Implicit Theories and Conceptual Change in Translator Training.” In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition, edited by John W. Schwieter and Aline Ferreira, 519–34. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Ramos Caro, Marina. 2015. “The Emotional Experience of Films: Does Audio Description Make a Difference?” The Translator 21 (1): 69–84. ———. 2016. “Testing Audio Narration: The Emotional Impact of Language in Audio Description.” Perspectives 24 (4): 606–34. Ramos Caro, Marina, and Ana M. Rojo López. 2014. “Feeling Audio Description – Exploring the Impact of AD on Emotional Response.” Translation Spaces 3: 133–50. Rodríguez-Inés, Patricia. 2009. “Evaluating the Process and Not Just the Product When Using Corpora in Translator Education.” In Corpus Use and Translating, edited by Allison Beeby, Patricia RodríguezInés, and Pilar Sánchez-Gijón, 129–49. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Rodríguez-Inés, Patricia, and Amparo Hurtado Albir. 2012. “Assessing Competence in Using Electronic Corpora in Translator Training.” In Global Trends in Translator and Interpreter Training, edited by Michal Borodo and Séverine Hubscher-Davidson, 96–126. London: Continuum. Rojo López, Ana M. 2002a. “Applying Frame Semantics to Translation: A Practical Example.” Meta 47 (3): 311–50. ———. 2002b. “Frame Semantics and the Translation of Humour.” Babel 48 (1): 34–77. ———. 2015. “Translation Meets Cognitive Science: The Imprint of Translation on Cognitive Processing.” Multilingua 34 (6): 721–46. ———. 2017a. “The Role of Emotions.” In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition, edited by John W. Schwieter and Aline Ferreira, 369–85. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. ———. 2017b. “The Role of Creativity.” In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition, edited by John W. Schwieter and Aline Ferreira, 350–68. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Rojo López, Ana M., and Marina Ramos Caro. 2014. “The Impact of Translators’ Ideology on the Translation Process: A Reaction Time Experiment.” MonTI. Monografías de traducción e interpretación Special Issue 1: 247–72. ———. 2016. “Can Emotion Stir Translation Skill? Defining the Impact of Positive and Negative Emotions on Translation Performance.” In Reembedding Translation Process Research, edited by Ricardo Muñoz, 107–30. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ———. 2018. “The Role of Expertise in Emotion Regulation: Exploring the Effect of Expertise on Translation Performance Under Emotional Stir.” In New Directions in Cognitive and Empirical

194

Cognitive approaches Translation Process Research, edited by Isabel Lacruz and Riitta Jääskeläinen, 105–29. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Rojo López, Ana M., and Iraide Ibarretxe Antuñano, eds. 2013. Cognitive Linguistics and Translation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Rojo López, Ana M., Marina Ramos Caro, and Javier Valenzuela Manzanares. 2014. “The Emotional Impact of Translation: A Heart Rate Study.” Journal of Pragmatics 71: 31–44. Rojo López, Ana M., and Javier Valenzuela. 2013. “Constructing Meaning in Translation. The Role of Constructions in Translation Problems.” In Cognitive Linguistics and Translation, edited by Ana M. Rojo and Iraide Ibarretxe Antuñano, 283–310. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Shreve, Gregory M., and Isabel Lacruz. 2014. “Translation as a Higher Order Cognitive Process.” In Companion to Translation Studies, edited by Sandra Bermann and Catherine Porter, 107–18. WileyBlackwell Companion Series. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. ———. 2017. “Aspects of a Cognitive Model of Translation.” In Handbook of Translation and Cognition, edited by John Schwieter and Aline Ferreira, 127–43. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Valenzuela Manzanares, Javier, and Ana M. Rojo López. 2016. “Traducción y lingüística cognitive.” In La traducción: nuevos planteamientos teórico-metodológicos, edited by Azucena Penas Ibañez, 47–74. Madrid: Síntesis.

195

11 AN OVERVIEW OF INTERPRETING IN SPANISH Past, present and future Robert Neal Baxter

Introduction Before going on to look in detail at the current state of interpreting in Spain and Spanishspeaking Latin America, providing a wide-ranging overview covering various aspects such as graduate and undergraduate training, regulation of the profession and current research topics and future trends, it is useful to begin with a working definition. Interpreting is akin to translation in that both involve the use of a third party or intermediary to overcome linguistic barriers to communication by “re-expressing in one language what has been expressed in another” (Gile 2009, 6), with the key difference between the two residing in the fact that “Translation converts a written text into another written text, while interpretation converts an oral message into another oral message” in the oft-quoted words of Seleskovitch (1978, 2). While problems arise regarding the exact nature of interpreting and especially the role of the interpreter (see, for example, Roy 2002), this simple working definition will suffice for the purposes of this chapter that deals, it should be stated, exclusively with spoken language interpreting as opposed to sign language interpreting. For the sake of convenience, two main modes (also often referred to as ‘techniques’) can be distinguished: firstly, the age-old consecutive mode, predating written translation, where the interpreter first hears the source text either whole or in parts before transmitting its meaning in a different language; and secondly, the far more recent simultaneous mode where the interpreter produces the ‘oral translation’ while listening to the original. The latter was first employed on a wide scale with the Nuremberg Trials in 1945 (Seeber 2015, 79) when technological advances rendered it feasible. A third variation whose exact status as a mode or not remains open to debate (Baxter 2016) usually referred to as “chuchotage” (susurrada in Spanish) also exists, where the interpreter sits next to their target audience and without the use of headphones or a microphone ‘whispers’ to them, i.e. speaking at a low volume so as to avoid disturbing other members of the public. The different modes tend to – although need not – be used for different types of interpreting (often referred to as modalidades in Spanish), ranging from conference interpreting for the private sector and international institutions and interpreting for the media, to public service interpreting, covering court (a.k.a. legal or judicial), medical and community interpreting, etc. and escort interpreting. 196

An overview of interpreting in Spanish

Finally, while usually performed in situ, in certain contexts new technologies now make it viable to provide interpreting remotely, either via telephone, which allows for visual input, or via video, both on-site (i.e. at the venue but not in the same room) and off-site (e.g. home-working). While all of these modes and variables share many features, each requires dedicated training in order to master of a series of specific techniques involving active listening, comprehension and memory (often supplemented by note-taking techniques) in the case of consecutive and bilateral interpreting and multi-tasking in the case of simultaneous interpreting. As such, they are the object of separate modules in undergraduate courses, many of which see consecutive as a preliminary stage before progressing to simultaneous interpreting, often set aside for advanced Master’s courses. Interpreting is one of the most popular and most widely taught undergraduate humanities courses in Spain, currently offered at twenty-three mainly public (17) and private or semipublic (6) universities, notably clustered mainly along the eastern Mediterranean in Catalonia (3), Valencia (4) and Murcia (1) as well as Madrid (6) and Andalusia (4), with outliers in Aragon (1), the Basque Country (1), the Canary Isles (1), Castile and León (2), and Galicia (1), with 2,500 places available in all.1 Most of the universities, except San Jorge, Córdoba and Murcia, belong to the Conference of Centres and Departments of Translation and Interpreting (CCDUTI).2 The Autonomous University of Barcelona and the Universities of Alicante, the Basque Country, Castelló, Granada and Las Palmas also belong to the Iberian Association of Translation and Interpreting Studies (AIETI)3 that holds a biennial Congress. All courses offer Spanish with English, followed by French and German as the main first foreign languages. Barring the private Antonio de Nebrija University (Madrid), all include a range of basic interpreting modules with varying levels of specialization. Approximately only half of the courses4 provide compulsory training in simultaneous interpreting with specific facilities differing considerably, ranging from only one laboratory with a capacity for twelve students, to four dedicated laboratories with a total capacity for seventy-eight students (Baxter 2014). The situation in Spanish-speaking South and Central America is somewhat different, where private universities predominate. Most courses are four years long as in Spain, but can last up to five years or more, as in the case of the University of Buenos Aires and the Higher Institute of Interpreters and Translators (Mexico). Most courses are available in combination with English only, although the University of Buenos Aires also offers German, French, Italian and Portuguese. The term ‘traductorado público’ used in Latin America usually does not ­necessarily – but often does – include sworn interpreting, as in the case of the University of Aconcagua that includes one basic introductory course to interpreting. Morón University also offers one basic consecutive and simultaneous module, while Caece and the University of Buenos Aires also have two, albeit unspecified, interpreting modules. Harvard Educational Systems (Mexico) and the American Technological University (Mexico) both offer degrees in Translation and Interpreting, again with unspecified interpreting contents (accounting for 12% in the case of the latter). The University of El Salvador (Argentina) offers a degree in Conference Interpreting, although the study plan only includes a minimal, mainly theoretical interpreting component,5 whereas the degree in Interpreting available at the Universidad del Museo Social Argentino provides limited consecutive and simultaneous training.6 One notable exception is the Higher Institute of Interpreters and Translators (Mexico) whose degree in Interpreting covers a wide range of specific and highly specialized interpreting courses, ranging from architecture and design, science and technology and economy and commerce to international conferences, medical and court interpreting. 197

Robert Neal Baxter

Following the creation of the first Master’s degrees at the Universidad de La Laguna (Canary Isles) in 1988, currently six public and four private universities in Spain7 offer degrees in Conference Interpreting, including Comillas (Madrid), which is a member of the European Masters in Conference Interpreting (EMCI) Consortium. Others include the specialized module within Interpreting and Intercultural Studies at the Autonomous University of Barcelona and the specialized itinerary in cultural mediation, including liaison interpreting, as part of the MA in Professional Translation and Intercultural Mediation at Las Palmas. The course offered by the Catholic University of Murcia involves blended learning while the research-oriented Master’s degree in Translation and Interpreting Research and Translation at the Jaume I University in Castelló (Valencia) is fully distance learning. All courses are available primarily in Spanish and English, with other languages depending upon availability, notably French and German with occasional Italian and Portuguese as well as Arabic (Granada and Alfonso X), Chinese (Alfonso X) and Russian (Alfonso X, Catholic University of Murcia). In Latin American, several – again mainly private – universities offer Translating and Interpreting Master’s degrees with Spanish in combination with English; often, however, with a limited and/or unspecified interpreting component, located mainly in Mexico (Universidad Autónoma de Guadalajara, Universidad Madero and Universidad Anáhuac), Colombia (Universidad Autónoma de Manizales) and Argentina (Universidad de Buenos Aires), covering consecutive and court interpreting. Turning to interpreting as a profession, both Spain and Latin America have a range of feepaying, non-profit associations which share a series of common aims, e.g. to bring together translators and interpreters to defend the interests of the profession; to guarantee high quality services and confidentiality enshrined in an ethical code of conduct; and to provide life-long training for the members though seminars, workshops and congresses, including new technologies. Most also provide a searchable online database of member translators and interpreters classified according to specialities and languages. Membership conditions vary considerably. For example, the Mexican College of Conference Interpreters (CMIC) requires a minimum of 200 professional working days’ experience as well as the backing of five existing members. The Colombian Association of Translators and Interpreters (ACTI) sets an entrance exam and requires documented proof of the quality of the applicant’s work, whereas an interview or five years’ accredited experience plus the backing of three members is required by the Guatemalan Association of Interpreters and Translators (AGIT). Different membership categories may also exist, depending upon the level of fees paid, e.g. full members versus students or graduates in the case of the Galician Association of Professional Translators and Interpreters (AGPTI), with only full-paying members appearing in the directory. In countries where it is legally feasible, as in Latin America, many professional associations function as official regulatory colleges, often reflected in their name, contributing to regulating the profession, e.g. rates, working conditions, etc. As a member of the European Union that guarantees free market competition, no new official regulatory colleges have been created in Spain since 2006 and no professional translators’ and interpreters’ associations function as such. A number of professional associations exist in Spain, one of which, the Conference Interpreters Association of Spain (AICE) founded in 1968 with over eighty members, is dedicated exclusively to interpreters and is a member of the Official College of Doctors and Graduates in Philosophy, Letters and Sciences of the Community of Madrid. However, most cover both translators and interpreters, such as the Spanish Professional Association of Translators and Interpreters (APETI), founded in 1954 – according to its site one of the oldest of its kind not 198

An overview of interpreting in Spanish

only in Spain but in the world – as well as correctors in the case of the Spanish Association of Translators, Correctors and Interpreters (ASETRAD) set up in 2003 which publishes the online journal La Linterna del Traductor (see the following) and the specific Professional Association of Legal and Sworn Translators and Interpreters (APTIJ), a founding member of EULITA (European Legal Interpreters and Translators Association), bringing together sworn court and police translators and interpreters appointed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation. Most are members of the Red Vértice network of professional Translation and Interpretation (T&I) associations that also includes several Latin American associations. Another specific network also exists for Public Administration Translators and Interpreters (RITAP) created in 2009 following the study days held in Madrid by the Directorate-General for Translation of the European Commission and responsible for drawing up the White Book on Institutional Translation and Interpreting in Spain.8 Finally, two special interest groups exist for members of the International Association of Conference Interpreters (AIIC) located in Madrid (AIM) and Barcelona (AIB). A number of local associations also exist, with associations such as the Galician Association of Professional Translators and Interpreters (AGPTI) founded in 2001 (not to be confused with the older, non-professional Galician Translators (ATG) founded in 1985 which publishes Viceversa) and the Association of Basque-Language Translators, Correctors and Interpreters (EIZIE) founded in 1987 which publishes Senez (see the following), both of which specifically include the promotion of the co-official languages amongst their statuary aims. Two associations operate in Catalonia: the Association of Sworn Translators and Interpreters of Catalonia (ATIJC) founded in 1992; and the Professional Association of Translators and Interpreters of Catalonia (APTIC) set up in 2009 after the fusion of the Association of Translators and Interpreters of Catalonia (ATIC) and Translators and Interpreters Associated for College (TRIAC). Finally, Valencia is home to the Xarxa, a network of professional translators and interpreters created in 2003. Many countries in Latin America also have professional associations and colleges, some of which are specifically for conference interpreters, while others cover both translators and interpreters. Most have between forty and fifty members and were mainly founded between the early 1980s and late 1990s, with the notable exceptions of the Association of Translators and Interpreters of Ecuador (ATIEC) founded in 2007 and the Guatemalan Association of Interpreters and Translators (AGIT) founded 1973, both of which are members of the International Federation of Translators (FIT), as are the Cuban Association of Translators and Interpreters (ACTI) and the Argentinian Association of Translators and Interpreters (AATI). Others include the Argentine Association of Conference Interpreters (ADICA), the Bolivian Association of Conference Interpreters (ABI), the College of Translators and Interpreters of Chile (COTICH), the Colombian Association of Translators and Interpreters (ACTI), the Mexican College of Conference Interpreters (CMIC) and the Venezuelan Association of Conference Interpreters (AVINC), founded in 1980 by members of the Venezuelan chapter of the International Association of Conference Interpreters (AIIC).

Historical background One of the leading international names in the history of interpreting is the Spanish-born, erstwhile professor of interpretation at the University of Salamanca and founding member of the AIETI, Jesús Baigorri Jalón, known for his essential reference work on the history of the 199

Robert Neal Baxter

profession (Baigorri Jalón 2000) and who has recently co-edited a groundbreaking work on the subject (Takeda and Baigorri Jalón 2016). However, while much is made in the literature of the Nuremburg Trials after the end of the Second World War as the genesis of modern-day interpreting, marked by the advent of the simultaneous mode, interpreting itself – notably consecutive interpreting which requires no technical equipment – can be traced back at least 3,000 years to the Ancient Egyptian “Overseer of Dragomans” (Hermann 2002, 16) and quite probably almost to the dawn of civilization with the first contacts between human groups speaking different languages who needed to communicate. Interpreting in Spanish can be dated to two such early key periods of contact between different cultures/languages. Firstly was the Al-Andalus period, with the Toledo School of Translators (Escuela de Traductores de Toledo) dedicated to translating (one may also fairly assume that in such a context interpreting would also have taken place) Arabic and Hebrew into Latin and later Spanish, often via Classical Greek and Latin between the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, making it amongst the oldest in the world. Zanón (2013), professor of Arabic translation at the University of Alacant, provides an interesting insight into the role of the embassy interpreters at the court of al-Ḥakam II, Caliph of Cordoba during the second half of the tenth century (961–976), while other researchers such as Abad Merino (2003, 2005, 2008), professor of Spanish at the University of Murcia, have also carried out extensive studies into the historical figure of the dragomán or trujimán in the later Morisco period (Alvar 2010). Later, still in Europe, this was to lead to the emergence of the jóvenes de lenguas in the eighteenth century selected to serve at the Spanish embassies and consulates abroad modelled on the earlier original Venetian giovani di lingua discussed in detail by Cáceres-Würsig (2012). Secondly was the colonization of the Americas. Much has also been written about the role of the interpreter – known variously as nahuatlos or lenguas – in the colonization of the Americas by the Spanish Crown, with notable contributions to the field by Payàs in collaboration with Alonso Araguás and other authors (2008, 2009, 2012 inter alia) who has published extensively on the subject of interpreting in the historical context of the New World, together with Bastin (2003), De la Cuba (2015), and Vega Cernuda (2004) as well as earlier works such as that by de la Cuesta (1992). One key figure often cited in the literature and worthy of mention in her own right is the controversial Malinche (also variously known as Malinalli, Malintzin or Doña Marina), a Nahua slave who served as interpreter and advisor to Hernán Cortés during the conquest of Mexico (Cypess 1991). Usually portrayed as a scheming traitor, her name gave rise, for example, to the term “malinchista” referring to someone who turns their back on their own origins, preferring to fawn over foreigners. Nevertheless, more recent, less politically emotive academic research (Godayol 2012; Valdeón 2013) has cast her figure in a somewhat different, more balanced light based on the actual historical evidence available. Returning, finally, to modern-day Europe, landmarks in interpreter training came about when the Autonomous University of Barcelona was the first public university in Spain to offer an official degree in Translation and Interpreting in 1972, followed five years later by the University of Granada.

Main research topics A preliminary idea of some of the main research topics under discussion in Spain can be gleaned from the catalogue of the leading academic publishing house in the field, Comares, in its Interlingua collection,9 with many publications stemming from academic research, 200

An overview of interpreting in Spanish

covering theoretical issues, especially quality in interpreting and community and public service interpreting, including medical and legal interpreting as well as manuals for learners. At a more in-depth level of analysis, many universities where Interpreting and Translation is taught have their own or associated journals, with an inevitable bearing on research topics, while a minority of journals are produced by professional associations with a strong practical bent. While the bulk of the publications focus primarily on translation-related issues, most devote a certain, albeit considerably lesser, amount of space to papers dealing with interpreting. In this respect, Sendebar stands out as a notable exception owing to the coverage given to interpreting. This section analyzes the key research trends reflected in the online indexes of eight currently published journals from Spain plus two from Latin America spanning the twenty-twoyear period 1994–2016, although not all of the journals have been running for the whole period (see the following). While other journals based outside Spanish-speaking countries may occasionally also publish in Spanish, they are not dealt with here owing to their considerably more sporadic nature. The vast majority of the journals analyzed are published by Translation and Interpreting faculties within Spain, namely: Estudios de Traducción (Complutense, Madrid), Hermeneus (University of Valladolid, Soria), Hikma (Córdoba), MonTI (Universidad de Alicante, Universidad Jaume I de Castelló, Universidad de Valencia), Quaderns (UAB), Sendebar (Granada), Skopos (Córdoba), and TRANS (Malaga), including two online journals both published by the University of Malaga: Redit and Entreculturas. Only two specialized journals publishing in Spanish outside Spain were located: Mutatis Mutandis (Universidad de Antioquia, Colombia), Onomázein (Pontificia Universidad Católica, Chile). Finally, three journals are produced by professional associations, namely Viceversa (Association of Galician Translators, in close collaboration with the University of Vigo), Senez (Association of Basque-language Translators, Correctors and Interpreters) and the online La linterna del traductor (Spanish Association of Translators, Correctors and Interpreters), which, as far as interpreting is concerned, mostly comprises interviews with practitioners regarding their personal experiences and other aspects of the profession. The longest-running journal is Senez founded in 1984 with forty-seven issues to date, closely followed by Sendebar (27 issues since 1990), followed by Viceversa (20 issues) Onomázein (38 issues), Trans (21 issues), Quaderns (24 issues) and Hermēneus (19 issues), all founded in the mid-late 1990s (1996–1999). Hikma began publishing in 2002 with 15 issues to date, with the remainder founded in the late 2000s (Redit, 9 issues since 2008; Mutatis Mutandis, 20 issues since 2008; EntreCulturas, 8 issues since 2009; MonTI, 12 issues since 2009; La Linterna del Traductor, 14 issues since 2009). The most recent are Estudios de Traducción (6 issues published since 2011) and Skopos (6 issues since 2012). The journal reference ratings used in Spain are the Integrated Classification of Scientific Reviews (CIRC, latest version 2012) run by the private, Granada-based company EC3metrics S.L. and the CARHUS+ (2014) developed by the Catalan Agency for the Management of University Aid and Research (AGAUR).10 Based on these, the majority of the journals analyzed fall within a CIRC 2012 range of B, with the notable exception of Onomázein, classed as A, containing only three interpreting-related papers all of recent origin (2011) and Transfer, classed as C. CARHUS+ 2014 ratings fluctuate between C and D, with the exception of Quaderns ranked as A. Over the period analysed, a total of 137 interpreting-related articles were located, in itself indicative of the marginal place given to interpreting in general vis à vis written translation. 201

Robert Neal Baxter

Figure 11.1 provides an overview of the main research topics covered in the journals analyzed with the number of articles in brackets. The first two leading research topics are community interpreting (including a handful of papers on cultural mediation), closely followed by papers discussing various theoretical aspects of interpreting, together accounting for 40% of the whole. The most widely published topic, community interpreting – usually referred to in Spanish as ‘Public Service Interpreting’ (interpretación para los servicios públicos) – is a relative newcomer. Although the first documented paper in the field was a short article published in Basque (González 2003), interest in the field really began to take off in 2014, most notably in the journal Sendebar, with a clear focus on healthcare, covering both specific local studies (Arumí Ribas and Burdeus Domingo 2012) and comparative international studies (Faya Ornia 2011) as well as more general studies (Martín Casado and Sánchez-Reyes Peñamaría 2004; Nevado Llopis 2015). One specific subfield of particular interest that has its centre in Spain is interpreting in contexts of gender violence against women, with authors such as María Isabel Abril Martí (2015) who belongs to the Speak Out for Support project11 coordinated by Maribel Del Pozo Triviño, who also co-edited Interpretación en contextos de violencia de género with Carmen Toledano Buendía (2015). The project, involving nine partner Universities from Catalonia, Valencia, Galicia, Madrid, Castile and León, Andalusia and the Canarias and co-financed by the Criminal Justice Programme of the European Union, led to the groundbreaking I International SOS-VIC Congress, held in Vigo (Galicia) in 2014 and has produced a wealth of reports and training materials available on the project’s online site. Practically on a par with community interpreting, and a constant focus of attention since 1998 until the present day, over one quarter of all of the papers published in Spanish or one of the co-official languages are devoted to a range of theoretical issues, addressing such topics as

Community (30)

Theory (29)

Legal (19)

History (8)

Quality (6)

Minority (4)

Figure 11.1  Main research topics

202

Training (23) Healthcare (6) Other (24)

An overview of interpreting in Spanish

the effects of intonation (Collados Aís 2001) and deverbalization in simultaneous interpreting (Castro Yáñez and Chaparro Inzunza 2014). One area of special interest involves memory and information processing with a strong empirical bent carried out by Padilla Benítez and Bajo Molina (1998) and Padilla Benítez, Macizo Soria, and Bajo Molina (2007) – both alone and in collaboration with other researchers (Bajo et al. 2001) and Alonso Bacigalupe (2007, 2008, 2010) in Galician, Spanish and English – whose PhD dissertation on the subject was published in English in abridged book format (Alonso Bacigalupe 2009). Next come various teaching and training-related issues and legal interpreting which together represent a further 28% of the published literature. Although there has been a steady trickle of papers since as early as 1994 dealing with a range of subjects such as general teaching approaches, especially geared to consecutive interpreting or specialized training in legal, business or community, interest in the subject can be seen to peak notably in 2009, sparked by Bologna reform (e.g. Arumí Ribas 2012; Baxter 2012). Legal interpreting accounts for 10%, mainly court but also police interpreting published in Spanish (Ortega Herráez 2013) and Basque (Amorrortu 1990), a subject on which González and Auzmendi (2009) have also published in English, as well as more specific questions such as the oral translation of legal sentences (Pérez Guarnieri 2013) and the problems involved in interpreting tapped telephone phone calls (González Rodríguez 2015). Other considerably more minor topics together account for 16%, including the history of interpreting, healthcare and medical interpreting (other than community interpreting), quality and minority languages. As far as co-official and other minority languages are concerned, Auzmendi (1994, 2003) is one of the most long-standing and prolific researchers with several papers in Basque published in Senez. Surprisingly, given the number of universities providing undergraduate translation and interpreting training in Catalan (see Baxter 2014) and despite the fact that Quaderns regularly publishes articles on translation in Catalan and also that a doctoral thesis (Arumí Ribas 2006) has been conducted in the language, only one paper was found on the subject of interpreting in Catalan, published by Branchadell (2007). The relationship between interpreting and co-official languages in Spain is also discussed in other international journals, e.g. within the context of legal interpreting for Catalan (Emmermann 2007) and as a part of the language planning efforts for Galician (Baxter 2013). In the context of Latin America, Kleinert and Stallaert (2015; Kleinert 2016) have also discussed training for indigenous-language interpreters in Mexico. Other outlying topics dealt with repeatedly but to a much lesser degree involve specialized medical interpreting, most notably Lucía Ruiz Rosendo (2005, 2008, 2013), a renowned specialist in the field and author of La interpretación en el ámbito de la medicina (Ruiz Rosendo 2009). Minor topics with only one or two papers include interpreting for trade and commerce (Aguayo Arrabal 2013; Trovato 2013) and telephone interpreting (Del Pozo Triviño and Campillo Rey 2016; García Luque 2009). Although, with the exceptions of Senez and Viceversa that publish exclusively in Basque and Galician respectively, as is to be expected, all of the journals publish predominantly in Spanish, other languages are accepted, including Catalan in the case of Quaderns, and especially English, but also French, German and Portuguese depending upon the journal in question. While the possibility of publishing notably in English can make journals potentially more attractive for researchers in Spain by raising their impact index – most of whom also publish in English in international journals – with the notable exception of MonTi which publishes more widely in English, relatively few papers in the field of interpreting are published in languages other than Spanish.

203

Robert Neal Baxter

Figure 11.2 presents the percentage share of the different languages papers on interpreting published in the journals analyzed with the number of papers in brackets. Finally, in order to gain a more complete idea of emerging trends in research, while not providing coverage for all of the universities where interpreting is taught, the online resources Dialnet and the Network of Doctoral Theses12 provide a representative sample of the topics covered in PhD dissertations, covering a total of thirty-seven theses between 1997 and 2016, only two of which were written in English and one in Catalan, with a notably high production in 2015 with ten dissertations in that year alone. Many dissertations are, as is to be expected with doctoral research, theoretical in nature (11 theses), covering such areas as cognitive processing, directionality and bilingualism in relation to interpreting. Two other main topics dealt with extensively involve various aspects of interpreter training and didactics (9) and public service interpreting (7), especially in the healthcare sector with a notable peak in 2015. Other fields of more marginal interest include legal and court interpreting (4) as well as quality in interpreting (3). Finally, apart from the courses organized by the professional associations for their members, the international T&I seminars and congresses hosted by several universities and research groups in Spain and Latin America also provide a showcase for and an insight into current research. Although mainly focusing on written translation, exceptions do exist, with congresses dedicated specifically to various aspects of interpreting, such as the Congress on Oral Communication: On-site and remote interpreting in Different Situational Contexts (UPOrality17. University Pablo de Olavide 2017) and the Second International Congress on Quality in Interpreting (ICIQ3. Granada 2017), with such well-known international and Spanish key speakers as Daniel Gile, Franz Pöchhacker and Jesús Baigorri Jalón and contributions covering a wide range of topics, e.g. quality assessment, cognitive processing, interpreting for the media and remote interpreting, cultural and sports interpreting, community interpreting and interpreting in war zones, court interpreting and interpreter training. The Second International Study-days on Interpreting hosted by the Portuguese Higher Institute of Accountancy and Administration (ISCAP) in collaboration with the University of Vigo (JOININ. Oporto

Spanish (100) Italian (2)

English (19) French (1)

Basque (11) Catalan (1)

Figure 11.2  Publishing languages

204

Galician (3)

An overview of interpreting in Spanish

2015), under the heading ‘Reinterpreting Interpreting’ with Franz Pöchhacker and Presentación Padilla Benitez as the guest speakers are also worthy of mention. Similar issues are broached by general and thematic congressing on both translation and interpreting, such as the Fifth International Congress of Translation and Interpreting (ENTRECULTURAS. University of Malaga 2017), the Sixth International Conference on Public Service Interpreting and Translating (TISP6. University of Alcalá 2017). The First Congress on Specialized Translation and Interpreting organized by the César Vallejo University (CITIE. Lima 2015) is also noteworthy by specifically including interpreting for the mining sector.

Future directions In the light of current trends in research analyzed in the preceding and given the ongoing process of globalization which particularly affects certain parts of Spain in the European context, most notably Andalusia and the Canary Isles as maritime points of entry from North Africa, and the controversy concerning illegal immigration across the United States-Mexican border, interest is likely to grow in the field of public service interpreting in this context, especially liaising with police and immigration officers, medical and legal interpreting. Issues in this field could cover how best to address the needs of migrants, training and professionalization to ensure that immigrants’ rights are properly respected, as well as the potential vicarious trauma (Ndongo-Keller 2015; Valero-Garcés 2006) involved for interpreters working in distressing and stressful situations. Further related topics of interest might be the need for additional training for this purpose in languages not taught as part of Interpreting courses, such as Maghrebi dialectal Arabic, Somali, Wolof, etc. Given the scale of the problem for public service providers, cost-effectiveness is also likely to become a prime issue, a concern already raised in the late 1990s (Jones 1998), almost inevitably ushering in the development and deployment of new technologies, such as apps and video interpreting. Indeed, thanks to technological advances over recent years, the application of new technologies to interpreting such as the use of the portable InfoPort system to reduce the costs associated with the hire of booths, receivers and technicians is another main area bound to be of interest to researchers and practitioners alike. There is already significant focus on remote interpreting (Fernández Pérez 2015), including telephone interpreting (García-Luque 2009) – especially in the case of violence against women (Del Pozo Triviño and Campillo Rey 2016) – discussing its pros and perceived cons (Martínez-Gómez Gómez 2008; Valero Garcés 2011). Nor will remote interpreting be limited to liaison interpreting, involving more widespread use of applications such as Skype for conference interpreting as well. Baxter (2017) also discusses the way new technologies can bridge the gap between translating and interpreting in order to improve speed without adversely affecting quality, therefore increasing cost-effectiveness and efficiency for translators and their clients. New technologies are also liable to become increasingly employed for interpreter training (Brander de la Iglesia 2008; Vitalaru, Pérez-Mateo Subirà, and Valero Garcés 2012), including virtual booths and online multimedia repositories for practice and self-tuition.

Recommended reading Collados Aís, Ángela, and María Manuela Fernández Sánchez. 2001. Manual de interpretación bilateral. Granada: Comares. Following a detailed history of interpreting up until the present day, the authors from the University of Granada go on to present and explain the different techniques (modes), namely bilateral, consecutive and simultaneous and modalities (types), e.g. conference, liaison, court, etc. The remaining chapters

205

Robert Neal Baxter deal with the characteristics of bilateral interpreting, how Daniel Gile’s key efforts model applies to bilateral interpreting and ends with a detailed teaching methodology. Jiménez Ivars, María Amparo. 2012. Primeros pasos hacia la interpretación inglés-español. Castelló: Universidad Jaume I. This book and accompanying DVD by this renowned researcher and professor of interpreting provide a wide-ranging introduction to basic skills shared by the main interpreting techniques, with specific exercises for sight translation, bilateral, consecutive, and simultaneous interpreting and can be used by trainers as well as students, including self-tuition. Mikkelson, Holly, and Jourdenais, Renée, eds. 2015. The Routledge Handbook of Interpreting. London: Routledge. This comprehensive handbook provides a detailed overview of the key topics in interpreting with twenty-seven chapters by leading researchers covering a wide-range of topics across all areas of interpreting, such as conference, sign language, court, healthcare interpreting and sight translation, as well as quality, ethics, vicarious trauma and training. Collados Aís, Ángela, and José Antonio Sabio Pinilla, eds. 2003. Avances en la investigación sobre interpretación. Granada: Comares. This volume brings together the lectures given by top names in interpreting, such as Daniel Gile, Robin Setton, Franz Pöchhacker and Ingrid Kurz at Granada University’s Faculty of Translation between 2000–2001, providing a general overview of recent progress in interpreting research, covering a broad spectrum of topics, including trends in cognitive investigation, processing models and live TV interpreting. Jiménez Ivars, Amparo. 2000. “El reto de investigar en interpretación.” Sendebar 10–11: 43–66. This extensive paper begins with a historical overview of research in interpreting dating back to the 1980s and the types covered before turning to the major problems encountered in the field, namely the lack of a clear paradigm and methodology. The advantages and shortcomings of both quantitative and qualitative approaches are addressed at length before closing with a series of proposals designed to address the methodological and design problems discussed.

Notes 1 A further private Higher Universities Studies Centre of Galicia (CESUGA), located in A  Coruña (Galicia), launched a degree in Translation and Intercultural Communication in 2014 including several interpreting subjects, although the full course cycle is as yet incomplete. 2 Conferencia de Centros y Departamentos de Traducción e Interpretación (CCDUTI) https://confetradi.wordpress.com/centros-y-departamentos/ 3 Asociación Ibérica de Estudios de Traducción e Interpretación (AIETI) 4 Namely: Autònoma (Barcelona), Basque Country, Comillas (Madrid), Complutense, Granada, Malaga, Pablo de Olavide (Seville), Pompeu Fabra (Barcelona), San Jorge (Zaragoza) and Valencia. 5 Study plan: www.usal.edu.ar/archivos/lenguas/docs/metodo_de_la_interpretacion_2017.pdf 6 Study plan: www.umsa.edu.ar/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Interpretariado-en-Idioma-Ingles-A4. pdf 7 Public: Autonomous University of Barcelona, Granada, Jaume I (Castelló, Valencia), La Laguna (Canary Isles), Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. Private: Alfonso X (Madrid), Catholic University of Murcia, Comillas Pontifical University (Madrid), and European University (Valencia). 8 Available for download in pdf format from the RITAP website: www.ritap.es/wp-content/ uploads/2012/11/libro_blanco_traduccion_vfinal_es.pdf 9 www.editorialcomares.com/TV/?loc=navegador&lib_colecciones=38 10 Homepages: http://agaur.gencat.cat/es/avaluacio/carhus/carhus-plus-2014/ and https://clasificacioncirc.es/inicio 11 http://sosvicsweb.webs.uvigo.es/ 12 These two resources together cover the following universities where Translation and Interpreting is taught: Alicante, Autònoma (Barcelona), Autónoma (Madrid), Comillas, Complutense, Córdoba,

206

An overview of interpreting in Spanish Granada, Jaume I, Las Palmas, Malaga, Murcia, Pablo de Olavide, Pompeu Fabra, Salamanca, Valencia, Valladolid, and Vic. See https://dialnet.unirioja.es/tesis and www.tdx.cat/

References Abad Merino, Mercedes. 2003. “Exeas y alfaqueques: aproximación a la figura del intérprete de árabe en el período fronterizo (s. XIII-XV).” In Homenaje al profesor Estanislao Ramón Trives, vol. 1, edited by Vera Luján, Agustín, Ramón Almela Pérez, José María Jiménez Cano, and Dolores Anunciación Igualada Belchí, 35–50. Murcia: Universidad de Murcia. ———. 2005. “Intérpretes latentes y patentes en el periodo morisco (1501–1568). Del medio oral al medio escrito.” Miscelánea medieval murciana 29–30: 9–26. ———. 2008. “El intérprete morisco. Aproximación a la historia de la traducción cotidiana en España en el ocaso de la Edad Media.” Hermeneus. Revista de la Facultad de Traducción e Interpretación de Soria 10: 23–53. Abril Martí, María Isabel. 2015. “La interpretación en contextos de violencia de género con referencia al caso español.” TRANS. Revista de Traductología 1 (19): 77–94. Aguayo Arrabal, Natividad. 2013. “El traductor-intérprete en el comercio exterior ¿Realidad o necesidad?” EntreCulturas. Revista de traducción y comunicación intercultural 5: 57–74. Alonso Araguás, Icíar, Jesús Baigorri Jalón, and Gertrudis Payàs. 2008. “Nahuatlatos y familias de intérpretes en el México colonial.” 1611. Revista de historia de la traducción 2: unpaginated. Alonso Bacigalupe, Luis. 2007. “Cara a unha nova visión do procesamento da información en interpretación simultánea: resultados experimentais.” Viceversa. Revista galega de traducción 13: 55–77. ———. 2008. “Sobre fases y modelos: hacia una propuesta explicativa del procesamiento de la información durante la interpretación simultánea.” Sendebar. Revista de la Facultad de Traducción e Interpretación. (Universidad de Granada) 19: 257–88. ———. 2009. El procesamiento de la información durante la interpretación simultánea. Un modelo en tres niveles. Granada: Atrio. ———. 2010. “Information Processing During Simultaneous Interpreting: A Three-Tier Approach.” Perspectives. Studies in Translation Theory and Practice 18 (1): 39–58. Alvar, Carlos. 2010. Traducciones y traductores: materiales para una historia de la traducción en Castilla durante la Edad Media. Madrid: Centro Estudios Cervantinos. Amorrortu, Alberto. 1990. “Auzitegietako interpretaritza [Court Interpreters].” Senez: Itzulpen aldizkaria 9: 45–54. Arumí Ribas, Marta. 2006. “Incidència d’una acció pedagògica dirigida a l’autoregulació. Dos estudis de cas a l’aula d’iniciació a l’aprenentatge de la interpretació consecutiva.” PhD diss., Universitat Pompeu Fabra. Arumí Ribas, Marta, and Noelia Burdeus Domingo. 2012. “Estudio de la práctica de la interpretación en los servicios públicos en el ámbito sanitario en el área metropolitana de Barcelona.” Sendebar. Revista de la Facultad de Traducción e Interpretación. (Universidad de Granada) 23: 17–36. Auzmendi, Lurdes. 2003. “Interpretazioa: alor eta mota berriak Euskal Herrian [Interpreting and New Types of Zones in the Basque Country].” Senez: Itzulpen aldizkaria 26: 113–14. Auzmendi, Lurdes, and Koldo Tapia. 1994. “Euskal interpretaritzaren errealitatea mingotsa [The Bitter Reality of the Basque-Language Interpreter].” Senez: Itzulpen aldizkaria 9: 25–33. Baigorri Jalón, Jesús. 2000. La Interpretación de conferencias. El nacimiento de una profesión. De París a Núremberg. Granada: Comares. Bajo, Teresa, Presentación Padilla Benítez, Ricardo Muñoz, Francisca Padilla, Carlos Gómez, María Carmen Puerta, Pilar Gonzalvo, and Pedro Macizo. 2001. “Comprehension and Memory Processes in Translation and Interpreting.” Quaderns. Revista de traducció 6: 27–31. Bastin, Georges L. 2003. “Por una historia de la traducción en Hispanoamérica.” Íkala. Revista de lenguaje y cultura 8 (14): 193–217. Baxter, Robert Neal. 2012. “Modelo de formación básica en interpretación consecutiva dentro del marco de la reforma de Bolonia.” Sendebar. Revista de la Facultad de Traducción e Interpretación. (Universidad de Granada) 23: 61–77. ———. 2013. “Interpreting and Minority Language Planning and Policy: Galician as a Case Study.” Language Problems and Language Planning 37 (3): 227–48.

207

Robert Neal Baxter ———. 2014. “Undergraduate Interpreter Training in the Spanish State: An Analytical Comparison.” Sendebar. Revista de la Facultad de Traducción e Interpretación. (Universidad de Granada) 25: 219–46. ———. 2016. “A Discussion of Chuchotage and Boothless Simultaneous as Marginal and Unorthodox Interpreting Modes.” The Translator 22 (1): 59–71. ———. 2017. “Exploring the Effects of Computerised Sight Translation on Written Translation Speed and Quality.” Perspectives. Studies in Translation Theory and Practice 25 (4): 622–39. Branchadell, Albert. 2007. “La interpretació al Senat espanyol.” Quaderns. Revista de traducció 14: 197–205. Brander de la Iglesia, María. 2008. “El EEES y las nuevas tecnologías aplicadas a la enseñanza de la interpretación.” In La adaptación al espacio europeo de Educación Superior en la Facultad de Traducción y Documentación, coordinated by Moro Cabero, Manuela, and Jesús Torres del Rey, 105–20. Salamanca: Universidad de Salamanca. Cáceres-Würsig, Ingrid. 2012. “The jeunes de langues in the Eighteenth Century: Spain’s First Diplomatic Interpreters on the European Model.” Interpreting 14 (2): 127–44. Castro Yáñez, Ginette Gabriela, and Waldo Boris Chaparro Inzunza. 2014. “Desverbalización y estructuras sintácticas en interpretación simultánea.” Onomázein. Revista de lingüística, filología y traducción de la Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile 29: 1–10. Collados Aís, Ángela. 2001. “Efectos de la entonación monótona sobre la recuperación de la información en receptores de interpretación simultánea.” TRANS. Revista de traductología 5: 103–10. Cypess, Sandra M. 1991. La Malinche in Mexican Literature: From History to Myth. Texas: University of Texas Press. De la Cuba, Ofelia Huamanchumo. 2015. “The Lenguas and the Quipocamayocs: Communication Mediators in Spaces of Colonial Legality (Peru, sixteenth century).” Signos Históricos 17 (33): 8–35. De la Cuesta, Leonel-Antonio. 1992. “Intérpretes y traductores en el descubrimiento y conquista del nuevo mundo.” Livivs. Revista de estudios de traducción 1: 25–34. Del Pozo Triviño, María Isabel, and Campillo Rey, Lucía. 2016. “La interpretación telefónica y su práctica profesional. Estudio de caso sobre dos empresas proveedoras del servicio en España.” Sendebar. Revista de la Facultad de Traducción e Interpretación. (Universidad de Granada) 27: 73–95. Emmermann, Annette. 2007. “La traducció i la interpretació de llengües estrangeres als jutjats I tribunals amb seu a Catalunya.” Quaderns Divulgatius 32: 25–40. Faya Ornia, Goretti. 2011. “Comparativa de herramientas empleadas para mejorar la comunicación con pacientes extranjeros en centros sanitarios del Reino Unido, Alemania y España.” Sendebar. Revista de la Facultad de Traducción e Interpretación. (Universidad de Granada) 22: 191–208. Fernández Pérez, María Magdalena. 2015. “La interpretación remota en contextos de violencia de género.” In Interpretación en contextos de violencia de género, edited by Carmen Toledano Buendía and Maribel Del Pozo Triviño, 101–22. Valencia: Tirant Humanidades. García Luque, Francisco. 2009. “La interpretación telefónica en el ámbito sanitario. Realidad social y reto pedagógico.” Redit. Revista electrónica de didáctica de la traducción y la interpretación 3: 18–30. Gile, Daniel. 2009. Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Godayol, Pilar. 2012. “Malintzin/La Malinche/Doña Marina: Re-Reading the Myth of the Treacherous Translator.” Journal of Iberian and Latin American Studies 18 (1): 61–76. González, Erika. 2003. “Interpretazioaren bide berriak: interpretazio soziala [La nueva interpretación de la forma: una interpretación social].” Senez: Itzulpen aldizkaria 26: 115–21. González, Erika, and Lurdes Auzmendi. 2009. “Court Interpreting in Basque. Mainstreaming and Quality: The Challenges of Court Interpreting in Basque.” In The Critical Link 5: Quality in Interpreting – a Shared Responsibility, edited by Sandra Beatriz Hale, Uldis Ozolins, and Ludmila Stern, 135–48. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. González Rodríguez, María Jesús. 2015. “Interpretar escuchas telefónicas en ámbito judicial: análisis descriptivo y metodología operacional.” TRANS. Revista de traductología 19 (1): 129–90. Hermann, Alfred. 2002 [1956]. “Interpreting in Antiquity.” In The Interpreting Studies Reader, edited by Franz Pöchhacker and Miriam Shlesinger, 15–22. London: Routledge. Jones, David. 1998. “Breaking Down Language Barriers: The NHS Needs to Provide Accessible Interpreting Services for All.” British Medical Journal 316 (7143): 1476–80.

208

An overview of interpreting in Spanish Kleinert, Cristina V. 2016. “Didáctica para la formación de intérpretes en lenguas nacionales de México. Trabajar de manera multilingüe.” EntreCulturas. Revista de traducción y comunicación intercultural 7–8: 599–623. Kleinert, Cristina V., and Christiane Stallaert. 2015. “La formación de intérpretes de lenguas indígenas para la justicia en México. Sociología de las ausencias y agencia decolonial.” Sendebar, Revista de la Facultad de Traducción e Interpretación. (Universidad de Granada) 26: 235–54. Martín Casado, Manuel, and María Sonsoles Sánchez-Reyes Peñamaría. 2004. “Necesidad de la provisión de un servicio de intérpretes en los hospitales.” Hermeneus. Revista de la Facultad de Traducción e Interpretación de Soria 6: 155–68. Martínez-Gómez Gómez, Aída. 2008. “Las nuevas tecnologías como alternativa (in)viable a la interpretación en el ámbito sanitaria.” In The Language of Health Care: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Language and Health Care (Alicante, 24, 25 and 26 October 2007), coordinated by Campos-Pardillos, Miguel Ángel, and Adelina Gómez González-Jover, unpaginated (CD). Valencia: Instituto Interuniversitario de Lenguas Modernas Aplicadas. Ndongo-Keller, Justine. 2015. “Vicarious Trauma (VT) and Stress Management.” In The Routledge Handbook of Interpreting, edited by Holly Mikkelson and Renée Jourdenais, 337–51. London: Routledge. Nevado Llopis, Almudena. 2015. “La influencia de los profesionales sanitarios en el reconocimiento y el desarrollo de la interpretación médica.” MonTI. Monografías de traducción e interpretación Special Issue 2: 185–215. Ortega Herráez, Juan Miguel. 2013. “La intérprete no sólo tradujo lo que le vino en gana, sino que respondió ella a las preguntas que los abogados le realizaban al testigo: requisitos de calidad en la subcontratación de servicios de interpretación judicial y policial en España.” Sendebar. Revista de la Facultad de Traducción e Interpretación. (Universidad de Granada) 24: 9–42. Padilla Benítez, Presentación, and María Teresa Bajo Molina. 1998. “Hacia un modelo de memoria y atención en interpretación simultánea.” Quaderns. Revista de traducció 2: 107–17. Padilla Benítez, Presentación, Pedro Macizo Soria, and María Teresa Bajo Molina. 2007. “Procesamiento de la información en tareas de comprensión oral: cuando la interpretación marca la diferencia.” Sendebar. Revista de la Facultad de Traducción e Interpretación. (Universidad de Granada) 18: 191–207. Payàs, Gertrudis, and Icíar Alonso Araguás. 2009. “La mediación lingüística institucionalizada en las fronteras hispano-mapuche e hispano-árabe ¿un patrón similar?” Historia 42 (1): 185–201. Payàs, Gertrudis, and Carmen Gloria Garbarini. 2012. “La relación intérprete-mandante claves de una crónica colonial para la historia de la interpretación.” Onomázein. Revista de lingüística, filología y traducción de la Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile 25: 345–68. Pérez Guarnieri, Verónica. 2013. “La interpretación judicial: dificultades de la traducción oral de las sentencias del español al inglés.” Hikma. Revista de estudios de traducción 12: 101–13. Roy, Cynthia B. 2002. “The Problem with Definitions, Descriptions, and the Role Metaphors of Interpreters.” In The Interpreting Studies Reader, edited by Franz Pöchhacker and Miriam Shlesinger, 345–53. London: Routledge. Ruiz Rosendo, Lucía. 2005. “La evaluación de la calidad en interpretación desde la perspectiva del usuario. Los congresos de medicina.” Sendebar. Revista de la Facultad de Traducción e Interpretación. (Universidad de Granada) 16: 219–50. ———. 2008. “Estudio comparado de la práctica de la interpretación en reuniones de medicina.” Hermeneus. Revista de la Facultad de Traducción e Interpretación de Soria 10: 185–208. ———. 2009. La interpretación en el ámbito de la medicina. Granada: Comares. ———. 2013. “Didáctica de la interpretación: aplicación especializada en el ámbito de la medicina.” Skopos. Revista internacional de traducción e interpretación 3: 201–22. Seeber, Kilian G. 2015. “Simultaneous Interpreting.” In The Routledge Handbook of Interpreting, edited by Holly Mikkelson and Renée Jourdenais, 79–95. London: Routledge. Seleskovitch, Danica. 1978. Interpreting for International Conferences: Problems of Language and Communication. Washington: Pen and Booth. Takeda, Kayoko, and Jesús Baigorri Jalón, eds. 2016. New Insights in the History of Interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Toledano Buendía, Carmen, and Maribel del Pozo Triviño, eds. 2015. Interpretación en contextos de violencia de género. Valencia: Tirant Humanidades. Trovato, Giuseppe. 2013. “El papel del intérprete en el ámbito ferial y de negocios. Actividades y propuestas didácticas.” EntreCulturas. Revista de traducción y comunicación intercultural 5: 75–91.

209

Robert Neal Baxter Valdeón, Roberto A. 2013. “Doña Marina/La Malinche: A Historiographical Approach to the Interpreter/ Traitor.” Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 25 (2): 157–79. Valero-Garcés, Carmen. 2006. “El impacto psicológico y emocional en los intérpretes y traductores de los servicios públicos: un factor a tener en cuenta.” Quaderns: revista de traducció 13: 141–54. ———. 2011. “Las nuevas tecnologías y la traducción e interpretación en los servicios públicos ¿bendición o maldición?” In Traducción e interpretación en los servicios públicos en un mundo INTERcoNEcTado/Public Service Interpreting and Translation in the Wild Wired World, coordinated by Carmen Valero Garcés, 7–19. Madrid: Universidad de Alcalá. Vega Cernuda, Miguel A. 2004. “Lenguas, farautes y traductores en el encuentro de los mundos. Apuntes para una historia de la comunicación lingüística en la época de los descubrimientos en la América protohispana.” Hieronymus complutensis. El mundo de la traducción 11: 81–108. Vitalaru, Bianca, Maria Pérez-Mateo Subirà, and Carmen Valero Garcés. 2012. “New Technologies for Enhancing Interpreting Competence in PSIT Training.” In III European Conference on Information Technology in Education and Society: A Critical Insight, edited by Sancho Gil, Juana María, Leticia Fraga Colman, Judith Arrazola Carballo, Raquel Miño Puigcercós, and Xavier Giró Gràcia, 220–22. Barcelona: TIES. Zanón, Jesús. 2013. “Los intérpretes en la corte de Al-Ḥakam II de Córdoba.” Hermeneus. Revista de la Facultad de Traducción e Interpretación de Soria 15: 323–47.

210

12 INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION Public service interpreting and translation Carmen Valero-Garcés

Introduction and definitions The rise of globalization, the strengthening of multicultural societies, changing borders as a result of war, conflicts or natural disasters, the continuous advances of technology and social networks as well as the increasing political power of economic forces are all key themes of the twenty-first century. Within this panorama, intercultural communication necessarily takes place. Guaranteeing this communication requires the presence of linguistic and cultural intermediaries or ‘translators’ to provide support through the services they offer in a such a diverse world with a large variety of languages and cultures and unprecedented levels of mobility. These intermediaries, also known as the ‘third link’, that enable communication between two speakers who do not share a common language and/or culture have historically been given different names such as cultural mediator, enabler, gatekeeper, committed bilingual, or professional interpreter and/or translator (Davidson 2000, 379). Generally speaking this third link can be described as a sort of intermediary capable of conveying a text from one language into another in various registers and in different contexts. Within Translation and Interpreting Studies (TS) there has also been a significant development during the second half of the twentieth century in a field greatly connected with intercultural communication known as Public Service Interpreting and Translation (PSIT) or Community Interpreting (and Translation). This chapter will be dedicated to exploring this new emergent field of PSIT within TS. One of the first problems that we encounter is defining PSIT and its scope. The difficulties in trying to define this field of practice are illustrated by the lack of acceptance of a common name. In English, there are a variety of terms for this intercultural activity: Community Interpreting, Liaison Interpreting, Interpreting in Social Services, Dialogue Interpreting, Public Service Interpreting and Translation (PSIT) or even specific names based on the profession: Healthcare Interpreter, Intercultural Health Mediator, Cultural Interpreter, Community Interpreter, Legal Interpreter, or Public Service Interpreter, to name but a few. The two terms most commonly used nowadays are PSIT and Community Interpreting. The latter is the name most commonly used in various pioneer countries such as the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, countries to which we also owe a large part of the work found on this subject. The United Kingdom and some other European countries prefer the name Public Service 211

Carmen Valero-Garcés

Interpreting and Translation over Community Interpreting. The main reason for choosing PSIT, according to Corsellis (2003, 271–3), is to avoid confusion with the intense task of translating documents and interpreting into the languages of the European Commission (EU) and the European Community. Following these criteria, in Spain and in this chapter the increasingly popular name Public Service Interpreting and Translation (PSIT) (Traducción e Interpretación en los Servicios Públicos) is used instead of Interpretación Social or Traducción Comunitaria that were once preferred. However in some Spanish-speaking countries where this field is emerging (Argentina, Mexico, Ecuador), the situation is similar to what occurred in Spain during the final decade of the twentieth century (Valero-Garcés 1997, 2008a), in which clear terminology did not exist. In a personal conversation with Kleinert (pers. comm. 3 October  2017), she mentions that in Latin America the term ‘community’ is associated largely with indigenous communities. For their part, institutions like the National Institute of Indigenous Languages use the term interpretation in indigenous languages, a term which is not widely accepted due to being considered discriminatory and excluding of foreign languages. Thus, she prefers public service interpreting or interpreting in national languages when discussing the situation in Mexico, reflecting the campaign there to define them as languages rather than dialects, a term which she considers has a pejorative connotation in the Mexican context. In addition, Kleinert points out that a percentage of the Mexican population is unaware of the fact that there are many languages and that they are all national languages, meaning that to name them as such would therefore contribute to their visibility and increase their prestige. This opinion is reflected in the recent publication Estudio de encuesta sobre la Traducción e Interpretación en México by the Italia Morayta Foundation (2017), in cooperation with Interpret America and Intérpretes y Traductores en Servicios Públicos y Comunitarios, A.C. of the first in-depth survey of translation and interpreting in Mexico. This one-hundred-page study includes demographic data, geographic distribution of interpreting activity, education levels, and salaries of translators and interpreters from across Mexico. The top six languages reported are firstly Spanish and English; the third is Nahuatl, followed by Mexican Sign Language (Lengua de Señas Mexicana, LSM), Maya and French. As for translators, the top four target languages after Spanish and English are French, Nahuatl, Maya and Tseltal (a language spoken in the highlands of Chiapas State) (Vaughn Holcomb 2017). Lea Martin, at the first International Congress on Translation, Interpretation and Cognition, which took place at the University of Aconcagua, Mendoza (31 August – 1 September 2017), presented an article entitled “Interpretación comunitaria en Argentina” (Community interpreting in Argentina), although in personal conversation by email she used interpretación en los servicios públicos (public service interpreting) or interpretación comunitaria (community interpreting) interchangeably in Spanish, while she preferred community interpreting in English. PSIT was one of the first forms of intercultural communication to take place historically; for example, in the encounters between the Romans and Iberians, and between the Spanish ‘conquistadores’ and the Amerindians, this form of communication was fundamental. According to Wadensjö (1998, 33), who has provided one of the first definitions of the term, PSIT refers to a type of interpreting that takes place in the public services to facilitate communication between staff and those who utilize a given service. Mikkelson (2014, 19) offers a much broader definition and considers PSIT to be an activity that facilitates equal access to legal services, healthcare, education and social services for certain groups of people belonging to cultural or linguistic minorities who generally have lower levels of education and income and 212

Intercultural communication

are often unfamiliar with, or unaccustomed to, the new social reality in the country in which they find themselves. Generally speaking, PSIT can be defined as a form of communication that takes place in any multicultural society where speakers of different languages must communicate directly with one another and where those who know both languages must act as intermediaries. However, there is still no general agreement on the scope of this activity. PSIT was born from the need to provide this service by institutions in the public sector. Thus, Ozolins rightfully pointed out that PSIT is an ‘institution-driven’ activity (Ozolins 2000, 32), which has come to mean that the development of this activity is affected by the institutions, governments or societal characteristics of their individual countries, in which each has its own laws; consequently, the professionalization of the activity is usually affected by institutional decisions. This is certainly the case in Spain and in other southern European countries, where, contrary to the situation in Sweden, the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, and the United States, PSIT is still not fully professionalized, and, in some areas (e.g. mental health services), the activity is virtually unknown, as in most Latin American countries.

Historical perspective and review Ever since PSIT became the focus of academic and research activity in 1995, following the First Critical Link Conference in Canada, and then in 1997 in Spain with the publication of the first article on PSIT (Valero-Garcés 1997, 267–77), publishing in this area has significantly increased. During these two decades, the increasing number of publications has indicated its evolution, as will be shown in this chapter. The literature shows that the evolution in Spain is similar to that in Italy and other southern EU countries, as described in the articles from the International Conferences on PSIT held at the University of Alcalá in 2002, 2005, 2008, 2011, 2014 and 2017.1 The following books, published in the early twenty-first century, are also noteworthy examples of the evolution of PSIT in Spain: Traducción e Interpretación en los Servicios Públicos. Contextualización, actualidad y futuro (Public Service Translating and Interpreting; Contextualization, Present and Future) (2003), Discursos (Dis)Con/Cordantes: Modos y formas de comunicación y convivencia ((Dis)Con/Cordant Speeches: Communicative Forms and Ways of Living Together) (2003), Retos del siglo XXI en comunicación intercultural: Mapa lingüístico y cultural de España en los comienzos del siglo XXI (Twenty-first Century Challenges in Intercultural Communication. A Linguistic and Cultural Map of Spain for the Early Twenty-first Century) (1st edition 2006, 2nd edition 2011) and Formas de mediación intercultural. Traducción e interpretación en los servicios públicos: Conceptos, datos, situaciones y práctica (Communicating Across Cultures. A Coursebook on Interpreting and Translating in Public Services and Institutions, 1st edition 2006, 2nd edition 2008). The last one has been revised and translated into Romanian (2012), English (2014), Chinese (2014), Russian (2014) and Arabic (2015). Research shows that the main challenges in the first stages of this profession/activity in Spain were the following: a lack of awareness about intercultural communication; linguistic and cultural barriers between the Spanish population and the ‘newcomers’ (African, Asian and East European migrants) whose languages and cultures where unfamiliar; restricted access and use of communication technology (ITC); a lack of recognition of the translator’s and interpreter’s role(s); few coordinated institutional initiatives; poor quality control of available resources; insufficient interdisciplinary studies; and difficulty accessing empirical research, among other challenges (Valero-Garcés 2008b). 213

Carmen Valero-Garcés

A close look at the profile of these intermediaries, who are responsible for communicating with people who do not speak the same language, as well as at the materials available in other languages will help us to understand the evolution of PSIT in Spain since the migration phenomenon started to affect the country at the end of the twentieth century. As in most countries, there are official and recognized figures in Spain in the field of PSIT, such as the traductor jurado, or sworn translator, a professional who earns recognition after passing the examination held by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs or after obtaining a degree in Interpreting and Translation and meeting all the relevant requirements (Boletín Oficial del Estado (BOE), 21 marzo 1997 (Official State Gazette, 21 March 1997)). There are also translators and interpreters for the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of the Interior who are considered to be qualified after passing an exam. Finally, the third ‘official’ figure that works in the PSIT field and has obtained recognition in Spain is the ‘hired’ translator/ interpreter who works in state offices and in other public services. This position is becoming increasingly important as a result of the often-unexpected arrival of individuals who speak languages virtually unknown in Spain and with whom communication must be established. This role was established by the Ministry of the Interior pursuant to Royal Decree 638/2000, dated 11 May 2000, and is recognized and used by the government and other institutions. There is no specific training requirement with respect to the work the translators and interpreters must perform. Before 2008 or thereabouts, the government occasionally hired workers on a temporary basis through a collaborative agreement with the then-labelled INEM (Instituto Nacional del Empleo (National Institute of Employment), now known as SEPE – Servicio Público de Empleo Estatal (State Employment Public Service)), depending on what services were required and the level of demand. When there was no one available on the list to serve as an intermediary, individuals were hired whose only qualification was knowing Spanish and the other language well enough to help resolve the conflict. Since 2008, the general policy of the European Commission as well as in most other countries is to outsource management of translation and interpreting services to private companies (Ortega and Foulquié 2008, 125). One of the greatest challenges faced in this field was (and still is) the vast number of languages that require PSIT services, as well as the impossibility of providing language-specific training and education in all these languages, particularly those of limited diffusion (e.g. some less-spoken African and Asian languages and dialects). This situation has given rise to some complaints, mainly in the legal sector (De Luna 2009, 2011), relating to the qualifications held by the interpreters contracted and the actual quality of the interpretation. Moreover, low rates of pay are causing many experienced and qualified interpreters and translators to reject working for the government. As a consequence, and with the aim of meeting the requirements, there has been a lowering of the required minimum qualifications, which stems from the excuse, or reality, that there would otherwise be no qualified interpreters available (Benhaddou 2012, 93–5). As García Beyaert (2015, 53) highlights: (. . .) outsourced management by a private company has not proved ideal, but policymakers have shown little sensitivity. Despite criticism of the lack of guarantees for quality in the original contract (which focused on language ability and devoted little attention to interpreting), the requirement for competence in interpreting completely disappeared from the new request for tenders in 2012. Nonetheless, bridging the gap between the right to an interpreter and the actual availability of interpreters is still work in progress worldwide. This situation has also given rise to the 214

Intercultural communication

proliferation of non-language-specific programmes available to interpreters of any language, although there is a lack of language-specific practice materials, with a few exceptions such as the group FITISPos, which has organized and managed the MA in Intercultural Communication and Public Service Interpreting and Translation, offered in ten language pairs at the University of Alcalá since 2006.2 There have also been various other initiatives carried out by members of the Red Comunica network, in their respective centres, such as the group Miras at the Autonomous University of Barcelona, the Alfaqueque group at the University of Salamanca, and CRIT at Jaume I University. Red Comunica3 is a network composed of research groups from all over Spain, and it is undoubtedly the driving force behind PSIT research, involving increasing activity in both training and research. Despite these difficulties, PSIT is undoubtedly a growing market, although it may not be considered as prestigious as other forms of interpreting such as conference interpreting or interpreting for international or commercial organizations (Gentile 2014, 195). Nonetheless, this has sparked debate over important topics such as training, the interpreter’s role in practice, and the recognition of interpreting as a profession. It has also led to the incorporation of new forms of communication, such as the use of remote interpreting in numerous settings, especially in healthcare and educational settings (Murgu and Jiménez 2011; Díaz García 2011; Helguera Gallego et al. 2011, 58–75). In addition, specific efforts have been made in an attempt to develop national standards for the profession, such as the publication of the Libro Blanco de la Traducción y la Interpretación Institucional (White Paper on Institutional Translation and Interpreting) in 2011,4 as well as the emergence of associations like APTIJ (Asociación Profesional de Traductores e Intérpretes Judiciales y Jurados), AFIPTIPS (Asociación de Formadores, Investigadores y Profesionales de la Traducción e Interpretación en los Servicios Públicos) and ENPSIT (European Network for Public Service Interpreting and Translation). This all serves to demonstrate that the first steps towards national accreditation systems are being taken in compliance with recommendations made by the EU following Directiva 2010/64 on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings (Le Bot 2016). Spain, as a Member State of the EU, has an obligation to incorporate this European Directive into its domestic law. Organic Law 5/2015 (La Ley Orgánica 5/2015), dated 27 April 2015, was adopted in order to apply EU Directiva 2010/64, concerning the right to interpretation and to translation in criminal proceedings, and the EU Directiva 2012/29, dated 22 May 2012, concerning the right to information in criminal proceedings.5 The creation of a National Register of certified translators and interpreters in the legal and/or police field, while still under discussion and is an attempt to meet that obligation, as its name indicates.6 Therefore, this is a historic moment in which two main factors converge: the need to change legislation to bring it in line with Directiva 2010/64 and the need to implement measures to ensure compliance with new mandates. The collection of articles included in MonTi 7 (2015) (Blasco and Del Pozo 2015) offers a good review of the current status of legal interpretation in Spain from the point of view of legislation and service provision. The authors draw attention to the measures that Spain should take to ensure that court and police interpretations are carried out in a way that guarantees fair and due process. These measures include the training of interpreters and legal operators, the creation of accreditation systems and records, as well as the consolidation of the professional profile of interpreters. In general, this research reveals a certain evolution  – that a country that was once considered to be monolingual and monocultural has received a great number of migrants with diverse languages and cultures in a very short time period (1995–2007) and within a reduced 215

Carmen Valero-Garcés

geographic area (i.e. the main urban centres, such as Madrid, Barcelona, Valencia, and the south of Spain due to the proximity to Africa, place of origin of many immigrants). In short, after twenty years of development of PSIT in Spain (1997–2017), certain conclusions and considerations that may influence its future are listed below: 1 2

3

4

5

6

7 8

PSIT is still a new field compared to conference interpreting and still seen as the ‘poor cousin’, but some progress has been made in terms of recognition and training. Discussion about the need for training still continues, but this is not just limited to translators and interpreters. Other agents that play a significant role in communication in PSIT contexts, such as service providers (public officials, attorneys, physicians, administrators, police officers), are being included in the debate. Considerations regarding PSIT in different settings and applying different labels (legal, medical, administrative) have been discussed in some fora, but the experience of many professionals who practice PSIT suggest that progress is made at different levels and speeds (e.g. T&I in the legal field is more developed than T&I in the healthcare area). Translation has largely been neglected in PSIT although there is no public service within which the written text does not play a role (informed consents, school reports, airline tickets, social services pamphlets, etc.). However, there is an increasing interest in this area as seen in the articles included in FITISPos International Journal (volume 2), 2015.7 Increasing interest is also observed on the part of academics and researchers at conferences and meetings, as opposed to delegates and representatives of diverse communities, and those actually practising PSIT. Such a tendency could lead to an imbalance in terms of development in the field, even though it does broaden the options for training and research. There is a trend of consolidation as demonstrated by the courses, seminars and workshops organized by a handful of enthusiastic volunteers, PSIT practitioners and trainers at local level as well as by the more solid structures which provide examples of good practice. Some examples are Global E-Party in PSIT, an online activity using social media organized by the research group FITISPoS since 2012, or Jornades sobre Traducció I Interpretació en els Servis Públcis, organized by the research group Miras since 2014, as well as EU support and participation in the workshop ‘Best practices, challenges and new horizons’ as part of the 6th International Conference on PSIT (March 2017, University of Alcalá)8 Going beyond local experiences to other national and even transnational ones with the creation of non-profit associations that have continued to fight for the recognition of PSIT (e.g. ENPSIT) is also a significant step. Increasing use of technology such as remote interpreting (Helguera Gallego et al. 2011, 58–75) and an increased number of initiatives that make greater use of this technology (Universal Doctor Project or Migralingua) offer good initiatives for the future. The support on the part of the administration for some of these actions (e.g, partially financing projects on development of apps or e-learning materials (such as a MOOC in PSIT)9 which often save time and money may be a good sign for future development.

With respect to PSIT in Latin America, the status of translation and interpreting is still in the development stage, with hardly any research being carried out from the point of view of Translation Studies, and even less relating to interpreting with linguistic combinations that include Native Amerindian languages, a topic directly related to PSIT as per the focus of the present chapter. According to Kleinert and Stallaert (2017) in some countries where the 216

Intercultural communication

indigenous languages have now died out (such as Cuba, for example) this is not even a topic of research, and in other countries, recognizing cultural and linguistic diversity is something incredibly new, particularly from the point of view of translation, interpretation and mediation. While there may be efforts to develop legislation and recognizing this diversity in the law, in everyday life neglect and discrimination are common. The study by Berk-Seligson (2008), describing the situation in Ecuador, and the work carried out by Kleinert (2016) and Kleiner and Stallaert (2017) in Mexico are practically the only studies addressing PSIT (see the following). In all other Latin American countries, PSIT is only developed in legal contexts, e.g. in Argentina. According to personal conversations with members of the Colegio de Traductores Públicos de Argentina (Institute of Public Translators in Argentina, July 2017), this is due to the fact that the country does not receive many nonSpanish-speaking immigrants, unlike the situation in Spain. There are cases in the justice field where public translators act as translation experts. The trials in which this usually occurs are most frequently related to economic, financial and political matters, such as investments, public debt, money laundering, and so forth. As well as holding the title of public translator, the expert must register every year with the courts and take a refresher course. On the other hand, indigenous-language interpreters are registered with the courts and are called when necessary. They act as required, given that there is no university education in those languages. In addition, these sources have also indicated that those responsible for the Colegio de Traductores Públicos in Buenos Aires are working on a project to develop courses on the basics of legal interpreting at the University of Buenos Aires. These courses are aimed at Amerindian or minority-language interpreters before they sign up with the courts. The Asociación Argentina de Traductores e Intérpretes (AATI) (Argentinian Association of Translators and Interpreters) also provides training sessions to interpreters of indigenous languages. In the previously cited work, Lea Martin (2017), a lecturer in the degree Traductorado Público (public translator) at the University of Aconcagua and at the National University of Cuyo, in Mendoza (located almost 1,000 km southwest of Buenos Aires, in the Andes), presents a complementary but different vision, and mentions the need for training and accreditation in public service interpreting. According to Martin, although Argentina is not a country with high numbers of non-Spanish-speaking immigrants, there are large communities of Asians and indigenous people, and furthermore, in recent years the government has become a signatory to various conventions which involve a commitment to take in refugees, mainly Syrians. They all use public services and public translators or conference interpreters who are available but are not suitably prepared for this kind of task, given that there is no kind of training for interpreters working in public services. Other studies focused on the linguistic policies relating to indigenous languages, but few on the actual practice of translation and interpreting (e.g. in Peru, Luna García 2016).

Research issues and methods In 2004, Sandra Hale (2004, xv) wrote: Much of what is being written or said on the topic (to professionalize legal interpreting) is of a very prescriptive or anecdotal nature, rarely based on empirical evidence. There is no real translation of research in the field of legal interpreting, although a body of research has increased in the last twenty years, with the majority of data based linguistic research being carried out in Spanish-English. 217

Carmen Valero-Garcés

Although she was writing about interpreting in a legal setting, this could be applied to some extent to PSIT as well. As Hale indicates, Spanish is a fundamental language when talking about research in PSIT. The scope and importance of Spanish is twofold, and goes beyond Spanish-speaking countries in which Spanish is the official language. In countries such as Australia, Canada or the US, Spanish has been, and still is, an important minority or immigrant language that has produced the most literature with respect to the linguistic combination English-Spanish. In these countries, PSIT is most commonly known as ‘community interpreting and translation’, and as we have already mentioned, is where this specialization is most developed. The extensive list of publications includes, for example, works by Angelelli (2008) (US), Hale (2004, 2007) (Australia), or Sasso and Malli (2014) (Canada). In this chapter, however, I will focus on Spain and Latin America. As previously mentioned, the first contact with PSIT in Spain was at the 3rd Conference on Translation, held in 1997 at the University of Alcalá (UAH). It was during this conference that the paper entitled ‘TISP ¿de qué me hablas? ¿una nueva especialización en los Estudios de Traducción?’ (PSIT: What are you talking about? A New Specialization in Translation Studies?) (Valero-Garcés 1997, 267–77) was presented and later published. However, some years passed before interest extended to this emerging specialization. The aforementioned publications and the following comments are a good reflection of the state of PSIT in Spain in the first decade of this century, which include the following: 1 2 3

4

Late integration of PSIT in the academic world. The background of researchers and professionals, many of them coming from disciplines such as the social sciences, social work or law, have received scant linguistic preparation and have leaned more towards cultural studies. Difficulties have been encountered in compiling a corpus of authentic data, given the setting in which this work is usually carried out (hospitals, police stations, courts, government offices) and the characteristics of the participants whose information is often protected (illegal immigrants, refugees, children). Along with this lack of research came the fact that the results obtained from the existing research did little to influence the work in practice (Angelelli 2008, 165).

Nonetheless, since the creation of the Red Comunica in 2005, PSIT has slowly been gaining respect both in the academic and research fields. A look at the different research groups that make up Red Comunica (Alfaqueque, CRIT, FITISPoS, GRETI, Miras) and their activities in PSIT provides some evidence, e.g. the consolidation of international conferences, the increased number of publications, and the establishment of different types of postgraduate training programmes or continuing education courses, seminars and workshops are signs of increasing visibility. The growing number of publications and empirical research on the analysis of interpreter discourses or translated texts for a specific community show that defining the scope of PSIT is a complex and difficult task. This complexity can also be seen in the large variety of issues and research methods that follow. In line with the publications in more advanced countries, a large body of research has been dedicated to analyzing the role(s) of the translator and/or interpreter. This issue has given rise to different approaches and practices, ranging from adhering to strict linguistic transfer all the way to mediation (also called “advocacy”), or to the view that the service user should belong to the minority group (see Valero-Garcés 2003a; CRIT 2014). Existing literature in countries where Spanish-speaking populations are significant (e.g. the United States and the 218

Intercultural communication

United Kingdom) also tends to deal with the effects of interpreters/mediators who interpret from Spanish into English and vice versa. This tendency is also seen in Spain. It is interesting to note that some researchers, especially those working with non-Western groups, report increased uses of interpreters as well as different forms of intercultural mediation (Ilie 2014; Jaime Pérez 2014; Jiménez Hortelano 2014; Ilie, Pérez, and Vitalaru 2014). Other studies have delved into larger communities currently living in Spain, such as Chinese (Vargas-Urpi 2014), Romanian (Ilie 2014) and Arabic (El-Madkouri 2008, 2014). A common issue is the conflicts that arise due to miscommunication and the need for enhanced interpersonal communication (or intercultural interaction). In legal settings, the roles of interpreters during any type of exchange or form of communication, as well as their ethical behaviour and professional status, have also been addressed (Ortega Herráez 2006; Ortega Herráez and Iliescu 2015, 37–62). The publications from the International Conferences on PSIT held in Alcalá de Henares (Valero-Garcés ed. 2002, 2005, 2008, 2011, 2014, 2017) provide examples of the research issues in Spain,10 including the necessary division between mediating and interpreting, translation quality, the interpreter’s role(s), as well as discussions of codes of ethics and any inherent dilemmas, like the use of ad hoc interpreters. A growing body of research has also shown the impact of interpreting in inherently stressful and sometimes traumatic settings such as domestic violence (Bodzer 2014; Toledano Buendía and del Pozo Triviño 2015), asylum and refugee situations (León Pinilla and Conseil 2014), mental health situations (Echauri 2016) and communicating in prisons (Martínez-Gómez 2011; Baixauli 2014; Valero-Garcés 2017). The main trends emphasize the need for further specialized research, the lack of a connection between research and practice, and the problem of difficult access to the labour market. Doctoral research in PSIT has also expanded since the publication of the doctoral theses by Ortega Herráez (2006) and Abril Martí (2006). These have been followed by more than a dozen doctoral theses, according to data from the Red Comunica network, and another dozen are currently underway. Some of the topics covered by recent dissertations show the vitality and complexity of PSIT, such as PSIT in the media (El Islam Sidi Bah 2015; Cedillo Corrochano 2017), in conflict zones (Persaud 2016; Moreno Bello 2017) and in mental health settings (Echauri 2016), to name but a few. This illustrates the diversity of topics covered by PSIT, something which could be indicative of the future of this field. With regards to PSIT research in Latin American, as already mentioned, it is very limited. Berk-Seligson (2008) has studied how the Quechua of Ecuador, along with other indigenous peoples of Latin America, have been struggling to attain the right to use their ancestral language and their traditional ways of administering justice in an effort to gain greater autonomy in a variety of sociopolitical spheres of life. Based on interviews with ninety-three Ecuadorians, including judges, magistrates, lawyers, justices of the peace, interpreters, translators, and local and national political leaders, the study found ideological differences on this subject. However, both the state and Quechua judicial authorities appear to be largely in agreement as regards the use of ad hoc interpreters/translators to meet the judicial needs of Ecuador’s indigenous population. Although both agree on the need for the professionalization of interpreters and translators, neither consider it a priority. On the other hand, Kleinert (2016) and Kleinert and Stallaert (2015), who have studied the situation in Mexico, point out that the professionalization of community interpreting in Mexico is slowly taking shape and shows great vitality. Through research based on data collected in the states of Veracruz, Puebla and Oaxaca with interpreters trained during 2011 and 2012, they reflect on the development and configuration of this field in the area of indigenous 219

Carmen Valero-Garcés

interpreters training in criminal justice. Kleinert and Stallaert (2015, 243) also point out that the study was also able to gather information about the employability of trained interpreters whose linguistic combinations include indigenous languages. There is optimism regarding the growing awareness on the part of users, as well as translators and interpreters, regarding their rights when communicating with the government (Kleinert and Stallaert 2015, 245). In Spain, Ortega Herráez and Iliescu (2015, 36) have stressed the evolution in Interpreting Studies, from the initial focus on conference interpreting to the current boom in community interpreting. They observe a shift from what they call ‘traditional’ insights in PSIT, such as discourse transfer processes, communicative situation specificities, contextual constraints (in the late twentieth century) towards other more relevant issues to the early twenty-first century, such as “the necessary division between mediating and interpreting, quality, the interpreter’s role, codes of ethics and dilemmas, including the one on the employment of ad hoc interpreters” (2015, 36). Regarding research methods, variety is again a characteristic of the interdisciplinary nature of research in PSIT. The main characteristics are: 1

2 3 4

5

Rather than large-scale studies, a plethora of smaller questionnaire-based surveys are being produced, often categorized as case studies (Ortega Herráez and Iliescu 2015, 45). This could be considered an indicator of some of the difficulties that researchers face due to a lack of collaboration or confidence between the parties involved (Valero-Garcés 2013). A range of various discourse approaches are usually adopted, which often focus on authentic (‘primary’) data. Observational research is more common than experimental research. In addition, deductive approaches are more common than inductive ones (Lázaro 2012). Researchers tend to use a combination of both qualitative and quantitative methods or make use of different qualitative methods, often referred to as a ‘triangulation’ of methods, involving questionnaire-based surveys that analyse authentic recordings from a descriptive viewpoint (Vargas-Urpi 2011, 86). Finally, it is important to mention the contribution of postgraduate pilot studies conducted by students who are often members of specific communities (e.g. Chinese, Arabic). They aim to develop multilingual corpora and databases in certain linguistic combinations and specific fields where there is a lack of material. Their contribution is also significant in studies dedicated to obtaining deeper knowledge of ethnic minorities and their culture, as a way to gain a first-hand understanding of their specific problems or degree of adaptation. Future contributions in this direction are expected.

All in all, as Hale (2007, 204) points out, such a diversity of topics and methods is not necessarily a negative characteristic: “By taking a multidisciplinary approach, a new paradigm is created, whereby only the methodologies that are useful to the aims of community interpreting research from different disciplines and methodologies are adopted”.

Future directions Research in PSIT is becoming one of the most fruitful areas of study within TS. The growing interest in Spain and other countries where the Spanish language is an object of study serves as proof of this. In Spain, the extensive list of studies that have been published by the Red Comunica network,11 the series of conferences and seminars held every three years at the University 220

Intercultural communication

of Alcalá since 2002,12 and the launching in 2014 of FITISPos International Journal, a yearly multilingual double-blind peer review and free-access online journal, are all examples of the recent efforts and developments in this field which may be indicators that this level of activity will continue. It is also worth mentioning the contribution of the Red Comunica members to EU research projects (Agora, EULITA, SOS-VICS, QUALETRA, Building Mutual Trust),13 which have made substantial contributions in the following areas: educational (manuals, teaching resources of different types), professional (position reports, recommendations, good practice guidelines) and even political (action plans, legislation, etc.). Ultimately, these results have allowed EU authorities to gain further understanding of the professional reality of legal and judicial interpreting in the member states, as well as develop specific legislation (Directiva 2010/64). Thanks to these projects, professional interpreters and translators, trainers and the authorities themselves have more resources at their disposal, a trend that hopefully will continue in the next few years. In some cases, the continuity of these projects (LITSearch, Justisigns), as well as cooperative and network-style research, requires support for their continuing existence and growth. As regards research on training, the article by Ortega Herráez and Iliescu (2015, 46) already mentioned and the collection of articles and materials from the international conference on Training, Testing, and Accreditation in PSIT (Valero-Garcés 2015) are good sources of information concerning the advances and challenges in this sector. A brief overview of its contents shows general changes in attitudes with regards to how certain elements affecting interpreting training and practices are perceived, including the roles of interpreters, quality assessment of interpreting, and growing technological influences, as well as the need to increase interest in translation. These changes have been reflected in theoretical and methodological orientations and will no doubt continue to be expanded in the future. In turn, the attractiveness of employment as a PSIT will hopefully provide more incentives for improving training, and the profession will finally be able to break the ‘vicious cycle’ described by Vargas-Urpi (2011, 82) where low prestige leads to low pay, which leads to little incentive for training, and thus to a lack of training, and the negative cycle perpetuates itself. The tendency towards more specific approaches to PSIT in sub-areas such as health or legal settings will likely take place. This tendency is already seen in countries where PSIT is more developed, such as Australia and Canada, where healthcare interpreting has made great advances in gaining attention and court interpreting is highly recognized as a profession. As Sasso and Malli (2014) indicate, if policy recognition is what is desired, then perhaps fragmenting the field is an alternative approach. However, they also warn about the impact that this fragmentation may have on PSIT versus the advantage of standing together and potentially becoming stronger as a profession. Evidence has shown that, as a unified body, significant milestones have been achieved, such as the publication of the first international standard for community interpreting – ISO norm: Interpreting: Guidelines for community interpreting.14 However, the differences between countries are so extensive that PSIT could evolve in many potentially diverse directions. In conclusion, and based on the preceding considerations, PSIT research could focus on: • •

Studying the boundaries between professions that are already considered well established (conference interpreting) and professions that are in the process of becoming so (PSIT), and where the limits are becoming blurred and the differences are starting to fade. Continuing with the debate over prestige and how each group is recognized by other professionals and by society as a whole. As interpreters seemed to take more active and 221

Carmen Valero-Garcés

• •

• •

visible approaches than was expected, attention could be focused on the extent to which such roles would interfere with legal operators’ decision-making, procedural strategies and/or market needs. Searching for models of good practice when facing the increasing demand for interpreters, based on recognizing that quality indeed impacts equal access to justice and a fair trial. Exploring non-professional interpreting both in research and training beyond mainstream institutions, to include groups of interpreting practitioners whose positions have been, or still are, rather peripheral (be they professional, ad hoc, novice, volunteer and/or activist), but who perform an active role in society. Merging different disciplines and methodological approaches for the purpose of research and training, leading to a higher degree of multi-disciplinarity. Incorporating technology to facilitate more interactive and collaborative roles not only as interpreters and translators, but also as participants in communicative events as mediators in conflict areas or emergency situations, escort interpreters in business meetings, members of teams developing technology related to translation and interpreting, as well as for those in other related tasks.

These are a few examples of the wide range of opportunities that PSIT has to offer students and future researchers as well as those who work with languages or are interested in crosscultural communication. PSIT is undoubtedly a significant mode of intercultural communication and an emergent specialized area in Translation and Interpreting Studies. The information presented in these pages will hopefully assist in sparking research interest in, and consequently contributing to, the growing professionalization of interpreting which, although it has existed for thousands of years, has become a profession recognized by the general public only recently.

Recommended reading Grupo CRIT. 2014. La práctica de la mediación interlingüística e intercultural en el ámbito sanitario. Granada: Comares. This book offers an objective approach to the professional reality of intercultural and interlingual healthcare mediators (mediadores interlingüísticos e interculturales sanitarios (MILICS)). It uses a theoretical framework and multidisciplinary methodology based on various scientific fields and defends an integrated and harmonious view of communication. Raga Gimeno, Francisco, and Valero-Garcés, Carmen, eds. 2012 [2006]. “Retos del siglo XXI en comunicación intercultural: nuevo mapa lingüístico y cultural de España.” Resla, Número Extraordinario 1. This book presents an overview of PSIT and its development in Spain at the beginning of the twentyfirst century. Valero-Garcés, Carmen. 2008. Formas de mediación intercultural e interpretación en los servicios públicos. Conceptos, datos, situaciones y práctica. Granada: Comares, 2nd edc. (1st edc. 2006). Also translated into Romanian (2012), Chinese (2014), Russian (2014) and Arabic (2015). A textbook which addresses the complex task of interpreting and translating through reflection and practice. Valero-Garcés, Carmen. 2014. Communicating Across Cultures. A Coursebook on Interpreting and Translating in Public Services and Institutions. Lanham, New York: University Press of America. An adaptation of the Spanish textbook Formas de mediación intercultural e interpretación en los servicios públicos, which addresses the complex task of interpreting and translating through reflection and practice in PSIT.

222

Intercultural communication

Notes 1 See http://www3.uah.es/master-tisp-uah/publicaciones-tisp-grupo-fitispos/ 2 See http://www3.uah.es/master-tisp-uah/ 3 http://red-comunica.blogspot.com/ 4 www.ritap.es/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/libro_blanco_traduccion_vfinal_es.pdf/ 5 See www.boe.es/diario_boe/txt.php?id=BOE-A-2015-4605. 6 See www.aptij.es/img/not/docs/Queja_web.pdf. 7 See http://www3.uah.es/fitispos_ij/OJS/ojs-2.4.5/index.php/fitispos/issue/view/3 8 http://tisp2017.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Best-Practices-UE-2017-en-25feb17.pdf 9 www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsK0tM-M2gE 10 See http://www3.uah.es/master-tisp-uah/publicaciones-tisp-grupo-fitispos/ 11 See Red Comunica: http://red-comunica.blogspot.com.es/ 12 http://www3.uah.es/master-tisp-uah/publicaciones-tisp-grupo-fitispos/ 13 See www.eulita.eu/ 14 www.iso.org/standard/54082.html

References AATI. Asociación Argentina de Traductores e Intérpretes. Accessed July  20, 2017. www.aati.org.ar/ content/8-recursos-para-profesionales-y-publicaciones/3-boletin/calidoscopio2016julio.pdf. Abril Martí, M. Isabel. 2006. La Interpretación en los Servicios Públicos: caracterización como género, contextualización y modelos de formación. Hacia unas bases para el diseño curricular. Granada: University of Granada. Angelelli, Claudia. 2008. “The Role of the Interpreter in the Healthcare Setting: A Plea for a Dialogue Between Research and Practice.” In Crossing Borders in Community Interpreting: Definitions and Dilemmas, edited by Carmen Valero Garcés and Anne Martin, 247–65. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Baixauli, Lluis. 2014. “Redescubriendo los códigos de conducta para la ISP médica: cultura, dilemas y papel profesional.” Panacea 15 (40): 198–217. Accessed July 20, 2017. www.medtrad.org/panacea/ IndiceGeneral/n40_tribuna_Baixauli-Olmos.pdf. Benhaddou Handi, Elhassane. 2012. “La traducción y la interpretación en el Ministerio del Interior.” In Ensayos sobre la traducción jurídica e institucional, edited by Icíar Alonso Araguás, Jesús Baigorri Jalón, and Helen Campbell, 91–102. Granada: Comares. Berk Seligson, Susan. 2008. “Judicial Systems in Contact: Access to Justice and the Right to Interpreting/ Translating Services Among the Quichua of Ecuador.” Interpreting 10 (1): 9–33. doi:10.1075/ intp.10.1.03ber. Blasco Mayor, M. Jesús, and Maribel del Pozo Triviño. 2015. “Legal Interpreting at a Turning Point.” MonTI. Monografías de traducción e interpretación 7. http://dti.ua.es/es/monti-english. Bodzer, Anca. 2014. “La interpretación en los servicios públicos desde la perspectiva de género. Aproximación al caso de la interpretación para las mujeres no hispanohablantes víctimas de violencia de género.” PhD diss., University of Alcalá (unpublished). Cedillo Corrochano, Carmen. 2017. “La presencia mediática de la traducción e interpretación en los servicios públicos a través del análisis de discursos en la red.” PhD diss., University of Alcalá (unpublished). Corsellis, Anne. 2003. “Formación de los proveedores de servicios públicos para trabajar con intérpretes y traductores. Habilidades y competencias interculturales.” In Traducción e interpretación en los servicios públicos. Contextualización, actualidad y futuro, edited by Carmen Valero-Garcés, 71–89. Granada: Comares. CRIT. 2014. La práctica de la mediación interlingüística e intercultural en el ámbito sanitario. Granada: Comares. Davidson, Brad. 2000. “The Interpreter as Institutional Gatekeeper: The Sociolinguistic Role of Interpreters in Spanish-English Medical Discourse.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 4 (3): 379–405. De Luna Jiménez de Parga, Pilar. 2009. “Informe sobre la calidad de la interpretación en los Juzgados de lo Penal de Madrid.” Accessed May  20, 2017. www.elgasconjurado.com/2010/02/15/ informe-de-la-magistrada-pilar-de-luna-jimenez-de-parga/.

223

Carmen Valero-Garcés ———. 2011. “El papel del traductor/intérprete en los Juzgados.” In Traducción e Interpretación en los Servicios Públicos en el siglo XXI. Avanzando hacia la unidad en medio de la globalización. (Textos+Audios), edited by Carmen Valero-Garcés. CD-ROM. Alcalá de Henares: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Alcalá. Díaz García, Antonio Luis. 2011. “El intérprete a distancia: videoconferencia.” In Traducción e Interpretación en los Servicios Públicos en un mundo INTERcoNEcTado. TISP EN INTERNET/Public Service Interpreting and Translation in the Wild Wired World-PSIT in WWW, edited by Carmen Valero-Garcés et  al., 278–84. Alcalá de Henares: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Alcalá. www3.uah.es/master-tisp-uah/publicaciones-tisp-grupo-fitispos/. Directiva 2010/64/UE del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, de 20 de octubre, relativa al derecho a interpretación y traducción en los procesos penales. Accessed July 20, 2017. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/ LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2010:280:0001:0007:es:PDF. Directiva 2012/29/UE del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, de 25 de octubre de 2012, por la que se establecen normas mínimas sobre los derechos, el apoyo y la protección de las víctimas de delitos, y por la que se sustituye la Decisión marco 2001/220/JAI del Consejo. Accessed July 20, 2017. http:// eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:315:0057:01:ES:HTML. Echauri, Bruno. 2016. “Pautas para la mejora de la comunicación bilingüe y bicultural en salud mental: terminología especializada y elementos pragmáticos.” PhD diss., University of Alcalá (unpublished). El Islam Sidi Bah. 2015. “La prensa y la Traducción e Interpretación en los Servicios Públicos.” PhD diss., University Autónoma de Madrid (unpublished). El-Madkouri, Mohamed. 2008. “Lengua oral y lengua escrita en la traducción e interpretación en los Servicios Públicos.” Tonos digital 15: 1–28. www.tonosdigital.com/ojs/index.php/tonos/article/ view/183/143]. ———. 2014. “La interpretación de las expresiones de contenido sexual en los servicios públicos (árabeespañol).” FITISPos International Journal 2: 51–65. www3.uah.es/fitispos_ij/OJS/ojs-2.4.5/index. php/fitispos/article/view/14/7. García-Beyaert, Sofia. 2015. “Key External Players in the Development of the Interpreting Profession.” The Routledge Handbook of Interpreting, 45–60. London/New York: Routledge. Gentile, Paola. 2014. “The Conflict Between Interpreters’ Role and Professional Status: A Sociological Perspective.” In (Re)Visiting Ethics and Ideology in Situations of Conflict, edited by Carmen ValeroGarcés and Bianca Vitalaru, 195–205. Alcalá de Henares: Servicio de publicaciones de la Universidad de Alcalá. Hale, Sandra. 2004. The Discourse of Court Interpreting. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ———. 2007. Community Interpreting. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Helguera Gallego, Antonio, A. Gómez Arévalo, A. Sanz Gil and Luis Carlos Martínez Aguado. 2011. “Traducción remota en el servicio de urgencias del Hospital Ramón y Cajal del servicio madrileño de salud.” In Traducción e Interpretación en los Servicios Públicos en un mundo INTERcoNEcTado. TISP EN INTERNET/Public Service Interpreting and Translation in the Wild Wired World-PSIT in WWW, edited by Carmen Valero-Garcés, 57–85. Universidad de Alcalá: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad. www3.uah.es/master-tisp-uah/publicaciones-tisp-grupo-fitispos]. Ilie, Liliana. 2014. “Mediación e interpretación de inglés y rumano en el proyecto InterMed.” In (Re)thinking Ethics and Ideology in PSIT, edited by Carmen Valero-Garcés, 148–57. Alcalá de Henares: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad. Ilie, Liliana, Adriana Jaime Pérez, and Bianca Vitalaru. 2014. “Actuación del intérprete-mediador en el ámbito sanitario en situaciones comunicativas problemáticas y conflictos culturales: análisis y comparación entre intérpretes con y sin formación en diferentes pares de lenguas (español > árabe, francés, inglés y rumano).” Panacea 15 (40). www.tremedica.org/panacea/IndiceGeneral/n40_tribuna_Ilieetal.pdf. Italia Morayta Foundation. 2017. Estudio de encuesta sobre la Traducción e Interpretación en México 2017. https://italiamorayta.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/ENCUESTAS.pdf Jaime Pérez, Adriana. 2014. “Acogida del Servicio de Interpretación en Centros de Salud de Parla.” In (Re) thinking Ethics and Ideology in PSIT, edited by Carmen Valero-Garcés, 128–37. Alcalá de Henares: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad. Jiménez Hortelano, Laura. 2014. “Mediación e Interpretación de Chino en el proyecto InterMed.” In (Re) Thinking Ethics and Ideology in PSIT, edited by Carmen Valero-Garcés, 138–47. Alcalá de Henares: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad.

224

Intercultural communication Kleinert, Cristina V. 2016. “Didáctica para la formación de intérpretes en lenguas nacionales de México: trabajar de manera multilingüe.” Entreculturas 7–8: 599–623. www.entreculturas.uma.es/n7yn8pdf/ articulo27.pdf. Kleiner, Cristina V., and Christiane Stallaert. 2017. “Papel y ética del intérprete en los servicios públicos mexicanos.” Paper read at the 6th International Conference on PSIT (PSIT6), Universid de Alcalá. March 6–8, Alcalá de Henares, Madrid (Spain). Kleinert, Cristina V., and Christiane Stallaert. 2015. “La formación de intérpretes de lenguas indígenas para la justicia en México. Sociología de las ausencias y agencia decolonial.” Sendebar 26: 235–54. http://revistaseug.ugr.es/index.php/sendebar/article/view/2664. Lázaro Gutiérrez, Raquel. 2012. La interpretación en el ámbito sanitario. Saarbrücken, Germany: Editorial Académica Española. Le Bot, Fabien. 2016. “Quality of Interpretation and Translation: Lessons from Directive 2010/64/EU.” In Training, Testing and Accreditation in PSIT /Formación, Evaluación y Acreditación en TISP, edited by Carmen Valero-Garcés, 39–52. CD-ROM. Alcalá de Henares: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Alcalá. León Pinilla, Ruth, and Ludivine Conseil. 2014. “La interpretación en el contexto de refugiados y el bienestar.” In (Re) considerando ética e ideología en situaciones de conflicto: (Re) Visiting Ethics and Ideology in Situations, edited by Carmen Valero-Garcés. Alcalá de Henares: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Alcalá. www3.uah.es/master-tisp-uah/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/ Valero2014-Reconsiderando-etica-conflicto.pdf. Luna García, Ruth. 2016. “Instauración de buenas prácticas de la traducción en lenguas indígenas y originarias.” Paper presented at the Simposio Internacional Traducción e interpretación en las lenguas originarias del Perú, Universidad Femenina del Sagrado Corazón (Unifé), March 21, Lima (Perú). Martin, Lea. 2017. “Interpretación comunitaria en Argentina”. Paper read at the First International Congress on Translation, Interpretation, and Cognition. University of Aconcagua. August  31–September 1, Mendoza (Argentina). Martínez-Gómez, Aida. 2011. “La interpretación en instituciones penitenciarias. La relevancia del componente interpersonal en la calidad de la actuación de intérpretes naturales.” PhD diss., University of Alicante. Mikkelson, Holly. 2014. “Evolution of Public Service Interpreter Training in the U.S.” FITISPos International Journal 1: 9–22. Moreno Bello, Yolanda. 2017. “Aplicación de estudios sobre el lenguaje en zonas en conflicto: el caso del intérprete de guerra.” PhD diss., University of Alcalá (unpublished). Murgu, Dora, and Sonia Jiménez. 2011. “La formación de un intérprete telefónico.” In Traducción e Interpretación en los Servicios Públicos en un mundo INTERcoNEcTado. TISP EN INTERNET/Public Service Interpreting and Translation in the Wild Wired World-PSIT in WWW, edited by Carmen Valero-Garcés. Alcalá de Henares: Servicio de publicaciones de la Universidad de Alcalá. www3.uah. es/master-tisp-uah/publicaciones-tisp-grupo-fitispos/. Ortega Herráez, Juan Miguel. 2006. Análisis de la práctica de la interpretación judicial en España: el intérprete frente a su papel profesional. Granada: University of Granada. Ortega Herráez, Juan Miguel, and Ana Foulquié Rubio. 2008. “Interpreting in Police Settings in Spain: Service Providers’ and Interpreters’ Perspectives.” In Crossing Borders in Community Interpreting: Definitions and Dilemmas, edited by Carmen Valero-Garcés and Anne Martin, 50–69. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Ortega Herráez, Juan Miguel, and Cata Iliescu. 2015. “The Interpreter Hears Voices . . . Academic and Professional Perspectives X-Rayed and Interpreted.” MonTI. Monografías de traducción e interpretación Special Issue 5: 37–62. Ozolins, Uldis. 2000. “Communication Needs and Interpreting in Multilingual Settings: The International Spectrum of Response.” In The Critical Link 2: Interpreters in the Community, edited by Roda P. Roberts, Silvana E. Carr, Diana Abraham, and Aideen Dufour, 21–33. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Persaud, Maria Clementina. 2016. “Interpretación de guerra: un estudio de caso sobre EUFOR BiH Althea/Interpreting at War: A Case Study on EUFOR BiH Althea.” PhD diss., University of Geneva, Switzerland. Sasso, Angela, and Kiran Malli. 2014. “Trying to Fit a Square Peg in a Round Hole: Is Community Interpreting Just Too Big for Public Policy? The Canadian Experience.” FITISPos International Journal 1: 42–50.

225

Carmen Valero-Garcés Toledano Buendía, Carmen, and Maribel del Pozo Triviño. 2015. Interpretación en Contextos de Violencia de Género. Valencia: Tirant Lo Blanc. Valero-Garcés, Carmen. 1997. “¿Traducción e interpretación en servicios públicos? ¿De qué me hablas? ¿Una nueva especialización?” In Nuevas Tendencias y Aplicaciones de la Traducción, edited by Carmen Valero-Garcés, 267–77. Alcalá de Henares: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad. Valero-Garcés, Carmen, ed. 2002. Traducción e Interpretación en los Servicios Públicos: Nuevas necesidades para nuevas realidades. Community Interpreting and Translating; New Needs for New Realities. Alcalá de Henares: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad. http://www3.uah.es/master-tisp-uah/ publicaciones-tisp-grupo-fitispos/. ———. 2003a. Discursos (Dis)Con/Cordantes: Modos y formas de comunicación y convivencia. Alcalá de Henares: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad. ———. 2003b. Traducción e Interpretación en los Servicios Públicos. Contextualización, actualidad y futuro. Granada: Comares. ———, ed. 2005. Traducción como mediación entre lenguas y culturas/Translation as mediation or how to bridge linguistic and cultural gaps. Alcalá de Henares: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad. http://www3.uah.es/master-tisp-uah/publicaciones-tisp-grupo-fitispos/. ———. 2008a. Formas de mediación intercultural e interpretación en los servicios públicos. Conceptos, datos, situaciones y práctica. Granada: Comares. ———, ed. 2008b. Investigación y práctica en Traducción e Interpretación en los Servicios Públicos: desafíos y alianzas/Research and Practice in Public Service Interpreting and Translation: Challenges and Alliances. Alcalá de Henares: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad. http://www3.uah.es/ master-tisp-uah/publicaciones-tisp-grupo-fitispos. ———, ed. 2011. Traducción e Interpretación en los Servicios Públicos en un mundo INTERcoNEcTado. TISP EN INTERNET / Public Service Interpreting and Translation in the Wild Wired World– PSIT in WWW. Alcalá de Henares: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad. http://www3.uah.es/ master-tisp-uah/publicaciones-tisp-grupo-fitispos. ———. 2013. “Formación de traductores e intérpretes en una sociedad multicultural. El programa de la Universidad de Alcalá.” Cuadernos de ALDEEU 25–39. ——— , ed. 2014. (Re)considerando ética e ideología en situaciones de conflicto/(Re)visiting Ethics and Ideology in Situations of Conflict. Universidad de Alcalá: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad. www3.uah.es/master-tisp-uah/publicaciones-tisp-grupo-fitispos. ———, ed. 2015. Public Service Interpreting and Translation (PSIT). Training, Testing and Accreditation. Universidad de Alcalá: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad. http://www3.uah.es/ master-tisp-uah/publicaciones-tisp-grupo-fitispos/. ———, ed. 2017. Superando límites en traducción e interpretación en los Servicios Públicos/Beyond Limits in Public Service Interpreting and Translation. Universidad de Alcalá: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad. http://www3.uah.es/master-tisp-uah/publicaciones-tisp-grupo-fitispos/. Vargas-Urpi, Mireia. 2011. “Linking Community Interpreting Research with Intercultural Communication Theories: Methodological Approach to the Specific Case of Chinese in Catalonia.” In Modelling the Field of Community Interpreting: Questions of Methodology in Research and Training, edited by Kainz et al., 66–86. Vienna/Berlin: Verlag. ———. 2014. “Actitudes y percepciones del colectivo chino en cuanto a la comunicación en los servicios públicos en el ámbito educativo: ejemplo del contexto catalán.” Lengua y migración 6 (1): 4–14. Vaughn Holcomb, Laura. 2017. Estudio de encuesta sobre la traducción y la interpretación en México 2017. Mexico: Fundación Italia Morayta. https://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/436939/Lenguas/ Estudio_Encuesta_MX.pdf?t=1509077873487. Wadensjö, Cecilia. 1998. Interpreting as Interaction. Harlow, Essex: Addison Wesley Longman Limited.

226

13 LINGUISTIC APPROACHES TO TRANSLATION Gloria Corpas Pastor and María-Araceli Losey-León

Introduction Translation and Linguistics have always been intertwined, as this type of mediation activity involves (at the very least) rendering ‘something’ in a particular ‘language’ into another ‘language’. Since the early years, the theoretical grounds of Linguistics have been explored to find out explanations about language use and patterns in translation. Linguistic theories, models and approaches became analytical tools to address translation problems and the equivalent issue, a recurrent landmark. In general terms, the dialogic bridges between Linguistics and Translation have definitely nurtured research in a heterogeneous but coherent way since the second half of the twentieth century.1 A non-extensive list of relevant linguistic ‘branches’ that have proved influential are Systemic Functional Linguistics, as quoted in Catford (1965), Halliday (1992), Fawcett (1997), Munday (2016) [2001], and Malmkjaer (2011), Structural Linguistics, as quoted in Malmkjaer (2011), and Venuti (2000), Stylistique Comparée, as quoted in Venuti (2000), Baker (2001), and Munday (2016) [2001], Generative Grammar, as quoted in Fawcett (1997), Functional theories, as quoted in Munday (2016) [2001], and García de Toro (2007), Discourse and Register Analysis approaches, as quoted in Munday (2016) [2001], Contrastive Rhetorics, as quoted by Hatim (2009), Cognitive Linguistics, as quoted in Malmkjaer (2011), Relevance Theory, as quoted in Fawcett (1997), Venuti (2000), and Malmkjaer (2005, 2011), and Corpus Linguistics,2 as quoted in Baker (2001), and Malmkjaer (2011). Further linguistic approaches have been widely applied to Translation, namely Contrastive Linguistics (Di Pietro 1971), Text Linguistics (De Beaugrande and Dressler 1981) and Genre-based Analysis (Swales 1990, Bhatia 1993).3 In addition, due to the multidisciplinary nature of Translation, most translation problems have also required the assistance of other non-linguistic disciplines under the umbrella term ‘Cultural Studies’ (Sociology, Anthropology, Psychology, History, Literature Theory and Schools of Criticism, etc.).4 This is the reason why further translation theories and/or methodologies have been built on perspectives gained from both linguistic and extralinguistic foundations such as culture, ideology, sociology, history, etc., having all enough specific weight. Broadly speaking, their main concern is to outline an adequate methodology for the translation work and/or research. This took the form of so-called Descriptive Translation Studies 227

Gloria Corpas Pastor and María-Araceli Losey-León

(DST) (Holmes 2000 [1972], 1988, Toury 2000 [1978], 1980), whose underlying theoretical and methodological assumptions were also shared by the Manipulation School and the Polysystems Theory,5 as well as the Functional theories of translation (specifically, the Skopos Theory), the cultural and ideological turns (specifically the interpretative, gender and postcolonial approaches) or the cultural and political agenda of translation (Munday 2016 [2001]), to name but a few. Both the linguistic and the cultural strands of translation theory have made significant contributions to the discipline. Albeit conceptually different, both strands are inherently interrelated. Given the interdisciplinary or, better, transdisciplinary nature of translation, it is not possible to draw a distinctive clear line between them. Both strands have been intimately involved in the development of present-day Translation Studies. And both strands have had an impact on the three main paradigmatic shifts in theoretical Translation Studies so far: prescriptive, descriptive and corpus-based (Corpas Pastor 2008, Zanettin 2012, Hu 2016). Given that premise, this chapter provides an insight into Translation Studies deeply rooted in Linguistics within the Spanish academic context. Our main aim is to examine scholars’ early work and trace their influence upon the evolution of the discipline in Spain. The study is divided into two parts. The first part sets out the research lanes along the timeline of linguistic theories that prompted new thoughts and views in Translation Studies from the second half of the twentieth century. The second part recaps on the linguistic foundations that prompted the consolidation of Translation Studies as an independent discipline in Spain. It is further divided into two subsections that present findings from a sample of journal publications and research groups and projects. Finally, in the concluding section, we foreground some of the study’s implications, and some directions for future research.

A brief historical overview Nearly fifty years after the publication of Ferdinand de Saussure’s Cours de linguistique générale (1983 [1916]), Roman Jakobson (1959) debated the central issues of equivalence and translatability that will be at the core of translation research in the 1950s and 1960s. In a related vein, just a year before, in 1958, Jean-Paul Vinay and Jean Darbelnet alluded to equivalence as a translation procedure, “the result of which replicates the same situation as in the original, whilst using completely different wording” (Vinay and Darbelnet 1995, 342 [1958]). Within the 1960s timeline, Eugene Nida (1964) in his essay “Principles of Correspondence” took a step further in the equivalence issue by highlighting the importance of contextual features – dynamic equivalence – alongside formal language equivalence – formal equivalence – in the translation work. Nida and Taber’s proposal (1974, vii [1969]) on a three-step translation process of analysis, transfer and restructuring was influenced by the Generative-Transformational Grammar with their focus on the sentence structure. Their claiming for a “priority of contextual consistency over purely verbal consistency” (15) resonate the view of language as communication. A far-reaching change took place in the 1970s through the functional view of language applied to translation. As displayed in Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar (1985), Systemic functional Linguistics (SF model) promoted a shift towards a view of language where it had a “formal meaning” - the item’s “operation in the network of formal relations”and a “contextual meaning”, that is, an item’s “relation to extratextual features” (245). The way linguistic theories are supposed to be transferred into Translation has not been the object of much debate. There are notable exceptions, though. Catford’s (1965, vii) theory of translation draws upon a General Linguistics theory of language where cultural and contextual situation of the target text performed a relevant role in the translation work. In the same vein, 228

Linguistic approaches to translation

Halliday’s (1992) functional approach distinguished between the translator’s position engaged in what is normative and evaluative and the linguist’s position giving an account of what is explanatory and descriptive. The key issue is the choice made by the translator during the process. In Halliday’s view, what linguistics can provide of relevance to Translation is a theory of meaning as choice or functional semantics. Therefore, Linguistics could not provide a theory of translation which catered for the equivalence problem but “a theory of context” (Halliday 1992, 16). In the same line, Hasan (1978) inquired into the text-context relations. The functional line of thought permeated the translation research methodology and traced the way to a more realistic approach to the thorny issue of equivalence in context. This linguistic theory contributed altogether to set the course for further linguistic models in the 1970s and 1980s where text, discourse and social function were of paramount importance. Text Linguistics (De Beaugrande and Dressler 1981) and Discourse Analysis (Dressler 1977) surpassed empirical research in Linguistics to provide a full account of other language-related disciplines such as Pedagogy and Translation. Seeing translation as communication was the landmark of the functionalist and communicative perspective (Nord 1997, Reiss and Vermeer 2014 [1984]) embodied by various approaches that focused on “the function of texts and translations” (Nord 1997, i) with Vermeer’s Skopos Theory as its fundamental basis. The implications of Functional Linguistics for translation were reflected on the relevance of the text type and on the emergence of the concept of adequacy alongside the concept of equivalence. From then on, translation would be vindicated as a textual fact where the concept of languages in comparison was replaced by one of texts in comparison. Notions like situational factors, genres, registers or language varieties began to play an important role as well, in line with traditional postulates at that time (Koller 1979, Hartmann 1980, Papegaaij and Schubert 1988, Neuvert and Shreve 1992, among many others). In addition, research in the cognitive aspects of text processing started to attract much attention in Translation Studies (Snell-Hornby 1988). The 1970s represent a period of rapid growth and consolidation of the discipline. A major landmark is Holmes’s 2000 [1972] map of Translation Studies. Translation is presented for the first time as a global discipline that would integrate all the topics, issues and problems clustered round the phenomenon of translating and translations. In this context, Descriptive Translation Studies plays a crucial role as the branch of the discipline which constantly maintains the closest contact with the empirical phenomena under study (Holmes 2000 [1972], 1988). From that time on, Translation was no longer seen as a mere linguistic fact but as a complex combination of cultural, social and ideological interactions. As described by Baker (2001, 22): “linguistic studies began to put more emphasis on the role of ideology in translation, both in terms of the conflict between source and target ideologies or world views and in terms of the translator’s and other participant’s own ideology”.6 The empirical trend in translator training was also centred on the functionalist textual approach which took precedence over the equivalence approach. All this background was the support for Contrastive Linguistics at a time when Lexicogrammar research was still developing. During the 1990s English for academic settings was the original starting point for the Genre-based studies (Swales 1990, Bhatia 1993) which were landing on the Translation research at that time. In the first decade of the twenty-first century, Pragmatics entailed a model originated in the Relevance theory (Sperber and Wilson 1986) and this was applied to the translation process (Gutt 1991). Finally, the last decade of the twentieth century brought about the corpus paradigm. Corpus Linguistics provided methodological rigour within a qualitative framework to the discipline together with a plethora of novel research lines, as predicted by Mona Baker (1993, 1996, 229

Gloria Corpas Pastor and María-Araceli Losey-León

1999). Since the inception of Corpus Linguistics, various fields of study have benefited from groundbreaking work and innovation. In particular, the use of corpora in Translation Studies opened up new prospects, directions and perspectives. The corpus paradigm supplied Translation with a significant methodological support as a discipline and increased its role, prominence and visibility across Linguistics. Since then, Corpus-based Translation Studies have become both a novel, integrative theoretical strand and a data-based research methodology compatible with most approaches to translation. Its unifying and agglutinating capability justifies its outstanding position within the discipline.

Linguistically oriented Translation Studies in the Spanish context The 1970s and the 1990s also witnessed important changes in Spain. In 1974 the Institute of Modern Languages and Translation (Instituto Universitario de Lenguas Modernas y Traductores, IUL-MyT) was set up at the Universidad Complutense (Madrid). This was the first official translator’s training institution in Spain The School of Translation and Interpreting (L’Escola Universitària de Traductors i Intèrprets, EUTI) at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona was founded two years later. However, their curriculum was not officially approved as diploma course by the Spanish Ministry of Education until 1980. In, 1982 the Spanish Centre for Translation Research (Centro Español de Investigaciones sobre la Traducción) was created under the auspices of the Fundación Alfonso X el Sabio. This Centre was headed by the eminent linguist Emilio Lorenzo, with the aim of improving the theoretical knowledge and technical aspects related to Translation. From that moment on there was a boom of translation activity in Spain not only aimed at foreign languages but to the translation into and from Spanish of the other official languages (namely, Catalan, Basque and Galician). Translation growth in Spain has been in constant rise since the end of the 1970s up to the present day. Spanish scholars had been much inspired by early work on different methods of translation, translation shifts and types of equivalence. In the early years, most translation theories informing research and practical translation were also linguistically oriented to a certain extent. Two outstanding examples are Gerardo Vázquez-Ayora (1977) and Valentín García Yebra (1982, 1983), whose seminal work leaves a legacy of contrastive analysis as the basis for translation. Much of the work carried out in Spain in the 1990s aimed at revising existing translation theories (Rabadán 1992, Tricás 1995, Vidal Claramonte 1995), elucidating the position of Translation within Applied Linguistics (Rabadán and Fernández Polo 1996) or exploring the intrinsic relationship with Text Linguistics, Frame Semantics, Pragmatics and Communication (Hurtado Albir 1994, 1996; García-Izquierdo 1997; Faber 1998). The focus on ‘metatheory’ in the early 1990s coincided in time with the appearance of the first university degrees in Translation and Interpreting in Spain (Granada, Malaga, Salamanca and Barcelona). This situation contributed to the rapid take-off and consolidation of the discipline. New developments at that time were the integrative views on the commonplace translation equivalence issue and the first applications of Corpus Linguistics to the study of translation both as process and product (Corpas Pastor 1995). Nowadays, Translation Studies in Spain present a similar picture. Navarro’s overview (2010, 88) summarizes the current situation by pointing out leading Spanish scholars working on the functionalist and skopos German theories (Elena), on the argumentation theory (Tricás), on theoretical fundamentals (Hurtado), on the descriptive translation studies (Rabadán and Merino), on deconstruction, ideology, power and manipulation 230

Linguistic approaches to translation

(Vidal), on the postcolonialism (Carbonell), on corpus-based translation (Corpas), and on cognitive approach (Muñoz). Furthermore, the research carried out (or led) by those scholars marks the latest trends of linguistically oriented work in Spain. This section aims at unveiling the linguistic foundations of recent developments of Translation Studies in the Spanish context. We have analysed a sample of representative studies and projects on Translation Studies. However, being aware of the existence of an endless number of books, research projects outputs and individual publications, the selection procedure has been narrowed down to papers in specialized translation journals, projects and publications posted on research groups’ websites. While the sample has been necessarily limited, the outcome can be deemed sufficiently representative of the present-day situation. The following two subsections present a bird’s eye survey of linguistically oriented Translation Studies by Spanish scholars. The first one provides a general insight in the amalgam of linguistic approaches underlying Spanish scholarly papers on translation, while the second one focuses specifically on the empiricist approach represented by Spanish research groups working on corpus-based translation studies.

Findings from publications in specialized journals Research and survey papers on translation published in specialized journals facilitate the identification of research trends easily and in a chronological fashion. Periodicals represent a valuable tool to grasp main trends in any discipline and the tension within continuity and innovation. The sample of journals examined for this preliminary study includes the list recommended by the Iberian Association for Translation and Interpreting Studies (AIETI),7 as well as other journals frequently used by Spanish scholars to disseminate their research outputs.8 The selection criteria for papers have been languages covered (Spanish and co-official languages in Spain), area (linguistically oriented Translation Studies) and authors’ affiliation (Spanish Universities). The number of journals consulted was forty. However, only thirty-one were finally selected as nine did not contain papers related to the topic. The time span was from 1991 until 2017. Though it was not our intention to exclude any language, the papers consulted dealt only with a limited number of languages (to/from Spanish, Catalan, Galician, Basque and English/ Chinese/French/German/Italian/Portuguese/Russian). No particular approach was excluded a priori, except for papers on Didactics without any linguistic framework.9 All papers selected were inspected individually for relevance, classified by their underpinning linguistic approach and stored according to publication date. The analysis was performed manually and the process turned out to be rather time-consuming. The overall number of bibliographic records devoted to linguistically oriented Translation Studies in the Spanish context amounts to 353 since 1991. Figure 13.1 illustrates the number of records by linguistic theory, approach or method including the publication time period. These results should be treated with caution, as they may show an approximate picture. The methods of data collection, analysis and interpretation are far from exhaustive, and many papers appear to combine several approaches at the same time. In those cases, the most prominent or relevant linguistic framework has been taken into consideration. That means, for instance, that a paper on the social construction of gender in translation with corpus methodology would be ascribed to the “Language ideology” category.10 231

Gloria Corpas Pastor and María-Araceli Losey-León

90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

89 65

55

46

29

27

16

12

11

1

1

1

Figure 13.1  Journal papers on translation classified by linguistic approach

The results obtained show that most publications have adhered to Contrastive Linguistics as a convenient theoretical framework. It might be due to the ‘umbrella’ effect of this theory that comprises contrastive rhetoric and contrastive stylistics, among others. In addition, Corpus Linguistics has prompted contrastive studies by supporting this strand with empirical data tools. The transversal nature of Corpus Linguistics makes it adequate for interdisciplinary studies so that it is quite common to come across it in other linguistic theories. Most phraseological studies have also been included in this strand because they are based on contrastive analysis. The data retrieved reveal that the most usual translation types studied within the contrastive framework are specialized translation (mainly legal and medical texts), audiovisual translation, sworn translation, dubbing and poetry translation. Latin American varieties (mainly Mexican and Argentinian) versus Castilian Spanish are also the object of many contrastive studies. Cognitive Linguistics, though younger than the other linguistic trends, is firmly consolidated due to the wide range of topics that can be the object of its discussion (psycholinguistics, ideology, etc.). Corpus Linguistics encompasses articles that explore its methodology and resources to extract information oriented to translator’s training and specialized translation, as well as descriptive studies on universals, norms and regularities. However, it should be borne in mind that a significant number of papers on different aspects of translation appear to make extensive use of corpus methodology and empirical data. The particular uses of language to transmit ideology, gender, culture, ethics and power do generally resort to cultural contrast, with censorship one of the most recurrent topics. It is worth mentioning that some of the works included in this strand lie close to Pragmatics as well. Papers within the latter framework deal with Relevance theory, Semantics, sociological issues, audiovisual translation and journalistic translation. The genre-based studies belong to the Text Linguistics strand and together with Discourse and Register analysis have been considered separately to provide finer information. Most genre-based studies have been devoted to legal, business and medical translation as well as to translation training. Ten articles focused on discourse analysis for business and legal translation with a pragmatic view. Papers on translation-oriented terminology and lexicography revolve around Contrastive Linguistics and Frame Semantics. As shown in Figure 13.1, contributions specific to mainstream linguistic theories 232

Linguistic approaches to translation

seem to occupy peripheral positions whereas other alternative linguistic theories seem to be gaining ground in the period under study. Interestingly enough, the functional communicative theory remains relevant nowadays as applied studies based on this approach reveal (e.g., subtitling, specialized translation, sworn translation, translation quality evaluation, comparative stylistics and so forth). Likewise, formal theories play an important role in papers related to translation technologies and machine translation, a feature shared with Natural Language Processing and Computational Linguistics. Translation memories, automatic audiovisual translation and hybrid approaches to Machine Translation combining rule-based and statistical-based paradigms are the focus of a myriad of studies.

Findings from projects and studies by research groups Even a cursory examination of how Linguistics is imbued in Translation research in Spanish academia from the 1990s onwards reveals a dynamic mode of contributions within various research lines and tradition whose common unifying thread appears to be the application of the Corpus Linguistics methodology, as stated above.11 However, not all linguistically oriented research in the Spanish academic context is corpusbased. Translation Studies in the twenty-first century encompass research that applies linguistic analysis (usually in a contrastive fashion) with little or no resort to corpora. By way of example, let us mention Taillefer and Muñoz Luna (2014) on discoursal approaches to gender in Middle English Translation; Doval Reixa (2002) on descriptive contrastive studies in the German and Spanish translations; Montoro del Arco and Sinner (2014) on contrastive analysis of phraseological units in Spanish and German; Mateo (1998) on relevance theory applied to translation and cross-cultural information; da Cunha and Iruskieta’s (2010) rhetorical contrastive study between different languages and the translation strategies used; Samaniego (2011, 2013) on a cognitive theory of metaphor in English-Spanish newspaper translation; Negro’s (2011) approaches to Translation Studies from a contrastive semantic perspective, etc. That said, the vast majority of studies on Ttranslation involves corpora to a certain extent. Corpus Linguistics is firmly consolidated in the Spanish context as attested by the increasing number of projects, conferences, book series and journal papers devoted to corpus-based translation studies. This does not come as a surprise since the transversal nature of Corpus Linguistics makes it particularly adequate for interdisciplinary studies. Corpora studies pervade almost every segment of research wherever linguistic data are the object of study, and translation is no exception. The advantages of using corpora have been pointed out by Corpas Pastor (2001, 2004, 2008), Sánchez Trigo (2004), Beeby, Rodríguez-Inés, and Sánchez-Gijón (2009) and Corpas Pastor and Seghiri (2016), among many other scholars. According to Corpas Pastor (2008), corpus-based translation studies (CBTS)12 can be divided into descriptive or applied. In what follows this simplified perspective will be at the background when presenting current research in the Spanish context. For obvious lack of space, our account will be necessarily non-exhaustive, but somehow representative.13 Only pioneer groups that remain active nowadays will be mentioned in some detail, as their work has shaped later corpus-based translation studies in Spain. Most corpus building activity in Spain can be found within the research groups on translation that have produced their own resources for a variety of end goals. Basically, the kind of corpus-based translation studies carried out by those groups fall within the descriptive and/ or the applied approaches. Since the 1990s, pioneering work in the corpus-based translation field is represented by the research group LEXYTRAD,14 led by Gloria Corpas Pastor at the University of Malaga (UMA). Their theoretical framework combined Contrastive Linguistics, 233

Gloria Corpas Pastor and María-Araceli Losey-León

Text Linguistics, Lexical Grammar and Corpus Linguistics in order to compile multilingual corpora for a variety of translation purposes (descriptive and applied). In their first funded research project,15 the group developed a corpus-based multilingual automated textual template for the translation of legal texts (sales contracts) in Spanish, English, German, Italian and Arabic (1999–2002). From then on, they have compiled a number of large reference and multilingual corpora (comparable, parallel) of medical, tourism and legal texts for automatic text generation and translation, as well as comparable/parallel corpus management tools and query systems. In addition, other tools have been developed, namely computer applications for automatic corpus compilation and representativeness (iCompile, ReCor), and corpus-based multilingual dictionaries, query systems and resources for translators (Trandix, Inteliterm, Termitur, OntoDiccionario). At present they are implementing a voice-text integrated system for interpreting that includes corpora, among other language tools and technologies (VIP). Members of LEXYTRAD have published extensively on a number of corpus-based translation topics including, but not limited to, machine-learning and detection of translationese, universals, specialized translation, translators’ training, translation technologies and tools for interpreters, terminology and phraseology. Some representative publications are Corpas Pastor (2001, 2002, 2003, 2008, 2015, 2016), Corpas Pastor and Seghiri (2009, 2016), Ilisei et al. (2009, 2010), Toledo Báez (2010), Seghiri (2011, 2012), Bautista Zambrana (2011, 2017), Durán Muñoz (2012), Costa, Corpas Pastor, and Durán Muñoz (2014), Durán and Fernández (2014) and Corpas Pastor and Durán Muñoz (2017, 2019). Another outstanding reference group in corpus-based studies in Spain is ACTRES,16 led by Rosa Rabadán at the University of Leon (UNILEON). Their first R&D (Research and Development)project (2001–2004) laid the theoretical grounds for the kind of contrastive studies and corpus-based translation and tools developed by the group for English and Spanish. From their initial focus on corpus-based contrastive grammar, rhetoric and phraseology, the group has geared towards NLP and bilingual text generation. Their latest funded project (2017–2019) intends to develop a semiautomatic system for producing controlled languages (English-Spanish). ACTRES have compiled a series of specialized small corpora (comparable, parallel and monolingual) from various domains, such as healthcare, wine and food, instruction manuals, electronic products, football match reports, etc. In addition, they have developed tools designed to facilitate comparable corpus-based contrastive analysis (Comparable corpus browser and Rhetorical move tagger),17 and semiautomatic scientific and technical writing aids in Spanish and English for a variety of text types: scientific abstracts (GAC), electronic product descriptions (GDPE), meeting minutes (GARE), wine tasting note (FIVI), technical reports (GITEC), director’s reports (GEDIRE), audit reports (GInA) and instruction manuals (GIT). One of their most outstanding outcomes is the implementation of Petra 1.0, a semiautomatic application designed to assess the grammatical quality of general English translations into Spanish. This tool was developed in collaboration with TRACE research group (see the following). Members of ACTRES have disseminated their research extensively. Some illustrative examples are Rabadán and Fernández Nistal (2002), Rabadán, Labrador, and Ramón (2004), Rabadán (2006, 2011), Rabadán et al. (2011), Rabadán and Izquierdo (2013), López Arroyo and Roberts (2014, 2015, 2016, 2017), Ramón (2015) and Pérez Blanco (2016a, 2016b). Both groups have been instrumental for the rapid development of corpus-based translation studies in Spain. The year 2003 was especially prolific in terms of R&D projects on the topic. Besides new developments by LEXYTRAD and ACTRES, several corpus-based projects were funded for the first time (2003–2006) to groups based in Universities of Castellon, the Basque Country, Leon and Granada. 234

Linguistic approaches to translation

Genre and textual approaches lie at the heart of GENTT,18 a research group led by Isabel García-Izquierdo at the University Jaume I, Castellón (UJI). Their initial project was devoted to the compilation and tagging of a multilingual corpus of several domains and genres as translation aids. Over the years, they have focused on the intralinguistic and interlinguistic analysis of medical and legal texts within several corpus-based research projects conducted by GarcíaIzquierdo and other members of the group (Anabel Borja, Vicent Montalt and Pilar Ezpeleta). Most research conducted within GENTT revolves around multilingual corpus compilation, corpus-based descriptive approach to legal translation and law genres (Borja and Prieto 2015, Borja and García-Izquierdo 2016), translator training (Montalt, Ezpeleta, and García-Izquierdo 2008, Borja, García-Izquierdo, and Montalt 2009, Monzó and Ordóñez 2009, Borja and García-Izquierdo 2014, Muñoz-Miquel 2014) and specialized genres in corpus-based specialized translation in the health domain (García-Izquierdo and Montalt 2013, García-Izquierdo 2016a, 2016b), among others. In addition to producing multilingual corpora, they have implemented the GENTT Corpus management system and two online management documentation platforms to assist genre-based writing and translation (JudGentt and MedGentt).19 Also at the University Jaume I, the COVALT20 group started their first funded project in 2003. Under the direction of Josep R. Guzmán Pitarch, COVALT delved into the descriptive side of translated literature in the context of the Valencian publishing sector. The main focus was on the characterization of translated language as regards not translated language (first Valencian Catalan, and later on, Spanish). Many of the studies conducted since then have been devoted to phraseological differences, interference, normalization and creativity. Contrastive analysis and translators’ training are the main research goals of other projects of the group (also led by Josep Marco Borillo and other relevant members). COVALT have developed their own comparable corpus of translated literature (German-Catalan/Spanish, French-Catalan/ Spanish, English-Catalan/Spanish, Spanish-Catalan and Catalan-Spanish) and a proprietary corpus alignment tool (Guzmán Pitarch and Serrano 2006). Some representative papers by members of COVALT are Guzmán Pitarch and Alcón (2009), Marco Borillo (2010, 2012, 2016), Guzmán Pitarch and Marco Borillo (2015), Molés-Cases and Oster (2015) and Van Lawick (2016), among others. Within the descriptive translation studies approach, TRALIMA21 and TRACE22 set out to study censorship in translated literature from a historical perspective by means of a coordinated research project which was also granted in 2003 (BFF2003-07597-C02–01 and BFF2003-07597-C02–02, 2003–2007). Both groups have remained quite active since then. TRACE (based at the University of Leon, led by Camino Gutiérrez Lanza) are mainly concerned with translation practices in twentieth-century Spain through the analysis of various parallel corpora (English-Spanish). Their research methodology has combined several complementary theoretical approaches (descriptive translation studies, ideology and the manipulation school) with corpus analysis and digital humanities (Gutiérrez Lanza 2005; Fernández López 2007). They have developed their own textual database (TRACE-ULE DB, v. 1.0) and the proprietary TRACE Corpus Tagger/Aligner (v. 1.0) (Gutiérrez Lanza et  al. 2014). TRALIMA (based at the University of the Basque Country, led by Raquel Merino Álvarez) have conducted extensive research on translated literature and audiovisual translation with a historical perspective and corpus methodology. They have compiled their own multilingual parallel corpora (English-German  Spanish/Basque) and developed TAligner 3.0, a corpus aligner and query system based on TRACE Corpus Aligner 1.0. Some representative papers are Montero Küpper (1995), Sanz Villar (2013), Sanz Villar, Zubillaga, and Uribarri (2014) and Zubillaga, Uribarri, and Sanz Zuriñe (2015). The latest project of the group was conducted 235

Gloria Corpas Pastor and María-Araceli Losey-León

by Ibon Uribarri Zenekorta on translation and censorship in Spain through textual corpora and cultural contexts (2012–2015). Finally, 2003 witnessed the emergence of LEXICON,23 led by Pamela Faber at the University of Granada (UGR). Even though their research is mainly concerned with terminology and lexical resources for translators,24 they should be mentioned as one of the first Spanish research groups working on corpus-based translation studies. Working within the theoretical framework of Frame Semantics and Cognitive Linguistics, they have compiled multilingual corpora of various domains (medicine, environment, coastal engineering and management), and corpus-based applications to represent the conceptual structure of the specialized domains (Oncoterm and Ecolexicon). LEXICON have also explored the potential of terminology variation in the medical domain (Varimed, led by María Isabel Tercedor) and the didactic potential of corpora in translation. Their latest funded projects (2015–2017) exploit EcoLexicon for purposes of translation, NLP and cognition. In this regard, Content project (2014–2017) is oriented towards the cognitive and neurologic basis for purposes of translation and natural language processing, whereas earlier projects have been focused on creating multilingual ontological knowledge frames (Ecosistema 2008–2011, MarcoCosta 2006–2009). Some publications related to the fundamentals of these projects include León Araúz, Reimerink, and Faber (2009), Faber (2012), Buendía Castro and Faber (2016) and Faber and León Araúz (2016).. Further publications on corpus-based translation training are López Rodríguez and Buendía Castro (2013) and Sánchez Cárdenas and Faber (2016). Most of the research groups mentioned so far have created synergies at some point, fostering cross-fertilization of ideas for advancing the field. For instance, TRALIMA and TRACE have collaborated with ACTRES (see Merino and Rabadán 2002); LEXYTRAD and LEXICON have been involved in the coordinated project ECOSISTEMA (2008–2011) and formerly in other research networks; and ACTRES is coordinating CorpusNet, a thematic network to enhance the visibility of groups’ translation-oriented corpus resources and optimize their use across a single web platform. The network encompasses well-established groups such as ACTRES, TRALIMA, COVALT, LEXYTRAD and TRACE together with more recent groups that have already produced solid work on corpus-based contrastive phraseology, translation and lexicography (FRASYTRAM,25 LITLINAL),26 corpus-based contrastive discourse analysis (DISCOM-COGFUNC);27 and corpus-based translation technologies, including machine translation (GLICOM).28 From the mid-1990s onwards, there has been an exponential increase of corpus-based research on Translation with deep roots in Linguistics, Language technologies, Culture and Ideology. Lack of space prevents us from citing all relevant groups and projects.29 Suffice to say that most of them can be further divided according to their main orientation and end goals. A tentative, non-exhaustive classification of representative research groups and trends would be as follows: (1) Contrastive linguistics and computational approaches (COLE,30 COMENEGO,31 FUNCAP,32 TALG);33 (2) Discourse, text genre and language ideology (ECPC,34 TRADDISC);35 (3) Terminology (IULATERM,36 TRADUVINO);37 and (4) Translation technology (TECNOLETTRA,38 TRADUMÀTICA).39 Figure  13.2 illustrates the geographical distribution of corpus-based research on translation studies in Spain. Pioneer research groups and later developments are indicated by means of colour codes (blue and grey, respectively), with their University affiliations in black. This ‘map’ is by no means exhaustive. For example, even though PACTE40 focus on translation competence and cognitive processes, they have traditionally considered corpora in experimental and non-experimental research design (for data triangulation, data-collection instrument and descriptive data analysis). In fact, an increasing number of well-established 236

Linguistic approaches to translation

TRALIMA ACTRES TRACE

COVALT GENTT

LEXICON LEXYTRAD

Figure 13.2  The ‘corpus turn’ on the Spanish map

research groups with a variety of research interests are resorting to corpus methodology for various purposes. For instance, members of ACTUALING41 are performing corpus-based contrastive analysis (English-Spanish) within a lexical constructional model; PETRA’s42 latest project on cognition (CÓDIGO) has implemented a text categorisator and lemmatiser for online texts in the Social Sciences (Spanish, English and French); GENTEX43 and TRADIC44 have carried out some corpus-based research on gender and language ideology in translation, etc.

Concluding remarks and future directions Translation Studies are (and have always been) inextricably linked to Linguistics in multiple ways. On the one hand, linguistic theories have provided convenient models to unravel the phenomena of language mediation and intercultural communication. Both product-oriented studies of translation and process-oriented studies of translating have traditionally found in Linguistics solid grounds to explain relevant differences among languages, to analyse factors affecting translation (textual, contextual, discoursal, pragmatic, cognitive, etc.), to design and implement computerized tools and to ascertain the unique nature of translated text. 237

Gloria Corpas Pastor and María-Araceli Losey-León

The evolution of linguistic trends has also influenced the advancement of the discipline. In other words, the major paradigm shifts in Linguistics have also challenged the basic assumptions within the ruling theories of translation. Besides, the increased technologization of society has thoroughly restructured the discipline. As pointed out by Bowker and Corpas (2015) “translation technology has influenced the practice and the product of translation, as well as translator’s professional competence and their preferences with regard to tools and resources”. No wonder that a significant number of Spanish research groups on Translation resort to language technologies for primary empirical data (corpora, NLP tools) and even develop language technologies for translators (multilingual e-resources and applications to automate processes). The linguistic foundations of Translation Studies are also intertwined with other cultural, ideological and sociological aspects governing intercultural and interlinguistic communication. The use of corpora has blurred the difference among approaches (linguistic and non-linguistic) to translation. The findings reported in this chapter, albeit fragmentary and incomplete, depict an interesting scenario. The broad classification categories become less clear-cut along the years. This hybridization tendency can be observed in different ways. In general, papers written in the 1990s are more easily ascribable to just one particular linguistic ‘trend’ than papers produced in the last couple of years, as they are compatible with several approaches simultaneously. The same applies as regards papers that apply corpus analysis methods to translation research. While corpus-based translation studies have “an inherent allegiance to linguistic approaches to translation” (Hu 2016, 223), they also represent a shift to descriptive approaches, usually in fruitful combination with other disciplines. Future directions within Translation Studies will probably rely on corpora for all kinds of research questions within a necessary evolving framework. Judging from the papers published by Spanish scholars, approaches based on contrastive linguistics, cognition and language ideology will largely benefit from corpus methodology in the near future. Similarly, research outputs from Spanish established teams suggest a long history of corpus-based descriptive and applied studies, especially in the field of technology tools. Further research is needed in order to provide a full account of the ‘corpus turn’ of Translation Studies in Spain and the actual degree of ‘allegiance to linguistic approaches’. It would also be interesting to compare results with the situation of Spanish translation. In America and/other Spanish-speaking countries, most linguistic approaches to translation still revolve around contrastive linguistics, languages in contact and bilingualism. In the United States,45 Colina’s work (2008, 2009 Colina et al. 2016) on translation quality and specialized translation follows a functionalist approach, while Fossa (2008, 2016) relies on contrastive analysis for her research on sixteenth-century Castilian language texts and native Andean language.46 By contrast, in some Latin American Universities there is cutting-edge research on corpusbased translation. For instance, at the University of Antioquia (Colombia), members of the research group on Translation and Technologies (TNT)47 are applying various linguistic models to semiautomatic corpus compilation extraction, specialized translation and terminology (including phraseology). Interestingly enough, TNT is led by Gabriel Quiroz, a former PhD student at the University Pompeu Fabra (Barcelona, Spain).

Recommended reading Corpas Pastor, G. 2008. Investigar con corpus en traducción: los retos de un nuevo paradigma. Frankfurt am Main/Berlin: Peter Lang. A comprehensive introduction to corpus-based Translation Studies, with special reference to translation universals in Spanish.

238

Linguistic approaches to translation Fawcett, Peter. 1997. Translation and Language. Linguistic Theories Explained. Manchester: St Jerome Publishing. An essential monograph covering the main linguistic approaches that had shaped early Translation Studies. Kenny, D. 2012. Linguistic Approaches to Translation. The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, vol. 4 edited by Carol Chappelle. Chichester, West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9781405198431. wbeal0713 (online). A user-friendly introduction to the linguistic foundations of Translation Studies that complements and updates Fawcett (1997)..

Acknowledgements The research presented in this paper has been partially carried out in the framework of the research projects INTELITERM (FFI2012-38881), TERMITUR (HUM2754) and VIP (FFI2016-75831-P). The authors would like to express their gratitude to all members of the Iberian Association of Translation and Interpreting Studies (AIETI) and the Spanish Society for Applied Linguistics (AESLA) who have provided us with information about their research outputs and publications on linguistic approaches and corpus-based translation.

Notes 1 For an overview, see Fawcett (1997) and Kenny (2012). 2 It is still debatable whether Corpus Linguistics is a full-fledged linguistic theory or, else, a research methodology (see McEnery and Gabrielatos 2006, 35). 3 This is a non-extensive list so that further linguistic sub-branches may be included, namely Cognitive Grammar, Cognitive Semantics, Role and Reference Grammar, Functional Discourse Grammar, Pragmastylistics, Biosemiotics, to name but a few. 4 Interestingly enough, Valdeón (2017, 182–3) points out that while translation has been influenced by the theoretical framework of neighbouring disciplines, “this interest in the academic Other seems to have gone in one direction”. 5 See the chapter on “Literary Translation” (this volume). 6 This paved the road for Cognitive Translatology. Cognitive models have also influenced Spanish translation studies academia. See the chapter “Cognitive approaches” in this volume. 7 AIETI’s website can be accessed at www.aieti.eu. 8 The sample surveyed covered other journals of translation not present in the AIETI list: Australian Review of Literary Translation, Estudios de Traducción, Hermes, Perspectives. Studies in Translation Theory and Practice, Revista de Historia de la Traducción, Rivista internazionale di tecnica della traduzione, Translation and Interpreting Studies Journal, Translation and Interpreting, Translation, Computation, Corpora, Cognition Journal, Translation Studies in the New Millenium, Translation Studies Journal, Translation Spaces, Scientia Traductionis, and Skase. It also included journals on languages and linguistics specially relevant for our study (Verba. Anuario Galego de Filoloxía, Anales de Filología Francesa, Caplletra, Revista de lenguas y literaturas catalana, gallega y vasca). 9 On translator training see the chapter “Pedagogy of translation” (this volume). 10 Language ideology is an interdisciplinary concept used mainly in linguistic anthropology, sociolinguistics, and cross-cultural studies. Due to the high number of papers on translation and language ideology, it has been classed as a separate category. 11 For an updated account on the uses of corpora in translation, see Frérot (2016), Hu (2016) and the papers included in Sánchez Nieto et al. (2015) and in Corpas Pastor and Seghiri (2016). 12 Recently, Corpas Pastor and Seghiri (2016) have included corpus-based interpreting studies within the corpus linguistics research and methodology approach as Corpus-based Translation and Interpreting

239

Gloria Corpas Pastor and María-Araceli Losey-León Studies (CTIS), which becomes divided into Descriptive Translation and Interpretive Studies (DTIS) and Applied Translation and Interpreting Studies (ATIS). 13 Research groups and projects have been selected for their significant contributions to the field. 14 http://lexytrad.es/. 15 For the sake of clarity, the first national R&D project granted will be considered as convenient starting date of their research activities when presenting groups in a chronological fashion. 16 http://actres.unileon.es/. 17 External services for tool access are offered through a built-in portal called ABN (ACTRES Business Network) integrated by the group members and researchers of the University of Leon (Spain), CITTAC (Centre of Research in Bilingual Terminology, Specialized Translation and Contrastive Analysis) of the Universidad de Valladolid (Spain), the Universidad del País Vasco (UPV/ EHU), the Universidad Europea Miguel de Cervantes de Valladolid, the Universidad Complutense de Madrid (Spain), Universite d’Ottawa (Canada) and the Unit of Computational Linguistics, Unicomputing, of the Bergen University (Norway). 18 www.gentt.uji.es 19 The latest funded project of GENTT is devoted to enhancing multilingual and multicultural clinical communication within a novel training methodology for healthcare professionals (FFI2015-67427-P, 2016–2019, V. Montalt and P. Ezpeleta). 20 www.uji.es/serveis/ocit/base/grupsinvestigacio/detall?codi=170 21 www.ehu.eus/tralima/ 22 http://trace.unileon.es/ 23 http://lexicon.ugr.es/ 24 See the chapter on “Terminology” (this volume). Other relevant research groups on corpus-based terminology for translators are IULATERM, TRADUVINO, and technology-oriented TECNOLETTRA and TRADUMÂTICA (see the following). 25 http://dti.ua.es/en/frasytram/research-group-frasytram.html (Pedro Mogorrón Huerta, University of Alicante, UA). 26 www.usc.es/litlinal/en/index.html (Irene Doval Reixa, University of Santiago de Compostela, USC). 27 www.campusmoncloa.es/discom-cogfunc/ (Juana Martín Arrese, Complutense University of Madrid, UCM). 28 https://portal.upf.edu/web/glicom/presentacio (Carme Colominas Ventura, UPF). 29 This list is obviously incomplete, as most Spanish research groups in Spain tend to resort to corpora occasionally. See, for instance, the list of recent publications by CITRANS (http://citrans.uv.es/, Juan José Martínez Sierra, University of Valencia, UV). 30 www.grupocole.org/ (Manual Vilares Ferro, UVIGO). 31 https://dti.ua.es/en/comenego/ (Daniel Gallego Hernández, University of Alicante, UA). 32 www.campusmoncloa.es/funcap/ (Julia Lavid López, UCM). 33 http://sli.uvigo.gal (Xavier Gómez Guinovart, University of Vigo, UVIGO). 34 www.ecpc.uji.es (María Calzada Pérez, UPF). 35 http://traddisc.grupos.uniovi.es/ (Marta Mateo Martínez-Bartolomé, University of Oviedo, UNIOVI). 36 www.upf.edu/web/iulaterm (Mercè Lorente Casafont, UPF). 37 http://girtraduvino.com/es/ (Miguel Ibáñez Rodríguez, University of Valladolid, UVA). 38 http://tecnolettra.uji.es/es/?page_id=29 (Amparo Alcina Caudet, UJI). 39 www.tradumatica.net (Pilar Sánchez-Gijón, UAB). TRADUMÀTICA is also a leading group in corpus-based terminology, localization and post-editing. 40 http://grupsderecerca.uab.cat/pacte/es (Amparo Hurtado Albir, UAB). 41 http://actualing.weebly.com/ (Victoria Marrero Aguiar, National Distance Education University, UNED). 42 www.cogtrans.net/nosotros-rmm.htm (Ricardo Muñoz Martín, University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, ULPGC). 43 http://gentext.blogs.uv.es/ (José Santaemilla Ruiz, University of Valencia, UV). 44 http://campus.usal.es/~tradic/ (Carmen África Vidal Claramonte, University of Salamanca,USAL). 45 See the chapter on “Spanish Translation in the US and Canada” (this volume). 46 One of the most outstanding works of this scholar from the University of Arizona is Glosas Croniquenses, a project devoted to the compilation of bilingual translation equivalents without resort to corpora. 47 www.udea.edu.co/wps/portal/udea/web/inicio/investigacion/grupos-investigacion/humanidades/tnt

240

Linguistic approaches to translation

References Baker, Mona. 1993. “Corpus Linguistics and Translation Studies: Implications and Applications.” In Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair, edited by Mona Baker, Gill Francis, and Elena TogniniBonelli, 233–50. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ———. 1996. “Corpus-based Translation Studies: The Challenges that Lie Ahead.” In Terminology, LSP and Translation: Studies in Language Engineering in Honor of Juan C. Sager, edited by Harold Somers, 175–86. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ———. 1999. “The Role of Corpora in Investigating the Linguistic Behaviour of Professional Translators.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 4 (2): 281–98. ———. 2001. “Linguistic Perspectives on Translation.” In The Oxford Guide to Literature in English Translation, edited by Peter France, 20–26. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bautista-Zambrana, María del Rosario. 2011. “Ontologías para la traducción de folletos de viaje combinado.” Babel 57 (4): 430–42. ———. 2017. “OntoDiccionario, un diccionario ontoterminológico multilingüe: (español-inglésalemán): aspectos de su construcción y resultados.” Linguistik Online 81 (2): 17. [online] doi:http:// dx.doi.org/10.13092/lo.81.3644. Beeby, Allison, Patricia Rodríguez-Inés, and Pilar Sánchez-Gijón. 2009. Corpus Use and Translating: Corpus Use for Learning to Translate and Learning Corpus Use to Translate. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Bhatia, Vijai Kumar. 1993. Analysing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. London: Longman. Borja Albi, Anabel, and Isabel García-Izquierdo. 2014. “Corpus-based Knowledge Management Systems for Specialised Translators: Bridging the Gap Between Theory and Profesional Practice.” In Corpusbased Translation and Interpreting Studies: From Description to Application, edited by María Teresa Sánchez Nieto, 191–210. Berlin: Frank & Timme. ———. 2016. “Web-based Tools and Resources for Legal Translators: The JudGENTT Translationoriented Glossaries for Criminal Courts Translators.” Onomazéin 33: 226–50. Borja Albi, Anabel, Isabel García-Izquierdo, and Vicent Montalt. 2009. “Research Methodology in Specialised Genres for Translation Purposes.” In The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, vol. 3, edited by Ian Mason, 57–78. Manchester: St. Jerome. Borja Albi, Anabel, and Fernando Prieto Ramos. 2015. Legal Translation in Context: Professional Issues and Prospects. Berna: Peter Lang. Bowker, Lynne, and Gloria Corpas Pastor. 2015. “Translation Technology.” In Handbook of Computational Linguistics, edited by Ruslan Mitkov. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi.10.1093/oxfor dhb/9780199573691.013.007. Buendía Castro, Miriam, and Pamela Faber. 2016. “Ecolexicon, une nouvelle versión plus proche des besoins des traducteurs.” In Aspects of Specialised Translation, edited by M. Carmen Balbuena Torezano and Ángeles García Calderón, 144–52. Tübingen: Narr. Catford, John Cunnison. 1965. A Linguistic Theory of Translation: An Essay in Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Colina, Sonia. 2008. “Translation Quality Evaluation: Empirical Evidence for a Functionalist Approach.” The Translator 14 (1): 97–134. ———. 2009. “Further Evidence for a Functionalist Approach to Translation Quality Evaluation.” Target 21 (2): 215–44. Colina, Sonia, Nicole Marrone, Maia Ingram, and Daisey Sánchez. 2016. “Translation Quality Assessment in Health Research: A Functionalist Alternative to Back-Translation.” Evaluation and the Health Professions, 40 (3): 267–93. [online] http://dx.doi. org/10.1177/0163278716648191. Corpas Pastor, Gloria. 1995. “El uso de corpora en traducción e interpretación.” In Actas del XI I Congreso de Lenguajes Naturales y Lenguajes Formales, edited by Carlos Martín Vide, 381–87. Barcelona: PPU. ———. 2001. “Compilación de un corpus ad hoc para la enseñanza de la traducción inversa especializada.” TRANS. Revista de traductología 5: 155–84. ———. 2002. “Traducir con corpus: de la teoría a la práctica.” In Texto, terminología y traducción, edited by Joaquín García Palacios and M. Teresa Fuentes Morán, 189–226. Salamanca: Almar. ———, ed. 2003. Recursos documentales y tecnológicos para la traducción del discurso jurídico (español, alemán, inglés, italiano, árabe). Granada: Comares.

241

Gloria Corpas Pastor and María-Araceli Losey-León ———. 2004. “Localización de recursos y compilación de corpus vía Internet: aplicaciones para la didáctica de la traducción médica especializada.” In Manual de documentación y terminología para la traducción especializada. Colección “Instrumenta Bibliologica,” edited by Valentín García Yebra and Consuelo Gonzalo García, 223–57. Madrid: Arco/Libros. ———. 2008. Investigar con corpus en traducción: los retos de un nuevo paradigma. Frankfurt am Main/Berlin: Peter Lang. ———. 2015. “Translating English Verbal Collocations into Spanish: On Distribution and other Relevant Differences related to Diatopic Variation.” Lingvisticae Investigationes, Special Issue “Spanish Phraseology Varieties and Variations” 38 (2): 229–62. ———, ed. 2016. Computerised and Corpus-based Approaches to Phraseology: Monolingual and Multilingual Perspectives (Full papers). Geneva, Switzerland: Tradulex. Corpas Pastor, Gloria, and Isabel Durán Muñoz. 2017. Trends in e-Tools and Resources for Translators and Interpreters. Leiden: Brill. ———. 2019.“Inteliterm: In Search of Efficient Terminology Lookup Tools for Translators.” In Studies on Multilingual Internet Lexicography, edited by María José Domínguez, Mónica Mirazo and Carlos Valcárcel, 117–136. Berlin: De Gruyter. Corpas Pastor, Gloria, and Míriam Seghiri Domínguez. 2009. “Virtual Corpora as Documentation Resources: Translating Travel Insurance Documents (English-Spanish).” In Corpus Use and Translating, edited by Alison Beeby, Patricia Rodríguez Inés, and Pilar Sánchez-Gijón, 75–107. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ———. 2016. Corpus-based Approaches to Translation and Interpreting: From Theory to Applications. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Costa, Hernani, Gloria Corpas Pastor, and Isabel Durán Muñoz. 2014. “Technology-assisted Interpreting.” Multilingual, April/May, 27–32. Da Cunha, Iria, and Mikel Iruskieta. 2010. “Comparing Rhetorical Structures of Different Languages: The Influence of Translation Strategies.” Discourse Studies 12 (5): 563–98. De Beaugrande, Robert-Alain, and Wolfgang Ulrich Dressler, eds. 1981. Introduction to Text Linguistics. London: Longman. Di Pietro, Robert J. 1971. Language Structures in Contrast. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Doval Reixa, Irene. 2002. “Análisis de las construcciones pasivas o pseudopasivas desde una perspectiva contrastiva alemán/español.” In Actas del V congreso de Lingüística General, coordinated by Milka Villayandre Llamazares, 773–86. Leon: Universidad de León. Dressler, Wolfgang Ulrich. 1977. Current Trends in Textlinguistics. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Durán Muñoz, Isabel. 2012. “Caracterización de la traducción turística: problemas, dificultades.” Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 7 (1): 103–14. http://hdl.handle.net/10251/16749. Durán Muñoz, Isabel, and Alejandro Fernández Sola. 2014. “Trandix: Herramienta proactiva apra la búsqueda terminológica del traductor y su evaluación.” MonTI. Monografías de traducción e interpretación 6: 115–39. Faber, Pamela. 1998. “Translation Competence and Language Awareness.” Language Awareness 7 (1): 9–21. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09658419808667097. ———, ed. 2012. A Cognitive Linguistics View of Terminology and Specialized Language. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Faber, Pamela, and Pilar León Araúz. 2016. “Specialized Knowledge Representation and the Parameterization of Context.” Frontiers in Psychology 7: 196. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00196. Fawcett, Peter. 1997. Translation and Language: Linguistic Theories Explained. Manchester: St Jerome Publishing. Fernández López, Marisa. 2007. “Comportamientos censores en la literatura infantil y juvenil traducida del inglés en la época franquista: Establecimiento de un corpus textual.” In Traducción y censura en España (1939–19865). Estudios sobre corpus TRACE: cine, narrativa, teatro, edited by Raquel Merino, 19–48. León: Universidad de León/Vitoria: Universidad del País Vasco. Fossa, Lydia. 2008. “El difuso perfil de Juan de Betanzos como traductor de lenguas indígenas.” TRANS 12: 51–65. ———. 2016. “Análisis de los hechos de traducción de lenguas indígenas en textos españoles del siglo XVI.” Paper presented at I Congreso Bienal: Los estudios de traducción e interpretación en América Latina y el Caribe, un primer acercamiento, Zacatecas, Mexico, June 29–July 1.

242

Linguistic approaches to translation Frérot, Cécile. 2016. “Corpora and Corpus Technology for Translation Purposes in Professional and Academic Environments. Major Achievements and New Perspectives.” Cadernos de Traduçao 36: 36–61. [online]. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5007/2175-7968.2016v36nesp1p36. García de Toro, Cristina. 2007. “Translation Studies: An Overview.” Cadernos de Tradução 2 (20): 9–42. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5007/%25x. García-Izquierdo, Isabel. 1997–1998. “Lingüística Aplicada y Traductología: una liaison dangereuse?” Sendebar 8–9: 55–69. ———. 2016a. “Organising Specialised/Medical Knowledge for Academic and Professional Settings. The Case of Patients Information Genres.” In LSP Research, Teaching and Translation Across Languages and Cultures, edited by Giuliana Elena Garzone, Dermot Heaney, and Giorgia Riboni, 148– 67. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars. ———. 2016b. “At the Cognitive and Situational Interface: Translation in Healthcare Settings.” Translation Spaces 5 (1): 20–37. García-Izquierdo, Isabel, and Vicent Montalt. 2013. “Equigeneric and Intergeneric Translation in Patientcentred Care.” Hermes: Journal of Language and Communication in Business 51: 39–54. García Yebra, Valentín. 1982. Teoría y práctica de la traducción, 2 vols. Madrid: Gredos. ———. 1983. En torno a la traducción. Teoría. Crítica. Historia. Madrid: Gredos. Gutiérrez Lanza, Camino. 2005. “La labor del equipo TRACE: metodología descriptiva de la censura en traducción.” In Trasvases culturales: Literatura, Cine y Traducción 4, edited by Raquel Merino, José Miguel Santamaría, and Eterio Pajares, 55–64. Vitoria: Servicio Editorial de la Universidad del País Vasco. Gutiérrez Lanza, Camino, Elena Bandín Fuertes, Sergio Lobejón Santos, and José Enrique García González. 2014. TRACE Corpus Tagger Aligner 1.0 (computer programme). Gutt, Ernst-August. 1991. Translation and Relevance: Cognition and Context. Oxford: Blackwell. Guzmán Pitarch, Josep Roderic, and Josep Marco Borillo. 2015. “Monogràfic sobre Traducció i models lingüístics.” Caplletra 58: 115–21. Guzmán Pitarch, Josep Roderic, and Álvar Serrano. 2006. “Alineamiento de frases y traducción: alfracovalt y el procesamiento de corpus.” Sendebar 17: 169–86. Guzmán Pitarch, Josep Roderic, and Eva Alcón Soler. 2009. “Translation and Language Learning: AlfraCovalt as a Tool for Raising Learners’ Pragmalinguistic and Sociopragmatic Awareness of the Speeh Act of Requesting.” Horizontes Lingüística Aplicada 8 (2): 238–54. Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood. 1985. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold. ———. 1992. “Language Theory and Translation Practice.” Rivista internazionale di tecnica della traduzione 00: 15–25. Hartmann, Reinhard Rudolf Karl. 1980. Contrastive Textology: Comparative Discourse Analysis in Applied Linguistics (Studies in Descriptive Linguistics 5). Heidelberg: J. Groos. Hasan, Ruqaiya. 1978. “Text in the Systemic-Functional Model.” In Current Trends in Textlinguistics, edited by Wolfgang Ulrich Dressler, 228–46. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Hatim, Basil. 2009. “Translating Text in Context.” In The Routledge Companion to Translation Studies, edited by Jeremy Munday, 36–53. London: Routledge. Holmes, James S. 2000 [1972]. “The Name and Nature of Translation Studies.” In The Translation Studies Reader, edited by Lawrence Venuti, 172–85. London: Routledge. ———. 1988. Translated! Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Hu, Kaibao. 2016. Introducing Corpus-based Translation Studies. Heidelberg: Springer. Hurtado Albir, Amparo. 1994. “Perspectivas de los estudios sobre la traducción.” In Estudis sobre la traducció, edited by Amparo Hurtado Albir, 25–43. Castelló: Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I. ———. 1996. “La Traductología: Lingüística y Traductología.” TRANS 1: 151–60. Ilisei, Iustine, Diana Inkpen, Gloria Corpas Pastor, and Ruslan Mitkov. 2009. “Towards Simplification: A Supervised Learning Approach.” Proceedings of Machine Translation 25 Years On, London, United Kingdom, November, 21–22. http://clg.wlv.ac.uk/papers/ilisei_et_al_2009.pdf ———. 2010. “Identification of Translationese: “A Machine Learning Approach.” In Proceedings of the Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing, 11th International Conference, CICLing 2010, edited by Alexander Gelbukh, 503–511. Heidelberg: Springer. Jakobson, Roman. 1959. “On Linguistic Aspects of Translation.” In On Translation, edited by Reuben Browe, 232–9. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

243

Gloria Corpas Pastor and María-Araceli Losey-León Kenny, D. 2012. “Linguistic Approaches to Translation.” In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, vol. 4, edited by Carol Chappelle. Chichester, West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0713. Koller, Werner. 1979. Einführung in die Übersetzungswissenschaft. Heidelberg: Quelle and Meyer. Lafarga, Francisco, and Luis Pegenaute, eds. 2004. Historia de la traducción en España. Alicante: Biblioteca Virtual Miguel de Cervantes. León Araúz, Pilar, Arianne Reimerink, and Pamela Faber. 2009. “Puertoterm & Marcocosta: A Framebased Knowledge Base for the Environmental Domain.” Journal of Multicultural Communication 1: 47–70. López Arroyo, Belén, and Roda P. Roberts. 2014. “A Corpus-based Writing Aid for Spanish Language Authors: The Scientific Abstract Generator Prototype.” International Journal of Linguistics and Communication 2 (2): 13–32. ———. 2015. “The Use of a Comparable Corpus: How to Develop Writing Applications.” In Corpusbased Translation and Interpreting Studies. From Description to Application, edited by María Teresa Sánchez Nieto, 147–66. Berlin: Frank and Timme. ———. 2016. “The Phraseology of the Language of Wine in English and Spanish.” Debate Terminológico 16: 2–14. ———. 2017. “Genre and Register in Comparable Corpora: An English/Spanish Contrastive Analysis.” Meta 62 (1): 114–36. López-Rodríguez, Clara Inés, and Miriam Buendía Castro. 2013. “Aplicación de la lingüística de corpus en la didáctica de la traducción científica y técnica.” In Proceedings of the XXVI Congres internacional de Lingüística i Filología Romaniques, vol. VIII, edited by EmiliCasanova Herrero and Cesáreo Calvo Rigual, 205–16. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Malmkjaer, Kirsten S. 2005. Linguistics and the Language of Translation. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. ———. 2011. “Linguistics and Translation.” In Handbook of Translation Studies Online, vol. 2, edited by Yves Gambier and Luc Van Doorslaer, 61–68. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Marco Borillo, Josep. 2010. “The Translation of Wordplay in Literary Texts: Typology, Techniques and Factors in a Corpus of English-Catalan Source Text and Target Text Segments.” Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 22 (2): 264–97. ———. 2012. “An Analysis of Explicitation in the COVALT Corpus: The Case of the Substituting Pronoun One(s) and Its Translation into Catalan.” Across Languages and Cultures 13 (2): 229–46. ———. 2016. “On the Margin of the Profession: The Work Placement as a Site for the Literary Translator Trainee’s Legitimate Peripheral Participation.” The Interpreter and the Translation Trainer 10 (1): 29–43. Mateo Martínez, José. 1998. “Be Relevant (Relevance, Translation and Cross-Culture).” Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses 11: 171–82. McEnery, Tony, and Costas Gabrielatos. 2006. “English Corpus Linguistics.” In The Handbook of English Linguistics, edited by Bas Aarts and April McMahon, 33–71. Oxford: Blackwell. Merino, Raquel, and Rosa Rabadán. 2002. “Censored Translations in Franco’s Spain: The TRACE Project-Theatre and Fiction (English-Spanish).” TTR: Traduction, Terminologie, Rédaction 15 (2): 125–52. Molés-Cases, Teresa, and Ulrike Oster. 2015. “Webquests in Translator Training. Introducing Corpusbased Tasks.” In Multiple Affordances of Language Corpora for Data-driven Learning, edited by Agnieszka Lenko-Szymanska and Alex Boulton, 201–23. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Montalt, Vicent, Pilar Ezpeleta, and Isabel García-Izquierdo. 2008. “The Acquisition of Translation Competence through Textual Genre.” Translation Journal 12 (4) [online] http://translationjournal. net/journal/46competence.htm. Montero Küpper, Silvia. 1995. “Proposta para unha traducción das perífrases aspectuais galegas ó alemán. As perífrases perfectivas e aproximativas.” Cadernos de Lingua 11: 23–37. Montoro del Arco, Estebán Tomás, and Carsten Sinner. 2014. “Pronominale Phraseolexeme: Beschreibung und kontrastive Analyse Spanisch-Deutsch.” In Kontrastive Phraseologie Deutsch-Spanisch. Semantische Aspekte, edited by Carmen Mellado Blanco, 167–82. Heidelberg: Julius Groos Verlag. Monzó, Esther, and Pilar Ordóñez. 2009. “La recerca en traducció basada en corpus: aplicaciones professionals i didàctiques del projecte GENTT.” Revista Tradumática 7 [online] www.fti.uab.cat/ tradumatica/revista/num7/articles/06/06art.htm.

244

Linguistic approaches to translation Munday, Jeremy. 2016 [2001]. Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and Applications. London: Routledge. Muñoz-Miquel, Ana. 2014. “El perfil y las competencias del traductor médico desde el punto de vista de los profesionales: una aproximación cualitativa.” TRANS. Revista de traductología 18: 163–81. Navarro Domínguez, Fernando. 2010. “La Théorie de la Traduction en Espagne.” Meta 55 (1): 88–104. doi:10.7202/039604ar. Negro, Isabel. 2011. “A Contrastive Semantic Analysis of English, Spanish and French Idioms.” Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses 63: 113–23. Neuvert, Albrecht, and Gregory M. Shreve. 1992. Translation as Text. Kent: The Kent State University Press. Nida, Eugene A. 1964. Toward a Science of Translating: With Special Reference to Pinciples and Procedures Involved in Bible Translating. Leiden: E. J. Brill. Nida, Eugene A., and Charles R. Taber. 1974 [1969]. The Theory and Practice of Translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Nord, Christiane. 1997. Translating as a Purposeful Activity: Functionalist Approaches Explained. Manchester: St Jerome Publishing. Papegaaij, Bart, and Klaus Schubert. 1988. Text Coherence in Translating. Dordrecht: Foris. Pérez-Blanco, María. 2016a. “An Important Issue’: A  Corpus-based Contrastive Study of Evaluation Along the Parameter of Relevance in English and Spanish Newspaper Opinion Discourse.” RAELRevista Electrónica de Lingüística Aplicada 15: 36–52. ———. 2016b. “Translating Multifunctional Stance Adverbs: A  Corpus-based Study of the Spanish Translations of ‘Certainly’.” Babel-AFIAL 25: 51–73. Rabadán, Rosa. 1992. “Tendencias teóricas en los estudios contemporáneos de Traducción.” In Estudios de traducción, 45–59. Valladolid: Universidad de Valladolid. ———. 2006. “Modality and Modal Verbs in Contrast. Mapping out a Translation(ally) Relevant Approach English-Spanish.” Languages in Contrast 6 (2): 261–306. ———. 2011. “Any into Spanish: A Corpus-based Analysis of a Translation Problem.” Linguistica Praguensia 2 (11): 57–69. Rabadán, Rosa, Ángeles Díez, Ramón-Ángel Fernández, and Belén López. 2011. “Writing Abstracts: Technological Applications from a Corpus-based Study.” In Innovation in the Teaching and Processing of LSPs, edited by Noa Talaván, Elena Martín Monje, and Francisco Palazón, 325–34. Madrid: UNED. Rabadán, Rosa, and Marlén Izquierdo. 2013. “A Corpus-based Study of English Approximate Negators and Their Translations into Spanish.” BeLLS (Bergen Language and Linguistics Studies). The Many Facets of Corpus Linguistics in Bergen-in Honour of Knut Hofland 3 (1): 43–59. Rabadán, Rosa, and Francisco Javier Fernández Polo. 1996. “Lingüística aplicada a la traducción.” In Avances en Lingüística Aplicada, edited by Milagros Fernández Pérez, 105–46. Santiago de Compostela: Universidad de Santiago. Rabadán, Rosa, Belén Labrador, and Noelia Ramón. 2004. “English-Spanish Corpus-based Contrastive Analysis: Translational Applications from ACTRES’ Project.” In Practical Applications in Language Corpora (PALC 2003), edited by Barbara Lewandowsha-Tomaszczyh, 141–51. Hamburg: Lang. Rabadán, Rosa, and Purificación Fernández Nistal. 2002. La Traducción Inglés-español: Fundamentos, Herramientas, Aplicaciones. León: Universidad de León. Ramón, Noelia. 2015. “Comparing Original and Translated Spanish: A Corpus-based Analysis of Adjective Position.” Babel 61 (4): 527–51. Reiss, Katharina, and Hans J. Vermeer. 2014 [1984]. Towards a General Theory of Translational Action: Skopos Theory Explained. London: Routledge. Samaniego Fernández, Eva. 2011. “Translation Studies and the Cognitive Theory of Metaphor.” Review of Cognitive Linguistics 9 (1): 262–79. ———. 2013. “The Impact of Cognitive Linguistics on Descriptive Translation Studies: Novel Metaphors in English-Spanish Newspaper Translation as a Case in Point.” In Cognitive Linguistics and Translation: Advances in Some Theoretical Models and Applications, edited by Ana María Rojo and Blanca Iraide Ibarretxe-Antuñano, 159–98. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Sánchez Cárdenas, Beatriz, and Pamela Faber Benítez. 2016. “Corpus Analysis and the Translation of Adverbs in Specialised Texts: Raising Student Awareness.” In Corpus-based Approaches to Translation and Interpreting. From Theory to Applications, edited by Gloria Corpas Pastor and Míriam Seghiri Domínguez, 195–217. Frankfort/New York: Peter Lang. http://dx.doi.org/10.3726/b10354.

245

Gloria Corpas Pastor and María-Araceli Losey-León Sánchez Nieto, María Teresa, Susana Álvarez Álvarez, Verónica Arnáiz-Uzquiza, María Teresa Ortego Antón, Leticia Santamaría Ciordia, and Rosa Fernández Muñiz, eds. 2015. Metodología y aplicaciones en la investigación en traducción e interpretación con corpus/ Methodologies and Applications in Corpus-based and Corpus-driven Translation and Interpreting Research. Valladolid: Universidad de Valladolid. Sánchez Trigo, María Elena. 2004. “Traducción de textos médicos entre el francés y el español: creación y explotación de corpus electrónicos.” Anales de Filología Francesa 12: 395–412. Sanz Villar, Zuriñe. 2013. “Hacia la creación de un corpus digitalizado, paralelo, trilingüe (alemán-español-euskera). Una propuesta metodológica para analizar la traducción de unidades fraseológicas.” In La fraseología del alemán y el español: lexicografía y traducción, coordinated by Carmen Mellado, edited by Patricia Buján, Nely M. Iglesias, M. Carmen Losada, and Ana Mansilla, 43–58. München: Peniope. Sanz Villar, Zuriñe, Naroa Zubillaga, and Ibon Uribarri. 2014. “Estudio basado en corpus de las traducciones del alemán al vasco.” In Corpus-based Translation and Interpreting Studies: From Description to Application/ Estudios traductológicos basados en corpus: de la descripción a la aplicación, edited by María Teresa Sánchez Nieto, 211–35. Berlin: Frank & Timme. Saussure, Ferdinand de. 1983 [1916]. Course in General Linguistics, edited by Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye. La Salle, IL: Open Court. Seghiri Domínguez, Míriam. 2011. “Metodología protocolizada de compilación de un corpus de seguros de viajes: aspectos de diseño y representatividad.” Revista de Lingüística Teórica y Aplicada 49 (2): 13–30. ———. 2012. “Creating Electronic Corpora: Design, Compilation Protocol and Representativeness.” In Aspects of Literary Translation: Building Linguistic and Cultural Bridge in Past and Present, edited by Eva Parra-Membrives, Miguel Ángel. García Peinado, and Albrecht Classen, 372–82. Tübingen: Narr Verlag. Snell-Hornby, Mary. 1988. Translation Studies: An Integrated Approach. Amsterdam/Frankfurt am Main: John Benjamins. Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson, eds. 1986. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Swales, John. 1990. Genre Analysis: English in Academic Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Taillefer, Lidia, and Rosa Muñoz-Luna. 2014. “Middle English Translation: Discursive Fields According to Social Class and Gender.” Women’s Studies International Forum 42: 61–67. Toledo Báez, María Cristina. 2010. El resumen automático y la evaluación de traducciones en el contexto de la traducción especializada. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Toury, Gideon. 1980. In Search of a Theory of Translation. Tel Aviv: Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics/Tel Aviv University. ———. 2000 [1978, revised 1995]. “The Nature and Role of Norms in Translation.” In The Translation Studies Reader, edited by Lawrence Venuti, 198–211. London: Routledge. Tricás, Mercedes. 1995. Manual de traducción Francés-Castellano. Barcelona: Gedisa. Valdeón García, Roberto Antonio. 2017. “From Translatology to Studies in Translation Theory and Practice.” Perspectives 25 (2): 181–8. Van Lawick, Heike. 2016. “Descripció fraseològica a partir del anàlisi basada en un corpus parallel: possibilitats, limits i una proposta.” Zeitschrift für Katalanistik 29: 81–93. Vázquez-Ayora, Gerardo. 1977. Introducción a la Traductología. Curso básico de traducción. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. Venuti, Lawrence, ed. 2000. The Translation Studies Reader. London: Routledge. Vidal Claramonte, María del Carmen África. 1995. Traducción, Manipulación, Deconstrucción. Salamanca: Ediciones Colegio de España. Vinay, Jean-Paul, and Jean Darbelnet. 1995 [1958]. Comparative Stylistics of French and English: A Methodology for Translation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Zanettin, Federico. 2012. Translation-driven Corpora: Corpus Resources for Descriptive and Applied Translation Studies. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing. Zubillaga, Naroa, Ibon Uribarri, and Zuriñe Sanz. 2015. “Building a Trilingual Parallel Corpus to Analyse Literary Translations from German into Basque.” In New Directions in Corpus-based Translation Studies, edited by Claudio Fantinuoli and Federico Zanettin, 71–93. Berlin: Language Science Press.

246

14 TERMINOLOGY Pamela Faber and Silvia Montero-Martínez

Introduction Terminology is the study of specialized concepts and their linguistic designations or terms. These specialized knowledge units are the result of the development of cognitive processes and communication among experts of a special language community (Sager 1997, 25). Terminology work focuses on the description of domain-specific knowledge structures and how they are transmitted in different communicative contexts. It also involves the organization and recording of the meaning and usage of terms in terminological resources such as term bases, dictionaries and glossaries, which can be used for text decoding as well as for text generation. From a theoretical as well as an applied perspective, Terminology is closely linked to specialized translation since the adequacy of the terminology used in a text, as well as its suitability for the knowledge level of text receivers, is one of the factors that determines translation quality. In this sense, Terminology is often regarded as a translation problem that must be addressed and solved during the translation process. This means that translators of specialized texts must also be closet terminologists and be capable of performing terminological management as a means of knowledge acquisition. Precisely for this reason, they should also have extensive training in the use of translation technologies, computer tools and resources (Alcina 2008; Candel-Mora 2011; Candel-Mora 2014). Specialized translators must thus know how to make use of all available resources to successfully deal with terminological problems during the analysis and processing of the source text as well as during the production and revision of the target text. Terminology work for translation purposes is known as Translation-Oriented Terminology (TOT) (Muráth 2010, 49; Thélen 2015). Its usefulness is generally acknowledged because of the computerization of the translation process and the increasingly large number of specialized texts that need to be rapidly translated (Vargas-Sierra 2011). According to ISO 12616: 2002, the objective of TOT is to facilitate translation by enabling translators to do the following: (1) to record and systematize terminology; (2) to use terminology consistently over time; and (3) to deal more efficiently with multiple languages. The problems encountered in TOT activities frequently stem from translators’ lack of familiarity with the terminological units, with term meaning in discourse, and with the possible correspondences of a term in the target language (Rodríguez-Camacho 2002, 319–20; Cabré et  al. 2002, 168–69). Furthermore, the lack of 247

Pamela Faber and Silvia Montero-Martínez

reliable terminological resources obliges translators to apply information management skills to resolve translation problems and even to create their own resources. In the course of their work, experienced translators develop strategies to effectively perform the following tasks: • • • •

Identification and understanding of specialized concepts in discourse; Evaluation, consultation, and creation of information resources; Specification of interlinguistic correspondences between terms in a specialized knowledge field; Data management for reuse in future translations.

Broadly speaking, there are two types of TOT work: (1) ad hoc terminology work and (2) pro-active terminology work (Lusicky and Wissik 2015). Ad hoc terminology work is performed case by case and involves collecting, understanding and processing a limited number of terms extracted from the source text during the translation process. In contrast, pro-active terminology work is performed previous to translation. It is also text-based in that translators assess future translation needs and then collect and describe domain-specific concepts that may appear in future translations. Consequently, TOT work is process-based and should be linked to the sequence of activities performed by translators. The workflow in TOT work consists of the following activities (Chiocchetti et al. 2013): • • •

Needs assessment and resource collection Term extraction and term selection Terminological research [concept and term description in the source and target languages, contrastive analysis, and documentation] • Revision • Elaboration of terminological entries • Quality assurance • Maintenance • Dissemination Although these activities can be performed in sequence, they may also occur in loops during the translation and revision process. Within the context of a translator’s personal database, certain steps (e.g. quality assurance, maintenance, dissemination) might be considered more or less relevant, or be skipped altogether. TOT activities have been the object of terminology research, particularly since they are closely linked to the concept of translation competence (PACTE 2014, 2015; Bolaños-Medina and Monterde-Rey 2010). In fact, the ability to carry out terminological work during the translation process has been regarded as an integral part of translation competence (Faber 2003; EMT 2009; MonteroMartínez and Faber 2009). Terminological competence in translation refers to the ability of the translator to quickly access the knowledge represented by terms as well as to find the best correspondence for the specialized concept in the target language. It is an acquired skill since translators are not terminologists, but rather language mediators that facilitate interlinguistic communication. Translators must thus develop strategies to understand and represent terms and their multilingual correspondences in context. They should also know how to evaluate and use knowledge resources with a view to producing optimal translations. The specific characteristics of the translation process are what determine the type of terminological competence required. 248

Terminology

This chapter presents theoretical and practical work in TOT in the Spanish-speaking world. The overview of recent research in the field highlights specific topics that are linked to phases of the translation process and which reflect current tendencies in terminology research.

Historical perspective: Terminology theory There are two theories of Terminology that have had a significant impact on the way terminology is described, analyzed and represented in contexts of multilingual communication. The first is the Communicative Theory of Terminology proposed by María Teresa Cabré at the University Pompeu Fabra (Barcelona), and the second is Frame-based Terminology proposed by Pamela Faber at the University of Granada. Both theories are complementary ways of envisaging specialized knowledge concepts and relations as well as their terminological designations and their activation in specialized texts.

Communicative Theory of Terminology The historical panorama of Terminology in Spain begins with Cabré (1993, 1999a, 1999b, 2000), who formulated the Communicative Theory of Terminology (CTT). The CTT is a descriptive approach that studies terms and their variants as they appear in texts, and envisages the multiple dimensions of specialized knowledge units, as well as their representation and analysis. Within the CTT, terminological units are regarded as “sets of conditions” (Cabré 2003, 184) derived from a certain knowledge area, conceptual structure, meaning, lexical and syntactic structure, and valence, as well as the communicative context of specialized discourse. Cabré (2003) proposes the Theory of the Doors, a metaphor representing the possible ways of accessing, analyzing and understanding terminological units. She compares a terminological unit to a polyhedron, a figure with three dimensions: a cognitive dimension, a linguistic dimension and a communicative dimension. Each dimension is a separate door through which terminological units can be accessed. According to Cabré, the CTT approaches specialized knowledge units through the language door. One of its most significant aspects is that terminological units are analyzed within a text by activating a domain-specific knowledge structure or context in which knowledge is transferred between users of the same or different knowledge levels. This evidently facilitates its application to specialized translation.

CTT Terminology and Translation According to Cabré (2004), both Translation and Terminology stem from practical activities performed in response to information and communicative needs. Both activities are similar in that they are interdisciplinary, and are also convergence points for linguistic, cognitive and communication sciences (Cabré 2000). Nevertheless, they differ because Terminology is not in itself a speech act, but rather an instrument used in specialized communication. Despite the fact that Translation primarily focuses on the communication process, terminology is vital for the translator because it activates the knowledge structure conveyed by a specialized text and is a means to achieve the interlinguistic transfer of terminological units and the knowledge that they encode (Cabré 2004; Velasquez 2002, 447). According to Cabré (2010), translation work can entail four degrees of terminology involvement. The first level is passive and involves the consultation of resources by the translator to find a solution. At the second level, translators use their lexicological knowledge to propose 249

Pamela Faber and Silvia Montero-Martínez

a neologism in the target language to fill the gap. At the third level, translators act as ad hoc terminologists by locating the problem in the conceptual structure of the field and filling the terminological gap with a new term, based on patterns of term formation. Finally, at the fourth level, translators resolve problems by extracting information from their own databases, which contain terms from prior translations.

CTT terminology resources The CTT is an influential theory of Terminology, which has had an impact on terminology analysis and management throughout the world. The practical application of the CTT is Terminus (terminus.iula.upf.edu), a web application for terminology management, which primarily targets terminologists and terminographers, who can use it to create and manage terminology projects. It is a computational reflection of the CTT terminological work sequence. (Cabré, Montané, and Nazar 2013). For translation purposes, it could be useful for specialized translators who wish to extensively document their experience with texts in a certain field to create a personal resource.

Frame-based Terminology Like the CTT, Frame-based Terminology (FBT) (Faber, León-Araúz, and Prieto-Velasco 2009; Faber 2011, 2012, 2015) is also a descriptive and text-driven approach and thus admits term variants as well as polysemy. However, it is more cognitively oriented since there is a greater emphasis on conceptual structure and semantic relations for enhanced knowledge acquisition during the translation process. FBT postulates a non-language-specific knowledge structure, which can be used to link terms to the same specialized concept. This theory focuses on: (1) conceptual organization; (2) the multidimensional nature of terminological units; and (3) the extraction of semantic and syntactic information through the use of multilingual corpora. More specifically, FBT applies the notion of frame (Fillmore 1985), defined as a knowledge structure that relates entities associated with a particular culturally embedded scene, situation or event. These frames, which the translator must reproduce in the target language text, are based on a set of micro-theories: (1) a semantic micro-theory focusing on term meaning; (2) a syntactic micro-theory to analyse term structure and collocations in specialized discourse; and (3) a pragmatic micro-theory that explains cultural and contextual parameters of specialized communication (Faber 2015). Each micro-theory is related to the information in term entries, the relations between specialized units, and the concepts that they designate. FBT maintains that knowledge of conceptualization processes, as well as the organization of semantic information in the brain (Faber et al. 2014), should underlie theoretical assumptions concerning the access, retrieval and acquisition of specialized knowledge as well as the design of specialized knowledge resources (Faber 2011; Faber and León-Aráuz 2014; Faber, León-Araúz, and Reimerink 2014). A crucial issue is thus how specialized concepts should be represented so as to provide translators with an understanding of their meaning as well as sufficient knowledge of their location within a specialized domain. The information in data categories are interrelated and enhanced with the visualization of conceptual networks in which concepts are linked by hierarchical and non-hierarchical relations. Linguistic and graphical descriptions of specialized entities play a major role in knowledge representation, especially when both converge to highlight the multidimensional nature of concepts as well as the conceptual relationships. 250

Terminology

Many of the theoretical premises in FBT are useful for specialized translators who must engage in pro-active terminology work. Even though corpus analysis and the analysis of contextual data are key factors in elaborating translations, most translators still tend to rely on bilingual specialized dictionaries in the hope that they will find the right correspondence. However, since most terminographic resources lag far behind technical advances, it is often more effective to search for and query corpus information regarding term meaning and usage in a personal database.

FBT specialized knowledge resources The practical application of FBT is EcoLexicon (ecolexicon.ugr.es), a freely accessible multimodal terminological knowledge base on environmental science (Faber, León-Araúz, and Reimerink 2014). EcoLexicon represents the conceptual structure of the specialized domain of the environment in the form of a visual thesaurus in which environmental concepts are configured in semantic networks. It includes terms in six languages as well as conceptual, linguistic and administrative information for each entry. It specifically targets translators who wish to expand their knowledge of the environment for the purpose of text comprehension or generation.

Research topics and methodology This section describes research in the Spanish-speaking world that explores theory-based terminology management within the context of the translation process. Following the sequence of the translation process, it highlights aspects such as needs assessment and resource collection, term identification and extraction, concept and term description, the elaboration of term entries, and quality assurance.

Needs assessment and resource collection In TOT, needs assessment and resource collection are closely related since one depends on the other. The translator has to be aware of how to access and use available resources. According to Pastor and Alcina (2010), translators are not trained to take full advantage of the search capabilities of electronic resources, and thus are often unaware of which resource is most useful at each moment of the translation process. As observed by Durán-Muñoz (2010, 2012), translators tend to prefer bilingual resources to monolingual ones, and are also most likely to consult bilingual specialized dictionaries or search engines such as Google. In regard to data fields in term entries, her results showed that definitions, equivalents, domain specification, contextual examples and phraseological information were regarded as most informative and useful for translation purposes. This type of needs analysis is related to the Function Theory of Lexicography (FTL) (Bergenholtz and Tarp 2003; Tarp 2008). In Spain, this theory was applied to Terminography in Fuertes and Tarp (2014) in which the authors present the basic premises of the FTL and analyze and assess a selection of online dictionaries and term bases. The main contribution of this book is of a practical nature, as reflected in its emphasis on user needs and the technological advances that may aid in fulfilling them and in improving specialized dictionaries. It is very true that knowledge resources are often created with little consideration for the targeted user group. This is underlined in Buendía-Castro and Faber (2014) who analyzed a set of Spanish and English monolingual collocation dictionaries. These resources were found 251

Pamela Faber and Silvia Montero-Martínez

to differ significantly in regards to the following types of information: (1) types of collocation encoded; (2) kinds of collocational information offered; and (3) place for collocations in the micro or macrostructure of the dictionary. To meet translation and text generation needs, it was concluded that there should be various ways of accessing collocations to enhance information retrieval as well as a classification of collocations within an entry and usage notes.

Term identification and extraction When translators read and process a specialized text, the semantic and syntactic complexity generally resides in the terms and terminological phrasemes. It is thus necessary to be able to identify the terms in the text and examine them in context. In the translation process, term identification is previous to term extraction. Both involve selecting terms from the sourcelanguage text not only to analyze and translate them, but also to manage and build a terminology for a specific domain. Most translators either do this work manually or use term-extraction applications with their respective advantages and drawbacks (Estopá 2009). As highlighted by Vargas-Sierra (2011, 47), Terminology is now a corpus-based activity, which allows the extraction of specialized knowledge with the help of semiautomatic term extractors. Examples of popular open-source term extractors are TermoStat, Taas, and LexTerm. The validation of the list of the terms extracted inevitably hinges on user perception of termhood or the degree to which a stable lexical unit is related to some domain-specific concepts (Kageura and Umino 1996). Although this definition refers to a property that can ideally be measured and quantified, or at least detected, there is no necessary and sufficient condition that determines whether a single or multi-word unit is a term in a domain. Evidently, if the user has sufficient knowledge of the domain to be aware of its most relevant domain-specific concepts, then it is easier to map terms onto them. This is one reason why translators tend to specialize in certain domains. As observed by Cabré and Estopà (2003), professional ends and objectives condition the identification of specialized knowledge units. These authors found that the lexical units identified as terms by field experts did not necessarily coincide with the terms selected by translators, who tended to identify the units that they perceived as the most likely sources of translation problems. The perception of termhood is thus very subjective, and depends on the perceiver’s needs and priorities. Within the translation process, it is based on the translator’s level of domain-specific knowledge and on his/her professional experience in the field. The FBT has a flexible vision of termhood that extends to phrasemes or multi-word expressions. Buendía-Castro and Faber (2015) examined the inclusion of phraseological information in a set of English-Spanish bilingual legal dictionaries in order to evaluate their potential usefulness for translators. Although this type of information is crucial in specialized legal translation, it was found that very little phraseological information was included in most of the dictionaries. A  noteworthy exception was Alcaráz, Hughes, and Campos (2012), which was found to be the bilingual legal dictionary that best responded to translation needs. A legal dictionary for translators should provide various ways of accessing phraseological units as well as a classification of phraseological information within each entry for a more effective retrieval of information. Finally, the dictionary should include a short description of the unit so that users are better able to understand its meaning and usage in different contexts as well as its contextualized correspondences in the target language and culture. Montero-Martínez and Buendía-Castro (2017) propose a semantic classification of verbal collocations with a view to enhancing the acquisition and codification of specialized knowledge in the translation process.

252

Terminology

Concept and term description Translators must also be able to link the terms extracted from a text to a concept or concepts in the real world and also know how to use them in texts. According to the ISO 12616 standard on Translation-Oriented Terminography, translators need to store a much broader set of data (e.g. phraseology, contexts, text segments, etc.) than are traditionally stored in term bases. Terms can be classified as main entry terms, synonyms, variants, phraseological units, etc. Data categories for term-related information include grammar, usage and equivalence, whereas concept-related descriptions include definition, explanation, context and figure. Aspects of these categories, which are important in translation, have been the focus of research. Concept descriptions can take the form of definitions (San Martín 2016), explanations in the form of contexts (Faber and León-Araúz 2016), concept maps (Faber 2011; León-Araúz, Faber, and Montero-Martínez 2012) and/or graphical images (Prieto-Velasco 2009; Prieto-Velasco and Faber 2012; Reimerink, León-Araúz, and Faber 2016). These are all modalities of knowledge representation that allow translators to establish full or partial correspondences between terms in different languages. If no equivalence can be established, they must implement another strategy such as citation of the non-translated term, paraphrasing, the creation of neologisms or a combination of these (De Groot 2006). In relation to concept and term description, topics of interest for TOT include conceptual organization and representation, semantic analysis, term variation and its parameters, and the creation and translation of neologisms.

Concept modelling and organization Although translators acknowledge the importance of domain specification (essential information) and semantic relations (desirable information) (Durán-Muñoz 2012), representations of concept structure are not usually a part of TOT. Even in pro-active terminology work, a translator’s personal term base is generally organized semasiologically (term-based) instead of onomasiologically (concept-based), though sometimes, it can be a mixture of the two (Bowker 2015). Even in large knowledge resources, conceptual representations are rarely included despite the fact that they can help the translator to quickly obtain knowledge of the specialized field (Faber et al. 2006). Although a concept system is conventionally envisaged as a structured set of concepts organized into classes and sub-classes in the form of a tree diagram (see Cabré 1999b, 135), the reality of conceptual organization is somewhat more complicated than a simple hierarchy (Faber 2011). As reflected in term bases such as EcoLexicon (ecolexicon.ugr.es), conceptual representations that graphically convey the semantic relations of a concept in the same way as a visual thesaurus are a useful and effective means of knowledge acquisition for translators (García-Aragón, Buendía-Castro, and López-Rodríguez 2014; López-Rodriguez, BuendíaCastro, and García-Aragón 2012; López-Rodríguez, Prieto-Velasco, and Tercedor-Sánchez 2013). In this regard, FBT envisages the configuration of specialized domains on the basis of definitional templates and creates situated representations for specialized knowledge concepts. These networks are based on an underlying domain event as well as a closed inventory of both hierarchical and non-hierarchical semantic relations. The conceptual relations as well as a concept’s combinatorial potential are extracted by means of corpus analysis (LeónAraúz, Faber, and Montero-Martínez 2012) and knowledge patterns (Tercedor-Sánchez and

253

Pamela Faber and Silvia Montero-Martínez

López-Rodríguez 2008; López-Rodríguez 2009; León-Araúz, Reimerink, and Faber 2009; Reimerink, García-Quesada, and Montero-Martínez 2012; San Martín 2014).

Semantic analysis The semantics of terminological units is an important topic in specialized translation because meaning is what the translator must extract from the source-language text and encode in the target language. Since the semantic load of a specialized text is concentrated in its terms rather than its syntax, the translation process involves an explicit (or implicit) semantic analysis of terms and their collocations. Descriptive terminology approaches, such as the CTT and FBT, envisage the semantic analysis of terms and their linguistic facets (Faber and L’Homme 2014) and highlight the fact that terms must be observed in their usage contexts. This analysis focuses on larger segments of discourse and also targets parts of speech other than nouns, such as adjectives or verbs (Buendía-Castro, Sánchez-Cárdenas, and León-Araúz 2014). For example, in the comprehension and structure of specialized discourse across languages, verbs play an important role since a considerable part of our knowledge is composed of events and states, many of which are linguistically represented by verbs. In this regard, according to Lorente (2000), the predominance of a certain group of verbs in a text determines, to a great extent, the nature of the text and its contents. She also states that even though verbs are not per se terminological units, they can acquire specialized value in context. She proposes the following typology of verbs for specialized discourse: (1) performative verbs (verbs linked to text functions such as discussing, stating, etc.); (2) verbs of logical relations (verbs acting as connectors); (3) phraseological verbs (verbs in collocations and fixed phrases that lexicalize actions and processes); and (4) quasi-terminological verbs (verbs that encode processes typical of a specialized field) (Lorente 2002, 2007). In this regard, Alonso-Campo and RenauArauque (2013) present a method to detect specialized uses of verbs based on Corpus Pattern Analysis (CPA). Their results showed that specialized uses of verbs were often reflected in specific patterns. Lexical specialization was also found to have degrees of context dependence that formed a continuum. Since verbs are cognitive nodes that articulate and structure a text, they set the scene for the terms that are the fillers of their slots. In fact the semantic features of specialized knowledge units interact with and constrain the meaning of the verb to reduce polysemy and restrict it to one sense (Sánchez-Cárdenas and Buendía-Castro 2012). In this line, Buendía-Castro (2013) describes a method of selecting correspondences between verb phraseological units in English and Spanish. The underlying idea is that verbs in specialized texts and their arguments can be classified and organized in a set of conceptual semantic categories typical of a given specialized domain. Verb meaning is thus constrained by the meaning of the terms that occupy the argument slots (Buendía-Castro, Sánchez-Cárdenas, and León-Araúz 2014). When verbs from the same lexical domain tend to combine with terms within the same conceptual categories, this makes it easier to predict and translate text segments.

Terminological variation An important source of problems encountered by translators of specialized texts is terminological variation. When dealing with multiple correspondences for the same specialized concept, it is usually necessary to ‘think outside the box’ to find the term that best fits the text and discourse context. Quite frequently, translators must opt for a variant instead of the correspondence found in the specialized dictionary. When various options are listed in the dictionary, it is 254

Terminology

very rare for any information about collocational restrictions to be included. For this reason, translators must possess the criteria to make the best choice. Denominative variation arises when a concept has various linguistic designations. Since there is rarely total correspondence between denominative variants in different languages, it is crucial to know why they exist and which variational parameter each responds to. Terminological variation is well worth studying because it provides insights into the dynamicity of conceptualization and also into different types of communicative context. Not surprisingly, term variation is a research focus in the CTT (Freixa 2002, 2006; Fernández-Silva, Freixa, and Cabré 2011) as well as the FBT (Tercedor-Sánchez 2011; Tercedor-Sánchez, LópezRodríguez, and Prieto-Velasco 2014; León-Aráuz and Faber 2014; León-Araúz 2015). In both the CTT and FBT, research highlights the fact that concept systems as well as categorization are dynamic and subject to change. Dynamicity underlies the idea of the emergence of terms through ongoing intrinsic processes, which largely depend on context (Faber 2011). Although certain types of variation are often used with little impact on communication, such as morphological variants, orthographic variants, ellipted variants, etc. (Freixa 2014), terminological variation can also have an impact on meaning. Freixa (2006) classifies the causes for variation in the following categories: (1) dialectal, based on origin; (2) functional, based on register; (3) discursive, based on style; (4) interlinguistic, based on the contact between languages; and (5) cognitive, based on different conceptualizations. Of these types of variation, most research has focused on cognitive variation, which involves a change in semantics, since it embodies a particular vision of the concept. In this sense, dynamism can be found in the naming of the same concept from different perspectives for reasons ranging from differences in subject field to level of perception or cognition (Fernández-Silva, Freixa, and Cabré 2011, 53). More specifically, within the CTT, Freixa (2002, 2006), Freixa, Fernández-Silva, and Cabré (2008) and Fernández-Silva, Freixa, and Cabré (2009, 2011) explore the motivations underlying denominative variation in specialized texts. Denominative variants are not only formally different, but also semantically different in that they highlight a different facet of the meaning of a concept (Freixa 2002). In this sense, Fernández-Silva, Freixa, and Cabré (2011) describe this phenomenon as the linguistic reflection of conceptual multidimensionality, the phenomenon in which concepts can be classified according to different points of view or facets (Bowker 1997; Rogers 2004; León-Araúz 2009). This has important consequences in regard to how domains are modelled, and is particularly evident in multi-word terms whose form reflects their motivation, stemming from contextual factors that are specific to a certain communicative situation (Fernández-Silva, Freixa, and Cabré 2009). Multidimensionality and the terminological variation thus generated are also important topics in FBT. This is highlighted in VariMed (varimed.ugr.es), a medical termbase in which denominative variation in medical communication is analyzed as a source of lexical creativity arising from the dynamism inherent in situated conceptualization (Tercedor-Sánchez, LópezRodríguez, and Prieto-Velasco 2014; Tercedor-Sánchez and Prieto-Velasco 2013). Multidimensionality is one of the main causes of terminological variation since the focus on a specific conceptual dimension is reflected in the linguistic designation. In VariMed as well as EcoLexicon, cognitive variation is analyzed and classified in terms of Pustejovksy’s (1995) qualia (Prieto-Velasco and Tercedor-Sánchez 2014). To explain contextual variation in Terminology, Tercedor-Sánchez (2011) reviews psycholinguistic research based on the ways-of-seeing (WOS) proposal (Croft and Cruse 2004, 137). She explains how a situated dynamic perspective can trigger the action of concept properties that have a perceptual or functional basis. In Terminology, these WOSs are codified in 255

Pamela Faber and Silvia Montero-Martínez

syntagmatic and compound terminological units that reflect terminological variation. According to Tercedor-Sánchez and López-Rodríguez (2012, 252–3), medical concepts can be lexicalized in various ways depending on the facet of the concept being highlighted. The facet selected can reflect a certain specialized domain or a priority of the text sender.

Neologism Cabré (1999a) distinguishes between general language neologisms and terminological neologisms. These are terms or terminological phrasemes that have been newly coined in a language because of the need for a designation. The rapid evolution of science and technology generates new concepts and new terms to designate them. In fact, it is impossible either to create specialized knowledge or to communicate new research advances in specialized fields without new terms (Cabré, Estopà, and Vargas 2012, 2). For translation purposes, recently created terms can be problematic because they rarely appear in specialized dictionaries and term banks and usually lack equivalences in the target language. In fact, the translation of neologisms has even been described as the biggest problem for non-literary and professional translators (Newmark 1988). They are often faced with situations in which there is no term in the target language to name a new concept designated by a newly coined term in the source language. As a result, they must decide whether to make an explanatory or descriptive translation by using generic terms from a definition derived from the term’s context or simply by calquing or adapting the source-language term. Exceptionally, in order to fill a lexical gap in the specialized domain, translators might even decide to propose a new term. This is a case of secondary term formation and involves creating an equivalent in the target language for a specialized knowledge unit in the source language. However, the new term should also conform to the word-formation rules in the target language system. This is demonstrated in Fernández-Domínguez (2016), who makes a contrastive analysis of the morphological and semantic characteristics of English and Spanish terms from the olive oil industry. The translation strategy sometimes depends on the capacity of the target language to accept and assimilate foreign words. Although almost half of English consists of words borrowed from other languages, languages such as Spanish or French may be more reticent about absorbing words from other languages and cultures. This tendency, however, is at odds with the rapid influx of technical and scientific terms in the modern world (Montero-Martínez, Fuertes-Olivera, and García de Quesada 2001). The fact that English is currently the predominant language for specialized knowledge transfer evidently conditions the creation of new lexical units in other languages. This means that terminology and terminological neology in Spanish (as well as in other romance languages) should be studied to assess their terminological dependency on English (Humbley and García-Palacios 2012). For this purpose, Sánchez-Ibáñez and García-Palacios (2014) measured the terminological dependency of Spanish on English in terms related to Alzheimer’s disease, based on the semantic characterization of a set of neologisms in this domain. They found that the importation of units from English involved a set of linguistic asymmetries that affected the conceptual configuration of the specialized domain. The results showed a significant, though not exact correlation between the uniformity of certain semantic features and the degree of terminological dependency detected in their Spanish equivalents. Similar results were also obtained in Sanz-Vicente (2012), who studied secondary term formation as reflected in the Spanish translation of English noun compounds in the domain of remote sensing.

256

Terminology

As highlighted by Cabré, Estopà, and Vargas (2012), neology has become an important research focus in recent years. This is evident in the number of publications on the topic, as well as the creation of the Observatori Neología (OBNEO) for Catalan and Spanish. Work on neology not only facilitates specialized translation, but also usefully contributes to activities such as dictionary updating, terminology binding, information and knowledge management, and the dissemination of scientific knowledge.

Elaboration and design of terminological entries A term entry in a translator’s personal termbase consists of data fields that represent what he/ she needs to know about the term. Entries can be as concise or detailed as necessary. Broadly speaking, there are three groups of possible data categories: (1) term and term-related; (2) concept-related; and (3) administrative. However, for translation purposes, the most basic categories are term type, subject field, definition, context examples, multilingual correspondences and multimodal information.

Definitions A terminographic definition is the linguistic description of a specialized concept and is based on conceptual analysis. As such, it is a statement that ideally allows users to access the meaning of a concept. A definition fixes the reference of a term to a concept, albeit by linguistic means only. At the same time it creates and declares relationships to other concepts within a knowledge structure. In Terminology, a good definition should situate and classify a concept within a certain conceptual system by stating the characteristics that identify the concept. In translation contexts, definitions of specialized concepts are useful to the extent that they facilitate knowledge acquisition and permit translators to attain the necessary threshold of domain-specific knowledge. From the perspective of the CTT, Cabré (1993, 209) proposes the following types of definitions, which differ in content as well as in the object described: (1) linguistic definition that defines a lexical unit; (2) ontological definition that defines a real-world entity; and (3) terminological definition that defines a concept within the conceptual system of a specialized domain. Although definitions of specialized knowledge units aspire to the third type, the definitions in terminological resources are often not in consonance with standards for the formulation of definitions (UNE 1-066 Principios y métodos and UNE 1-070 Vocabulario de la terminología) (Azarian and Tebé 2011). This situation would be improved if definitional information were derived from texts and corpus analysis, in which term meaning is analyzed in context. FBT emphasizes that definitions should have both macro- and microstructural coherence. In other words, not only should the information contained in the definition be adequately formulated, but it should also be coherent with the information contained in the definitions of similar concepts within the system. Definitions can be regarded as mini-knowledge representations, which require a definitional frame or template for each category (Faber and Tercedor-Sánchez 2001; Faber et al. 2007). Similarly to the CTT, FBT also advocates the use of corpus analysis to derive conceptual information for definitions. More specifically, knowledge patterns (Barrière 2004) are used to search the corpus in order to identify semantic relations between concepts and include them in definitions (León-Aráuz, Reimerink, and Faber 2009). Similarly, Acosta and Sierra (2011) and Acosta, Sierra, and Aguilar (2015) show how

257

Pamela Faber and Silvia Montero-Martínez

definitional contexts in Spanish can also be automatically extracted through the definition of hyponymy-hyperonymy relations. Given that context is crucial in the choice of definitional information, since a concept may be categorized differently depending on the context, FBT advocates the creation of flexible definitions in order to better account for multidimensionality (León-Araúz and San Martín 2012). A single definition is not sufficient to describe multidimensional concepts that participate in various conceptual frames (San Martín and León-Araúz 2013). However, recontextualized definitions for concepts adapt to contextual variation and better respond to user needs. Contextual variation, based on the analysis of contextonyms, can be characterized in terms of modulation, perspectivization and subconceptualization (San Martín 2016).

Contextual information As previously mentioned, one of the most valuable types of data in translation is information related to context. In the sequence of TOT work, it is suggested that contexts be included in term entries. However, the type is left deliberately vague since there is no universally accepted definition for context (Faber and León-Araúz 2016). In the CTT, the importance of term contexts has always been acknowledged in term records (Cabré et al. 2004) for purposes of text understanding and encoding (e.g. Estopà et al. 2006), and for automatic information retrieval (Araya and Vivaldi 2004). Alarcón, Bach, and Sierra (2007) present a methodology for the automatic extraction of definitional contexts involving: (1) the extraction of definition patterns; (2) filtering of non-relevant contexts; and (3) identification of constitutive elements such as terms, definition patterns and pragmatic patterns. Context is also central to FBT since specialized knowledge units are only understood with reference to their underlying conceptual frame, whose elements are selected based on context (Reimerink, García-Quesada, and Montero-Martínez 2012). FBT divides contexts into local or global. Local contexts are usually limited to the words within the term itself, to a small number of words in the immediate vicinity of a term, or to words connected by syntactic dependencies to the term. In contrast, global contexts can encompass the whole text or go beyond the text and refer to the communicative situation (i.e., formal vs. informal), to the conceptual networks reflected in it, or to the culture in which the text is interpreted. Both local and global contexts can be subdivided, based on whether they are syntactic, semantic or pragmatic (Faber and León-Araúz 2016).

Graphical information Linguistic information is not the only means of describing concepts. Images are also useful for this purpose, particularly in certain domains, such as engineering, architecture and medicine. The inclusion of types of visual representation enhances textual comprehension and complements the linguistic information provided in other data fields (Faber et al. 2007; Prieto-Velasco and López-Rodríguez 2009; Reimerink, León-Araúz, and Faber 2016). Although the traditional classification of images is based on their morphology (photographs, drawings, videos, diagrams, etc.) (Monterde 2002), a more useful way of categorizing them is in terms of their relationship with the real-world entity represented, based on criteria of iconicity, abstraction and dynamism (Prieto-Velasco 2009; Prieto-Velasco and Faber 2012). FBT advocates a multimodal description of specialized concepts in which the information contained in definitions meshes with the visual information in images for better understanding. Types of image thus can vary, depending on the level of specialization of the text, and 258

Terminology

their characteristics should correspond to the most salient features of the concept (Reimerink, León-Araúz, and Faber 2016). Accordingly, the images to be included in a term entry should be appropriate for the concept and the user.

Quality assurance: standardization and harmonization Translation quality is an issue with a wide scope that encompasses all stages of the translation process. Standard quality assurance tasks in the post-translation stage include revising and spell checking. In specialized translation, revising also involves assessing textual coherence, which includes verifying to what degree the meaning of the terms in the target-language text corresponds to the meaning of those in the source-language text. In this sense, translation memories also have features for terminology verification, and the translator can decide which checks to run (Vargas-Sierra 2011, 59). However, to obtain satisfactory results, it is necessary for the translator to have performed ad hoc as well as pro-active terminology management throughout the translation process. Translators should also be familiar with good practices as set out in standards. Alcina (2015) discusses the ISO standards currently applied in Translation and Terminology. The ones most directly related to TOT are ISO 26162: 2012 (Systems to manage Terminology, knowledge and content – Design, implementation and maintenance of terminology management systems) and ISO 12616:2002 (Translation-Oriented Terminography). Closely related to standardization is the concept of harmonization. Unlike standardization, harmonization provides different variants and recommends (without imposing) their use to reduce ambiguity. Durán-Muñoz (2014) focuses on cross-domain harmonization, a kind of intralingual harmonization that involves different specialized domains. This is particularly relevant in legal domains.

Future directions Terminology has become an increasingly important part of the specialized translation process. This chapter has presented a panorama of Translation-Oriented Terminology as reflected in recent research carried out within the Spanish-speaking world. Future directions should focus on different ways that translators can access, understand and interact with terminology, terminology management systems and knowledge resources in their work. Although this type of process-oriented research is complex, it is the only way to create a more detailed catalogue of terminology-related problems and translator needs, which could lead to improvements in available tools and resources. Research is also needed on the cognitive parameters that drive terminological awareness as well as the perception of interlinguistic correspondences between terms in different languages. Further study should also focus on the processes of primary and secondary term formation and terminogenesis in different specialized knowledge contexts of language dominance. In regard to product-oriented research, the syntax and semantics of specialized knowledge units in specialized texts should be explored in greater depth since the limits between a terminological phraseme and a collocation are far from clear. Knowledge of how terms are represented in knowledge resources compared to how they behave in texts is crucial because meaning can vary, depending on the context in which a term appears. Translation-Oriented Terminology should thus include further studies on corpus analysis for concept derivation and specification, given the vital importance of this type of information in translation. 259

Pamela Faber and Silvia Montero-Martínez

Within a broader scope of translation-oriented studies, there is a need for work dealing with terminology from the perspective of the interpreting process. Theoretically based studies, inclusive of the recent advances in Terminology theory and practice, should be carried out. It would also be interesting to explore the extent to which translators and interpreters process and manage terminology in similar or different ways, and whether these professionals share the same terminological tools and strategies. Finally, results from process-oriented and product-oriented studies should lead to experimental research on teaching models and strategies in the context of translation training programmes. Undergraduate and postgraduate students need to master terminological and terminology-related skills to respond to the challenges of a rapidly changing market, both in terms of the diversification and specialization of contents and technology-related professional practices.

Recommended reading For an understanding of Terminology theory in the Spanish-speaking world, it is necessary to read Cabré (1999a, 1999b) for a description of Communicative Terminology Theory and Faber (2012) for a description of Frame-based Terminology. The following studies are indicative of research paths in Terminology that are in need of further development. Cabré, María Teresa, Rosa Estopà, and Chelo Vargas. 2012. “Neology in Specialized Communication.” Terminology 18: 1. This special volume of Terminology includes recent research on the many facets of neology. The articles in this volume focus on language change and the reasons behind such change. They underline how advances in knowledge are expressed through terms. Such neologisms represent the constant changes of a society and are a clear indication of the vitality of a language. Faber, Pamela, and Pilar León-Araúz. 2016. “Specialized Knowledge Representation and the Parameterization of Context.” Frontiers in Psychology 7 (00196). doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00196. In specialized texts, the meaning of terminological units depends on context. This article shows how context can be parameterized in a taxonomy, primarily based on scope (local and global), which is further divided into syntactic, semantic and pragmatic facets. These facets cover the specification of different types of terminological information, such as predicate-argument structure, collocations, semantic relations, term variants, grammatical and lexical cohesion, communicative situations, subject fields and cultures. Fernández-Domínguez, Jesús. 2016. “A Morphosemantic Investigation of Term Formation Processes in English and Spanish.” Languages in Contrast 16 (1): 54–83. There is a scarcity of studies on term formation and terminogenesis, especially from a contrastive perspective, which are based on a coherent methodology that can also account for term semantics. This article uses corpus analysis techniques to study derivational features of terminogenesic processes as well as the semantic characteristics of terms belonging to the olive oil industry with a view to relating the form and meaning of these specialized knowledge units in English and Spanish. Fernández-Silva, Sabela, Judit Freixa, and María Teresa Cabré. 2011. “A Proposed Method for Analysing the Dynamics of Cognition through Term Variation.” Terminology 17 (1): 49–73. This article presents a methodology that effectively describes the conceptually motivated patterns of term variation detected in a corpus of specialized texts. This method analyzes the conceptual information reflected in the form of the specialized knowledge units and provides a framework that systematically accounts for the flexibility of concepts and conceptual structures. Vargas-Sierra, Chelo. 2011. “Translation-Oriented Terminology Management and ICTs: Present and Future.” In Interdisciplinarity and Languages: Current Issues in Research, Teaching, Professional Applications and ICT, edited by Francisca Suau Jiménez and Barry Pennock, 45–64. Bern: Peter Lang.

260

Terminology Specialized translators must be able to effectively acquire specialized knowledge, solve terminological problems, and manage term-related information. This chapter addresses different aspects of terminology management and its computerized workbench, all with regard to Translation-Oriented Terminology tasks and ICTs. It describes and classifies the types of translation practices related to terminology management, including the software that can be used in a particular task.

Acknowledgements This research was carried out within the framework of project FF2017-52740-P, Herramientas Terminológicas Orientadas hacia la Traducción de Textos Medioambientales (TOTEM) funded by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness.

References Acosta, Olga, Gerardo Sierra, and César Aguilar. 2011. “Extraction of Definitional Contexts using Lexical Relations.” International Journal of Computer Applications 34 (6): 46–53. ———. 2015. “Extracting Definitional Contexts in Spanish Through the Identification of HyponymyHyperonymy Relations.” In Modern Computational Models of Semantic Discovery in Natural Language, edited by Jan Zizka and František Daren, 48–72. Hershey: IGI Global. Alarcón, Rodrigo, Carme Bach, and Gerardo Sierra. 2007. “Extracción de contextos definitorios en corpus especializados: hacia la elaboración de una herramienta de ayuda terminográfica.” Revista Española de Lingüística 37: 247–77. Alcaraz-Varo, Enrique, Brian Hughes, and Miguel Ángel Campos. 2012. Diccionario de términos jurídicos. A Dictionary of Legal Terms: inglés-espanol, Spanish-English, 11th ed. Barcelona: Ariel. Alcina, Amparo. 2008. “Translation Technologies. Scope, Tools, and Resources.” Target 20 (1): 79–102. ———. 2015. “Estándares y formatos de intercambio en terminología.” Revista Tradumática 13: 571–83. Alonso-Campo, Araceli, and Irene Renau-Araque. 2013. “Corpus Pattern Analysis in Determining Specialised Uses of Verbal Lexical Units.” Terminalia 7: 26–33. Araya, Raúl, and Jordi Vivaldi. 2004. “Mercedes: A Term-in-Context Highlighter.” In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2004), 445–8. Lisbon: European Languages Resources Association. Azarian, Jenny, and Carles Tebé. 2011. “La metodología de elaboración de definiciones terminológicas en vocabularios normalizados: análisis en normas UNE.” Debate Terminológico 7: 2–23. Barrière, Caroline. 2004. “Building a Concept Hierarchy from Corpus Analysis.” Terminology 10 (2): 241–64. Bergenholtz, Henning, and Sven Tarp. 2003. “Two Opposing Theories: On H.E. Wiegand’s Recent Discovery of Lexicographic Functions.” Hermes. Journal of Linguistics 31: 171–96. Bolaños-Medina, Alicia, and Ana Marúa Monterde-Rey. 2010. “Sistema de competencias terminológicas mínimas para la integración de la docencia de la traducción científica y técnica y de la terminología.” In Estudios de traducción: Perspectivas. Zinaida Lvóvskaya, in memoriam, edited by Sonia Bravo Utrera and Rosario García López, 131–46. Berlin: Peter Lang. Bowker, Lynne. 1997. “Multidimensional Classification of Concepts and Terms.” In Handbook of Terminology Management, edited by Sue Ellen Wright and Gerard Budin, 131–43. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ———. 2015. “Terminology and Translation.” In Handbook of Terminology, edited by Hendrik J. Kockaert and Frieda Steurs, 304–23. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Buendía-Castro, Miriam. 2013. “Phraseology in Specialized Language and its Representation in Environmental Knowledge Resources.” PhD diss., University of Granada. Buendía-Castro, Miriam, and Pamela Faber. 2014. “Collocation Dictionaries: A  Comparative Analysis.” MonTI. Monografías de traducción e interpretación 6: 203–35. ———. 2015.  “Phraseological Units in English-Spanish Legal Dictionaries: A  Comparative Study.” Fachsprache: International Journal of Specialized Communication XXXVII (3–4): 161–75. Buendía-Castro, Miriam, Beatriz Sánchez-Cárdenas, and Pilar León-Araúz. 2014. “The Role of Conceptual Categories for Argument Structure Prediction.” In Communication, Cognition and Cybernetics.

261

Pamela Faber and Silvia Montero-Martínez Selected Papers from the 31st International Conference of the Spanish Association of Applied Linguistics (AESLA), 879–903. La Laguna: University of La Laguna. Cabré, María Teresa. 1993. La terminología. Teoría, métodos, aplicaciones. Barcelona: Antártida. ———. 1999a. La terminología: Representación y comunicación. Elementos para una teoría de base comunicativa y otros artículos. Barcelona: Institut Universitari de Lingüística Aplicada. ———. 1999b. Terminology: Theory, Methods and Applications. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ———. 2000. “Terminologie et linguistique: La théorie des portes.” Terminologies Nouvelles 21: 10–15. ———. 2003. “Theories of Terminology. Their Description, Prescription and Explanation.” Terminology 9 (2): 163–200. ———. 2004. “La terminología en la traducción especializada.” In Manual de documentación y terminología para la traducción especializada, edited by Consuelo Gonzalo García and Valentín García Yebra, 89–122. Madrid: Arco. ———. 2010. “Terminology and Translation.” In Handbook of Translation Studies, edited by Luc van Doorslaer and Yves Gambier, 356–65. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Cabré, María Teresa, María Amor Montané, and Rogelio Nazar. 2013. “TERMINUS, the Terminologist´s Workstation: An Integral System for the Production of Glossaries.” In La formation en terminologie, edited by Carmen-Stefania Stoean, Nina Ivanciu, Ruxandra Constantinescu-Stefanel, and Antoaneta Lorentz, 443–54. Bucharest: Editura. Cabré, María Teresa, Carme Bach, Rosa Estopà, Judit Feliu, Gemma Martínez, and Jordi Vivaldi. 2004. “The GENOMA-KB Project: Towards the Integration of Concepts, Terms, Textual Corpora and Entities.” In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2004), 87–90. Lisbon: European Languages Resources Association. Cabré, María Teresa, and Rosa Estopá. 2003. “On the Units of Specialized Meaning Used in Professional Communication.” Terminology Science & Research 14: 15–27. Cabré, María Teresa, Rosa Estopá, Judit Freixa, Merce Lorente, and Carles Tebé. 2002. “Les necessitats terminològiques del traductor científic.” In Translating Science. Proceedings 2nd International Conference on Specialized Translation, February 28–March 2, 2002, edited by José Chabás, Rolf Gaser, and Joëlle Rey, 165–74. Barcelona: University Pompeu Fabra. Cabré, María Teresa, Rosa Estopà, and Chelo Vargas. 2012. “Neology in Specialized Communication.” Terminology 18 (1): 1–8. Candel-Mora, Miguel Ángel. 2011. “Computer-Assisted Translation and Terminology Management: Tools and Resources.” In Interdisciplinarity and Languages: Current Issues in Research, Teaching, Professional Applications and ICT, edited by Francisca Suau, and Barry Pennock, 145–60. Bern: Peter Lang. ———. 2014. “Adaptación de la tecnología para la gestión terminológica desde la perspectiva de la traducción.” In TIC, trabajo colaborativo e interacción en Terminología y Traducción, edited by Chelo Vargas-Sierra, 47–56. Granada: Comares. Chiocchetti, Elena, Barbara Heinisch-Obermoser, Georg Löckinger, Vesna Lušicky, Natascia Ralli, Isabella Stanizzi, and Tanja Wissik. 2013. Guidelines for Collaborative Legal/Administrative Terminology Work. Bolzano/Bozen: EURAC. www.sep.gov.mk/data/file/Preveduvanje/Procedural_ Manual_on_Terminology_final_version.pdf. Croft, William, and Alan D. Cruse. 2004. Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. De Groot, Gerard-René. 2006. “Legal Translation.” http://digitalarchive.maastrichtuniversity.nl/fedora/ get/guid:35a1b7c4-f6b9-4e5a-a152-5354fd274893/ASSET1. Durán-Muñoz, Isabel. 2010. “Specialized Lexicographical Resources: A Survey of Translators’ Needs.” In eLexicography in the 21st Century: New Challenges, New Applications. Proceedings of ELEX2009. Cahiers du Cental, vol. 7, edited by Sylviane Granger and Magali Paquot, 55–66. Louvain-La-Neuve: Presses Universitaires de Louvain. ———. 2012. “Meeting Translators’ Needs: Translation-Oriented Terminological Management and Applications.” Journal of Specialized Translation 18: 77–92. ———. 2014. “Cross-domain Harmonization. A  Case Study with Adventure Activities in Legal and Tourism Domains in Spain.” In Dynamics and Terminology, edited by Rita. Temmerman and Marc Van Campenhoudt, 61–78. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Estopà, Rosa. 2009. “Los extractores de terminología: logros y escollos.” In Terminología y sociedad del conocimiento, edited by Amparo Alcina, Esperanza Valero, and Elena Rambla, 117–46. Bern: Peter Lang.

262

Terminology Estopà, Rosa, Jaume Martí, Diego Burgos, Sabela Fernández-Silva, César Jara, María Amor Montané et al. 2006. “La identificación de unidades terminológicas en contexto: de la teoría a la práctica.” In Terminología y derecho: complejidad de la comunicación multilingüe: V Actividades de IULATERM de Verano (4–14 de julio de 2005), edited by María Teresa Cabré, Carme Bach, and Jaume Martí. Barcelona: IULA. European Master’s in Translation  – EMT. 2009. “Competences for Professional Translators, Experts in Multilingual and Multimedia Communication.” DGT. European Commission. http://ec.europa.eu/ dgs/translation/programmes/emt/key_documents/emt_competences_translators_en.pdf. Faber, Pamela. 2003. “Terminological Competence and Enhanced Knowledge Acquisition.” Research in Language 1: 95–116. ———. 2011. “The Dynamics of Specialized Knowledge Representation: Simulational Reconstruction or the Perception-Action Interface.” Terminology 17 (1): 9–29. ———, ed. 2012. A Cognitive Linguistics View of Terminology and Specialized Language. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter. ———. 2015. “Frames as a Framework for Terminology.” In Handbook of Terminology, edited by Hendrik J. Kockaert and Frieda Steurs, 14–33. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Faber, Pamela, and Pilar León-Aráuz. 2014. “From Cognition to Culture-Bound Terminology.” In Dynamics and Terminology, edited by Rita Temmerman and Marc Van Campenhoudt, 135–58. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ———. 2016. “Specialized Knowledge Representation and the Parameterization of Context.” Frontiers in Psychology 7 (00196). doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00196. Faber, Pamela, Pilar León-Araúz, and Juan Antonio Prieto-Velasco. 2009. “Semantic Relations, Dynamicity, and Terminological Knowledge Bases.” Current Issues in Language Studies 1 (1): 1–23. Faber, Pamela, Pilar León-Araúz, Juan Antonio Prieto-Velasco, and Arianne Reimerink. 2007. “Linking Images and Words: The Description of Specialized Concepts.” International Journal of Lexicography 20 (1): 39–65. Faber, Pamela, Pilar León-Araúz, and Arianne Reimerink. 2014. “Representing Environmental Knowledge in EcoLexicon.” In Languages for Specific Purposes in the Digital Era, edited by Elena Bárcena, Timothy Read, and Jorge Arus, 267–301. Berlin: Springer. Faber, Pamela, and Marie Claude L’Homme. 2014. “Lexical Semantic Approaches to Terminology. An Introduction.” Terminology 20 (2): 143–50. Faber, Pamela, Silvia Montero-Martínez, María Rosa Castro-Prieto, José Senso-Ruiz, Juan Antonio Prieto-Velasco, Pilar León-Arauz et  al. 2006.  “Process-Oriented Terminology Management in the Domain of Coastal Engineering.” Terminology 12 (2): 189–213. Faber, Pamela, and Maribel Tercedor-Sánchez. 2001. “Codifying Conceptual Information in Descriptive Terminology Management.” Meta: Translators’ Journal 46 (1): 192–204. Faber, Pamela, Juan Verdejo, Pilar León-Araúz, Arianne Reimerink, and Gloria Guzmán. 2014. “Neural Substrates of Specialized Knowledge Representation: An fMRI Study.” Revue française de linguistique appliquée 19 (1): 15–32. Fernández-Domínguez, Jesús. 2016. “A Morphosemantic Investigation of Term Formation Processes in English and Spanish.” Languages in Contrast 16 (1): 54–83. Fernández-Silva, Judit Freixa, and María Teresa Cabré. 2009. “The Multiple Motivation in the Denomination of Concepts.”  In Terminology Science & Research 20. Vienna: International Network for Terminology. Fernández-Silva, Sabela, Judit Freixa, and María Teresa Cabré. 2011. “A Proposed Method for Analysing the Dynamics of Cognition Through Term Variation.” Terminology 17 (1): 49–73. Fillmore, Charles. 1985. “Frames and the Semantics of Understanding.” Quaderni di Semantica 6: 22–254. Freixa, Judit. 2002. “Reflexiones acerca de las causas de la variación denominativa en terminología.” In Panorama actual de la terminología, edited by Gloria Guerrero Ramos and Manuel Fernando Pérez, 107–15. Granada: Comares. ———. 2006. “Causes of Denominative Variation in Terminology. A  Typology Proposal.”  Terminology 12 (1): 51–77. ———. 2014. “La variación denominativa en terminología: tipos y causas.” In As ciências do léxico: lexicologia, lexicografia, terminología, edited by Aparecida Negri Isquerdo and Giselle O. Mantovani Dal Corno, 311–29. Campo Grande: UFMS.

263

Pamela Faber and Silvia Montero-Martínez Freixa, Judit, Sabela Fernández-Silva, and María Teresa Cabré. 2008. La multiplicité des chemins dénominatifs. Meta: Translators’ Journal 53 (4): 731–47. Fuertes-Olivera, Pedro A., and Sven Tarp. 2014. Theory and Practice of Specialised Online Dictionaries: Lexicography versus Terminography. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter. García-Aragón, Alejandro, Miriam Buendía-Castro, and Clara Inés López-Rodríguez. 2014. “Evaluación de una base de conocimiento terminológica sobre el medio ambiente en el aula de la traducción especializada.” In TIC, trabajo colaborativo e interacción en Terminología y Traducción, edited by Chelo Vargas-Sierra, 447–87. Granada: Comares. Humbley, John, and Joaquin García-Palacios. 2012. “Neology and Terminological Dependency.” Terminology 18 (1): 59–85. Kageura, Kyo, and Bin Umino. 1996. “Methods of Automatic Term Recognition.” Terminology 3: 259–89. León-Araúz, Pilar. 2009. “Representación multidimensional del conocimiento especializado: el uso de marcos desde la macroestructura hasta la microestructura.” PhD diss., University of Granada. ———. 2015. “Term Variation in the Psychiatric Domain. Transparency and Multidimensionality.” In Word Formation and Transparency in Medical English, edited by Pius ten Hacken and Renata Panocová, 33–54. Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars. León-Araúz, Pilar, and Pamela Faber. 2014.  “Context and Terminology in the Multilingual Semantic Web.” In Towards the Multilingual Semantic Web, edited by Paul Buitelaar and Philipp Cimiano, 31–47. Berlin: Springer. León-Aráuz, Pilar, Pamela Faber, and Silvia Montero-Martínez. 2012. “Specialized Language Semantics.” In A Cognitive Linguistics View of Terminology and Specialized Language, edited by Pamela Faber, 95–175. Berlin: De Gruyter. León-Aráuz, Pilar, Arianne Reimerink, and Pamela Faber. 2009.  “Knowledge Extraction on Multidimensional Concepts: Corpus Pattern Analysis (CPA) and Concordances.” In 8ème Conférence Internationale Terminologie et Intelligence Artificielle. Toulouse. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-578/paper24.pdf. León-Aráuz, Pilar, and Antonio San Martín. 2012. “Multidimensional Categorization in Terminological Definitions.” In Proceedings of the 15th EURALEX International Congress, edited by Ruth V. Fjeld and Julie M. Torjusen, 578–84. Oslo: EURALEX. López-Rodríguez, Clara Inés. 2009. “Extracción y representación de conocimiento a partir de corpus.” In Terminología y sociedad del conocimiento, edited by Esperanza Valero and Amparo Alcina, 341–74. Bern: Peter Lang. López-Rodríguez, Clara Inés, Miriam Buendía-Castro, and Alejandro García-Aragón. 2012. “User Needs to the Test: Evaluating a Terminological Knowledge Base on the Environment by Trainee Translators.” Jostrans. The Journal of Specialized Translation 18: 57–76. López-Rodríguez, Clara Inés, Juan Antonio Prieto-Velasco, and Maribel Tercedor-Sánchez. 2013. “Multimodal Representation of Specialized Knowledge in Ontology-based Terminological Databases. The Case of EcoLexicon.” The Journal of Specialized Translation 20: 49–67. Lorente, Mercé. 2000. “Tipología verbal y textos especializados.” In Cuestiones conceptuales y metodológicas de la lingüística, edited by Miguel González and Montserrat Souto, 143–53. Santiago de Compostela: University of Santiago de Compostela. ———. 2002. “Verbos y discurso especializado.” Estudios de Lingüística Española 16. http://elies.rediris.es/elies16/Lorente.html. ———. 2007. “Les unitats verbals dels textos especialitzats. Redefinició d’una proposta de classificació.” In Estudis de lingüístics i de lingüística aplicada en honor de Mª Teresa Cabré Castellví, vol. 2, edited by Mercé Lorente, Rosa Estopà, Judit Freixa, Jaume Martí, and Carles Tebé, 365–80. Barcelona: IULA. Lušicky, Vesna, and Tanja Wissik. 2015. Procedural Manual on Terminology. Translation-Oriented Terminology Work. cordis.europa.eu/docs/projects/cnect/7/270917/080/deliverables/001D33Guidelinesf orcollaborativelegaladministrativeterminologywork.pdf. Monterde-Rey, Ana María. 2002. Ejercicios de introducción a la terminology para traductores e intérpretes. Las Palmas: University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. Montero-Martínez, Silvia, and Miriam Buendía-Castro. 2017. “Clasificación semántica de colocaciones verbales para la adquisición y codificación de conocimiento experto: el caso de los riesgos naturales.” Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada (RESLA) 30 (1): 240–72. Montero-Martínez, Silvia, and Pamela Faber. 2009. “Terminological Competence in Translation.” Terminology 15 (1): 88–104.

264

Terminology

Montero-Martínez, Silvia, Pedro Fuertes-Olivera, and Mercedes García de Quesada. 2001. “The Translator as ‘Language Planner’: Syntactic calquing in an English-Spanish Translation of Chemical Engineering.” Meta 46 (4): 687–98. Muráth, Judith. 2010. “Translation-Oriented Terminology Work in Hungary.” In Terminology in Everyday Life, edited by Marcel Thelen and Frieda Steurs, 47–59. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Newmark, Peter. 1988. A Textbook of Translation. New York: Prentice-Hall. PACTE. 2014. “First Results of PACTE Group’s Experimental Research on Translation Competence Acquisition. The Acquisition of Declarative Knowledge of Translation.” MonTI. Monografías de traducción e interpretación 1: 85–115. ———. 2015. “Results of PACTE’s Experimental Research on the Acquisition of Translation Competence. The Acquisition of Declarative and Procedural Knowledge in Translation. The Dynamic Translation Index.” Translation Spaces 4 (1): 29–53. Pastor, Veronica, and Amparo Alcina. 2010. “Search Techniques in Electronic Dictionaries. A Classification for Translators.” International Journal of Lexicography 23 (3): 333–57. Prieto-Velasco, Juan Antonio. 2009. Traducción e imagen: la información visual en textos especializados. Granada: Tragacanto. Prieto-Velasco, Juan Antonio, and Pamela Faber. 2012.  “Graphical Information.” In A Cognitive Linguistics View of Terminology and Specialized Language, edited by Pamela Faber, 225–48. Berlin: De Gruyter. Prieto-Velasco, Juan Antonio, and Clara Inés López-Rodríguez. 2009. “Managing Graphic Information in Terminological Knowledge Bases.” Terminology 15 (2): 179–213. Prieto-Velasco, Juan Antonio, and Maribel Tercedor-Sánchez. 2014. “La naturaleza situada de los conceptos médicos: por una representación multimodal del dolor.” In TIC, trabajo colaborativo e interacción en Terminología y Traducción, edited by Chelo Vargas-Sierra, 575–90. Granada: Comares. Pustejovksy, James. 1995. The Generative Lexicon. Cambridge: MIT Press. Reimerink, Arianne, Mercedes García de Quesada, and Silvia Montero-Martínez. 2012.  “Contextual Selection for Term Entries.” In A Cognitive Linguistics View of Terminology and Specialized Language, edited by Pamela Faber, 208–23. Berlin: De Gruyter. Reimerink, Arianne, Pilar León-Araúz, and Pamela Faber. 2016. “Image Selection and Annotation for an Environmental Knowledge Base.” Language Resources and Evaluation, 1 − 32. doi:10.1007/ s10579-016-9345-8. Rodríguez-Camacho, Emma. 2002. “La Terminología en la formación de un traductor especializado.” In Panorama Actual de la Terminología, edited by Gloria Guerrero and Manuel Fernando Pérez, 307–26. Granada: Comares. Rogers, Margaret. 2004. “Multidimensionality in Concept Systems. A Bilingual Textual Perspective.” Terminology 10 (2): 215–40. Sager, Juan. 1997. “Term Formation.” In Handbook of Terminology Management, edited by S. E. Wright and G. Budin, 25–41. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. San Martín, Antonio. 2014. “KWIC Corpora as a Source of Specialized Definitional Information. A Pilot Study.” Actes Du CEC-TAL’2013, edited by Wajdi Zaghouani. www.qatar.cmu.edu/~wajdiz/cec-tal/ san-martin_CECTAL.pdf. ———. 2016. “La representación de la variación contextual mediante definiciones terminológicas flexibles.” PhD diss., University of Granada. San Martín, Antonio, and Pilar León-Araúz. 2013. “Flexible Terminological Definitions and Conceptual Frames.” In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Definitions in Ontologies (DO 2013), edited by Selja Seppälä and Alan Ruttenberg. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1061/. Sánchez-Cárdenas, Beatriz, and Miriam Buendía-Castro. 2012. “Inclusion of Verbal Syntagmatic Patterns in Specialized Dictionaries: The Case of EcoLexicon.” In Proceedings of the 15th EURALEX International Congress, edited by Ruth V. Fjeld and Julie M. Torjusen, 554–62. Oslo: EURALEX. Sánchez-Ibáñez, Miguel, and Joaquin García-Palacios. 2014. “Semantic Characterization of Terms as a Trace of Terminological Dependency.” Terminology 20 (2): 171–97. Sanz-Vicente, Lara. 2012. “Approaching Secondary Term Formation Through the Analysis of Multiword Units. An English-Spanish Contrastive Study.” Terminology 18 (1): 105–27. Tarp, Sven. 2008. Lexicography in the Borderland between Knowledge and Non-Knowledge. General Lexicographical Theory with Particular Focus on Learner’s Lexicography. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.

265

Pamela Faber and Silvia Montero-Martínez Tercedor-Sánchez, Maribel. 2011.  “The Cognitive Dynamics of Terminological Variation.”  Terminology 17 (2): 181–97. Tercedor-Sánchez, Maribel, and Clara Inés López-Rodríguez. 2008. “Integrating Corpus Data in Dynamic Knowledge Bases The Puertoterm Project.” Terminology 14 (2): 159–82. ———. 2012. “Access to Health in an Intercultural Setting: The Role of Corpora and Images in Grasping Term Variation.”  Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series – Themes in Translation Studies (11): 247–68. Tercedor-Sánchez, Maribel, Clara Inés López-Rodríguez, and Juan Antonio Prieto-Velasco. 2014. “También los pacientes hacen terminología: retos del proyecto VariMed.” Panace@: Revista de Medicina, Lenguaje y Traducción 25 (39): 95–103. Tercedor-Sánchez, Maribel, and Juan Antonio Prieto-Velasco. 2013. “Las barreras en la comunicación médico-paciente: el proyecto VARIMED.”  Translating Culture; Traduire la Culture; Traducir la Cultura: De barreras culturales en la traducción científica y técnica, edited by Ana Belén Martínez López, Isabel Jiménez Gutiérrez, and María Isabel Martínez Robledo, 593–606. Granada: Comares. Thélen, Marcel. 2015. “The Interaction Between Terminology and Translation or Where Terminology and Translation Meet.” Trans-kom 8 (2): 347–81. Vargas-Sierra, Chelo. 2011. “Translation-Oriented Terminology Management and ICTs: Present and Future.” In Interdisciplinarity and Languages: Current Issues in Research, Teaching, Professional Applications and ICT, edited by F. Suau Jiménez and B. Pennock, 45–64. Bern: Peter Lang. Velasquez, Gonzalo. 2002. “La traducción y la terminología en la comunicación bilingüe mediada.” Meta 47 (3): 444–59.

266

15 LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL TRANSLATION M. Rosario Martín Ruano1

Introduction and definitions It is no exaggeration to say that the categories of legal and institutional translation conjure up clearly defined images as ‘special types’ of translation (as also perceived by Harvey 2002; Mayoral 2002), seemingly subject to very precise expectations. These prevailing expectations include the frequently invoked values of “fidelity”, “accuracy”, or “neutrality”, which are often expressly required of practicing professionals by existing Codes of Ethics (see Lobato 2007, 159–69; Ortega and Lobato 2008, 551; Baixauli 2012, 196–200; Martín Ruano 2014), as well as literal translation as the norm to be followed “by default” (see Mayoral 1999a, 2002, 2003, 2004a). However, despite the powerful grip of these ideas and conceptualizations regarding legal and institutional translation on the general population, and even on translation users in legal and institutional settings, these labels in fact apply to an extremely wide range of heterogeneous translational practices with specific requirements and particular challenges in the vast array of national, international and supranational contexts within which translation operates, either at an intrasystemic or at an intersystemic level, serving a variety of different goals. Indeed, legal and institutional translated texts may be produced merely for informational purposes, may have legal effects which may or may not coincide with those initially attributed to the source text, and may even be granted authoritative status as original texts – a practice which paradoxically requires obscuring their translated nature. Research on legal translation has increasingly served to recognize and highlight the internal diversity of this activity (as highlighted by Argüeso 1997 in the Spanish context), as well as the intricate and multidimensional nature of the practices in a field which resists concrete definitions but which, over the last two decades, has gradually been established as the object of a distinct branch within Translation Studies. Furthermore, certain authors, including Prieto (2014a) in a much-quoted article, have claimed recognition for so-called Legal Translation or Legal Translation Studies as a discipline or interdiscipline in its own right. As emphasized by diverse scholars, including several authors from Spanish-speaking contexts, demarcating the boundaries of legal translation certainly proves to be an extremely difficult endeavour, as theoretical taxonomies do not necessarily reflect reality and may perhaps reveal themselves as an obstacle for adequate professional praxis (Mayoral 2004a). In this regard, legal translation has often been included in the category of specialized translation even though the degree 267

M. Rosario Martín Ruano

of specialization required varies from text to text; due to the interdisciplinary nature of law (Prieto 2009), it often overlaps with other types of translation (for instance, administrative, commercial, economic and financial – an interrelation frequently accounted for in the design of modules in translator training programmes in the Spanish-speaking context –, or even technical or medical, as made evident in the special issue of Panace@ edited by Borja and Gallego-Borghini (2012) and in the articles by Gallardo (2012) and Ortega Arjonilla (2002); legal translation can also combine with interpreting tasks, as it is often the case for sworn translators and court interpreters (Mayoral 2000a). Needless to say, despite the difficulties in defining this field, there have been efforts, often undertaken with didactic purposes, to identify the features that characterize the most representative textual manifestations of the legal field in different languages and to categorize the types of texts most commonly translated by legal translators. Paradigmatic examples in this regard include the already classical works written under the direction of Enrique Alcaraz on legal Spanish (Alcaraz and Hughes 2002a) and on British and American Legal English (Alcaraz 1994; Alcaraz, Campos and Giambruno-Day Miguélez 2001). The features of legal English are also studied by Borja (2002), and explained in helpful handbooks for judicial cooperation across the EU written with the participation of Spanish authors (Campos et al. 2012, 6–15; Campos et  al. 2013, 6–15). Gallegos Rosillo (1997) and Castellano Martínez (2011) study the features of legal French; Cobos (2009), Beltrán Gandullo (2002), and Varela et al. (1998) explore the characteristics of legalese in German, whereas Roser Nebot (2003) focuses on the differences between Spanish and Arabic legal language. In any event, and not surprisingly, even though these descriptions identify a series of distinctive lexical, syntactic, pragmatic and stylistic features as characteristic of legal texts, they also ascertain the diversity of legal language. Indeed, if it is globally and widely accepted that the raw material with which legal translators work includes not only the language of the Law, but also the language used in varied texts and communicative situations within the legal context (Cao 2014, 106), prominent scholars from Spanish-speaking contexts even include that language found in ordinary texts which may require official translation and which are used in the legal process (Mayoral 2003, 2004a; Vigier 2010, 57ff; Prieto 2014a, 264; Way 2016, 1013), or even the “fictional representation of the law commonly found in popular novels of the detective story or thriller type” (Alcaraz and Hughes 2002b, 101) as within its scope. Taking into account the fact that every language has geographical varieties that may surface in the (legal and non-legal) texts rendered by professional legal translators and, also taking into account that the legal language in them may be employed by users with differing degrees of expertise and varied purposes in terms of their outreach, the variety, complexity and heterogeneity of the textual manifestations which fall into the category of legal translation becomes apparent. This obviously problematizes existing expectations regarding legal translation, and calls into question the appropriateness of literalness as a panacea. To the contrary, it emphasizes versatility, as also argued by Mayoral (2004b), as a desired competence and an actual capacity of multifaceted professionals who need to be, to put it using the title of an enlightening article by Mary Snell-Hornby (1992), both “language specialists” and “all-round experts”. This overall picture of legal translation is also true of institutional translation, which in fact often deals with texts of a legal nature or which serve a legal purpose. Comparably rigid expectations, attuned to what Venuti terms an “ethic of sameness” (1998, 82), prevail in relation to this equally undefined and vague realm, which, nevertheless, has also been gradually receiving growing attention as a distinctive type of translation. The existence of separate entries devoted to “institutional translation” in encyclopaedias and handbooks on Translation Studies (Kang 2009; Koskinen 2011) clearly proves this degree of recognition. In any event, 268

Legal and institutional translation

and even though a legicentrist bias (Harvey 2002, 198) observably shapes the dominant translation model at work across global institutional settings, institutional translation covers a wide variety of thematic fields, text types, discourses and text-processing practices. The Routledge Encyclopaedia of Translation Studies includes those translations carried out inside and for specific organizations, as well as within institutionalized social systems in this category, even though it is highlighted that “translation itself is arguably an institution in its own right” and that, throughout their production process, any translation interacts in one way or another with institutions, thus becoming “institutional” (Kang 2009, 141, quoted in Martín Ruano 2010). Adding to the inexactness of the boundaries of the term “institutional translation”, the current trend in favour of the outsourcing of translation and interpreting services within institutions at a national and an international level cannot be forgotten. In relation to its diverse character, the Libro blanco de la traducción e interpretación institucional en España (RITAP 2011) also attests to the diversity of texts translated by professionals – although not frequently recognized as translators – working for varied services and bodies in the public sector, the most common of which are of a technical and specialized nature (RITAP 2011, 39), as well as the regular intersection of translation (from and into Spanish) with other activities: simultaneous, consecutive or liaison interpreting, mediation, and other ancillary tasks. This combination of duties is also frequently taken up by other bodies of translators officially acknowledged by public authorities in different countries in the Spanish-speaking world as producers of “institutional” or “official” translations (“traductores-intérpretes jurados” in Spain, “traductores públicos” in Argentina and Uruguay, “peritos traductores oficiales” in Mexico, “traductores públicos juramentados” in Peru, “intérpretes públicos” in Venezuela, etc.). However, this practice is rare in international organizations such as the United Nations or the European Union, where translation is recognized as a distinct professional category accorded higher status compared to that of (institutional) translators working in other contexts and where, nevertheless, translators with varied individual profiles (Vidal 2010) deal with very different types of subject matter and texts, frequently weaving interrelations with other professional roles – including that of terminologists, revisers or verbatim reporters (Prieto 2010), as well as that of legislative drafters (Prieto 2011b). In sum, legal and institutional translation appears as a vast, variegated field, and as a complex, many-sided phenomenon. Both the general trends and the context-bound specificities of local practices require and deserve to be examined from a variety of angles and research perspectives.

Historical perspective Translation-related activities linked to legal and institutional environments in Spanishspeaking contexts have been undertaken since this language developed in the form of a progressively normalized written standard as distinct from Latin. Through adopting historical and historiographical perspectives, a number of studies have shed light on the workings of legal and institutional translation and on the profile and role(s) played by translators and interpreters in legal and institutional settings in the past, where translation and interpreting duties were often intertwined, frequently involving additional negotiation and mediation tasks. To mention some relevant examples of historical approaches to legal and institutional translation, Santoyo (1997) documents translations of legal texts from Latin into Spanish during the Middle Ages; studies by the research group Alfaqueque have analyzed the institutionalized figures of alfaqueques – originally, “liberators of prisoners”, and generally of interpreters also undertaking mediation and translation tasks in the field of justice in the Kingdoms of Castile 269

M. Rosario Martín Ruano

and Granada from the thirteenth to the seventeenth centuries –, of Nahuatlatos and lenguas – interpreters also bestowed with official attesting powers in the Aztec region conquered by the Spaniards at the beginning of the sixteenth century – and of capitanes de amigos – ­interpreters negotiating with the local populations in the Araucanian region on behalf of Spain in the seventeenth century (Payás and Alonso 2009); Schmit (2004) refers to legal translation in her study on the role of translation and interpreting during the conquest and colonization of Mexico; Cáceres (2001) examines the Secretaría de Interpretación de Lenguas created by Charles V in 1527 as a pioneering institutional service in Europe for the provision of “official” or “sworn” translation; Peñarroja Fa (2000) and Cáceres and Pérez González (2003) track the history of sworn translators/interpreters in the Spanish context from the sixteenth century, whereas Giambruno-Day Miguélez (1997) and Mayoral (1999b, 2003) define and characterize official or sworn translation as practised in contemporary Spain, focusing on the changes affecting the profession in this country due to recent changes in the normative framework regarding the regulation of accreditation procedures (Mayoral 2000a). Focusing on Spanish and Arabic, Feria (2002) traces the history of Arabic legal texts into Spanish over the centuries, whereas Arias and Feria (2013) concentrate on state-sponsored translation and interpreting involving Arabic during the twentieth century. Other studies on this same language pair provide insights into the specificities of legal translation in particular socio-historical contexts by interviewing practitioners working in the Spanish protectorate of Morocco in the first half of the twentieth century (Arias, Feria, and Olmo 2003) or by describing the professional market of Spanish-Arabic sworn translation and court interpreting in a Southern Spanish city throughout the 1990s, a decade characterized by large-scale immigration from the Maghreb (Feria 2007), as demonstrated in a study providing data which problematizes conclusions put forward in general studies such as that published by ACT (2005). Research informed by historical and historiographical approaches not only contributes to a better understanding of legal translation in the past, but is also perceived as being enlightening regarding the profession’s future improvement (Giambruno-Day Miguélez 2008). A number of studies written in Spanish also adopt historical perspectives to track the evolution of scholarly reflection on legal translation – for instance, Borja (2003), Valderrey (2009) and de Sterck and Valderrey (2013). Although the history of legal and institutional translation as a practice is long, systematic scholarly research on these activities is relatively recent, only starting its consolidation in the last quarter of the twentieth century. At a global level, research on legal and institutional translation has witnessed significant progress in recent decades, replicating, albeit after a certain delay, those developments in research in the general field of Translation Studies. In an article which presents an overview of research trends in the field of legal translation and which critically analyzes the evolution of the field on an international level, Prieto (2014a) distinguishes three main stages in the contemporary scholarly reflection on legal translation: an initial period from the 1970s to the mid 1990s, which contributed to identifying the difficulties in legal translation and proposed techniques to overcome those problems aided by comparative approaches; a crucial, “catalytic” period in which functionalist perspectives and other recent translation theories paved the way for communicative approaches to legal translation; and an ongoing period which we have been experiencing since the mid-2000s, whereby we have witnessed an amplification of scope and a proliferation of interdisciplinary input into the discipline, which in turn brought about a consolidation of Legal Translation Studies (LTS) as well as a wider span of focus. The contributions to legal and institutional translation from and within the Spanish-speaking context have run parallel to this evolution, and have also decisively pushed and fostered it at an international level from the 1990s, with individual 270

Legal and institutional translation

scholars and research groups authoring reference contributions which have acted as essential drivers in the worldwide evolution of this growingly relevant branch of Translation Studies. This boost in research runs concurrently with the years following Spain’s accession to the European Union and the proliferation of specific translator training programmes at higher education institutions in this country. In broad terms, scholarly publications on legal and institutional translation have witnessed an evolution from prescriptive and/or didactic approaches oriented towards the development of practical competence in this specialist area to functional-descriptive approaches arguing for translation models attuned to a communicative paradigm, and even to critical perspectives informed by sociological and post-structuralist theories, placing growing emphasis on issues related to status, power, ideology or identities. The following non-exhaustive list of landmark references makes it possible to perceive this qualitative shift in academic texts and research models in the Spanish-speaking context: the book El inglés jurídico by Enrique Alcaraz (1994), which has been repeatedly reprinted since its publication and which stands out as an indisputable reference work in the field, explains the organization of the English legal system, providing idiomatic Spanish renderings for terms, concepts and fragments included as representative samples of prototypical textual manifestations; the sequel El inglés jurídico norteamericano (Alcaraz, Campos, and Giambruno-Day Miguélez 2001) familiarizes the reader with the U.S. legal and judicial system and shows the linguistic features of texts related to specific legal fields, suggesting natural translation solutions into Spanish; El español jurídico, by Alcaraz and Hughes (2002a), sets out the main features of legalese in Spanish and addresses common problems and challenges in its translation into other European languages, already advocating for the communicative, fluent and explanatory translation praxis as argued for in Legal Translation Explained (Alcaraz and Hughes 2002b). A  number of pioneering books also published during this period aim at providing methodological guidelines and suggest solutions for the translation of a range of legal texts. These include the handbook by Álvarez Calleja (1995); the widely distributed introductory books to legal and sworn translation edited by San Ginés Aguilar and Ortega Arjonilla (1996a, 1996b), which decisively contributed to mapping a field which had thus far been grossly under-researched; Borja Albi’s materials (1999) and the subsequent comprehensive textbook on legal translation by the same author (Borja 2007a); the works by Elena (2001), and Medina (2005) focusing on the language pair German/Spanish, as well as introductory sections on legal translation in other publications such as those written by Borja and Hurtado (1999), by Campos Pardillos (1999), and that on the translation of legal and administrative texts included in the handbook by Zaro and Truman (1998). The goal of producing idiomatic legal translations seen in Alcaraz’s works inspired other studies, which continued to enlarge the field both theoretically and methodologically by extrapolating ever more diversified approaches to legal translation. For instance, in an already classical book which establishes a taxonomy of legal genres in English and Spanish, Borja Albi (2002) draws on the concept of ‘genre’ as a central pillar for achieving acceptability in legal translations. In line with the thesis advanced by Sarcevic ([1997] 2002) in her groundbreaking work, authors publishing research in Spanish including Franzoni (1996), Prieto (2002), Strandvik (2002), Campos Pardillos (2003) and, notably, Mayoral in his extensive theoretical production on legal and official translation (Mayoral 1999a, 1999b, 2000b, 2003) adopt a functionalist approach to call into question the prevailing literalist model and the traditionally sacrosanct concept of “fidelity” in this field. Studies inspired by descriptive approaches, either focusing on the textual or on the socio-professional level, also serve a similar purpose. For instance, Valderrey departs from a descriptive perspective with the aim of drawing relevant 271

M. Rosario Martín Ruano

conclusions for a systematic approach to the teaching of legal translation, in which this activity is conceived as a communicative act which needs to be attuned to the needs and norms of the context (be it international, supranational, national or regional), to the function to be accomplished by the translated text, and to the specificities of the translation brief (Valderrey 2002, 3). Collections like the ones edited by Feria (1999), Cruces and Luna (2004), Monzó and Borja (2005), Ortega Arjonilla (2008), Baigorri and Campbell (2009), Alonso, Baigorri, and Campbell (2010, 2011, 2012, 2013), and Borja Albi and Prieto Ramos (2013) are very helpful for the discovery of the variety of existing norms and expectations, insofar as they offer an overview of the extremely diverse scenarios where legal and institutional translators operate at regional, national and international levels, as well as of the features, factors and specificities governing translation and interpreting activities in different contexts, including the private sector, public institutions and international organizations. Among these factors, certain studies initiated at a national or international level (for instance, the Libro blanco de la traducción e interpretación institucional en España published with the support of the Spanish Ministry of Foreign Affairs [RITAP 2011], or the study on The Status of the Translation Profession in the European Union, sponsored by the European Commission [2012]), highlight the low status of translation and interpreting and their under-recognition as a profession, as well as additional worrying signs of market disorder which, in the long run, may foster underprofessionalism or the de-professionalization of the sector, especially in less common language pairs, as has been recurrently underlined by research on public service translation and interpreting (Arróniz et al. 2004; Valero 2006; Valero 2011; Del Pozo 2013). From an acute awareness of this precarious professional reality, research informed by sociological perspectives has advocated greater social recognition for legal and institutional translators and interpreters, as well as an enhanced awareness on the part of practitioners of their responsibility as social agents (Way 2003, 2005; Monzó 2002, 2005a), for instance vis-à-vis language preservation or language change in contexts where English as a lingua franca is influencing language use of minor languages (Muñoz and Valdivieso 2004). Recent approaches to legal translation which have been termed as “critical” or “post-structuralist” and which have been explicitly linked to Spanish authors (cfr. Monzó 2015a, 194; Engberg 2016, 54) have also underlined the agency of legal and institutional translators. For instance, they have highlighted that prevailing habiti (which can be challenged and changed) exert an influence on the translators’ (re)presentations of texts and individuals (Monzó 2002; Vidal 2005). These approaches emphasize the ideological implications of their performance, insofar as translators are constantly forced to make decisions which are never innocent nor neutral (Feria and Escámez 1997; Martín Ruano 2009); they also underline the fact that legal and institutional translators negotiate the identity of other cultures and of other agents, and, at the same time, that they project a particular identity of their own culture, as well as their own professional identity (Martín Ruano 2012, 2015a). Empirical proof of this fact can be found in Álvarez Nieves’ (2013) study on the negotiation of identity and political status in the translated versions of laws in Puerto Rico over the first half of the twentieth century, and in Calzada’s (2003) article on the identitarian implications of transitivity shifts in the translation of European Parliament speeches. All of these different, yet complementary insights into legal and institutional translation reflect the evolution in prevailing societal ideas regarding legal and institutional translation and interpreting. At the same time, they have contributed to their transformation, triggering new conceptualizations of legal and institutional translation and interpreting which, in turn, have fostered changes in professional practices in the Spanish-speaking world. In this regard, 272

Legal and institutional translation

much progress has been made from the Spanish sworn translations of legal documents which, on the basis of their experience, Pym (1992, 212) and Nord (1997, 113) defined as “literalist to the point of illegibility”. In the twenty-first century, translation in legal and institutional contexts is often conceived, taught and practiced as cross-cultural mediation (Pérez González 2005, 136; Toda 2010; LePoder 2010, 181). This includes searching for idiomatic renderings and explanatory techniques in translated texts in an attempt to bridge conceptual and cultural gaps and to preserve the symbolic status of Spanish within networks of power, as well as of political relations between languages.

Research issues and methods Legal and institutional translation is a vast and diverse field, weaving interrelations between various thematic areas and disciplines, and presenting different features in different cultural, social and institutional settings. Thus, it comes as no surprise that scholars from, or working on, Spanish-speaking contexts have adopted a wide range of research methodologies with a view to shedding light on the different aspects and factors influencing the workings of this field. In many cases, they are driven by the willingness to apply research findings to the teaching of future institutional and legal translators and interpreters. The focus of existing research ranges from the ‘microscopic’ to the ‘telescopic’, and beyond. Some studies concentrate on the lower units of the micro-level in particular language pairs in order to facilitate the search for equivalents. By way of illustration, Vázquez y del Árbol (2007) focuses on the translation problems posed by verbal tenses; Álvarez Álvarez (2008) analyzes cohesive items in English and Spanish judgements; Vázquez y del Árbol (2006) and Macías Otón (2013) provide guidelines for the translation of doublets and triplets which characterize legal English and legal French, respectively; Gómez González-Jover (2010) addresses the translation problems posed by specialized collocations with the aid of communicative approaches to terminology. The translation of the specialized terminology of particular areas of Law is the concern of studies focusing, for instance, on Maritime Law in English and Spanish (Bocanegra 1993), on Criminal Law in English and Spanish (Cruz 1999), or on civil liability in Spanish and French (Thiry 2005). Holl (2012) and Orozco (2014) propose a taxonomy of techniques for dealing with culture-bound items and specialized terminology. Other investigations deal with larger and more complex translation units. Gallegos Rosillo (2007a), for example, reflects on the difficulties in rendering fixed expressions of legal French into Spanish. Andrades Moreno (2014) uses a bilingual comparable corpus as a tool to be used in the search for possible solutions for specialized phraseological units recurrently appearing in agreements in Civil Law systems. Vergara (2013) analyzes a corpus of opinions from the US Supreme Court and their translations into Spanish in order to analyze how translators deal with metaphors in legal texts. Other authors including Corpas (2002, 2003), Monzó (2011) and López Arroyo (2011) have also argued for taking advantage of the benefits of compiling corpora for legal translation, not merely for descriptive purposes (as is the case of Andújar 2011’s study on the treatment of paratextual elements in sworn translation, or of Balteiro and Campos’s 2010 analysis of the use of Latinisms in opinions from the United States Supreme Court and the Spanish Constitutional Court) or vis-à-vis the search of idiomatic renderings, but also as a means in automated processes of multilingual text generation. Projects such as Legebidun (Abaitua et al. 1997), aimed at establishing a methodology for the reusability of bilingual legal and administrative texts produced by authorities in the Basque Country, assume the usefulness of corpus exploitation in the legal field. The goal of other projects with clear application to translation such as the ECPC is to discover differences in the “textual fit” of 273

M. Rosario Martín Ruano

representative genres at different institutions, analyzing comparable texts produced in both national and international settings (Calzada et al. 2006). Reliance on relevant representative corpora is a common characteristic of studies adopting contrastive approaches at a textual level. Worthy of special mention in this regard is research designed around the concept of genre, such as that carried out by the members of the group GITRAD (Borja 2007b, 2013), specifically focusing on legal translation and embedded in the larger project GENTT (Textual Genres for Translation). By investigating the formal aspects of particular legal genres in different cultures, their research helps to better identify translation problems and to search for translation solutions from a communicative approach (Borja 2002) which is also informed by sociological perspectives (Monzó 2005b). Many authors have stressed the usefulness of genre-based approaches for identifying recurrent patterns which may be taken into account in order to make informed decisions during the translation process (Acuyo Verdejo 2004; Gallardo 2008; Prieto 2009; Vigier 2016), potentially in the direction of searching for idiomaticity, as argued for by certain authors adopting functional perspectives (Mayoral 2008; Ortega Herráez and Calvo Encinas 2009) or wary of the alienating effects of the increasing technologization of the profession (Bestué and Orozco 2011). Not surprisingly, research has frequently praised and/or explored the usefulness of genre-based approaches for the teaching of institutional and legal translation (Monzó 2002, 2003; Román Mínguez 2008; Delgado and García 2011). Elena García’s (2001) book on the (sworn) translation of official documents from German to Spanish is an illustrative example of the methodological productivity of a genre-based approach for the acquisition of professional competence. Certain authors have also argued for a combination of a contrastive approach at a textual level with a comparative perspective at a conceptual level in order to properly address legal texts which establish intertextual relations with other documents in a particular legal context (Ferrán Larraz 2005), as well as to deal with legal constructs and/or culture-specific items (Arntz 2000/2001; Way 2002; Terral 2003; Ferrán Larraz 2004; Bestué 2008, 2016a; Holl 2012; Vázquez y del Árbol 2014; Holl and Elena 2015). Indeed, the methods of Comparative Law have been praised as a tool for producing relevant renderings (Ferrán Larraz 2009) which depart from a functional perspective (Soriano Barabino 2002) and from an understanding of translation as intercultural transfer (Soriano Barabino 2016a). This understanding, which overcomes the limitations of the dominant ‘scientific bias’ in legal and institutional translation (criticized by Ortega Arjonilla 2009) and which underlies calls for more elaborate resources (such as terminological entries specifically designed to address the needs of legal translators, as advocated for by Prieto and Orozco 2015), inspires works with a clear didactic purpose explaining the organization of the legal system in different countries, such as the aforementioned publications by Alcaraz (1994), Alcaraz, Campos, and Giambruno-Day Miguélez (2001), and Peñaranda’s (2015) comparative study on the criminal process across a number of cultures. In this regard, in line with the views of a canonical author like Gémar (2005), published in Spanish, several authors have stressed the cultural specificity of Law and the cultural dimension of legal translation (Martín Ruano 2005; Gallegos Rosillo 2007b; Soriano Barabino 2016b). Research has shown that cultural specificity may emerge within the confines of a particular language, which may convey and/or encompass different legal cultures (Holl 2007), and may even arise in the texts and discourses of international organizations, for instance those related to allegedly universal human rights (Campos 2011; Feria 2013). The need to bridge gaps in order to make cultural difference intelligible in institutional and legal translation has become even more evident in our increasingly globalized and multicultural societies, as advocated by Mayoral (2000c, 2003, 17–26), Alkhalifa (2000) and El-Madkouri (2005) in the light of their experience in translating legal documents from Pakistan and Arabic-speaking 274

Legal and institutional translation

countries into Spanish. This has been strongly demanded in the field of public service interpreting and translation (Valero 2006, 2008), which often overlaps with legal and institutional translation, where the need to contribute to the battle against social exclusion has also been underlined (González and de las Heras 2010). In any event, the conflicts and dilemmas arising from the obvious mismatch between the perceived need for intercultural mediation in certain contexts and the rigidity of existing norms and prevailing expectations around legal translation and interpreting have also been underscored by certain scholars (Valero and Vitalaru 2014; Gómez Moreno 2014; Martín Ruano 2014; Ortega and Iliescu 2015). Based on first-hand experience in the field and aided by post-foundational epistemologies, recent contributions argue for a larger understanding of the role played and to be played by legal translators and interpreters vis-à-vis cultural difference in sensitive contexts and in the heterogeneous social landscapes of our asymmetrically global societies, where the ethical dimensions of legal and institutional translation need to be highlighted (Handi 2012; Vidal 2013; Martín Ruano 2017). The ethical dimensions of legal and institutional translation are also relevant in relation to Catalan, Galician and Basque. Studies including Duarte (1989), Monzó (2006), Sever (2007) and Baqué (2010) offer an overview of legal and institutional translation in the Catalan-speaking context; García (2007, 2010), Rodríguez and Miramontes (2004) and Rei-Doval (2004) focus on Galician; and Berasategui (1989) and Biguri (2007) analyze legal and institutional translation in the Basque Country. As argued for by Domènech (2012), the goals and challenges of translation from Spanish to Catalan go beyond intercomprehension. For Jiménez and Monzó (2017), in relation to minority or ‘minoritized’ languages, translation might be a tool for safeguarding ethnolinguistic democracy. All of these arguments support the view, expressed in research and informed by sociological theories, that legal and institutional translation is to be understood as social action, as argued by Way (2005) in a study drawing on sociological perspectives and concentrating on the sworn translation of academic transcripts. Legal and institutional translation appear as socially situated practices influenced by dominant representations of translation in the profession. In this regard, whereas certain studies have focused on the translation of ideology in legal and institutional settings (Calzada 2003, 2007; Castellano 2015), recent research has also focused on the (linguistic and professional) ‘ideology’ or ‘ideologies’ governing translation and interpreting practices in legal and institutional settings (Yoshida 2012; Martín Ruano 2014; Monzó 2015b), which may have extremely far-reaching effects in certain contexts, as proved by Berk-Seligson ([1990] 2002) in her study of the performance of Spanish/English court interpreters in US courts, and by Martin and Taibi (2010) in their analysis of legal translations made in the politicized context of the War on Terror. For this reason, recent research has examined the self-concept, backgrounds and training of practising legal and institutional translators (Monzó 2002; Way 2004; Vigier 2009) in order to understand their performance as a result of an acquired habitus which may, nevertheless, be changed through a different socialization process which empowers them as expert social agents and raises awareness about their social responsibility (Monzó 2005a; Way 2016). This becomes even more important in the light of research on legal and institutional translation which, from post-structuralist perspectives, acknowledges the representational nature of language (Vidal 2005) and the unsustainability of traditionally sacrosanct maxims in legal translation such as fidelity and neutrality (Vidal and Martín Ruano 2003; Vidal 2013; Martín Ruano 2009, 2014, 2015b). The development in research oriented towards the teaching of legal and institutional translation demonstrates this shift in the perception of these activities, as well as the progressive widening of focus in scholarly publications on the field. The recurrent debate on the best profile for translating legal texts seen in early stages, which often established a sharp dichotomy between 275

M. Rosario Martín Ruano

(legal) experts and translators, gave way to studies aimed at establishing methodologies for the development of the multiple competences required for satisfactory professional practice. In this regard, the techniques of Comparative Law (Bestué 2008, 2016a; Holl 2012) and information mining strategies (Monzó 2005c; Orozco and Sánchez Gijón 2011) have been considered to be essential for (trainee) translators to acquire and update an adequate thematic competence (Mayoral 2005; Valderrey 2003, 2004, 2012). Some authors have explained proven models constructed on the grounds of research from fields as varied as cognitive linguistics and the genre-based approaches already mentioned (Elena 2001) for an appropriate sequencing of activities designed for the acquisition of specific skills at particular stages of the training process. In any event, in recent research contributions which extrapolate complex models like the one designed by the PACTE group to the legal and institutional field, competence in legal and institutional translation is conceived as the association of various sub-competences (communicative and textual competence, thematic and cultural competence, instrumental competence, interpersonal and professional management competence) coordinated by a key strategic or methodological competence (Prieto 2011a). This conceptualization clearly integrates aspects ranging from the linguistic, conceptual and textual microlevels to other higher-order factors at the macrolevel (including “market conditions, associations and deontology issues”) which influence institutional and legal translation as socially situated practices. Accordingly, the need to take into account “the legal, contextual, macrotextual and microtextual parameters of decision-making” in order to search for or to assess the adequacy, appropriateness or suitability of legal translation has also been highlighted (Prieto 2015, 17). To this end, recent scholarly research pays attention to theoretical, methodological and professional issues simultaneously (see, for instance, the chapter by Ortega Arjonilla 2005 on legal, court, and sworn translation, or Ortega Herráez’s 2010 study on the practice of court interpreting in Spain). Given that the debate on the limits and possibilities of equivalence in legal and institutional translation is currently considered to be inextricably intertwined with the specific idiosyncrasies of particular contexts, the importance of descriptive contributions shedding light on the workings of legal and institutional translation in diverse settings cannot be overemphasized. On occasion, these contributions have taken the form of comprehensive overviews of the state of play of translation and interpreting in different institutions and situations (San Ginés and Ortega Arjonilla 1996a, 1996b; Feria 1999), frequently assembled as a result of conferences gathering together scholars and practitioners with expertise in various translation scenarios (such as the previously mentioned collections edited by San Ginés Aguilar and Ortega Arjonilla 1996; Cruces and Luna 2004; Monzó and Borja 2005; Ortega Arjonilla 2008; Baigorri and Campbell 2009; Alonso, Baigorri, and Campbell 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, Borja Albi and Prieto Ramos 2013). The contributions by practitioners in legal and institutional settings, published in journals like puntoycoma or in proceedings of conferences organized with the support of institutions including the European Commission (Hernúñez and González 2002, 2004, 2008, 2010; Hernúñez 2014) also provide ethnographic evidence revealing actual translation practices and prevailing norms across legal and institutional settings. Scholarly networks and professional associations such as the Comunica network (http://red-comunica.blogspot.com.es/), which has established a Public Service Translation and Interpreting Observatory, or the Spanish Professional Association of Court and Sworn Translators and Interpreters (APTIJ; www.aptij.es/), associated to the European Legal Interpreters and Translators Association EULITA (www. eulita.eu), also play a crucial role in monitoring the progress and setbacks in the evolution of legal and institutional translation, as well as in identifying the challenges ahead. In this regard, research has contributed to the discovery of legal and institutional translation not merely as a heterogeneous field with variegated practices in diverse settings, but also as 276

Legal and institutional translation

a “multifaceted and dynamically changing profession” (Borja and Prieto 2013, back cover). As a discipline “concerned with all aspects of translation of legal texts, including processes, products and agents” (Prieto 2014a, 261), legal translation studies is by no means limited to the description of existing practices and the perpetuation of prevailing professional practices, and thus also of their limitations. In an enlightening article on how to produce legal translation, Mayoral (2002, 11) argues that the mission of translation scholars is not to fossilize the norm, but to make it move forward in pursuit of a greater communicative efficiency. The field of legal and institutional translation faces unprecedented challenges in the rapidly changing landscapes of our current hybrid, asymmetrically globalized societies.

Future directions As complex and diverse as it is, the field of legal and institutional translation urgently requires interdisciplinary research models capable of crossing boundaries across research approaches and disciplines in order to account for the many factors impinging on this social practice, as also recently argued for by Biel and Engberg (2013) and Biel et al. (2019). Research needs to shed light on the workings of legal translation in different situations; it may also attempt to respond to the challenges faced by legal and institutional translation today, which are largely derived from a number of paradoxes. In this regard, even though legal translation is now considered to be an interdiscipline in its own right (Prieto Ramos 2014), there is still a long way to go in achieving recognition of the activities related to it, which are still highly invisible and often entrusted to non-professional translators, especially in the case of less common language pairs. Research also needs to reflect on how to reconcile the conflicting demands linked to the ideal of sameness and the recognition of diversity in Law, translation and legal translation. In this regard, the ‘Target Text reorientation’ perceived and called for in some studies (Biel 2010, 6) and an increased concern for the respect of cultural differences and identities in recent research in legal translation (Biel 2014, 13; Martín Ruano 2017) coexists and collides with ongoing processes towards standardization in international organizations and with a revival of literalism in professional settings fuelled by an increased automation of the profession (Bestué 2016), the implications of which need to be reassessed. In a similar vein, research certainly needs to contribute towards meeting the pedagogical challenges of training highly specialized professionals, even though, as it has been also highlighted (Monzó 2015a), today’s global markets require flexible professionals able to work in a broad spectrum of national, international and transnational translation situations. Similarly, whereas scholarly works have often echoed calls for the better regulation of an under-regulated profession (European Commission 2009, 2012; Blasco and del Pozo 2015) with instruments including professional registers and codes of ethics, critical perspectives have also called into question the validity of their decontextualized ethical requirements (Martín Ruano 2014, 2015a), especially in conflictual situations (Martin and Taibi 2010; Gómez Moreno 2014) where the intervenient role of legal and institutional translators becomes apparent. In the era of asymmetry, legal and institutional translation needs to be revisited as a highly politicized activity with serious ideological and ethical implications (Vidal 2013).

Recommended reading San Ginés Aguilar, Pedro, and Emilio Ortega Arjonilla. 1996. Introducción a la traducción jurídica y jurada. Granada: Comares.

277

M. Rosario Martín Ruano This collection was a pioneer in the provision of methodological guidelines for a diversity of representative translation briefs in the field of legal and institutional translation in the Spanish-speaking context. Alcaraz Varó, Enrique, and Brian Hughes. 2002. Legal Translation Explained. Manchester: St Jerome. In this work, internationally recognized as a benchmark, Alcaraz Varó and Hughes argue for fluent legal translations bridging linguistic, conceptual and cultural gaps. Borja Albi, Anabel. 2002. El texto jurídico inglés y su traducción al español. Barcelona: Ariel. Borja’s work is an undisputable reference book, which has inspired genre-based research approaches. Mayoral Asensio, Roberto. 2003. Translating Official Documents. Manchester: St Jerome. Mayoral describes the norms and identifies the challenges of translating documents for public authorities. Vidal Claramonte, Mª del Carmen África. 2005. “Re-presenting the ‘Real’: Pierre Bourdieu and Legal Translation.” The Translator 11 (2): 259–75. Vidal’s contributions incorporate post-structuralist and deconstructivist perspectives in order to highlight issues of power that are very relevant in legal translation. RITAP. 2011. Libro blanco de la traducción e interpretación institucional en España. Madrid: Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores y Cooperación. This study mapped the situation of institutional translation in Spain, highlighting the scarce professional recognition that translation-related activities receive from institutions.

Note 1 This contribution is a result of a research project entitled VIOSIMTRAD (“Symbolic Violence and Translation: Challenges in the Representation of Fragmented Identities within the Global Society”, FFI2015–66516- P; MINECO/FEDER, UE).

References Abaitua Odriozola, Joseba K. et al. 1997. “Tratamiento de textos administrativos bilingües: El proyecto LEGEBIDUN.” Philologia Hispalensis 11 (2): 115–30. Acuyo Verdejo, M. del Carmen. 2004. “Textual Knowledge in Legal Translation.” Hermes 32: 167–84. Alcaraz Varó, Enrique. 1994. El inglés jurídico. Barcelona: Ariel. Alcaraz Varó, Enrique, Miguel Ángel Campos Pardillos, and Cynthia Giambruno-Day Miguélez. 2001. El inglés jurídico norteamericano. Barcelona: Ariel. Alcaraz Varó, Enrique, and Brian Hughes. 2002a. El español jurídico. Barcelona: Ariel. ———. 2002b. Legal Translation Explained. Manchester: St Jerome. Alkhalifa, Waleed Saleh. 2000. “El tortuoso camino de la traducción: la traducción jurídica del árabe.” In Traducción, emigración y culturas, edited by Miguel Hernando de Larramendi Martínez and Juan Pablo Arias Torres, 231–40. Cuenca: Universidad de Castilla La Mancha. Alonso Araguás, Icíar, Jesús Baigorri Jalón, and Helen Campbell, eds. 2010. Translating justice/Traducir la justicia. Granada: Comares. ———. 2011. Lenguaje, Derecho y Traducción/Language, Law and Translation. Granada: Comares. ———. 2012. Ensayos Sobre Traduccion Juridica e Institucional/Essays on Legal and Institutional Translation. Granada: Comares. ———. 2013. Translating the Law. Theoretical and Methodological Issues/ Traducir el Derecho. Cuestiones teóricas y metodológicas. Granada: Comares. Álvarez Álvarez, Susana. 2008. “Elementos cohesivos en el lenguaje jurídico: análisis contrastivo de las sentencias en lengua inglesa y española.” In Actas del III Congreso Internacional de la AIETI, edited by Luis Pegenaute et al., 407–18. Barcelona: PPU. Álvarez Calleja, M. Antonia. 1995. Traducción jurídica inglés-español. Madrid: UNED. Álvarez Nieves, Alejandro. 2013. “La nación manipulada: desfases traductológicos de los documentos jurídicos fundacionales de Puerto Rico.” PhD diss., Universidad de Salamanca, Salamanca. www.tdx. cat/handle/10803/131245.

278

Legal and institutional translation Andrades Moreno, Arsenio. 2014. “Estudio contrastivo de unidades fraseológicas especializadas (UFE) en un corpus comparable bilingüe de contratos de derecho civil en lengua inglesa y Española.” PhD diss., Universidad Complutense, Madrid. Andújar, Gemma. 2011. “Los elementos paratextuales en la traducción jurada de documentos académicos.” RAEL 10: 89–100. Argüeso, Antonio. 1997. “La traducción jurídica en España.” Senez 19: 77–80. Arias, Juan Pablo, and Manuel Feria. 2013. Los traductores de árabe del Estado español. Del Protectorado a nuestros días. Barcelona: Bellaterra. Arias, Juan Pablo, Manuel Feria, and Rafael Olmo. 2003. “La traducción en el protectorado español. Entrevista con Rafael Olmo Villafranca.” TRANS 7: 107–19. Arntz, Reiner. 2001 [2000]. “La traducción jurídica, una disciplina situada entre el Derecho Comparado y la Lingüística Contrastiva.” Revista de Lenguas para Fines Específicos 7 (8): 376–99. Arróniz, Pilar et  al. 2004. “Situación actual de la práctica de la traducción y de la interpretación  en la Administración de Justicia.” In La traducción en el ámbito institucional: autonómico, estatal y europeo, edited by Susana Cruces and Ana Luna, 85–126. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. Asociación de Centros Especializados en Traducción (ACT). 2005. Estudio de situación del mercado profesional de servicios profesionales de traducción. Madrid: ACT. Baigorri Jalón, Jesús, and Helen Campbell, eds. 2009. Reflexiones sobre la traducción jurídica/Reflections on Legal Translation. Granada: Comares. Baixauli, Lluís. 2012. “La interpretació als serveis publics des d’una perspective ética.” PhD diss., Universitat Jaume I, Castellón. repositori.uji.es/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10234/74752/lbaixauli.pdf. Balteiro, Isabel, and Miguel Ángel Campos Pardillos. 2010. “A Comparative Study of Latinisms in Court Opinions in the United States and Spain.” International Journal of Speech, Language & the Law 17 (1): 95–118. Baqué, Laia et al. 2010. Materials i diccionari per a la traducció juridicoadministrativa francès-català. Barcelona: Servei de Publications, UAB. Beltrán Gandullo, Milagros. 2002. “Problemas traductológicos del lenguaje especializado: El lenguaje jurídico alemán-español.” In Traducción e Interpretación en los servicios públicos: nuevas necesidades para nuevas realidades, edited by Carmen Valero Garcés and Guzmán Mancho Barés, 271–6. Alcalá de Henares: Universidad de Alcalá de Henares. Berasategui, J. Ignazio. 1989. “La traducción jurídico-administrativa en el País Vasco.” Revista de Llengua i Dret 13: 29–45. Berk-Seligson, Susan. [1990] 2002. The Bilingual Courtroom: Court Interpreters in the Judicial Process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Bestué, Carmen. 2008. “El  método comparativo  en la  traducción  de  textos jurídicos.  Úsese  con  precaución.” Sendebar 19: 199–212. ———. 2016a. “La variación terminológica de los conceptos del derecho de sociedades y sus estrategias de traducción.” Revista de Llengua i Dret/Journal of Language and Law 65: 18–35. ———. 2016b. “Translating Law in the Digital Age. Translation problems or matters of legal interpretation?” Perspectives 24 (4): 576–90. Bestué, Carmen, and Mariana Orozco. 2011. “La necesidad de la naturalidad en la reformulación en la traducción jurídica en la ‘era de la automatización’ de las traducciones.” JoSTrans 15: 180–99. Biel, Łucja. 2010. “Corpus-based Studies of Legal Language for Translation Purposes: Methodological and Practical Potential.” In Reconceptualizing LSP. Online proceedings of the XVII European LSP Symposium 2009, edited by Carmen Heine and Jan Engberg, 1–15. http://bcom.au.dk/fileadmin/www. asb.dk/isek/biel.pdf. ———. 2014. Lost in the Eurofog: The Textual Fit of Translated Law. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Biel, Łucja, and Jan Engberg. 2013. “Research Models and Methods in Legal Translation.” Linguistica Antverpiensia 12: 1–11. Biel, Łucja et al., eds. 2019. Research Methods in Legal Translation and Interpreting. Crossing Methodological Boundaries. London/New York: Routledge. Biguri, Koldo. 2007. “La situación actual de la traducción jurada en lengua vasca.” Papers Lextra 3: 37–40. Blasco, M. Jesús, and Maribel del Pozo, eds. 2015. “Legal Interpreting at a Turning Point/La interpretación judicial en un momento de cambio.” Special Issue MonTI. Monografías de traducción e interpretación 7.

279

M. Rosario Martín Ruano Bocanegra, Antonio. 1993. “Algunas consideraciones sobre la terminología legislativa inglesa con especial referencia al derecho marítimo inglés.” In Teoría y práctica de la traducción: Reflexiones sobre la traducción, edited by Luis Charlo Brea, 191–204. Cádiz: Universidad de Cádiz. Borja Albi, Anabel. 1999. Traducción jurídica inglés-español. Curso de iniciación. Castellón: Universitat Jaume I. ———. 2002. El texto jurídico inglés y su traducción al español. Barcelona: Ariel. ———. 2003. “La investigación en traducción jurídica.” In Panorama actual de la investigación en traducción e interpretación, edited by Miguel García Peinado and Emilio Ortega Arjonilla, 415–26. Granada: Atrio. ———. 2007a. Estrategias, materiales y recursos para la traducción jurídica inglés – español: guía didáctica. Castellón/Madrid: Universitat Jaume I/Edelsa. ———. 2007b. “Corpora for Translators in Spain. The CDJ-GITRAD Corpus and the GENTT Project.” In Incorporating Corpora – The translator and corpora, edited by Gunilla M. Anderman and Margaret Rogers, 243–65. Clevendon: Multilingual Matters. ———. 2013. “A Genre Analysis Approach to the Study of the Translation of Court Documents.” Linguistica Antverpiensia 12: 33–53. Borja Albi, A., and A. Hurtado Albir. 1999. “La traducción jurídica.” In Enseñar a traducir, edited by A. Hurtado, 154–66. Madrid: Edelsa. Borja Albi, Anabel, and Lorenzo Gallego-Borghini. 2012. “Los géneros médico-jurídicos. Textos híbridos en la confluencia de dos grandes disciplinas.” Panace@ XIII (36): 165–6. Borja Albi, Anabel, and Fernando Prieto Ramos, eds. 2013. Legal Translation in Context. Professional Issues and Prospects. Oxford/ Bern/New York: Peter Lang. Cáceres Würsig, Ingrid. 2001. “Breve historia de la Secretaría de Interpretación de Lenguas.” Meta 49 (3): 609–28. Cáceres Würsig, Ingrid, and Luis Pérez González. 2003. “Antecedentes históricos y proyección futura de la figura del intérprete jurado en España.” Hermeneus 5: 19–42. Calzada Pérez, María. 2003. “Constructing Identity via Translation: A  Descriptive-explanatory Study of Transitivity Shifts in the Translation of European Parliament Speeches.” In Speaking in Tongues: Language across Contexts and Users, edited by Luis Pérez González, 67–90. Valencia: Universidad de Valencia. ———. 2007. Transitivity in Translating: The Interdependence of Texture and Context. A Contrastive Study of Original and Translated Speeches in English and Spanish from the European Parliament. Bern: Peter Lang. Calzada Pérez, María et al. 2006. “ECPC: European Parliamentary Comparable and Parallel Corpora/ Corpus comparables y paralelos de discursos parlamentarios europeos.” Procesamiento del Lenguaje Natural 37: 349–50. Campos Pardillos, Miguel Ángel. 1999. “Traducción jurídica.” In Técnicas documentales aplicadas a la traducción, edited by M. Pinto Molina and J. A. Cordón, 217–34. Madrid: Síntesis. ———. 2003. “La traducción de los contratos y el papel del traductor en el salto tipológico ¿qué traducimos, cómo y para qué?” In Panorama actual de la investigación en traducción e interpretación, edited by Emilio Ortega Arjonilla, 427–40. Granada: Atrio. ———. 2011. “El lenguaje de los derechos humanos en inglés: aspectos generales y contrastivos.” In Lenguaje, derecho y traducción/Language, Law and Translation, edited by Icíar Alonso, Jesús Baigorri, and Helen Campbell, 99–115. Granada: Comares. Campos Pardillos, Miguel Ángel et al. 2012. Language Training on the Vocabulary of Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters. Brussels: European Judicial Training Network. ———. 2013. Language Training on the Vocabulary of Judicial Cooperation in Civil Matters. Brussels: European Judicial Training Network. Cao, Deborah. 2014. “Teaching and Learning Legal Translation.” Semiotica 201: 103–19. Castellano Martínez, José María. 2011. “La traducción al español de textos jurídicos-institucionales franceses: principales parámetros orientados a los alumnos de Traducción e Interpretación.” Íkala 16 (27): 191–216. ———. 2015. “La traducción institucional y el concepto de equivalencia en la Unión Europea: oficialidad y divergencia en las versiones francesa e inglesa de la Declaración de Berlín.” Skopos 6: 85–103. Cobos López, Ingrid. 2009. “La traducción jurídica alemán-español: tipos de errores traductológicos.” Redit 2: 11–32.

280

Legal and institutional translation Corpas, Gloria. 2002. “Utilización de corpus multilingües en traducción: introducción al tipologizador textual automático para textos jurídicos.” In La traducción científico-técnica y la terminología en la sociedad de la información, edited by Amparo Alcina and Silvia Gamero, 155–62. Castellón: Universitat Jaume I. ———. 2003. “TURICOR: compilación de un corpus de contratos turísticos alemán, español, inglés, italiano para la generación textual multilingüe y la traducción jurídica.” In Panorama actual de la investigación en traducción e interpretación, edited by Miguel Ángel García Peinado and Emilio Ortega Arjonilla, 373–84. Granada: Atrio. Cruces Colado, Susana, and Ana Luna, eds. 2004. La traducción en el ámbito institucional: autonómico, estatal y europeo. Vigo: Universidad de Vigo. Cruz Martínez, M. Soledad. 1999. El inglés jurídico. Estudio contrastivo inglés-español de términos jurídico-penales. Alicante: Universidad de Alicante. Delgado, Iván, and Francisca García Luque. 2011. “La tipologización textual del lenguaje jurídico y su aplicación al proceso de enseñanza-aprendizaje de la traducción especializada (francés-español).” Anales de Filología Francesa 19: 63–74. Del Pozo Triviño, Maribel. 2013. “El camino hacia la profesionalización de los intérpretes en los servicios públicos y asistenciales españoles en el siglo XXI.” Cuadernos de Aldeeu 25: 109–30. De Sterck, Goedele, and Cristina Valderrey. 2013. “Corrientes de análisis de la traducción especializada jurídica y científico-técnica en el ámbito francófono: una revisión crítica.” In Puntos de Encuentro: los primeros 20 años de la Facultad de Traducción y Documentación de la Universidad de Salamanca, edited by Belén Santana and Críspulo Travieso, 279–96. Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad Salamanca. Domènech, Ona. 2012. Traduir del castellà al català, més enllà de la intercomprensió. Barcelona: Editorial UOC. Duarte, Carles. 1989. “La traducció jurídico-administrativa avui a Catalunya: mètodes i problemas.” Revista de Llengua i Dret 13: 61–69. El Madkouri, Mohamed. 2005. “Lengua y cultura en la traducción de la terminología jurídica (árabefrancés-español como ejemplo).” In IV Jornadas sobre la Formación y Profesión del Traductor e Intérprete: Calidad y traducción – Perspectivas académicas y profesionales, edited by M. Elena García García et al. Madrid: Universidad Europea. Elena García, Pilar. 2001. La traducción de documentos alemanes: traducción jurada. Granada: Comares. Engberg, Jan. 2016. “Emphasising the Individual in Legal Translation: Consequences of Knowledge Communication and Post-structuralist Approaches.” In Language for Specific Purposes: Research and Translation across Cultures and Media, edited by Giuliana Garzone, Dermot Heaney, and Giorgia Riboni, 41–61. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. European Commission. 2009. Reflection Forum on Multilingualism and Interpreter Training. Final Report. Luxembourg: European Commission. ———. 2012. The Status of the Translation Profession in the European Union. Luxembourg: European Commission. Feria García, Manuel, ed. 1999. Traducir para la justicia. Granada: Comares. ———. 2002. “La traducción fehaciente del árabe al español. Fundamentos históricos, jurídicos y metodológicos.” PhD diss., Universidad de Málaga, Málaga. ———. 2007. “La interpretación judicial y la traducción jurada árabe-español en Málaga durante los años noventa.” Puentes 8: 25–32. ———. 2013. “Algunos obstáculos en el proceso traductor de textos de las naciones unidas sobre derechos humanos redactados en árabe, o redactados en otras lenguas oficiales si incluyen conceptos islámicos.” In Translating the Law. Theoretical and Methodological Issues/ Traducir el Derecho. Cuestiones teóricas y metodológicas, edited by Icíar Alonso, Jesús Baigorri Jalón, and Helen Campbell, 47–56. Granada: Comares. Feria García, Manuel, and Sebastián Escámez. 1997. “De la terminología a la ideología: el papel del traductor de textos jurídicos.” In El papel del traductor, edited by Esther Morillas and Juan Pablo Arias, 341–69. Salamanca: Almar. Ferrán Larraz, Elena. 2004. “La traducción de la forma solemne del documento jurídico negocial (common-law vs. civil-law).” Sendebar 15: 45–63. ———. 2005. “La intertextualidad en el derecho y en la lingüística. La intertextualidad entre los documentos jurídicos de una cadena. Un análisis para la traducción.” Meta 50 (4).

281

M. Rosario Martín Ruano ———. 2009. “La institución desconocida y la intraducibilidad. Paralelismo entre el derecho comparado y la traducción jurídica frente a la intraducibilidad.” Meta 52 (2): 295–308. Franzoni, Ada. 1996. “La equivalencia funcional en traducción jurídica.” Voces 20: 2–13. Gallardo, Natividad. 2008. “La traducción de modelos de contratación electrónica: estudio de la macroestructura y su terminología.” In La comunicación especializada, edited by Carmen Navarro et al., 219–42. Bern: Peter Lang. ———. 2012. “Hacia una ‘globalización’ de la traducción: el caso de la traducción jurada de los documentos médico-legales (inglés-español).” Sendebar 23: 227–50. Gallegos Rosillo, José Antonio. 1997. “Lenguaje jurídico y lengua francesa.” In Introducción a la traducción jurídica y jurada (francés-español). Orientaciones metodológicas para la realización de traducciones juradas y de documentos jurídicos, edited by Pedro San Ginés Aguilar, and Emilio Ortega, 39–62. Granada: Comares. ———. 2007a. “Locuciones y paremias en los lenguajes jurídicos francés y español.” In Traducción y cultura. La paremia, edited by Guadalupe Ruiz Yepes and Cristina Valderrey, 51–80. Málaga: Encasa. ———. 2007b. “La traducción jurídica: didáctica e implicaciones culturales.” In Traducción y cultura. El papel de la cultura en la comprensión del texto original, edited by José Antonio Gallegos Rosillo and Hannelore Benz Busch, 199–246. Málaga: Encasa. García, Marta. 2007. “La habilitación de traductores jurados en Galicia.” Papers Lextra 3: 31–36. ———. 2010. “La traducción jurídica y económica de la lengua gallega.” In Los caminos de la lengua. Estudios en homenaje a Enrique Alcaraz Varó, edited by José Luis Cifuentes et al., 147–62. Alicante: Universidad de Alicante. Gémar, Jean Claude. 2005. “La asimetría cultural y el traductor jurídico. El lenguaje del derecho, la cultura y la traducción.” In La traducción y la interpretación en las relaciones jurídicas internacionales, edited by Esther Monzó and Anabel Borja, 33–64. Castellón: Universitat Jaume I. Giambruno-Day Miguélez, Cynthia. 1997. “Language Mediation in the Judicial System: The Role of the Court Interpreter.” PhD diss., Universidad de Alicante, Alicante. ———. 2008. “The Role of the Interpreter in the Governance of Sixteenth and Seventeenth Century Spanish Colonies in the ‘New World’: Lessons from the Past for the Present.” In Crossing Borders in Community Interpreting. Definitions and Dilemmas, edited by Carmen Valero and Anne Martin, 27–49. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Gómez González-Jover, Adelina. 2010. “Las combinaciones léxicas especializadas (CLE) y su opacidad en el discurso jurídico: problemas de traducción.” In Opacidad, idiomaticidad, traducción. Opacité, idiomaticité, traduction, edited by Pedro Mogorrón and Salah Mejri, 151–78. Alicante: Universidad de Alicante. Gómez Moreno, Paz. 2014. “Situaciones de conflicto en el ámbito de la interpretación en los tribunales de justicia españoles: análisis descriptivo y estrategias de prevención.” In (Re)considerando ética e ideología en situaciones de conflicto/(Re)visiting Ethics and Ideology in Situations of Conflict, edited by Carmen Valero, 33–37. Alcalá: Universidad de Alcalá. González, Luis, and Carmen de las Heras, eds. 2010. La traducción y la interpretación contra la exclusión social. Madrid: Comisión Europea. Handi, Elhassane Benhaddou. 2012. “La traducción y la interpretación en el ministerio del interior. la protección internacional.” In Reflexiones sobre la traducción jurídica/Reflections on Legal Translation, edited by Helen Campbell and Jesús Baigorri, 91–102. Granada: Comares. Harvey, Malcolm. 2002. “What’s so Special About Legal Translation?” Meta 47 (2): 177–85. Hernúñez, Pollux, ed. 2014. Actas del V Congreso “El Español, Lengua de Traducción”. La traducción y la proyección internacional del español. Bruselas: Esletra. Hernúñez, Pollux, and Luis González, eds. 2002. Actas del I Congreso Internacional “El Español, Lengua de Traducción”. Almagro: Comisión Europea. ———. 2004. Actas del II Congreso “El Español, Lengua de Traducción”. Las palabras del traductor. Bruselas: Esletra. ———. 2008. Actas del III Congreso “El español, lengua de traducción”. Contacto y Contagio. Bruselas: Esletra. ———. 2010. Actas del IV Congreso “El Español, Lengua de Traducción”. El español, lengua de traducción para la cooperación y el diálogo. Bruselas: Esletra. Holl, Iris. 2007. “Análisis de una sentencia de divorcio alemana: aspectos jurídicos y textuales.” In Puente entre dos mundos: últimas tendencias en la investigación traductológica alemán-español, edited by Belén Santana et al., 190–200. Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca.

282

Legal and institutional translation ———. 2012. “Técnicas para la traducción jurídica: Revisión de diferentes propuestas, últimas tendencias.” Hermeneus 14: 191–216. Holl, Iris, and Pilar Elena. 2015. “Análisis textual y jurídico comparado para la traducción: el caso de las capitulaciones matrimoniales alemanas y españolas.” Meta 60 (3): 494–517. Jiménez Salcedo, Juan, and Esther Monzó, eds. 2017. “Introducció. Les identitats minoritzades davant l’oportunitat del postmonolingüisme.” In Les llengües minoritzades en l’ordre postmonolingüe/ Minoritized languages under a postmonolingual order/Las lenguas minorizadas en el orden posmonolingüe, edited by Juan Jiménez Salcedo and Esther Monzó, 1–4. Castellón: Universitat Jaume I. Kang, Ji-Hae. 2009. “Institutional Translation.” In Routledge Encyclopaedia of Translation Studies, edited by Mona Baker and Gabriela Saldanha, 141–44. London/New York: Routledge. Koskinen, Kaisa. 2011. “Institutional Translation.” In Handbook of Translation Studies, vol. 2, edited by Yves Gambier, 54–60. Philadelphia: John Benjamins. LePoder, Evelyne. 2010. “Introducción a la traducción jurídica.” In Los caminos de la lengua: estudios en homenaje a Enrique Alcaraz Varó, edited by José Luis Cifuentes et al., 177–88. Alicante: Universidad de Alicante. Lobato, Julia. 2007. “Aspectos deontológicos y profesionales de la traducción jurídica, jurada y judicial.” PhD diss., University of Málaga, Málaga. www.tdx.cat/handle/10803/37288. López Arroyo, Belén. 2011. “Recursos terminológicos, fraseológicos y retóricos aplicados a la traducción jurídica.” In Lenguaje, Derecho y Traducción/Language, Law and Translation, edited by Icíar Alonso Araguás, Jesús Baigorri Jalón, and Helen Campbell, 157–76. Granada: Comares. Macías Otón, Elena. 2013. “Las expresiones binomiales en el lenguaje jurídico y su traducción en el aula de terminología (español-inglés/francés).” Paremia 22: 209–25. Martin, Anne, and Mustapha Taibi. 2010. “Translating and Interpreting for the Police in Politicised Contexts: The Case of Tayseer Allouny.” In Compromiso Social y Traducción/Interpretación, edited by Julie Boéri and Carol Maier, 214–26. Granada: ECOS. Martín Ruano, M. Rosario. 2005. “La transmisión de la cultura en traducción jurídica: nuevas estrategias, éticas alternativas.” In Traducción y cultura. El referente cultural en la comunicación especializada, edited by María Gracia Torres and Marie-Ange Bugnot, 161–200. Málaga, Encasa. ———. 2009. “La neutralidad a examen: nuevos asideros para el ejercicio de la traducción jurídica.” In Reflexiones sobre la traducción jurídica/Reflections on Legal Translation, edited by Jesús Baigorri and Helen Campbell, 73–89. Granada: Comares. ———. 2010. “Teorías y utopías: hacia nuevos vocabularios y prácticas de la traducción institucional.” Puntoycoma 117: 72–83. ———. 2012. “Traducción institucional e identidad(es): asimetrías, conflictos, posibilidades.” In Ensayos sobre traducción jurídica e institucional, edited by Jesús Baigorri and Icíar Alonso, 45–68. Granada: Comares. ———. 2014. “From Suspicion to Collaboration: Defining New Epistemologies of Reflexive Practice for Legal Translation and Interpreting.” JosTRans 22: 1–20. ———. 2015a. “(Trans)formative Theorising in Legal Translation and/or Interpreting: A  Critical Approach to Deontological Principles.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer (ITT) 9 (1) (Special Issue: Training Legal Translators and Interpreters: Theory, Research and Practice, edited by Esther Monzó): 141–55. ———. 2015b. “The Role of Legal and Institutional Translation in Processes of Identity (Re)construction in Multilingual and Multicultural Contexts.” Terminology Science & Research 25: 16–27. ———. 2017. “Developing PSTI Under the Paradigm of Recognition: Towards Difference-sensitive Ethics in PSTI.” In Ethics, Ideology and Policy Development in Public Service Interpreting and Translating, edited by Carmen Valero and Rebecca Tipton, 21–37. Bristol/Buffalo/Toronto: Multilingual Matters. Mayoral Asensio, Roberto. 1999a. “Las fidelidades del traductor jurado: batalla indecisa.” In Traducir para la justicia, edited by Manuel Feria, 17–57. Granada: Comares. ———. 1999b. “Traducción oficial (jurada) y función.” En Traducir para la justicia, edited by Manuel Feria, 59–86. Granada: Comares. ———. 2000a. “Consideraciones sobre la profesión de traductor jurado.” In La traducción y la interpretación en España hoy: perspectivas profesionales, edited by Dorothy Kelly, 116–43. Granada: Comares. ———. 2000b. “(Official) Sworn Translation and Its Functions.” Babel 46 (4): 300–31.

283

M. Rosario Martín Ruano ———. 2000c. “La traducción jurada de documentos paquistaníes en España.” In Traducción, emigración y culturas, edited by Miguel Hernando de Larramendi, 211–18. Cuenca: Universidad de Castilla La Mancha. ———. 2002. “Cómo se hace la traducción jurídica?” Puentes. Hacia nuevas investigaciones en la mediación intercultural 2 (Special Issue on legal translation, edited by Catherine Way): 9–14. ———. 2003. Translating Official Documents. Manchester: St Jerome. ———. 2004a. “Lenguajes de especialidad y traducción especializada. La traducción jurídica.” In Manual de documentación y terminología para la traducción especializada, edited by Consuelo Gonzalo and Valentín García Yebra, 49–72. Madrid: Arco Libros. ———. 2004b. “El polifacetismo del traductor (jurídico y jurado).” In Experiencias de traducción. Reflexiones desde la práctica traductora, edited by Cristina García de Toro and Isabel García Izquierdo, 165–80. Castellón: Universitat Jaume I. ———. 2005. “Cuánto derecho debe saber el traductor jurídico?” In La traducción y la interpretación en las relaciones jurídicas internacionales, edited by Esther Monzó Nebot and Anabel Borja, 107–12. Castellón: Universidad Jaume I. ———. 2008. “Argumentos en contra de la literalidad en la traducción jurada.” In Estudios de traducción, cultura, lengua y literatura: in memoriam Virgilio Moya Jiménez, edited by Isabel Pascua et al., 31–44. Las Palmas: Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. Medina Reguera, Ana. 2005. La traducción al castellano de textos administrativos alemanes. Sevilla: Bienza. Monzó, Esther. 2002. “La professió del traductor jurídic i jurat. Descripció sociològica de la professió i anàlisi discursive del transgènere.” PhD diss., Universitat Jaume I, Castellón. ———. 2003. “La traducción jurídica a través de los géneros: el transgénero y la socialización del traductor en los procesos de enseñanza/aprendizaje.” Discursos. Revista de tradução 2: 21–36. ———. 2005a. “Descripción de la práctica social y textual de los traductores jurídicos. El proyecto ACTIVE.” In El español: lengua de cultura, lengua de traducción, edited by Nicolás Campos Plaza et al., 415–26. Granada: Atrio. ———. 2005b. “Reeducación y desculturación a través de géneros en traducción jurídica, económica y administrativa.” In El género textual y la traducción. Reflexiones teóricas y aplicaciones pedagógicas, edited by Isabel García Izquierdo, 69–92. Bern: Peter Lang. ———. 2005c. “Cómo traducir derecho sin ser jurista: Nuevas fuentes y métodos documentales para la traducción jurídica.” In Documentarse para traducir, edited by Dora Sales, 123–46. Granada: Comares. ———, ed. 2006. Les plomes de la justícia. La traducció al català dels textos juridics. Barcelona: Portic. ———. 2011. “La explotación de corpus en los organismos internacionales.” In Lenguaje, Derecho y Traducción/Language, Law and Translation, edited by Icíar Alonso Araguás, Jesús Baigorri Jalón, and Helen Campbell, 117–55. Granada: Comares. ———. 2015a. “Understanding Legal Interpreter and Translator Training in Times of Change.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 9 (2) (Special Issue: Training Legal Interpreters and Translators, edited by Esther Monzó): 129–40. ———. 2015b. “(Re)producing Habits in International Negotiations: A Study on the Translation of Collocations.” Fachsprache 3–4: 193–209. Monzó, Esther, and Anabel Borja, eds. 2005. La traducción y la interpretación en las relaciones jurídicas internacionales. Castellón: Universitat Jaume I. Muñoz, Francisco Javier, and María Valdivieso. 2004. “Autoridad y cambio lingüístico en la traducción institucional.” In Las palabras del traductor. Actas del II Congreso “El español, lengua de traducción,” edited by Luis González and Pollux Hernúñez, 445–80. Bruselas: Esletra. Nord, Christiane. 1997. Translating as a Purposeful Activity. Manchester: St Jerome. Orozco, Mariana. 2014. “Propuesta de un catálogo de técnicas de traducción: la toma de decisiones informada ante la elección de equivalentes.” Hermeneus 16: 233–64. Orozco, Mariana, and Pilar Sánchez Gijón. 2011. “New Resources for Legal Translators.” Perspectives 19 (1): 25–44. Ortega Arjonilla, Emilio. 2002. “La traducción técnica dentro del ámbito de la traducción judicial: los retos traductológicos del futuro espacio judicial europeo.” In La traducción científico-técnica y la terminología en la sociedad de la información, edited by Amparo Alcina and Silvia Gamero, 163–6. Castellón: Universitat Jaume I.

284

Legal and institutional translation ———. 2005. “La traducción jurídica, jurada y judicial; aspectos teóricos, metodológicos y profesionales.” In La traducción y la interpretación en las relaciones jurídicas internacionales, edited by Esther Monzó Nebot and Anabel Borja, 113–32. Castellón: Universidad Jaume I. ———, ed. 2008. La traducción y la interpretación jurídicas en la Unión Europea. Retos para la Europa de los ciudadanos. Granada: Comares. ———. 2009. “La ‘conceptualización’, el ‘efecto dominó’ y el ‘sesgo cientificista’ en la traducción jurídica institucional.” In Reflexiones sobre la traducción jurídica/Reflections on Legal Translation, edited by Helen Campbell and Jesús Baigorri, 109–24. Granada: Comares. Ortega Herráez, Juan Miguel. 2010. Interpretar para la Justicia. Granada: Comares. Ortega Herráez, Juan Miguel, and Elisa Calvo. 2009. “A Functional Approach to Legal Translation Teaching: Combating Literality.” In Curriculum, Multilingualism and the Law, edited by Lelija Socanac et al., 349–72. Zagreb: Nakadni zavod Globus. Ortega Herráez, Juan Miguel, and Catalina Iliescu. 2015. “The Interpreter Hears Voices . . . Academic and Professional Perspectives X-Rayed and Interpreted.” MonTI 2: 37–62. Ortega, Emilio, and Julia Lobato. 2008. “Comentario sobre los códigos deontológicos vigentes.” In La traducción e interpretación jurídicas en la Unión Europea. Retos para la Europa de los ciudadanos, edited by Emilio Ortega Arjonilla, 545–52. Granada: Comares. Payás, Gertrudis, and Icíar Alonso. 2009. “La mediación lingüística institucionalizada en las fronteras hispano-mapuche e hispano-árabe. Un patrón similar?” Historia 1 (42): 185–201. Peñaranda López, Antonio. 2015. Proceso penal comparado (España, Francia, Inglaterra, Estados Unidos, Rusia). Descripción y terminología. Granada: Comares. Peñarroja Fa, Josep. 2000. “Historia de los intérpretes jurados.” In Conferencias del curso académico 1999/2000, edited by José Antonio Sabio et al., 161–95. Granada: Comares. Pérez González, Luis. 2005. “Aportaciones de las nuevas tecnologías a la investigación en el ámbito de la traducción jurídica.” In La traducción y la interpretación en las relaciones jurídicas internacionales, edited by Esther Monzó and Anabel Borja, 133–52. Castellón: Universitat Jaume I. Prieto Ramos, Fernando. 2002. “Beyond the Confines of Literality: A  Functionalist Approach to the Sworn Translation of Legal Document.” Puentes. Hacia nuevas investigaciones en la mediación intercultural 2 (Special Issue on legal translation): 27–35. ———. 2009. “Interdisciplinariedad y ubicación macrotextual en traducción jurídica.” Translation Journal 13 (4). ———. 2010. “Conciencia profesional y formación del traductor institucional del siglo XXI.” Puntoycoma 120: 10–14. ———. 2011a. “Developing Legal Translation Competence: An Integrative Process-oriented Approach. Comparative Legilinguistics.” International Journal for Legal Communication 5: 7–21. ———. 2011b. “El traductor como redactor de instrumentos jurídicos: el caso de los tratados internacionales.” JoSTrans 15: 200–14. ———. 2014. “Legal Translation Studies as Interdiscipline: Scope and Evolution.” Meta 59 (2): 260–77. ———. 2015. “Quality Assurance in Legal Translation: Evaluating Process, Competence and Product in the Pursuit of Adequacy.” International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 28: 11–30. Prieto Ramos, Fernando, and Mariana Orozco. 2015. “De la ficha terminólogica a la ficha traductólogica: hacia una lexicografía al servicio de la traducción jurídica.” Babel 61 (1): 110–30. Pym, Anthony. 1992. Translation and Text Transfer: An Essay on the Principles of Intercultural Communication. Bern: Peter Lang. Rei-doval, Gabriel. 2004. “A traducción xurada de lingua galega.” In La traducción en el ámbito institucional: autonómico, estatal y europeo, edited by Susana Cruces and Ana Luna, 55–82. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. RITAP. 2011. Libro blanco de la traducción e interpretación institucional en España. Madrid: Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores y Cooperación. Rodríguez, Anxela, and María Miramontes. 2004. “A traducción institucional: o servicio de traducción.” In La traducción en el ámbito institucional: autonómico, estatal y europeo, edited by Susana Cruces and Ana Luna, 23–54. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. Román Mínguez, Verónica. 2008. “Exploración didáctica de un encargo real de traducción: análisis de dificultades en la traducción de una escritura de compraventa de acciones.” Sendebar 19: 151–66. Roser Nebot, Nicolás. 2003. “El lenguaje jurídico en español y en árabe.” In Recursos documentales y tecnológicos para la traducción del discurso jurídico (español, alemán, inglés, italiano, árabe), edited by Gloria Corpas, 297–309. Granada: Comares.

285

M. Rosario Martín Ruano Salvador, Sever. 2007. “L’habilitació professional de la traducció i la interpretació jurades en llengua catalana.” Papers Lextra 3: 25–30. San Ginés Aguilar, Pedro, and Emilio Ortega Arjonilla. 1996a. Introducción a la traducción jurídica y jurada (inglés-español). Orientaciones metodológicas para la realización de traducciones juradas y de documentos jurídicos. Granada: Comares. ———. 1996b. Introducción a la traducción jurídica y jurada (francés-español). Orientaciones metodológicas para la realización de traducciones juradas y de documentos jurídicos. Granada: Comares. Santoyo, Julio César. 1997. “Traducciones cotidianas en la Edad Media: Una parcela olvidada.” Livius 9: 159–86. Sarcevic, Susan. 2000 [1997]. New Approach to Legal Translation. The Hague: Kluwer Law International. Schmit, Christine. 2004. “Lerôle de la traduction et de l’interprétation dans la conquête et la colonisation du Mexique.” BA diss., Université de Genève, Geneva. Snell-Hornby, Mary. 1992. “The Professional Translator of Tomorrow: Language Specialist or All-round Expert?” In Teaching Translation and Interpreting, edited by Cay Dollerup and Anne Loddegaard, 9–22. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Soriano Barabino, Guadalupe. 2002. “Incongruencia terminológica y equivalencia funcional en traducción jurídica: la guarda de menores en España e Inglaterra y el País de Gales.” Puentes 2: 53–60. ———. 2016a. Comparative Law for Legal Translators. Bern: Peter Lang. ———. 2016b. “La traducción de los órganos jurisdiccionales franceses en tanto que instituciones culturales.” Revista de Llengua i Dret/Journal of Language and Law 66: 172–88. Strandvik, Ingemar. 2002. “Transparencia, gobernanza y traducción: ha llegado la hora de un enfoque funcional?” In El español, lengua de traducción, Actas del I Congreso Internacional, edited by Pollux Hernúñez and Luis González, 443–58. Almagro: Esletra. Terral, Florence. 2003. “Derecho comparado y traducción jurídica: relación de interdependencia.” Sendebar 14: 97–106. Thiry, Bernard. 2005. “Diccionario jurídico: terminología de la responsabilidad civil (español-francés y francés-español).” In El español: lengua de cultura, lengua de traducción, edited by Nicolás Campos Plaza et al., 433–44. Granada: Atrio. Toda, Fernando. 2010. “La formación de traductores en la Licenciatura y el Máster Europeo de la Universidad de Salamanca; aspectos relacionados con la traducción jurídica y la inmigración.” In La traducción y la interpretación contra la exclusión social, edited by Luis González and Carmen de las Heras. Madrid: Comisión Europea. http://cvc.cervantes.es/lengua/tices/toda.htm. Valderrey, Cristina. 2002. “Análisis descriptivo de la traducción jurídica (francés-español). Aportes para una mayor sistematización de su enseñanza.” PhD diss., Universidad de Salamanca, Salamanca. ———. 2003. “Formación de traductores en el ámbito jurídico: la comprensión en la fase inicial del aprendizaje.” In Actas del I Congreso Internacional de la AIETI, edited by Ricardo Muñoz, 427–39. Granada: AIETI. ———. 2004. “Didáctica de la traducción jurídica: cómo se puede enseñar/aprender a traducir textos jurídicos sin morir en el intento?” In Panorama actual de la investigación en traducción e interpretación, vol 3, edited by Emilio Ortega Arjonilla, 85–94. Granada: Atrio. ———. 2009. “Recorrido, actualidad y perspectivas de la investigación en Traducción Jurídica.” In Reflexiones sobre la traducción jurídica/Reflections on Legal Translation, edited by Helen Campbell and Jesús Baigorri, 59–71. Granada: Comares. ———. 2012. “Thematic Competence in Law: The Non-lawyer Translator.” In Iberian Studies on Translation and Interpreting, edited by Isabel García Izquierdo and Esther Monzó, 11–22. Bern: Peter Lang. Valero, Carmen. 2006. “Las instituciones oficiales y sus soluciones a los problemas de comunicación.” RESLA (special issue: Retos del siglo XXI en comunicación intercultural: nuevo mapa lingüístico y cultural de España, edited by Carmen Valero, and Francisco Raga) 1: 29–48. ———. 2008. Formas de Mediación Intercultural Traducción e Interpretación en los Servicios Públicos. Granada: Comares. ———. 2011. “Presente y Futuro.” In La traducción y la interpretación contra la exclusión social, edited by Luis González and Carmen de las Heras, 93–108. Madrid: Comisión Europea. http://cvc.cervantes. es/lengua/tices/valero.htm. Valero, Carmen, and Blanca Vitalaru. 2014. “Ética e ideología en TISP en situaciones de conflicto en el siglo XXI. A  modo de introducción.” In (Re)considerando ética e ideología en situaciones de

286

Legal and institutional translation conflicto/(Re)visiting Ethics and Ideology in Situations of Conflict, edited by Carmen Valero, 7–12. Alcalá: Universidad de Alcalá. Varela, M. José et  al. 1998. “Problemática de la traducción al español de textos jurídicos en alemán: análisis de un contrato de arrendamiento.” In II Estudios sobre traducción e interpretación, edited by Leandro Félix and Emilio Ortega Arjonilla, 947–68. Málaga: Universidad de Málaga. Vázquez y del Árbol, Esther. 2006. “La traducción al español de las expresiones binomiales y trinomiales (Doublet & Triplet Expressions) en inglés jurídico: El caso de los Testamentos (Wills).” Babel AFIAL: Aspectos de Filología Inglesa y Alemana 15: 19–26. ———. 2007. “El tiempo verbal en textos jurídicos en español y su traducción jurada al inglés.” Sendebar 18: 99–107. ———. 2014. Derecho Civil Comparado aplicado a la traducción jurídico-judicial. Reino Unido y España. Madrid: Dykinson. Venuti, Lawrence. 1998. The Scandals of Translation. London/New York: Routledge. Vergara, Laura. 2013. “La metáfora en los textos jurídicos y su traducción: las resoluciones del Tribunal Supremo de los EEUU.” PhD diss., Universidad de Alicante, Alicante. Vidal Claramonte, Mª del Carmen África. 2005. “Re-presenting the ‘Real’: Pierre Bourdieu and Legal Translation.” The Translator 11 (2): 259–75. ———. 2013. “Towards a New Research Model in Legal Translation: future perspectives in the era of asymmetry.” Linguistica Antverpiensia (Special Issue on legal translation) 12: 183–96. Vidal Claramonte, Mª del Carmen África, and M. Rosario Martín Ruano. 2003. “Deconstructing the Discourse on Legal Translation, or Towards an Ethics of Responsibility.” In Speaking in Tongues: Language across Contexts and Uses, edited by Luis Pérez González, 141–59. Valencia: Publicacions Universitat de València. Vidal, Miquel. 2010. “Las tres caras del traductor institucional.” Puntoycoma 117: 38–42. Vigier, Francisco Javier. 2009. “Qué formación en traducción jurídica reciben los intérpretes jurados en la Universidad?” Redit 2: 109–28. ———. 2010. “El nombramiento de traductores-intérpretes jurados de inglés mediante acreditación académica: descripción de la formación específica y del grado de satisfacción de los egresados.” PhD diss., Universidad de Granada, Granada. http://digibug.ugr.es/handle/10481/5658#.WQTNU4jyjIU. ———. 2016. “Teaching the Use of ad hoc Corpora.” Language and Law/Linguagem e Direito 3 (1): 100–19. Way, Catherine. 2002. “Traducción y Derecho: iniciativas para desarrollar la colaboración interdisciplinar.” Puentes 2: 15–26. ———. 2003. “La traducción como acción social: El caso de los documentos académicos (españolinglés).” PhD diss., Universidad de Granada, Granada. http://digibug.ugr.es/bitstream/10481/4591/1/ Tesis.pdf. ———. 2004. “Los intérpretes jurados de inglés: quiénes son?” In Panorama actual de la investigación en traducción e interpretación, vol 3, edited by Emilio Ortega, 267–76. Granada: Atrio. ———. 2005. “Investigando la traducción como acción social: el caso de los documentos académicos (español-inglés).” In La traducción y la interpretación en las relaciones jurídicas internacionales, edited by Esther Monzó and Anabel Borja, 255–64. Castellón: Universitat Jaume I. ———. 2016. “The Challenges and Opportunities of Legal Translation and Translator Training in the 21st Century.” International Journal of Communication 10: 1009–29. Yoshida, Rika. 2012. “Práctica, ideología y función poética: juicios penales con intérprete(s) en el nuevo sistema de jurado en Japón.” In Ensayos sobre traducción jurídica e institucional, edited by Jesús Baigorri, and Icíar Alonso, 123–32. Granada: Comares. Zaro Vera, Juan Jesús, and Michael Truman. 1998. Manual de Traducción/A Manual of Translation. Textos españoles e ingleses traducidos y comentados. Madrid: SGEL.

287

16 TECHNICAL AND MEDICAL TRANSLATION Goretti Faya and Carmen Quijada

Introduction The development of science and technology in an increasingly interconnected world has had an important impact on the number of texts published in both fields. Scientific and technical texts are written mainly in English, with Spanish being the second most common language internationally (Moreno Fernández 2015, 10). Consequently, the number of translation assignments of scientific and technical texts has also increased (Lambert 2007). In fact, “technical translation already looms large in that it comprises more than 90% of the translation of the professional world output” (Kingscott 2002, 247). This situation has caused a growing interest in the features and translation of scientific and technical texts. This circumstance has given a place to several research works with a mainly terminological or didactic approach. In the 1990s, the BITRA (Bibliografía de Traducción e Interpretación) bibliographic database provided 1,989 search results for studies on technical and scientific translation (Aixelá 2013, 41), whereas, nowadays, the same database gives 8,128 results. To define ‘scientific and technical texts’, it is convenient to clarify certain concepts which are frequently mixed up in the literature, namely ‘languages for specific purposes (LSP)’, ‘specialised languages’, ‘specialised texts’ and ‘scientific and technical texts’. Typically, LSP includes aspects of lexicology, terminology, translation and discourse analysis; however, traditionally it also has been related to teaching languages in specific fields. LSP is highly student-centred, and therefore mainly focused on learners’ professional linguistic needs as well as the production of teaching materials (Gálová 2007, 2). In fact, when referring to LSP, languages are usually thought of in terms of a user of that specific language; however, when dealing with the term ‘specialised language’, mediators and language specialists should also be taken into consideration. Thus, LSP must not be mistaken for ‘specialised languages’, which are related mainly to the terminology of a communicative situation confined to a particular domain (Lavagnino 2012, 47), and can be considered an essential instrument for communication among specialists (Cabré Castellví 1999, 90). Specialized languages may include different varieties, such as legal, economic, administrative and medical (Aguado de Cea and Álvarez de Mon 2003, 2). However, not all texts using a specialized language can be considered to be ‘specialised 288

Technical and medical translation

texts’ – while a very specific topic can result in a specialized text, it is not the only factor that determines whether a text is specialized or not (Cabré Castellví 1999, 24). It is thus necessary to also include some extratextual criteria related to the communicative situation: mainly the text function, the features of the interlocutors (Gamero Pérez 2001, 28), and even the skills required to translate these texts (Gamero Pérez and Hurtado Albir 1999; Alcina Caudet and Gamero Pérez 2002; Olohan 2016). Other features worth mentioning include the existence of an established discipline that acts as a communicative frame, an author who is a specialist in the matter, a rigid structure, a systemic thematic progression, a clear presence of specialized terminology, a trend towards a syntactic simplification and a clearly formal register (Franco Aixelá 2013, 39). On the other hand, it should be stressed that there is a clear permanent interrelationship between a specialized language and a non-specialized one, i.e. they are not and cannot be independent (Loffler-Laurian 1984; Jacobi 1987; Gläser 1993; among others). In this vein, scientific and technical texts (those pertaining to the fields of science and technology) can be specialized or not – depending on their function and participants – and their features will be determined by the conventions agreed by the scientific community that produces them (Swales 1981, 1990). The barriers between science and technology, however, are not always clear (Byrne 2012, 2); both disciplines deal with different kinds of knowledge, but at the same time they are related (Olohan 2016), though not consciously or immediately (Pinchuck 1977, 13). Scientific and technical disciplines present very varied natures (Sánchez Trigo 2005, 132), as the UNESCO Nomenclature for the fields of science and technology shows: Logic

Earth and Space Science

Economic Sciences

Political Science

Mathematics

Agricultural Sciences

Geography

Psychology

Astronomy and Astrophysics

Medical Sciences

History

Sciences of Arts and Letters

Physics

Technological Sciences

Juridical Science and Law

Sociology

Chemistry

Anthropology

Linguistics

Ethics

Life Sciences

Demography

Pedagogy

Philosophy

In addition, some objects of study are covered simultaneously both by scientific (related to theoretical knowledge) and technical disciplines (related to the application of knowledge, for example to industrial exploitation [technological sciences] or floor exploitation [agricultural sciences]). There are even applied sciences, as is the case of medicine. The differences between science and technology will also determine different approaches and strategies in the translation of these texts: [. . .] while a technical text is designed to convey information as clearly and effectively as possible, a scientific text will discuss, analyze and synthesize information with a view to explaining ideas, proposing new theories or evaluating methods. Due to these differing aims, the language used in each type of text, and consequently the strategies needed to translate them, may vary significantly. (Byrne 2012, 2) 289

Goretti Faya and Carmen Quijada

However, due to the close link between both disciplines, and since scientific research is gradually moving closer to technical applications, it seems appropriate to use the mixed label of ‘scientific and technical texts’ (Álvarez de Mon 2001, 41). On the other hand, it is convenient to clarify that, in Translation Studies, scientific and technical translation has been traditionally limited to pure and exact sciences (Valero Garcés, Tejedor Martínez, and Carmen Santamaría García 1997), that is to say, the disciplines related to notions of universalism and objectivism: Translation studies has traditionally taken inspiration from traditional LSP (Language for Specific Purposes) research and terminology studies in analyzing intrinsic features of specialized discourse; those studies often perpetuated a view of science as consisting of absolute truths, involving objective and referential communication. (Olohan and Salama-Carr 2011, 180) In particular, the scientific and technical texts studied in Translation Studies tend to be related with the disciplines of health (medicine, biology, pharmacy, etc.), computing sciences, environmental sciences, engineering, physics and chemistry. Texts pertaining to any other discipline, however, have been studied in a completely independent way, as is the case of legal or economic sciences (see the chapter on LEGAL TRANSLATION). Translators must thus develop strategies to understand and deal with a wide variety of texts belonging to different specialized fields. This chapter aims to survey the origins of scientific and technical translation and presents an overview of the major theoretical and practical works in the Spanish-speaking world. The overview of recent research in the field highlights the specific topics being studied and reflects the current tendencies in scientific and technical translation.

Historical perspective Translating specialized languages is not new. In fact, both the advancement of our societies and the scientific, technical and social development of humankind are, to a large extent, due to the translation of scientific and technical texts (Olohan 2009, 246). Ranging from the Baghdad House of Wisdom and the Granada Tibbonids to the Toledo School of Translators, through to the alexandrine translations and the permanent knowledge transfer in the Mediterranean area, translation has always been a loyal and necessary ally of scientific and technical improvements (Montalt i Resurrecció 2005, 50–51; Gutiérrez Rodilla 2009, 230; Eckart 2009, 63–64, 72–76). The Spanish language has not been alien to the great translation trends throughout history. Quite the contrary, the Iberian Peninsula was the centre of several medieval cultural institutions in which scientific knowledge was translated: first, from Arabic to Latin (and, to a lesser extent, from Hebrew [Santoyo 2009, 246–7]) in the monasteries of Vic and Ripoll, and in the medieval translation centres of Tarazona, León and Segovia, and later into the Spanish that was taking shape at that time. All these places were important precursors of the Toledo School of Translators (Gil 1985; Samsó 1996; Vegas González 1998; Santoyo 2004; García Yebra 1989, 323–36, 1994, 88–91; Santoyo 2009, 239–42, among others), which from the twelfth century, and through various stages and periods, accomplished the translation of different types of knowledge that had been gathered in the libraries of the Mediterranean area (Burnett 2007; Wright 2007; Valls 2007; Gutiérrez Rodilla 1998, 54; Eckart 2009, 74, among many others). However, this School of Translators never existed as such, but rather it was a group of 290

Technical and medical translation

translators who did their work individually or in small groups under the supervision and guidance of a patron (Santoyo 2004, 3). These scientific translations can be then considered the cornerstone of scientific and technical translation in Spanish. They are characterized by a lack of prefaces (Burnett 2007, 1232) and by almost methodical literalness (i.e. translators attempted to convey precisely the meaning of the source Arabic text, to the detriment of the classical Latin style), and the result was “a strict word for word agreement between source and target text” (Burnett 2007, 1235). The vast translating activity carried out in medieval Spain provided the Western world with a collection of scientific, philosophical and medical knowledge which changed European scientific thinking and gave a new impetus to the European science (Huot 2007, 1372). The extraordinary advancement of science in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries should also be mentioned, as should the essential role played by translation both in spreading knowledge and information about new discoveries. In addition, the source languages used by the greatest scientists of that time were varied and, consequently, the translating activity was essential: for example, Max Planck, Albert Einstein and Sigmund Freud wrote in German; Robert Boyle and Alexander Fleming in English; Niels Bohr, in Danish; Louis Pasteur as well as Pierre and Marie Curie, in French; and Severo Ochoa and Santiago Ramón y Cajal published their works mainly in Spanish. Another relevant milestone in the history of scientific and technical translation in Spanish is institutional translation, promoted by the international organizations created after the Second World War: the Spanish language is one of the five official languages of the United Nations and plays an important role in the directorate-general for translation of the European Union, since it is one of its twenty-four official languages (though it has recently been dropped as an official language of the European Patent Office (European Union 2012, see also Valdivieso 2014, 99–101) and is gradually becoming weaker (Fernández Vítores 2012, 68; Pérez Vidal 2008 on the situation of the Spanish language in the Community institutions). In addition, in the community framework, the member states of the EU are required to have any kind of technical documents translated into the language of the country in which a product will be commercialized or sold, an activity will be carried out or a law will be implemented (European Union 1998, 2002), which involves a higher volume of scientific and technical translation projects (Byrne 2012). In the twenty-first century, the profession of the translator is facing a moment of change as a result of technologization and commercial expansion, the globalization of all aspects of daily life, and also the specialized activities and unquestionable internationalization of scientific activity. These factors decisively influence the work volume of specialized translators (Montalt i Resurrecció 2005, 47–48). As Lambert (2007, 1689) points out, “globalization has become and actually is one of the external conditions for the strongest areas of the translation business”. In fact, the new needs for multilingual communication are reinforced and influenced by the proliferation of information and communications technology (Kingscott 2002; Lambert 2007; Olohan 2009). Moreover, virtually any product or service entails a translation order which in most cases will be scientific or technical (Byrne 2012, 5). In addition, the position of English as a lingua franca also impacts scientific and technical translation (Ammon 2001; Aréchaga 2005, 2014; Gimeno Menéndez and Gimeno Menéndez 2003; Montgomery 2000, 2009; Navarro 1998, 2001a, 2001b, 2002; Olohan 2009, 2016, 138– 39, among many others). This has a double implication: firstly, the well-known phrase ‘publish or perish’ (Garfield 1996) has settled so strongly on scientific and academic publications that one might think that the exponential increase in the volume of texts in English (Lambert 2007; Navarro 2001b) would involve a rise in the number of translation projects. However, 291

Goretti Faya and Carmen Quijada

it is rather the opposite: in order to be able to publish, be visible and be cited, it is necessary to write in English (Angell 1986; Almirón Roig 2007; Montgomery 2009), and authors are frequently non-native speakers (Vandenbroucke 1989; Montgomery 2009). The second major effect of the use of English as a lingua franca is a consequence of the previous one: the higher the number of publications in English, the lower the need to translate texts (Timo-Iaria 1998; Pérez-Eid 1992), even though some researchers defend the opposite position and think that translation will become even more central (Montgomery 2009). The consequence of this on Spanish is, as Matías-Guiu, García Ramos and Porta-Etessam (2014, 36) highlight: [. . .] en España se da la paradoja de que quienes más se resisten a entender que la calidad tiene poco que ver con el idioma y mucho con la investigación desarrollada son las administraciones públicas, que siguen promocionando lo de fuera y limitando lo de dentro, aunque sea de forma inconsciente. The effects of the predominance of English in scientific research is also having an impact on the Spanish language, as stated by an increasing number of linguists and specialists (Matías-Guiu 1996; Aldrete 1999; Alberch 1996; Pérez-Eid 1992; Navarro 2001b; Aleixandre-Benavent et al. 2007), and a direct impact on translation (Navarro 2001b), but the current situation could also be viewed optimistically: “[T]ranslation in varied form will more than ever be at the unacknowledged core of global scientific communication” (Montgomery 2009). In Spanish-speaking countries, ranging from the Spain of Maimónides to the Argentina of Etcheverry (the translator of Freud into Spanish), scientific and technical translation into Spanish has always had a high demand (Montgomery 2009; Kelly 2012; see also Anguita Acero 2002, 369; Olohan 2016, 8). As regards research, however, scientific and technical translation has not received the same attention as in other disciplines (for example, there are several studies published covering legal translation in Spanish [see chapter on Legal Translation]) or the great impulse that this type of specialized translation has had in other languages (see also Maillot 1969, translated into Spanish in 1997, dealing with scientific and technical translation in French; Pinchuck 1977; Hann 1992; Wright and Wright 1993; Byrne 2006 about the English language; Jumpelt 1961; Kalverkämper and Weinrich 1986 about German). This may be due to the belief among translators that theory is not necessary or even useful (Sánchez Trigo 2005, 134). Another possible cause for the scarce interest that scholars have in scientific and technical texts is thought to be the limited creativity traditionally associated with these text types (Franco Aixelá 2013, 40). In this sense, Ortega y Gasset pointed out that the man of science has to begin by translating his own thoughts into the created language established by the ‘deliberate convention’ of the experts of a particular discipline. He also added that scientific translation might be understood as a partial exception to the essential untranslatability that he claims, since the scientist translates himself or herself from a language into a terminology (Ortega y Gasset 1937, 9). This observation helps us to place the starting point of the meritorious efforts of those that have tried to establish a theoretical framework for scientific and technical translation in the Spanish context. The first works focused mainly on terminological aspects (González Pueyo 1988; Alpízar Castillo 1991a, 1991b, 1991c; Díaz Prieto 1995; Prado 1998, among others), while a high number of practical contributions were also published as a consequence of the exceptional development of Translation Studies at Spanish-speaking universities, as is the case of Congost Maestre (1994), Valero Garcés, Tejedor Martínez, and Santamaría García (1997) and Gamero Pérez and Hurtado Albir (1999). More recent publications regarding this type of translation and its teaching include the work by Montalt i Resurrecció (2002), Garrido Rodríguez 292

Technical and medical translation

(2010), Sevilla Muñoz (2006, 2007), Jiménez Serrano (2007), Gómez and Gómez (2011) and Mayor Serrano (2002a, 2002b, 2003a, 2003b, 2005a, 2005b, 2007, 2010), among others). On the other hand, guidelines and manuals are scarce. However, as will be shown later, a high number of papers and monographic works on specific aspects of scientific and technical translation or about specific disciplines have been published, as well as works of great merit describing scientific and technical Spanish (Gutiérrez Rodilla 1998, 2005; Vivanco Cervero 2006; Edo Marzá and Ordóñez López 2010, the fifth chapter of Martínez López 2011, and the most recent contributions of Sarmiento and Vilches 2016; Navarro 2015b, 2017b). Nevertheless, there is still no comprehensive publication dealing with both the essential elements and specific aspects of scientific translation (Gallardo San Salvador 2003, 161). The situation described by Gallardo San Salvador more than ten years ago has not changed substantially. In order to assess the reasons for this stagnation or lack of interest, it would be convenient to reflect on two issues: (1) who is interested in the research in this field, and (2) who benefits from it. As in any specialized language, there are two main agents in the translatorial act: the specialist and the translator (Byrne 2012, 18–24). A third group, which is a kind of hybrid of both, should be added: the academic researcher who produces a very high number of publications on Translation Studies (Rovira-Esteva, Orero, and Aixelá [2015] estimate that the number of annual publications on Translation Studies could be as high as 3,000). This third group is particularly important in the case of the Spanish language, as publications are an integral part of the Spanish university system. Studies by specialists (i.e. any potential client of a scientific and technical translation, such as doctors, biologists, aeronautic or automobile technicians, etc.) and translators reflecting on this type of translation are scarce. Special attention must be paid to the medical field, which has always aroused interest among specialists, translators, researchers and scholars. An example can be found in the medical translation forum MedTrad (see Claros Díaz 2005) or Panace@. Revista de Medicina, Lenguaje y Traducción, a publication in which both doctors and translators, along with medical editors, journalists, specialists and scholars, share their research results. This journal has even published monographs which have partially filled the research gap on scientific translation in the Spanish language. In any case, they are isolated works which do not represent or involve a continuum in the research on scientific and technical translation.

Research issues As previously mentioned, scientific and technical texts cover a vast and diverse range of fields and disciplines, which require the development of different translation strategies. Thus, researchers have adopted a wide variety of research approaches, ranging from linguistic and terminological issues to frequent translation difficulties and the application of these findings to the training of future translators. This section is organized in five parts: (1) research monographs, (2) edited collections, (3) book chapters and articles in specialized journals, (4) lexicographical works and (5) doctoral theses.

Research monographs As mentioned previously, despite the large number of works on specific thematic areas in other languages, mostly in English (e.g. Pinchuck 1977; Wright and Wright 1993; Byrne 2006, 2012; Montalt i Resurrecció and González Davies 2007; Varela Salinas and Meyer 2015; Olohan 293

Goretti Faya and Carmen Quijada

2016, etc.), the number of monographs that deal with scientific and technical translation in Spanish is much smaller. In general, scientific and technical translation is tackled in books which study different approaches and different types of translation, and which devote one section to each of them (López Campos, Balbuena Torezano, and Jurado 2010). In this sense (see the following), contributions about scientific and technical translation are more frequently found in edited collections and articles in specialized journals. In 1994, Congost Maestre published Problemas de la traducción técnica, the first noteworthy monograph in this line of research. The book, which studied the pair English-Spanish, aimed at combining two parameters of modern linguistic research: the analysis of technical translation and pragmatics, with particular reference to the study of medical language. In the theoretical part of the work, the author deals on the one hand with scientific and technical translation (e.g. relevance, specialized language, terminology, normalization and internationalization, the most common problems, etc.), and on the other with a pragmatic view of scientific and technical translation applied to medical language. The second, and more practical, part of the book includes a contrastive analysis in which the translations of three medical texts (namely, different sections of research papers) are compared with their matching source texts. Possible translation alternatives are also discussed. In 2001, Silvia Gamero Pérez published La traducción de textos técnicos, a widely cited work with very positive reviews (Sager 2002). Although the author explores the pair GermanSpanish, the theoretical part on technical translation and text genres is applicable to other language combinations, which makes it a useful tool for the students of technical translation. The book is structured in four parts: (1) a theoretical explanation of the nature of technical translation; (2) a detailed model of the analysis of the genre of user guides; (3) a comprehensive bibliography section of the literature on scientific and technical translation; and (4) a selection of text samples in both German and Spanish, which can also be suitable for other students working with Spanish as their target language. On the other hand, the Manual de traducció cientificotècnica (2005), by Vicent Montalt i Resurrecció, is worth mentioning. This wide-ranging book (which has been reviewed positively, e.g. Gutiérrez Rodilla 2006) deals with the different factors that determine specialized translation. The content is divided into eight chapters, which include both a theoretical approach and practical activities. The first three focus on scientific and technical communication, whereas the fourth and fifth deal with scientific and technical translation (i.e. its features, the process of translation and the difficulties they entail). The last three have a more practical focus, allowing students to practise their reading skills. The book also trains them to use different reference resources, shows how to carry out searches, as well as to write and revise the target text. As previously mentioned, medical texts have received the greatest attention – most of the contributions being scientific papers and edited collections rather than monographs. Traducción y Lenguaje en Medicina (1997b), edited by Fernando Navarro, is worth mentioning. Although two chapters are co-authored, most of the text was written by Navarro himself. The author not only includes useful word lists of problematic medical and pharmaceutical terms, but also deals with morphosyntactic issues. Other books deal with very specific medical topics, such as La traducción de textos médicos especializados para el ámbito editorial (inglés-español) (2011), by Ana Belén Martínez López, based on the author’s doctoral thesis. It focuses on the translation of specialized texts (English-Spanish) for the publishing sector. Theoretical, methodological and practical aspects are also discussed. It offers a categorization of common problems which can be applied to the improvement of both the professional practice and university teaching. It should be pointed 294

Technical and medical translation

out that, despite its title, it deals with scientific language in general and not medical texts in particular (Escribà Jordana 2012). On the other hand, Claros Díaz’s Cómo traducir y redactar textos científicos en español (2017) compiles a handful of useful strategies and norms to deal with scientific terminology (mainly from the chemical and pharmaceutical fields) in a didactic and informal style that might be helpful for scientific writers as well as professional and trainee translators. The book makes a call for ‘correct scientific writing’, i.e. the use of correct and precise specialized compound nouns, collocations, and mathematical symbols, as well as for the compliance with ISO norms, IS units, and basic orthographic and stylistic rules – aspects which are frequently ignored by scientists or scientific writers and/or translators. Finally, it is not uncommon to find direct references to translation or even whole chapters devoted to the above in monographs dealing with specialized languages, for example, the fifth chapter of the book by Martínez López (2011) and the first section of the edited collection by Edo Marzá and Ordóñez López (2010, 13–194).

Edited collections Although some edited collections are of a more general nature, such as Aspects of specialised translation (Balbuena Torezano and García Calderón 2016) and Traducción científica y técnica (francés-español): Aspectos teóricos, metodológicos y profesionales (Ortega Arjonilla and San Ginés Aguilar 2014), others delve into more specific topics. For instance, Traducción e Interpretación en el ámbito biosanitario (1998), edited by Leandro Félix Fernández and Emilio Ortega Arjonilla, describes the translating and interpreting activity in medical-pharmaceutical contexts. Structured in four sections, the topics discussed include the didactics of medicalpharmaceutical translation and conference interpreting in the health sector. The second and third chapters are especially worth mentioning, since they analyze the professional translation practice, first in institutions and companies, and then from the perspective of the freelance translator. This book, which was pioneering in dealing with the topic of medical and pharmaceutical translation in Spanish-speaking contexts, has been widely quoted (Corpas Pastor 2001; Ruiz Rosendo 2005, 2009; Díaz Galaz 2011, among others) and has been a reference work for years. La traducción científico-técnica y la terminología en la sociedad de la información (2002), edited by María Amparo Alcina Caudet and Silvia Gamero Pérez and with an emphasis on terminological issues, is divided into five sections with contributions by some of the main researchers in this area, who discuss specialized multilingual communication, research about scientific and technical translation and terminology at Spanish universities, different professional profiles and useful tools for translators. Manual de documentación y terminología para la traducción especializada (Gonzalo García and García Yebra 2004) also puts a strong emphasis on terminology. Although its title includes the words ‘specialised translation’, a considerable part of the book is devoted to scientific and technical translation. It offers a detailed and critical study of the documenting techniques applied to specialized translation. The theoretical fundamentals are discussed at the beginning of the book before delving into the documenting and terminological competences of the translator. It concludes with an analysis and assessment of the main software tools useful for specialized translation. The collection, which has been positively reviewed (Gallego Pelegrín 2004; Anguiano Pérez 2005; Sales Savador 2005, among others), may be a valuable resource for technical translators, terminologists, documentalists, philologists and lexicographers, but it may also be a basic reference for lecturers and researchers. 295

Goretti Faya and Carmen Quijada

Finally, De Beni’s Ciencias y traducción en el mundo hispánico (2016) is divided into five chapters, mainly dealing with the role of scientific translation throughout history. Therefore, it may be of great interest to historians and scholars focusing on the history of translation.

Book chapters and articles in specialized journals In terms of content and topics, these can be grouped into the following categories: Some publications are general studies of scientific and technical translation (Gallardo San Salvador 1992; Gamero Pérez 1999; Sánchez Trigo 2005; Castillo Bernal 2014; Franco Aixelá 2013, 2015), while other studies focus on their historical evolution (Franco Aixelá 2004; Olohan 2009; Acuña Partal 2015; Micó Romero 2016; Jiménez Domingo and Lépinette Lepers 2016; Sánchez González de Herrero 2016; Puche Lorenzo 2016; Muñoz Bello 2016). In addition, some discuss rigour and creativity in technical translation (Spang 1997; Bocorny Finatto 2010) as well as cultural aspects (Aguado de Cea and Álvarez de Mon 2003; Nakao, Goeuriot, and Daille 2010), or highlight and investigate the main translation difficulties (Tercedor Sánchez and López Rodríguez 2004; Fidalgo González 2014), with a focus on terminological issues (Prado 1990; Prieto Velasco 2007; Martínez Robledo 2009; Serra Pfennig 2016; among others). Some of them can be applied to any kind of scientific and technical text genre, such as Claros Díaz’s (2006), or may more specific thematically speaking, i.e. they cover only a certain field, such as telecommunications (Navarrete Sirvent 2013), science and technology in the press (Del Pino Romero 2016), and the scientific translation of acupuncture (Jongyoung 2006). They study a particular text genre such as user guides (Vázquez y del Árbol 2008) or scientific documentaries (Ogea Pozo 2013); or they analyse a very specific topic, such as papers on cosmetic products (Vázquez y del Árbol 2007), the euphemistic value of technical terms (Echauri Galván 2013), the translation of highly specialized scientific titles (Soler 2015), or even metaphors in the fields of blindness, tiredness and spirituality (Vivanco Cervero 2016). Many of these publications have opened up new research lines. The importance of the medical field is also reflected in the high volume of chapters and articles, as stated by Diego Amado and Gutiérrez Rodilla (2006). The use of translation in healthcare settings has been particularly productive (Navarro 1997a, 1997b, 2001a; Ortega Arjonilla et al. 1999; Gutiérrez Rodilla 1998, 2005, among others). Particularly noteworthy are the works by doctor and translator Fernando Navarro, who has written glossaries and explanations concerning confusing medical terms in different language combinations (for the English-Spanish pair, see Navarro 2007a, 2007b, 2008a, 2008d, 2009b, 2009c, 2010a, 2010b, 2012; for French-Spanish glossaries, see Navarro 2013b; for German-Spanish words, see Navarro 1996, 2003). Navarro has also published glossaries of abbreviations (2011a), lists of terms from very specific fields (2006b, 2006c, 2008b, 2008c, 2009a, 2011; see also Saladrigas et al. 2008a, 2008b), as well as linguistic-medical reflections (2013b, 2014, 2015a). A number of specialists dealing with medical translation have focused on the mistakes and terminological difficulties linked to the field (Díaz Prieto 1995; Korning Zethsen 2004; Navarro 2006a; Jiménez Gutiérrez and Mañas Castro 2007; Martínez López 2007, 2010; Ruiz Rosendo 2008; Williams 2008; Texidor Pellón and Reyes Miranda 2009; Mayor Serrano 2010; Claros Díaz 2016). Cultural and textual approaches have also been productive (Marsh 1999; Jongyoung 2006; Olmo Cazevieille 2015), including several contrastive studies of the same text genre in different cultures (Mayor Serrano 2005b, 2006; Faya Ornia 2015b; Martínez Motos 2016; Jiménez Crespo 2017), and dealing with specific language pairs (Quijada Díez 2009, 2013; García-Esteban and Varela Salinas 2015; Martínez López 2015; Ortega Arjonilla 2015, among others). 296

Technical and medical translation

Finally, several contributions have approached scientific and technical translation from a pedagogical perspective, as is the case of Gamero Pérez and Hurtado Albir (1999), Gamero Pérez (2010), Mayor Serrano (2002a, 2002b, 2003a, 2003b, 2005a, 2005b, 2007, 2010) and Montalt i Resurrecció (2002). Other key contributions include Vega Expósito (1999), Sevilla Muñoz (2006, 2007), González Davies, Scott-Tennent, and Torras (2001), Jiménez Serrano (2007), Clifford (2007), Garrido Rodríguez (2010), Gómez and Gómez (2011), Veiga Díaz (2011), Vázquez y del Árbol, Martínez Lillo, and Ortiz García (2012), Alcalde and Gregorio Cano (2013), Ruiz Mezcua (2014) or Sánchez Ramos (2017) among others.

Terminological and lexicographical works As regards terminological and lexicographical issues, the Diccionario Técnico español-inglés (1983) by Guy Malgorn is one of the most widely used technical dictionaries. It focuses on vocabulary related to machinery, tools, combustion engines, metallurgy, public works, etc, while the Diccionario politécnico de las lenguas española e inglesa (1997), by Federico Beigbeder, includes also acronyms, abbreviations and the main measurement units. In the field of medicine, the Manual de traducción médica. Diccionario básico de Medicina (inglés-francés-español) (1999) is an adaptation by Ortega Arjonilla and his collaborators of the source French book by Henri Van Hoof (1986). However, it is not a mere lexicographical text in the strict sense, since its first part deals with the process of translation, linguistic systems, translation procedures and the problems that usually arise when translating medical texts, while the second section of the book contains a basic glossary of medical terms (EnglishFrench-Spanish), as well as an annex of medical texts in French to be translated into Spanish. Although it has been criticized for a lack of coherence (Turrión 2000), it may be interesting for translation students working with these three languages since practical exercises are combined with solid theoretical foundations. In this same field, it is worth mentioning the List and Glossary of Medical Terms developed by the GENTT research group (based at the Universitat Jaume I), who apply the concept of textual genre to the analysis of specialized translation, as well as the Medical Spanish and English Dictionary by Slonczewski and Ramírez, which may be useful for both students and professionals. It includes descriptions of diseases, pictures and medical interviews in audio support. Especially relevant is the Diccionario Crítico de Dudas inglés-español de Medicina (3rd edition) (2000) by Fernando Navarro (popularly known as the Red Book), probably the most important reference work on medical translation. This exhaustive dictionary (with more than 48,000 entries) not only provides a Spanish equivalent for every English term, but also explains the reasons why other options are wrong, or even the suitability of certain alternatives depending on the context. Moreover, it warns of unnecessary calques and false friends, meticulously explains affixes to better understand the meaning of derivatives, compiles several polysemous words and deals with orthographic and stylistic issues. This dictionary, which is currently available only online in the Cosnautas portal (Navarro 2013a), is a reference work for the specialized translator, since it includes four relevant lexicographic works: (1) an updated version of the Red Book, (2) the Diccionario inglés-español de alergología e inmunología clínica by Igea Aznar (2016), (3) the Repertorio de siglas, acrónimos, abreviaturas y símbolos utilizados en los textos médicos en español (2017c), drafted by Navarro himself, and (4) a resource pack especially useful for translators of the medical field and related sciences: a collection of links which are permanently updated, the so-called Árbol de Cos (2013) by Laura Munoa. 297

Goretti Faya and Carmen Quijada

In July  2017 this portal launched a German-Spanish medical dictionary with more than 200,000 entries: Medizin. Gran diccionario médico alemán-español, by Fernando Navarro. It fills a gap which had been only partially covered by previous works, such as Ruiz Torres (1960), Ruiz Torres and Ruiz Torres (2001) and Tamayo Delgado (1999) (see Navarro 2003 for further information on other German-Spanish medical dictionaries). Finally, other hardcopy bilingual medical dictionaries are worth mentioning: the Stedman, Diccionario bilingüe de Ciencias Médicas (inglés-español, español-inglés) (2001), the Diccionario Médico Español-Inglés, Inglés-Español (2005), and the Spanish monolingual Diccionario de términos médicos (2011), an important contribution to lexicography by the Spanish Royal Academy of Medicine. To conclude this section, other notable lexicographical titles on very specific fields include the Diccionario de Arquitectura, Construcción y Obras Públicas (1987) (which not only provides explanations of each term but also includes engravings, pictures, drawings and equivalence tables for measuring units and other data of professional interest), the Wörterbuch der Sportwissenschaft. Deutsch, Englisch, Spanisch. Dictionary of sport science. German, English, Spanish. Diccionario de las ciencias del deporte. Alemán, Inglés, Español (1992), the Mathematics dictionary and handbook: English-Spanish = Diccionario y manual de matemáticas: inglés-español (1996) (concerning terms, formulas and mathematical expressions in conjunction with explanations and examples), and the Spanish Computing Dictionary/Diccionario Bilingüe de Informática (2004) (which provides over 50,000 computing and information technology terms).

Doctoral theses In the last few years, several doctoral theses underscore the importance of both this research area and of translation as an academic discipline in the Spanish-speaking world. Although the topics covered are varied, they can be classified in three groups. The first one includes theses dealing with the translation process of scientific and technical texts and related aspects (e.g. Gamero Pérez 1998; Camón Herrero 2002; Ojanguren Sánchez 2003; Veroz González 2014; Barba Redondo 2015). The second group contains theses on terminological and discursive issues (e.g. Gallardo San Salvador 1997; Fernández Polo 1998; Candel Mora 2003; Tijeras López 2008; Tsai 2011; Astorga Zambrana 2011; Pinilla Machado 2017), many of which are on the medical field (such as the theses by López Rodríguez 2000; Mayor Serrano 2002a; Quijada Diez 2007; Muñoz Torres 2011; Sánchez Ibáñez 2013; González Darriba 2014; Faya Ornia 2015a; Martínez Motos 2016). Finally, theses in the third group study the didactics of scientific and technical translation (e.g. Sevilla Muñoz 2002; Bolaños Medina 2008; Martínez López 2008; Contreras Blanco 2011).

Future directions Many translators specialize in scientific and technical translation nowadays, as the field has broadened covering a wide range of disciplines (from engineering to applied sciences such as medicine). This interest can also be found in the growing number of higher education programmes, both in Latin America and Spain, including not only degrees in Translation Studies, but also in very specific areas of scientific and technical translation. Research into this type of translation, as complex and diverse as it is, requires an interdisciplinary approach that sheds light not just on the translators’ practice but also on the challenges for the practice of scientific and technical translation in the Spanish-speaking parts of the 298

Technical and medical translation

world. The growing number of postgraduate and research degrees offered is a positive sign of the changing times, but there is still a long way to go as regards the production of qualitative and quantitative research involving the Spanish language and by Spanish-speaking language specialists. As previously stated, there is an evident lack of monographic works in this field, be it for the current status of English in academia or for the lack of professional language specialists willing to dedicate their time to this type of translation research. A possible reason for this lack of language researchers may be that specialized texts have been traditionally translated by field specialists with a knowledge of two languages rather than by professional translators; however, this practice also seems to be changing with the increasing professionalization of this sector. Notwithstanding this, more continuous and solid research is desirable, and other language combinations besides the English-Spanish pair should be taken into consideration, since their impact on the market should not be neglected (Claros Díaz 2017, 7–15). In this regard, the interest in medical texts, as highlighted by the articles, book chapters and edited collections published in the past, seems to continue. The overall picture of scientific-technical translation drawn here shows that, despite the growing importance of this type of translation in recent years, more research into it is needed. Future research may cover, as Gallardo San Salvador (2003, 161) pointed out, aspects such as specialized language and writing, terminology, documentation, the main features of these types of text, as well as professional, didactic, and methodological issues.

Recommended reading Gonzalo García, Consuelo, and Valentín García Yebra. 2004. Manual de documentación y terminología para la traducción especializada. Madrid: Arco/Libros. This pioneering collection includes a wide variety of contributions recommended to gain an overall understanding of scientific and technical translation in the Spanish-speaking context. Byrne, Jody. 2012. Scientific and Technical Translation Explained. A Nuts and Bolts Guide for Beginners. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing. Byrne’s well-structured and comprehensive book is a handbook suited to both translator trainees and translator trainers. Although it does not cover Spanish, it will be of great help to newcomers, as it offers an overview of the field accompanied by a large number of texts, samples and exercises in English. Olohan, Maeve. 2016. Scientific and Technical Translation. London: Routledge. Olohan’s work offers exercises and a reference list at the end of each chapter. Two chapters deal with theoretical aspects and five focus on specific text types. Its didactic approach makes it an interesting option for scholars, teachers, and (mainly postgraduate) students. Claros Díaz, Manuel Gonzalo. 2017. Cómo traducir y redactar textos científicos en español. Reglas, ideas y consejos. Barcelona: Fundación Dr. Antonio Esteve. One of the latest contributions to scientific translation focuses on the English-Spanish pair and aims mainly at establishing a clear, easy-to-find and quick style guide for nomenclatures, chemical, biochemical, and pharmaceutical compound nouns, and how to deal with them not just when translating from English but also when writing original scientific texts in Spanish. It is a well-documented book with abundant examples and very useful explanations for non-scientists on how to manage very specific terminology as well as basic orthographic and stylistic rules.

References Acuña Partal, Carmen. 2015. “La aportación de Cádiz a la historia de la traducción médica en la España del siglo XIX.” In Translating and Interpreting Healthcare Discourses, edited by María José Varela Salinas and Bernd Meyer, 17–30. Berlin: Frank & Timme.

299

Goretti Faya and Carmen Quijada Aguado de Cea, Guadalupe, and Inmaculada Álvarez de Mon. 2003. “La traducción técnica inglés-español.” In El inglés como vocación: homenaje al profesor Miguel Castelo Montero, edited by Antonio Raúl de Toro Santos and María Jesús Lorenzo Modia, 27–41. La Coruña: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de La Coruña. Alberch, Pere. 1996. “Language in Contemporary Science: The Tool and the Cultural Icon.” In Sciences et langues en Europe, edited by Roger Chartier and Pietro Corsi, 257–64. Paris: Centre Alexandre Koyré. Alcalde, Elena, and Ana Gregorio Cano. 2013. “Implicaciones didácticas en la traducción especializada: los anglicismos y su (no) traducción en el ámbito profesional del desarrollo de softwares.” Íkala: revista de lenguaje y cultura 18 (2): 59–67. Alcina Caudet, María Amparo, and Silvia Gamero Pérez. 2002. La traducción científico-técnica y la terminología en la sociedad de la información. Castellón de la Plana: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universitat Jaume I. Aldrete, Jorge Antonio. 1999. “Publicando en español.” Revista Argentina de Anestesiología 57: 281–3. Aleixandre-Benavent, Rafael, Juan Carlos Valderrama Zurián, Adolfo Alonso-Arroyo, Alberto MiguelDasit, Javier González de Dios, and José Ignacio de Granda Orive. 2007. “Español versus inglés como lenguaje de publicación y factor de impacto de Neurología.” Neurología 22: 19–26. Almirón Roig, Nuria. 2007. “La economía política de la investigación informacional.” Revista Latina de Comunicación Social 62: 197–217. Alpízar Castillo, Rodolfo. 1991a. “Bases para el desarrollo de la terminología científico-técnica en Cuba.” Ciencias de la información 2 (158): 24–31. ———. 1991b. “Bases para el desarrollo de la terminología científico-técnica en Cuba (Segunda parte).” Ciencias de la información 3 (159): 12–21. ———. 1991c. “Bases para el desarrollo de la terminología científico-técnica en Cuba (Tercera parte, final).” Ciencias de la información 4 (160): 45–49. Álvarez de Mon, Inmaculada. 2001. “Problemas en torno a la denominación del lenguaje científico-técnico: ciencia, técnica, tecnología e ingeniería.” Ibérica: Revista de la Asociación Europea de Lenguas para Fines Específicos (AELFE) 3: 31–42. Ammon, Ulrich, ed. 2001. The Dominance of English as a Language of Science. Effects on Other Languages and Language Communities. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Angell, Marcia. 1986. “Publish or Perish: A Proposal.” Annals of Internal Medicine 104: 261–2. Anguiano Pérez, Rocío. 2005. “Manual de documentación y terminología para la traducción especializada.” Review of Manual de documentación y terminología para la traducción especializada, by Consuelo Gonzalo García and Valentín García Yebra. Hermeneus: Revista de la Facultad de Traducción e Interpretación de Soria 7: 244–9. Anguita Acero, Juana María. 2002. “La traducción científico-técnica: situación actual en España.” In Actas del I Congreso “El español, lengua de traducción”. Ciudad Real: ESLETRA/Comisión Europea/Agencia EFE. Aréchaga, Juan. 2005. “Las revistas profesionales como claves para el desarrollo de la ciencia y la tecnología en España.” Panace@ 6: 23–27. ———. 2014. “Lenguaje y comunicación en la investigación biomédica básica.” In La importancia del lenguaje en el entorno biosanitario, edited by Bertha M. Gutiérrez Rodilla and Fernando A. Navarro, 21–32. Barcelona: Fundación Dr. Antonio Esteve. Astorga Zambrana, Esther. 2011. “Sobre la traducción de textos médicos especializados (francés-español). Análisis terminológico, lingüístico y traductológico.” Doctoral thesis, Universidad de Málaga, Málaga. Balbuena Torezano, María del Carmen, and Ángeles García Calderón. 2016. Aspects of Specialised Translation. Thuringia: Narr. Barba Redondo, Isaac. 2015. “Problemas conceptuales en la traducción técnica: textos de automoción.” Doctoral thesis, Universidad de Málaga, Málaga. Beatty, William, Everett Beneke, and Alfred Jay Bollet. 2001. Stedman, Diccionario bilingüe de Ciencias Médicas (inglés-español, español-inglés). Madrid: Editorial Médica Panamericana. Beigbeder Atienza, Federico. 1997. Diccionario politécnico de las lenguas española e inglesa. Madrid: Ediciones Díaz de Santos. Beyer, Erich, and José Antonio Aquesolo Vegas. 1992. Diccionario de las ciencias del deporte: Alemán, Inglés, Español = Wörterbuch der Sportwissenschaft: Deutsch, Englisch, Spanisch = Dictionary of sport science: German, English, Spanish. Málaga: Unisport-Junta de Andalucía.

300

Technical and medical translation Bocorny Finatto, María José. 2010. “Metaphors in Scientific and Technical Languages: Challenges and Perspective.” DELTA Documentacao De Estudos Em Linguistica Teorica E Aplicada 26: 645–56. Bolaños Medina, Alicia. 2008. Diseño y aplicación de un modelo didáctico innovador para la traducción de géneros digitales. Las Palmas de Gran Canaria: Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. Burnett, Charles. 2007. “Translation from Arabic into Latin in the Middle Ages (Übersetzungen aus dem Arabischen ins Latainische im Mittelalter).” In Übersetzung – Translation – Traduction: Ein internationales Handbuch zur Übersetzungsforschung/An international Encyclopaedia of Translation Studies/Encyclopédie internationale de la recherche sur la traduction, vol. 2, edited by Harald Kittel et al., 1231–7. Berlin: De Gruyter. Byrne, Jody. 2006. Technical Translation: Usability Strategies for Translating Technical Documentation. Dordrecht: Springer. ———. 2012. Scientific and Technical Translation Explained. A Nuts and Bolts Guide for Beginners. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing. Cabré Castellví, María Teresa. 1999. La terminología: representación y comunicación. Elementos para una teoría de base comunicativa y otros artículos. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Institut Universitari de Lingüística Aplicada. Camón Herrero, Juan Bosco. 2002. “Metodología de traducción de textos especializados en informática (inglés-español).” Doctoral thesis, UNED, Madrid. Candel Mora, Miguel Ángel. 2003. “Terminología aplicada a la traducción técnica de informes sobre la gestión de la I+D.” Doctoral thesis, Universitat Politècnica de València, Valencia. Castillo Bernal, María Pilar. 2014. “La traducción técnica como especialización.” Skopos: revista internacional de traducción e interpretación (4): 35–48. Claros Díaz, Manuel Gonzalo. 2005. “MedTrad: un foro de traducción médica en internet.” Trans 9: 151–9. ———. 2006. “Consejos básicos para mejorar las traducciones de textos científicos del inglés al español (I).” Panace@ 7 (23): 89–94. ———. 2016. “La traducción al español de los fármacos y de los compuestos químicos.” Translation and Translanguaging in Multilingual Contexts 2 (1): 49–65. ———. 2017. Cómo traducir y redactar textos científicos en español. Reglas, ideas y consejos. Barcelona: Fundación Dr. Antonio Esteve. Clifford, Andrew. 2007. “Grading Scientific Translation: What’s a New Teacher to Do?” Meta: Journal des traducteurs = translators’ journal 52 (2): 376–89. Collin, Simon M. H., J. Piqué, S. Posteguillo, and L. Melción. 2004. Spanish Computing Dictionary/ Diccionario Bilingüe de Informática. London: Bloomsbury. Congost Maestre, Nereida. 1994. Problemas de la traducción técnica. Alicante: Universidad de Alicante. Contreras Blanco, Fernando. 2011. Sobre la adquisición de metodologías de trabajo profesional y capacitación terminológica en el aula de traducción científico-técnica (francés-español): propuesta de elaboración de un diccionario de clase de apoyo a la enseñanza-aprendizaje de la traducción. Madrid: Universidad Autónoma de Madrid. Corpas Pastor, Gloria. 2001. “Compilación de un corpus ad hoc para la enseñanza de la traducción inversa especializada.” Trans 5: 155–84. De Beni, Matteo. 2016. Ciencias y traducción en el mundo hispánico. Mantua: Universitas Studiorum. Del Pino Romero, Javier. 2016. “La traducción de términos de la ciencia y la técnica en la prensa española.” Translation and Translanguaging in Multilingual Contexts 2 (1): 26–48. Díaz Galaz, Stephanie. 2011. “The Effect of Previous Preparation in Simultaneous Interpreting: Preliminary Results.” Across Languages and Cultures 12 (2): 173–91. Díaz Prieto, Petra. 1995. “La importancia de la normalización terminológica en la calidad de la traducción científico-técnica.” Estudios humanísticos. Filología 17: 355–64. Diego Amado, Carmen, and María Bertha Gutiérrez Rodilla. 2006. “Algunos datos respecto a la investigación sobre traducción médica en España.” Panace@ 7 (23): 115–21. Echauri Galván, Bruno. 2013. “El valor eufemístico de los términos técnicos: presencia e implicaciones en la traducción y la interpretación en el marco de la salud mental.” Onomázein: revista de lingüística, filología y traducción de la Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile 27: 258–68. Eckart, Wolfgang Uwe. 2009. Geschichte der Medizin, 6th ed. Heidelberg: Springer. Edo Marzá, Nuria, and Pilar Ordóñez López, eds. 2010. El lenguaje de la ciencia y la tecnología. Castelló de la Plana: Publicaciones de la Universitat Jaume I.

301

Goretti Faya and Carmen Quijada Escribà Jordana, Marta. 2012. “La traducción de textos médicos especializados para el ámbito editorial.” Review of La traducción de textos médicos especializados para el ámbito editorial, by Ana Belén Martínez López. Panace@ 13 (36): 374–7. European Union. 1998. “Council Resolution of 17 December 1998 on Operating Instructions for Technical Consumer Goods.” Official Journal of the European Communities, December 31: 1–4. Accessed July 6, 2017. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/LV/TXT/?uri=CELEX:31998Y1231(02). ———. 2002. “Directive 2001/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 December 2001 on General Product Safety.” Official Journal of the European Communities, January 15: 11/4–11/17. Accessed July 6, 2017. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32001L0095. European Union. 2012. “The Unitary Patent.” Library Briefing. Library of the European Parliament, 671272012. Accessed July  6, 2017. www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/bibliotheque/ briefing/2012/120404/LDM_BRI(2012)120404_RE. Faya Ornia, Goretti. 2015a. “El folleto médico como género. Estudio contrastivo (inglés-español).” Doctoral thesis, Universidad de Oviedo, Oviedo. ———. 2015b. “Estudio contrastivo del folleto médico (inglés-español).” Quaderns – Revista de Traducció 22: 347–62. Félix Fernández, Leandro, and Emilio Ortega Arjonilla. 1998. Traducción e Interpretación en el ámbito biosanitario. Granada: Comares. Fernández Polo, Francisco Javier. 1998. “Aspectos discursivos en la traducción de textos científicos del inglés al español.” Doctoral thesis, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela. Fernández Vítores, David. 2012. “El español en las relaciones y los foros internacionales. Los casos de la Unión Europea y las Naciones Unidas.” In El español en las relaciones internacionales, edited by Javier Rupérez and David Fernández Vítores, 58–84. Madrid/Barcelona: Fundación Telefónica/Ariel. Fidalgo González, Leticia. 2014. “Difusión del conocimiento y traducción científica: un enfoque didáctico.” Skopos 4: 63–86. Franco Aixelá, Javier. 2004. “The Study of Technical and Scientific Translation: An Examination of its Historical Development.” JoSTrans. The Journal of Specialised Translation 1: 29–49. Accessed May 16, 2017. www.jostrans.org/issue01/art_aixela.php. ———. 2013. “La traducción científico-técnica: aportaciones desde los estudios de traducción.” Letras 21 (3): 37–60. ———. 2015. “La traducción de textos científicos y técnicos.” Tonos digital: Revista electrónica de estudios filológicos 29: 139–54. Gallardo San Salvador, Natividad. 1992. “Reflexiones sobre la traducción científico-técnica.” Sendebar: Revista de la Facultad de Traducción e Interpretación 3: 185–91. ———. 1997. “El orden de la descripción de las características y su importancia para la denominación y traducción de un término. Casos que se presentan en términos de Nutrición.” Doctoral thesis, Universidad de Granada, Granada. ———. 2003. “Investigación en traducción científica.” In Panorama actual de la investigación en traducción e interpretación, vol. II, edited by García Peinado, Miguel Ángel, and Emilio Ortega Arjonilla, 153–66. Granada: Atrio. Gallego Pelegrín, José. 2004. “Manual de documentación y terminología para la traducción especializada.” Review of Manual de documentación y terminología para la traducción especializada, by Consuelo Gonzalo García and Valentín García Yebra. Panace@ 5 (17–18): 285–6. Gálová, Dita. 2007. Languages for Specific Purposes: Searching for Common Solutions. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Gamero Pérez, Silvia. 1998. “La traducción de textos técnicos (alemán-español): Géneros y subgéneros.” Doctoral thesis, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona. ———. 1999. “La traducción de textos técnicos y la diversidad tipológica.” Sendebar: Revista de la Facultad de Traducción e Interpretación 10–11: 127–58. ———. 2001. La traducción de textos técnicos. Barcelona: Ariel Lenguas Modernas. ———. 2010. Traducción alemán-español: Aprendizaje activo de las destrezas básicas. Castelló de la Plana/Madrid: Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I/ Edelsa. Gamero Pérez, Silvia, and Amparo Hurtado Albir. 1999. “La traducción técnica y científica.” In Enseñar a traducir, edited by Amparo Hurtado Albir, 139–53. Madrid: Edelsa. García Esteban, Ana Isabel, and María José Varela Salinas. 2015. “El accidente cerebrovascular (ACV) y su tratamiento terminológico desde la perspectiva fisioterápica. Creación de un glosario básico español-inglés.” In Translating and Interpreting Healthcare Discourses/ Traducir e interpretar en

302

Technical and medical translation el ámbito sanitario, edited by María José Varela Salinas and Bernd Meyer, 201–24. Berlin: Frank & Timme. García Yebra, Valentín. 1989. En torno a la traducción, 2nd ed. Madrid: Gredos. ———. 1994. Traducción: historia y teoría. Madrid: Gredos. Garfield, Eugene. 1996. “What Is the Primordial Reference for the Phrase ‘Publish or Perish’?” The Scientist 10 (12): 11. Garrido Rodríguez, Carlos. 2010. “Modificaciones substanciales en la traducción de artículos de tema científico-técnico de la Encyclopaedia Britannica. Implicaciones para la didáctica y la crítica de la traducción científico-técnica.” Hermenēus. Revista de Traducción e Interpretación 12: 93–120. GENTT [Géneros Textuales para la Traducción]. 2000. “List and Glossary of Medical Terms.” Accessed August 28, 2017. https://users.ugent.be/~rvdstich/eugloss/ES/lijst.html. Gil, J. 1985. La escuela de traductores de Toledo y los colaboradores judíos. Toledo: Instituto Provincial de Investigaciones Toledanas. Gimeno Menéndez, Francisco, and María Victoria Gimeno Menéndez. 2003. El desplazamiento lingüístico del español por el inglés. Madrid: Cátedra. Gläser, Rosemarie. 1993. “A Multilevel Model for a Typology of LSP Genres.” Fachsprache International Journal of LSP 15 (12): 18–26. Gómez, Norman, and Jorge Iván Gómez. 2011. “Aproximación a una didáctica de la traducción de textos científicos y técnicos inglés-español.” Íkala, revista de lenguaje y cultura 16: 135–63. González Darriba, Patricia. 2014. “English to Spanish Translated Medical Forms: A Descriptive Genrebased Study.” Doctoral thesis. Rutgers University, NJ. González Davies, María, Christopher Scott-Tennent, and Fernanda Rodriguez Torras. 2001. “Training in the Application of Translation Strategies for Undergraduate Scientific Translation Students.” Meta: Journal des traducteurs = translators’ journal 46 (4): 737–43. González Pueyo, María Isabel. 1988. “Traducción técnica: elementos discursivos y terminología.” Miscelánea: A Journal of English and American Studies 9: 5. Gonzalo García, Consuelo, and Valentín García Yebra. 2004. Manual de documentación y terminología para la traducción especializada. Madrid: Arco/Libros. Gutiérrez Rodilla, Bertha María. 1998. La ciencia empieza en la palabra. Barcelona: Península. ———. 2005. El lenguaje de las ciencias. Madrid: Gredos. ———. 2006. “Manual de traducción científico-técnica.” Review of Manual de traducción científicotécnica, by Vicent Montalt i Resurrecció. JoSTrans. The Journal of Specialised Translation 5: 149–50. ———. 2009. “Científica, Traducción.” In Diccionario histórico de la traducción en España, edited by Francisco Lafarga and Luis Pegenaute, 230–9. Madrid: Gredos. Hann, Michael. 1992. The Key to Technical Translation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Herrera McElroy, Onyria, and Lola L. Grabb. 2005. Diccionario Médico Español-Inglés, Inglés-Español. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Huot, Sylvia. 2007. “The Roman de la Rose in Translation in Medieval Europe (Übersetunzgen des ‘Rosenromans’ im europäischen Mittelalter).” In Übersetzung – Translation – Traduction: Ein internationales Handbuch zur Übersetzungsforschung/An international Encyclopaedia of Translation Studies/Encyclopédie internationale de la recherche sur la traduction, vol. 2, edited by Harald Kittel et al., 1366–70. Berlin: De Gruyter. Igea Aznar, Juan Manuel. 2016. Diccionario inglés-español de alergología e inmunología clínica, 3rd ed. Last update: March 2016. www.cosnautas.com/es/catalogo/alergologia. Jacobi, Daniel. 1987. Textes et images de la vulgarisation scientifique. Bern: Peter Lang. Jiménez Crespo, Miguel Ángel. 2017. “Combining Corpus and Experimental Studies: Insights into the Reception of Translated Medical Texts.” JoSTrans. The Journal of Specialised Translation 28: 2–22. Jiménez Domingo, Elena, and Brigitte Lépinette Lepers. 2016. “Los traductores del ámbito de la medicina.” In Reconstruyendo el pasado de la traducción: a propósito de obras francesas especializadas, científicas y técnicas en sus versiones española, edited by Brigitte Lépinette Lepers and Julia Pinilla Martínez, 109–56. Granada: Comares. Jiménez Gutiérrez, Isabel, and Aurora Mañas Castro. 2007. “Un ejemplo de análisis terminológico en el ámbito específico de la traducción de textos médicos inglés-español (anatomía).” In Traducción y mediación cultural: reflexiones interdisciplinares, edited by María del Carmen Balbuena Torezano and Ángeles García Calderón, 317–24. Granada: Atrio.

303

Goretti Faya and Carmen Quijada Jiménez Serrano, Óscar. 2007. “El enfoque profesional en la didáctica de la traducción técnica.” In Traducción y mediación cultural: reflexiones interdisciplinares, edited by María del Carmen Balbuena Torezano and Ángeles García Calderón, 419–26. Granada: Atrio. Jongyoung, Kim. 2006. “Beyond paradigm: Making Transcultural Connections in a Scientific Translation of Acupuncture.” Social Science and Medicine 62 (12): 2960–72. Jumpelt, Rudolf Walter. 1961. Die Übersetzung naturwissenschaftlicher unt technischer Literatur. Berlin: Langenscheidt. Kalverkämper, Hartwig, and Harald Weinrich, eds. 1986. Deutsch als Wissenschaftssprache. Thuringia: Gunter Narr. Kelly, Nataly. 2012. “Clearing up the Top 10 Myths About Translation.” The Blog, The Huffington Post. Accessed July  12, 2017. www.huffingtonpost.com/nataly-kelly/clearing-up-the-top-10my_b_1590360.html. Kingscott, Geoffrey. 2002. “Technical Translation and Related Disciplines.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 10 (4): 247–55. doi:10.1080/0907676X.2002.9961449. Korning Zethsen, Karen. 2004. “Latin-based Terms: True or False Friends?” Target: International Journal of Translation Studies 16 (1): 125–42. Lambert, José. 2007. “Translation and the Globalization of the Modern World.” In Übersetzung – ­Translation – Traduction: Ein internationales Handbuch zur Übersetzungsforschung/An international Encyclopaedia of Translation Studies/Encyclopédie internationale de la recherche sur la traduction, vol. 2, edited by Harald Kittel et al., 1680–700. Berlin: De Gruyter. Lavagnino, Elisa. 2012. “Les langues de spécialité et la variation discursive: une étude contrastive de la réduction des termes complexes.” Synergies Espagne (5): 47–64. Loffler-Laurian, Anne Marie. 1984. “Vulgarisation Scientifique: Formulation, Reformulation, Traduction.” Langue française 64 (1): 109–25. López Campos, Rafael, María del Carmen Balbuena Torezano, and Manuela Álvarez Jurado, eds. 2010. Traducción y modernidad. Textos científicos, jurídicos, económicos y audiovisuales. Córdoba: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Córdoba. López Rodríguez, Clara Inés. 2000. “Tipología textual y cohesión en la traducción biomédica inglésespañol: un estudio de corpus.” Doctoral thesis, Universidad de Granada, Granada. Maillot, Jean. 1969. La traduction scientifique et technique. Paris: Eyrolles. Malgorn, Guy. 1983. Diccionario técnico español-inglés. Madrid: Ediciones Paraninfo. Marsh, Malcolm. 1999. “Algunas consideraciones sobre la traducción médica.” In Aproximaciones a la traducción, edited by Antonio Gil de Carrasco, and Leo Hickey. Madrid: Instituto Cervantes. Martínez López, Ana Belén. 2007. “Problemas de traducción de la terminología médica (del inglés al español) para el sector audiovisual: el caso de la serie “House” en español.” In Traducción y mediación cultural: reflexiones interdisciplinares, edited by María del Carmen Balbuena Torezano, and Ángeles García Calderón, 335–48. Granada: Atrio. ———. 2008. La traducción editorial de manuales especializados dentro del ámbito biosanitario: Aplicaciones a la enseñanza y a la práctica profesional de la traducción médica del inglés al español. Granada: Universidad de Granada. ———. 2010. “La terminología médica en francés, inglés y español: problemas que se derivan de la presencia del inglés como lingua franca de la comunicación científica a escala internacional.” Anales de Filología Inglesa 18: 393–404. ———. 2011. La traducción de textos médicos especializados para el ámbito editorial (inglés-español) (vol. 93 of Colección Interlingua). Granada: Comares. ———. 2015. “About the Practice of Translating Specialized Medical Texts from English into Spanish.” In Translating and Interpreting Healthcare Discourses/ Traducir e interpretar en el ámbito sanitario, edited by María José Varela Salinas and Bernd Meyer, 187–200. Berlin: Frank & Timme. Martínez Motos, Raquel. 2016. “El género prospecto y el efecto de la traducción inglés-español en su legibilidad y facilidad de uso para el lector lego.” Doctoral thesis, Universidad de Alicante, Alicante. Martínez Robledo, María Isabel. 2009. “Aspectos terminológicos en traducción científica españolfrancés: un caso práctico.” Entreculturas 1: 487–511. Matías-Guiu, Jorge. 1996. “Las publicaciones científicas en español.” Revista de Neurología 24: 506–7. Matías-Guiu, Jorge, Rocío García Ramos, and Jesús Porta-Etessam. 2014. “El idioma y la difusión de la investigación.” In La importancia del lenguaje en el entorno biosanitario, edited by Bertha María Gutiérrez Rodilla and Fernando Antonio Navarro, 33–37. Barcelona: Fundación Dr. Antonio Esteve.

304

Technical and medical translation Mayor Serrano, María Blanca. 2002a. Tipología textual pragmática y didáctica de la traducción en el ámbito biomédico. Granada: University of Granada. ———. 2002b. “La formación de traductores médicos? Sugerencias didácticas.” Panace@ 3 (9–10): 83–89. ———. 2003a. “Elementos metacomunicativos en el artículo de divulgación médica (inglés-español) e implicaciones didácticas para la formación de traductores.” Ibérica 6: 89–109. ———. 2003b. “La formación de traductores médicos en España, otra asignatura pendiente?” Trans 7: 131–6. ———. 2005a. “Consideraciones fundamentales en la formación de traductores: mercado de trabajo y tipo de alumnado.” Trans 9: 195–201. ———. 2005b. “Análisis contrastivo (inglés-español) de la clase de texto “folleto de salud” e implicaciones didácticas para la formación de traductores médicos.” Panace@ 20 (6): 132–41. ———. 2006. “La citacion en la comunicación medica escrita (inglés- español): funciones y tipos.” Lebende Sprachen 2 (51): 72–77. ———. 2007. “La importancia de la tipología textual pragmática para la formación de traductores médicos.” Panace@ 9 (26): 124–37. ———. 2010. “Necesidades terminológicas del traductor de productos sanitarios: evaluación de recursos.” Panace@ 11 (31): 10–14. Micó Romero, Noelia. 2016. “La actividad lexicográfica especializada (siglo XIX). Diccionarios y enciclopedias traducidos.” In Reconstruyendo el pasado de la traducción: a propósito de obras francesas especializadas, científicas y técnicas en sus versiones españolas, edited by Brigitte Lépinette Lepers and Julia Pinilla Martínez, 85–108. Granada: Comares. Montalt i Resurrecció, Vicent. 2002. “Entre el aula y la profesión: reflexiones y propuestas en torno a la formación de traductores especializados.” In La traducción científico-técnica y la terminología en la sociedad de la información, edited by Amparo Alcina Caudet and Silvia Gamero Pérez, 219–30. Castellón de la Plana: Universitat Jaume I. ———. 2005. Manual de traducción cientificotècnica. Vic: Eumo Editorial. Montalt i Resurrecció, Vicent, and María González Davies. 2007. Medical Translation Step by Step. Learning by Drafting. Manchester: St Jerome Publishing. Montgomery, Scott L. 2000. Science in Translation: Movements of Knowledge Through Cultures and Time. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. ———. 2009. “English and Science: Realities and Issues for Translation in the Age of an Expanding Lingua Franca.” JoSTrans. The Journal of Specialised Translation 11: 5–16. Accessed July 12, 2017. www.jostrans.org/issue11/art_montgomery.php. Moreno Fernández, Francisco. 2015. La maravillosa historia del español. Madrid: Instituto Cervantes/ Espasa Libros. Munoa, Laura. 2013. Árbol de Cos. Accessed March 2017. www.cosnautas.com/es/catalogo/arboldecos. Muñoz Bello, Rosa. 2016. “Traducción y enseñanza de la química a finales del siglo XVIII en España.” In Reconstruyendo el pasado de la traducción: a propósito de obras francesas especializadas, científicas y técnicas en sus versiones españolas, edited by Brigitte Lépinette Lepers, and Julia Pinilla Martínez, 265–76. Granada: Comares. Muñoz Torres, Carlos Arturo. 2011. “Análisis contrastivo y traductológico de textos médicos (inglésespañol). El género ‘caso clínico’.” Doctoral thesis, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Barcelona. Nakao, Y., L. Goeuriot, and B. Daille. 2010. “Multilingual modalities for specialized languages.” Terminology 16 (1): 51–76. Navarrete Sirvent, Á. 2013. “La traducción técnica y el lenguaje de las telecomunicaciones.” Skopos: revista internacional de traducción e interpretación 2: 111–28. Navarro, Fernando Antonio. 1996. “Palabras alemanas de traducción engañosa en medicina.” Medicina Clínica 106 (14): 537–44. ———. 1997a. “Anatomía de la traducción médica.” In Lecciones de teoría y práctica de la traducción, edited by Leandro Félix Fernández, and Emilio Ortega Arjonilla, 137–62. Málaga: Universidad de Málaga. ———. 1997b. Traducción y lenguaje en medicina. Barcelona: Fundación Dr. Antonio Esteve. ———. 1998. “En pos de la verdadera causa de los anglicismos médicos.” In Traducción e interpretación en el ámbito biosanitario, edited by Leandro Félix Fernández, and Emilio Ortega Arjonilla, 451–61. Granada: Comares.

305

Goretti Faya and Carmen Quijada ———. 2000. Diccionario Crítico de Dudas inglés-español de Medicina. Madrid: McGraw-Hill/ Interamericana. ———. 2001a. “La traducción médica ante el siglo XXI: tres retos para el lenguaje científico en español.” In II Congreso Internacional de la Lengua Española. Valladolid: Real Academia Española e Instituto Cervantes. Accessed May  15, 2017. http://cvc.cervantes.es/obref/congresos/valladolid/ ponencias/nuevas_fronteras_del_espanol/1_la_traduccion_en_espanol/navarro_f.htm. ———. 2001b. “El inglés, idioma internacional de la medicina. Causas y consecuencias de un fenómeno actual.” Panace@ 2: 35–51. ———. 2002. “En pos de la verdadera causa de los anglicismos médicos.” Ars Medica. Revista de Humanidades 1 (1): 53–64. ———. 2003. “Diccionarios médicos alemán-español. Cuál me compro?” Traducción & Comunicación 4: 85–120. ———. 2006a. “La traducción de los nombres de fármacos y medicamentos: Zantac, penicillin G, aspirin, EPO, dipyrone, viagra, AZT, dilantin, sirolimus. . . .” In Corcillum: estudios de traducción, lingüística y filología dedicados a Valentín García Yebra, edited by Consuelo Gonzalo and Pollux Hernúñez, 547–66. Madrid: Arco Libros. ———. 2006b. “Pequeño glosario inglés-español de términos jergales y coloquiales en medicina (1.a parte: A-J).” Panace@ 7 (23): 39–54. ———. 2006c. “Pequeño glosario inglés-español de términos jergales y coloquiales en medicina (2.a parte: K-Z).” Panace@ 7 (24): 183–98. ———. 2007a. “Minidiccionario crítico de dudas.” Panace@ 8 (25): 3–14. ———. 2007b. “Minidiccionario crítico de dudas (II etapa, 2.a entrega).” Panace@ 8 (26): 108–15. ———. 2008a. “Repertorio de siglas, acrónimos, abreviaturas y símbolos utilizados en los textos médicos en español.” Panace@ 9 (27): 55–59. ———. 2008b. “Glosario de dudas y dificultades inglés-español para pediatras.” Revista Pediatría de Atención Primaria 10: 317–38. ———. 2008c. “Ciento cincuenta palabras y expresiones inglesas de traducción difícil o engañosa en dermatología.” Actas Dermo-Sifiliográficas 99: 349–62. ———. 2008d. “La anglización del español: mucho más allá de bypass, piercing, test, airbag, container y spa.” In Traducción: contacto y contagio, edited by Luis González and Pollux Hernúñez, 213–32. Brussels: ESLETRA. ———. 2009a. “Patientspeak: A Spanish-English Glossary of Lay Medical Malapropisms.” The Write Stuff-The Journal of European Medical Writers 18: 2–4. ———. 2009b. “Minidiccionario crítico de dudas (II etapa, 3.a entrega).” Panace@ 10 (29): 3–8. ———. 2009c. “Minidiccionario crítico de dudas (II etapa, 4.a entrega).” Panace@ 10 (30): 117–23. ———. 2010a. “Minidiccionario crítico de dudas (II etapa, 5.a entrega).” Panace@ 11 (31): 3–9. ———. 2010b. “Minidiccionario crítico de dudas (II etapa, 6.a entrega).” Panace@ 11 (31): 117–23. ———. 2011. “Heilpflanzen LA-DE-ES: trescientas plantas medicinales de uso frecuente en Centroeuropa, con su sinonimia popular en alemán y español.” Panace@ 12 (34): 166–99. ———. 2012. “Minidiccionario crítico de dudas (II etapa, 7.a entrega).” Panace@ 13 (35): 57–68. ———. 2013a. Cosnautas. Accessed May 2017. www.cosnautas.com/es. ———. 2013b. “Palabras francesas de traducción compleja o engañosa en medicina (primera parte: A-D).” Panace@ 14 (38): 176–96. ———. 2014. “Palabras francesas de traducción compleja o engañosa en medicina (segunda parte: E-Q).” Panace@ 15 (39): 3–33. ———. 2015a. “Palabras francesas de traducción compleja o engañosa en medicina (tercera parte: R-Z).” Panace@ 16 (41): 7–25. ———. 2015b. Medicina en español. Laboratorio del lenguaje: florilegio de recomendaciones, dudas, comentarios etimológicos, errores, anglicismos y curiosidades varias del lenguaje médico. Madrid: Fundación Lilly/Unión Editorial. ———. 2017a. Medizin. Gran diccionario médico alemán-español. Accessed July 12, 2017. www.cosnautas.com/es/catalogo/diccionario-aleman. ———. 2017b. Medicina en español II. Laboratorio del lenguaje: florilegio de recomendaciones, dudas, comentarios etimológicos, errores, anglicismos y curiosidades varias del lenguaje médico. Madrid: Fundación Lilly/Unión Editorial. ———. 2017c. Repertorio de siglas, acrónimos, abreviaturas y símbolos utilizados en los textos médicos en español. Accessed July 12, 2017. www.cosnautas.com/es/catalogo/diccionariosiglas.

306

Technical and medical translation Nichols, Eugene D., and Sharon L. Schwartz. 1996. Mathematics dictionary and handbook English-Spanish = Diccionario y manual de matemáticas: inglés-español. Mexico: Grupo Editorial Iberoamérica. Ogea Pozo, M. 2013. “Notas sobre la traducción y la subtitulación de documentales científicos y agroalimentarios.” Skopos: revista internacional de traducción e interpretación 2: 129–44. Ojanguren Sánchez, Ana. 2003. “La traducción de textos técnicos como estrategia cognitiva de adquisición de la competencia discursiva en la L2.” Doctoral thesis, Universidad de Oviedo, Oviedo. Olmo Cazevieille, F. 2015. “Aproximación cultural y textual a los informes médico forenses en la traducción especializada francés/español.” Synergies Espagne 8: 33–47. Olohan, Maeve. 2009. “Scientific and Technical Translation.” In Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies, 2nd ed., edited by Mona Baker and Gabriela Saldanha, 246–9. London: Routledge. ———. 2016. Scientific and Technical Translation. London: Routledge. Olohan, Maeve, and Myriam Salama-Carr. 2011. “Translating Science.” The Translator 17 (2): 179–88. doi:10.1080/13556509.2011.10799485. Ortega Arjonilla, Emilio. 2015. “Algunas reflexiones teórico-prácticas sobre la traducción de textos médicos especializados del francés al español.” In Translating and Interpreting Healthcare Discourses/ Traducir e interpretar en el ámbito sanitario, edited by María José Varela Salinas and Bernd Meyer, 157–86. Berlin: Frank & Timme. Ortega Arjonilla, Emilio, and Pedro San Ginés Aguilar. 2014. Traducción científica y técnica (francésespañol). Aspectos teóricos, metodológicos y profesionales (vol. 16 of Colección Interlingua). Granada: Comares. Ortega Arjonilla, Emilio, Elena Echevarría Pereda, Ana Belén Martínez López, and Ignacio Villena Álvarez. 1999. Manual práctico de traducción médica. Diccionario básico de términos médicos (inglésfrancés-español). Granada: Comares. Ortega y Gasset, José. 1937. “Miseria y esplendor de la traducción.” Scientia Traductionis 13: 5–50. doi:10.5007/1980-4237.2013n13p5. Pérez-Eid, Claudine. 1992. “Préponderance de l’anglais: effets et limites de l’unilinguisme en science.” Mémoires de la Société Royale Belge d’Entomologie 35: 75–79. Pérez Vidal, Alejandro. 2008. “La identidad del español en la Unión Europea: multilingüismo, políticas lingüísticas y traducción.” In Traducción: contacto y contagio, edited by Luis González and Pollux Hernúñez, 73–115. Brussels: ESLETRA. Pinchuck, Isadore. 1977. Scientific and technical traslation. London: André Deutsch. Pinilla Machado, María Josefa. 2017. “Gestión terminológica y optimización del proceso de traducción especializada: aplicación en el ámbito de la seguridad informática.” Doctoral thesis, Universidad de Córdoba, Córdoba. Prado, Daniel. 1990. “Quelques organismes travaillant en terminologie scientifique, technique ou professionnelle pour les langues espagnole et portugaise.” Meta: La traduction dans le monde hispanolusphone 35 (3): 561–70. ———. 1998. “Sistema de colecta y difusión de terminología científico-técnica.” In La lengua española y los medios de comunicación, coordinated by Luis Cortés Bargalló, Carlos Mapes and Carlos García Tort, vol. 2, 1305–19. Zacatecas: Siglo XXI de España Editores. Prieto Velasco, Juan Antonio. 2007. “Visualizar para traducir: cómo gestionar la terminología en traducción científica y técnica.” In Traducción y mediación cultural: reflexiones interdisciplinares, edited by María del Carmen Balbuena Torezano and Ángeles García Calderón, 357–68. Granada: Atrio. Puche Lorenzo, Miguel Ángel. 2016. “La lengua de la minería a través de las traducciones inglesas en el siglo XIX: un nuevo ejemplo de traducción oculta.” In Reconstruyendo el pasado de la traducción: a propósito de obras francesas especializadas, científicas y técnicas en sus versiones españolas, edited by Brigitte Lépinette Lepers and Julia Pinilla Martínez, 239–50. Granada: Comares. Putnam, R. E., and G. E. Carlson. 1987. Diccionario de arquitectura, construcción y obras públicas. Inglés/español, español-inglés. Madrid: Ediciones Paraninfo. Quijada Diez, Carmen. 2007. “Estudio traductológico del texto médico: propuesta de un modelo de análisis y aplicación a un corpus textual (alemán-español).” Doctoral thesis, Universidad de Salamanca, Salamanca. ———. 2009. “Comparación alemán-español de artículos biomédicos con fines traductológicos.” In La comparación en los lenguajes de especialidad, edited by Eva Martha Eckkrammer, 277–88. Berlin: Frank & Timme. ———. 2013. “La doble terminología médica en alemán y sus implicaciones para el traductor: de la Otitis a la Ohrenentzündung por el camino del medio.” Panace@ 14 (37): 121–8.

307

Goretti Faya and Carmen Quijada Real Academia Nacional de Medicina. 2011. Diccionario de términos médicos. Madrid: Editorial Médica Panamericana. Rovira-Esteva, Sara, Pilar Orero, and Javier Franco Aixelá. 2015. “Bibliometric and Bibliographical Research in Translation Studies.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 23 (2): 159–60. doi:10.108 0/0907676X.2015.1026361. Ruiz Mezcua, Aurora. 2014. “Interpretation and Training in Medical Settings in Spain.” Hermeneus 16: 265–89. Ruiz Rosendo, Lucía. 2005. “La práctica profesional de la interpretación en el campo de la medicina: estudio exploratorio de la percepción de los intérpretes.” Puentes 5: 67–81. ———. 2008. “English and Spanish Medical Languages: A Comparative Study from Translation Point of View.” TRANS: Revista de Traductología 12: 213–46. ———. 2009. “La interpretación en el ámbito de la medicina. Estudio exploratorio de la situación de la práctica profesional en España desde la perspectiva de los médicos usuarios.” Babel 55 (4): 345–63. Ruiz Torres, Francisco. 1960. Diccionario alemán-español de medicina. Madrid: Alhambra. Ruiz Torres, Francisco, and Francisco Ruiz Albrecht. 2001. Diccionario de medicina alemán-español, español-alemán. Medizinisches Wörterbuch deutsch-spanisch, spanisch-deutsch. Valladolid: Zirtabe. Sager, Juan Carlos. 2002. “La traducción de textos técnicos (Descripción y análisis de textos alemánespañol).” Review of La traducción de textos técnicos (Descripción y análisis de textos alemánespañol), by Silvia Gamero Pérez. Quaderns. Revista de traducció 8: 150. Saladrigas, María Verónica, Fernando Antonio Navarro, Laura Munoa, Pablo Mugüerza, and Álvaro Villegas. 2008a. “Glosario EN-ES de ensayos clínicos (1.a parte A-M).” Panace@ 9 (27): 8–54. ———. 2008b. “Glosario EN-ES de ensayos clínicos (2.a parte N-Z).” Panace@ 9 (28): 107–41. Sales Savador, Dora. 2005. “Manual de documentación y terminología para la traducción especializada.” Review of Manual de documentación y terminología para la traducción especializada, by Consuelo Gonzalo García and Valentín García Yebra. Anales de documentación: Revista de biblioteconomía y documentación (8): 288–91. Samsó, Julio. 1996. “Las traducciones toledanas en los siglos XII-XIII.” In La Escuela de Traductores de Toledo, edited by Julio Samsó, 17–22. Toledo: Diputación Provincial de Toledo. Sánchez González de Herrero, María de las Nieves. 2016. “La actividad traductora en lengua castellana durante la Baja Edad Media vista a través de algunos textos médicos y enciclipédicos.” In Reconstruyendo el pasado de la traducción: a propósito de obras francesas especializadas, científicas y técnicas en sus versiones españolas, edited by Brigitte Lépinette Lepers and Julia Pinilla Martínez, 203–22. Granada: Comares. Sánchez Ibáñez, Miguel. 2013. “Neología y traducción especializada: claves para calibrar la dependencia terminológica español-inglés en el ámbito de la enfermedad de Alzheimer.” Doctoral thesis, Universidad de Salamanca, Salamanca. Sánchez Ramos, María del Mar. 2017. “Corpus-based Methodology and Training in Specialized Translation (English-Spanish): An Approach for Specialized Vocabulary Acquisition.” Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 12: 137–50. Sánchez Trigo, Elena. 2005. “Investigación traductológica en la traducción científica y técnica.” Trans 9: 131–48. Santoyo, Julio César. 2004. “Sobre la historia de la traducción en España: algunos errores recientes.” Hermenēus. Revista de Traducción e Interpretación 6: 1–10. ———. 2009. La traducción medieval en la Península Ibérica (siglos III-XV). León: Universidad de León. Sarmiento González, Ramón, and Fernando Vilches Vivancos. 2016. El lenguaje de la medicina. Madrid: Dykinson. Serra Pfennig, Isabel. 2016. “La problemática en la traducción técnica entre el alemán y el español y viceversa. Nuevos retos en el campo de la traducción para fines específicos.” In Beyond the universe of languages for Specific Purposes: The 21st century perspective, edited by Mary Frances Litzler, Jesús García Laborda, and Cristina Tejedor Martínez, 159–64. Alcalá de Henares: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Alcalá de Henares. Sevilla Muñoz, Manuel. 2002. Didáctica de la traducción científico-técnica (inglés-español) para estudiantes de Humanidades. Madrid: Universidad Complutense de Madrid. ———. 2006. “Análisis del potencial pedagógico de un texto como material didáctico en la asignatura de traducción científico-técnica.” Didáctica (Lengua y literatura) 18: 295–314.

308

Technical and medical translation ———. 2007. “Estudio crítico de la aplicación de un modelo didáctico en el aula de traducción científicotécnica.” Didáctica (Lengua y literatura) 19: 279–94. Slonczewski, Joan, and Ana Ramírez. (n.d.) Medical Spanish and English. Accessed August 28, 2017. http://biology.kenyon.edu/slonc/span-med/welcome.htm. Soler, Viviana. 2015. “Traducción de títulos científicos altamente especializados: hacia un estado de la cuestión.” Trabalhos em Lingüística Aplicada 54 (1): 9–28. Spang, Kurt. 1997. “Rigor y creatividad en la traducción técnica.” RILCE: Revista de filología hispánica 13 (1): 102–17. Swales, John. 1981. Aspects of article introductions. Birmingham: Language Studies Unit at the University of Aston. ———. 1990. Genre Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Tamayo Delgado, Juan. 1999. Medizinisches Wörterbuch deutsch-spanisch. Diccionario médico alemánespañol. Essen: DZS. Tercedor Sánchez, María Isabel, and Clara Inés López Rodríguez. 2004. “Problemas, evaluación y calidad en traducción científica y técnica.” Sendebar: Revista de la Facultad de Traducción e Interpretación 15: 29–43. Texidor Pellón, Raiza, and Daniel Reyes Miranda. 2009. “Algunas reflexiones acerca de los errores más frecuentes encontrados en textos médicos traducidos del idioma inglés.” Revista Cubana de Educacion Medica Superior 23 (4): 220–5. Tijeras López, Enrique. 2008. “La traducción de términos especializados de agricultura. Aplicaciones a la didáctica y a la práctica profesional de la traducción científico-técnica del francés al español.” Doctoral thesis, Universidad de Granada, Granada. Timo-Iaria, César. 1998. “La catástrofe del monolingüismo anglófono.” Actas Dermo-Sifiliográficas 89: 566–70. Tsai, Hui-Wen. 2011. “Terminología del sutra del corazón: técnicas y opciones metodológicas de su traducción al chino, inglés y español.” Doctoral thesis, Universidad de Barcelona, Barcelona. Turrión, Miguel Á. 2000. “Manual práctico de traducción médica.” Review of Manual práctico de traducción médica. Diccionario básico de términos médicos (inglés-francés-español). Panace@ 1 (2): 79–81. Valdivieso, María. 2014. “El español en la Unión Europea. Los platos rotos de un multilingüismo de ida y vuelta.” In La traducción y la proyección internacional del español. Actas del V Congreso “El español, lengua de traducción”, edited by Pollux Hernúñez, 91–111. ESLETRA. Accessed July 6, 2017. http://cvc.cervantes.es/lengua/esletra/pdf/05/008_valdivieso.pdf. Valero Garcés, Carmen, Cristina Tejedor Martínez, and María del Carmen Santamaría García. 1997. A Coursebook on Technical Texts: Contrastive Activities in English-Spanish. Madrid: Universidad de Alcalá. Valls, Helen. 2007. “Medical and Scientific Texts in Translation in Medieval Europe.” In Übersetzung – Translation – Traduction: Ein internationales Handbuch zur Übersetzungsforschung/An international Encyclopaedia of Translation Studies/Encyclopédie internationale de la recherche sur la traduction, vol. 2, edited by Harald Kittel et al., 1371–4. Berlin: De Gruyter. Vandenbroucke, Jan P. 1989. “On Not Being Born a Native Speaker of English.” British Medical Journal 298: 1461–2. Van Hoof, Henri. 1986. Précis pratique de traduction médicale (anglais-français). Paris: Maloine. Varela Salinas, María José, and Bernd Meyer, eds. 2015. Translating and Interpreting Healthcare Discourses. Berlin: Frank & Timme. Vázquez y del Árbol, Esther. 2007. “La composición con función adjetival en prospecto de productos cosméticos de venta en farmacias.” Lebende Sprachen 52 (4): 146–9. ———. 2008. “Aspectos de la traduccion técnica: errores e incorreciones graves en la traducción de los manuales de instrucciones alemanes e italianos al español.” Lebende Sprachen 53 (1): 1–6. Vázquez y del Árbol, Esther, R. Martínez Lillo, and J. Ortiz García. 2012. Errores de reproducción y trasmisión de sentido en traducción general y especializada (inglés/árabe-español): la experiencia en el aula de la universidad. Granada: Universidad de Granada. Vega Expósito, Miguel. 1999. “La enseñanza de la traducción científica y técnica.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 7 (2): 241–51. Vegas González, Serafín. 1998. La Escuela de Traductores de Toledo en la historia del pensamiento. Toledo: Concejalía de Cultura.

309

Goretti Faya and Carmen Quijada Veiga Díaz, María Teresa. 2011. “Challenges and Strategies in Teaching How to Understand Scientific Texts.” Hermeneus 13: 233–57. Veroz González, María Azahara. 2014. “La traducción en el Parlamento Europeo. Estudio de los textos técnicos y de comunicación administrativa.” Doctoral thesis, Universidad de Córdoba, Córdoba. Vivanco Cervero, Verónica. 2006. El español de la ciencia y la tecnología. Madrid: Arco Libros. ———. 2016. “La metáfora técnica en la traducción español-inglés de los campos de la ceguera, el cansancio y la espiritualidad.” Círculo de lingüística aplicada a la comunicación 67: 343–60. Williams, Ian A. 2008. “Semantico-syntactic Environments of the Verbs ‘Show’ and ‘Demonstrate’ and Spanish ‘Mostrar’ and ‘Demostrar’ in a Bilingual Corpus of Medical Research Articles.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 13 (1): 38–74. Wright, Roger. 2007. “Translation and the role of Latin in Medieval Europe.” In Übersetzung  –­ Translation – Traduction: Ein internationales Handbuch zur Übersetzungsforschung/An international Encyclopaedia of Translation Studies/Encyclopédie internationale de la recherche sur la ­traduction, vol. 2, edited by Harald Kittel et al., 1263–70. Berlin: De Gruyter. Wright, Sue Ellen, and Leland D. Wright, eds. 1993. Scientific and Technical Translation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

310

17 AUDIOVISUAL TRANSLATION Frederic Chaume

Introduction Contrary to new political ethnocentric movements in Europe (Brexit, for example) and America (Trump’s protectionist policies), audiences and spectators around the globe seem to ignore walls and borders, and instead seek to overcome language barriers; they enjoy audiovisual productions from all over the world in a variety of languages and formats, this being a result of both globalization and digitalization. Today’s active and passive consumption and use of audiovisual products has increased exponentially compared to previous decades. World media markets generating audiovisual content and entertainment take this into account and are progressively becoming more aware of translation, which they sometimes refer to as ‘localization’, ‘internationalization’, or even ‘glocalization’, that is, the process of adapting an audiovisual production to the norms and likes and dislikes of different target cultures. The media industry is nowadays constantly in transition. Digital technologies have accelerated the pace of change not only in film and TV production and distribution, but also in Audiovisual Translation. The markets are witnessing a turning point in consumer behaviour. New approaches are being adopted in advertising and branding, social networks, the blogosphere and impact of citizen journalism, intellectual property rights, digital cinema, video games, etc. In the realm of audiovisual translation, new translation trends are appearing, among which we find crowdsourcing and community translation, the non-professional translation of audiovisual texts, fansubs and fandubs, new forms of free-commentary, such as the literal video versions, the use of machine translation, and several others. Therefore, in the age of technology, the notion of audiovisual translation needs to be wide enough to acknowledge and encompass the continuous changes that arise in the market, this way maintaining its validity as a theoretical concept. This has an obvious impact on Audiovisual Translation as a field, both in professional circles as well as in scholarly research. Audiovisual Translation is an academic umbrella term that includes all types of linguistic and semiotic transfer of audiovisual texts. At the end of the twentieth century, this activity was named after the main practices that it encompassed at that time, mainly dubbing, subtitling and voice-over. Both before and since then, scholars also proposed other terms that either focused on just one audiovisual translation mode or aimed to cover all modes of transfer of audiovisual texts (Chaume 2003a), namely: film dubbing 311

Frederic Chaume

(Fodor 1976), constrained translation (Titford 1982), film translation (Snell-Hornby 1988), screen translation (Mason 1989), film and TV translation (Delabastita 1989), media translation (Eguíluz et  al. 1994), multimedia translation (Mateo 2001), transadaptation (Gambier 2003; Neves 2005, who coined the term), localization – particularly in the field of videogame translation (Chandler 2005)– as well as other hyponymic terms that refer to an actual practice or group of practices, such as revoicing, captioning, or sound synchronization. The same ‘naming’ process took place in various languages other than English, with labels referring to film translation, subordinate translation, and the like, until eventually the term ‘audiovisual translation’ became established in most languages once and for all. The boom of AVT modes, platforms, electronic devices, new windows and possibilities and tendencies has interestingly engaged the attention of practitioners, teachers and researchers alike. As a result, AVT has become a leading field in the broad discipline of Translation Studies, where literary translation had always been second to none. Spain, research in Spanish and Spanish-speaking scholars (as well as Italy, research in Italian and Italian-speaking scholars) have largely contributed to this new status of AVT, since it has featured in seminal pieces of research enabling AVT to earn its solid recognition.

Historical perspective Audiovisual translation is nowadays employed as an all-encompassing term that includes both well-established as well as new groundbreaking interlinguistic, intralinguistic and intersemiotic screen translation practices such as dubbing, subtitling, surtitling, respeaking, audiosubtitling, voice-over and partial dubbing, simultaneous interpreting in film festivals (Lecuona 1994), free-commentary, subtitling for the deaf and the hard of hearing, audio description for the blind and visually impaired, and fansubbing and fandubbing (Chaume 2013a). All these audiovisual translation modes can be gathered into two large macro-modes: captioning and revoicing. The captioning modes imply the insertion of text onto or next to the screen, be it a translation into a target language or the intralingual reproduction of dialogues and inserts. The revoicing modes imply the addition of a newly recorded voice track in a different language; the original soundtrack of the source-language dialogues is either deleted (dubbing) or left in place (voice-over); alternatively, a new track with a narration explaining what is happening on screen for the blind and visually impaired is added over above the original one (audio description), when dialogues and relevant noises are not heard. In other words, the audiovisual text is either captioned or revoiced. AVT Scholars from all over the world are greatly indebted to a seminal article authored by Mayoral, Kelly and Gallardo, first published in Spanish in 1986 and later in English, in 1988. These authors expanded Titford’s concept of ‘constrained translation’ and coined the term ‘subordinate translation’ (traducción subordinada) to refer to modalities such as the translation of comics, songs, advertising, and any type of AVT. Though primarily applied to subtitling, Mayoral et al. succeeded in extending this concept to all AVT types and made the first attempt to classify AVT according to the number of constraints each mode presented. This term gained wide consensus in academic research and has been used and expanded by Rabadán Álvarez in 1991, as well as Lorenzo and Pereira (2000, 2001a, 2004) and Hurtado Albir in 2000. It has also been applied to the translation of children’s literature, advertising and comics. These scholars define subordinate translation as a translation that has to be rendered by respecting meaning conveyed primarily by images – for instance, in dubbing the translation has to fit the onscreen characters’ mouth movements; in comics the translation has to fit into the space and size of the original balloons, and so on and so forth. Later on, Zabalbeascoa (1993) picked up the baton 312

Audiovisual translation

from these authors and proposed a model intended to analyse audiovisual translation based on two notions: priorities and restrictions, the latter being highly productive in audiovisual translation research. The 1990s also brought about the first articles, PhD theses and book editions devoted to audiovisual translation published in Spanish or authored by Spanish scholars; these mostly focused on the peculiarities and specificities of audiovisual translation in comparison to conventional written modes of translation. In a way, this decade witnessed the inception of AVT theory. The process of audiovisual translation required illustration and description, and so did the role of agents, markets, distributors, dubbing and subtitling companies, translators, dialogue writers, voice talents, dubbing directors, sound engineers, quality control specialists, etc. Hence, that decade was flooded by such necessary contributions. The new century witnessed a step ahead in the research of AVT. Once the actual process had been largely tackled in the 1990s, especially where dubbing and subtitling were concerned, researchers could not avoid integrating Descriptive Translation Studies (DTS) in AVT investigation. Although DTS had been long established in our discipline, AVT needed time to first describe what it consisted in and how it was done (1990s) before entering the stage in which it could be studied in a rigorous and scientific way (2000s). AVT researchers soon realized that this field constituted fertile ground in the application of DTS methodology with the objective of mapping translation norms, trends, routines, strategies and techniques and even translation methods. Researchers set out to collect coherent catalogues of dubbed and/or subtitled audiovisual texts in their own target languages; after learning about the translation process and how this was affected by the various professional roles involved, they sought to describe – from a rather detached perspective – the macrotextual and microtextual operations that the original text underwent in order to match the target language and culture requirements. These pieces of research shed great light upon AVT and what it was like in a certain space and time and contributed towards the general understanding of this field. In the present decade AVT research has been taken further ahead. If on the one hand the last decade was (necessarily) overflowing with descriptive studies, the 2010s have been dominated by the Cultural Turn and the Social Turn, and this has dramatically changed the perspective of audiovisual translation. The concepts of ideology, otherness, postcolonialism, power, resistance, patronage, censorship and gender, among others, now receive scholarly attention, after mostly being ignored in the research on the translation process (1990s) and in descriptive studies, which focused mainly on the translation product (2000s). Researchers tried to establish a sanitized debate on translation norms, but rarely went beyond and questioned the actual reasons behind these norms and translation techniques. Descriptive aseptic approaches are now substituted by fiery discussions and ardent appeals in favour of or against certain translation solutions that are no longer seen as naive strategies, but rather as intentional and deliberate choices, sometimes revealing a hidden agenda intended to shape a culture, to mould the viewers’ tastes and to sculpt their will. All these stages will be analyzed in the following sections.

Research issues and methods History of AVT There is a general lack of bibliography in the history of AVT. Although thorough cinema-history works are available, hardly any of them tackle the role of translation in the globalization of film and the reception of foreign cinematic productions in each country. Still, describing the history of AVT is essential, starting from the birth of cinema and the first intertitles (called, 313

Frederic Chaume

interestingly, subtitles), and moving on to the first sound movies and first dubbing attempts, the so-called multilingual movies or double versions, the advent of TV, VHS, DVDs, Internet, VoD consumption, and the new break-in devices that change AVT conventions, such as smartphones and tablets, until we get to today’s 3D cinema, not to mention new popular genres such as videogames, which for instance require new ways of understanding subtitling and dubbing. Although an authoritative history has yet to be written, some significant contributions have provided important insights into the function of AVT in cinema over the years, and have explained the reasons for preferring one AVT mode over another according to the country, and the motivation behind different norms that regulate AVT transfer across the world. Authors who have made substantial contributions in this area include, first and foremost, Izard (1992), then Ávila (1997a, 1997b), and also Chaves (2000), Pereira (2000), Ballester (2001), Díaz Cintas (2001a, 2003), the significant work by Gutiérrez Lanza (2008a, 2008b, 2011, 2012, 2014, among many others), Díaz Cintas (2001a), Díaz Cintas and Remael (2007), Chaume (2003a, 2004, 2010, 2012), Sande Rodríguez (2011), Garnemark (2012, 2015a), Martínez Tejerina (2016) and Fuentes Luque (2012, the first piece of research ever focused on the history of Latin American dubbing, and also 2017). Several Spanish authors in Martínez Sierra (2012a) offer a critical review of AVT, evaluating the past, describing the present and forecasting the future of this field of study. It is difficult to divide audiovisual translation modes into clear-cut sections, since much of the existing research in this field tends to analyze them in comparison with one another. The intention hereunder is to tackle each AVT mode separately, but most of the references mentioned necessarily deal with other modes too. The following section on dubbing features many references which focus on dubbing, but which also tackle subtitling as a means of comparison between these two major modes.

Dubbing In 1976 István Fodor published his seminal work Film Dubbing: Phonetic, Semiotic, Esthetic and Psychological Aspects, considered to be the first monograph on dubbing. Fodor set the scene for research in dubbing adopting a distinctively professional perspective, focusing on lip synchronization and on the skills required to obtain quality dubbing in terms of interpretation, vocal performance and mouth articulation (Chaume 2007a). Mayoral et al. (1986), this time in the Spanish language, was the next kick-off to this promising field of research. A number of authors highlighted the specificities of dubbing, while claiming the need for AVT as an independent field of study, distinguishable from literary translation (not only as far as dubbing was concerned, but also subtitling). These include Zabalbeascoa (1993, 1996a, 1997), Chaume (1994, 2003a, 2004a, 2004b), Agost (1999), Chaves (2000), Lorenzo (2000), Bartrina (2001), Díaz Cintas (2001a) and more recently Martínez Sierra (2012b), among many others. These authors have described the specific characteristics of audiovisual texts (already researched in communication and media studies twenty years earlier) and relate these characteristics to the dubbing process, drawing the conclusion that AVT deserves its own research methodology. The approach generally adopted by some practitioners in such studies can be criticized as failing to comply with established research methodologies. However, their contribution has helped researchers develop AVT theory. Before conceiving a valid methodological framework of research that could explain the various dubbing and subtitling norms, it was necessary to take the industrial process into account: what took place and how. In the case of dubbing, technological, sociological, legal and financial aspects were described. Other factors taken into consideration were the dubbing market, fees, working conditions and the roles involved 314

Audiovisual translation

in dubbing. Contributions in Spanish include Chaume (1994, 2000, 2004a, 2007a on quality standards, 2016 on the assessment of a dubbed TV series according to quality standards), Agost (1999), Chaves (2000), Fuentes Luque (2001a), del Águila and Rodero Antón (2005), Martínez Sierra (2008 and 2012b), Montero Domínguez (2008), Marzà and Torralba (2013), and more recently Cerezo et al. (2016), which draws a map of dubbing conventions in Spain by means of interviews to the main professional agents, while Ferrer Simó (2016) describes market fluxes up to present day, new trends in the dubbing industrial process, and the new roles performed by agents. Once the process was thoroughly grasped and described, scholars started to focus on ­linguistic issues. Apart from preliminary research on the invasion of English in Spanish ­dubbings – most of which was carried out in a prescriptive and even apocalyptic fashion – there have been two major linguistic issues that have attracted scholarly attention: the language of dubbing, or dubbese, and multilingualism. Dubbese is the register of dubbing, and as such it can be described using the four traditional language levels: particular features of dubbese are found at phonetic, morphological, syntactical and lexical levels. For many years, this term has had derogative connotations: if the Spanish used in dubbing sounds contrived, it is surely due to the influence of the source text and the source language (Castro Roig 1997; Fontcuberta i Gel 2001; Duro 2001; Gómez Capuz 2001), thus limiting its definition to the analysis of calques and Anglicisms in Spanish dubbings. However, nowadays this term is understood in a much wider sense – dubbese is a register, and as such, it has its own calques, but it is also characterized by specific features of the language of audiovisual media, while many other features will respond to target language norms (among them, the language used in previous dubbings), rather than to the source text. Authors working on this topic agree that there is such a thing as a Spanish dubbing language (likewise, a Catalan dubbese, a Galician dubbese or a Basque dubbese) and that it sometimes sounds stilted and contrived. Different terms such as fiction register (Dolç and Santamaria 1998, 102), dubbing genre (Palencia Villa 2002, 66), and even audiovisual translationese (Chaume 2004, 175) have been used to describe this phenomenon, but it seems that dubbese is gradually being consolidated, a term first used by Myers (1973) and then by others such as Chiaro (2006), who applied it to the Italian dubbing language, as well as Marzà et al. (2006), and Romero Fresco (2006), who used it in reference to the Spanish-dubbed language, even though the features of dubbese may differ across languages. In this field, major contributions have been made by Chaume (2001, 2003a, 2004, 2013b), Romero Fresco (2006, 2009a, 2012d), Pérez-González (2007); Baños-Piñero (2009, 2013, 2014, 2016, among many others), Marzà and Chaume (2009), Romero Ramos (2010), Zabalbeascoa (2010) and Valdeón (2011, 2015). There still is a huge unexplored niche, the so-called español neutro, that appeared in the first dubbing attempts that took place in Hollywood. The advent of sound in film made audiences question the credibility and verisimilitude of cinema, its potential as a creative art and its relationship with the public. Incipient dubbings into Spanish were even more shocking since the language used was the so-called neutral Spanish, an artificial dialect that combined features from the major Spanish dialects, in particular American localisms. Neutral Spanish was promoted as a way of producing a version for the entire Spanish-speaking world that would not favour one dialect over another and thus prevent rejection by some regions. In Spain, the Disney classics were still dubbed into this artificial dialect until as late as the 1980s. The Spanish-speaking countries in Latin America are nowadays considered as one single territory for the distribution of programmes in the TV market; hence, foreign programmes are still dubbed into a Neutral Spanish in this region of the world. Scandura (2015) offers promising avenues of research in this field, and combines a tentative description of this non-existing 315

Frederic Chaume

register with the notions of censorship and patronage being the reasons behind the survival and usage of this virtual register. Research on dubbese in Catalan is extremely rich thanks to Bassols, Rico and Torrent (1997), Izard (1998, 2006), Dolç and Santamaria (1998), Santamaria (1998, 2000, 2010a), Chaume (2003a), Rico (2007), Cuenca (2006), Marzà et al. (2006), Matamala (2005a, 2008a, 2008b, 2009, 2010), Zabalbeascoa, Izard, and Santamaria (2001), Zabalbeascoa (2006a, 2008a, 2008b), Bassols and Segarra (2010, though this encompasses both dubbing and domestic productions and introduces the term pseudo-colloquial register), Prats Rodríguez (2014, the first study focusing on Balearic Catalan), Marzà (2016, on the Valencian variety of Catalan), Marzà and Chaume (2009), Torralba, Marzà, and Chaume (2012), and especially Marzà and Prats (2018), among some others. Basque-language contributions include the timid research started by Zabalondo (2004, 2011) and Larrinaga (2007) and successfully completed by Barambones (2009, 2012, 2017), who exhaustively describes the linguistic model of Basque dubbing. As far as Galician-language contributions are concerned, there is still a long way to go, although there are some good foundations on which to build a descriptive and cultural research, for example, the work by Montero Domínguez (2006, 2010, 2017) and the articles compiled in those last two books, as well as some promising incipient research on dubbing (Lorenzo 2005) and language policy by García González and Veiga Díaz (2011). Further promising fertile ground for research is the translation of multilingual movies. This field is not restricted to dubbing at all, but it tends to combine studies that compare dubbed and subtitled polyglot movies and TV series. In Spain, Corrius was the pioneer in this field, introducing the concept of L3. In addition to the two languages essentially involved in translation, that of the source text (L1) and that of the target text (L2), Corrius proposed the concept of a third language (L3) (Corrius 2005) to refer to any other language(s) found in either one or both texts. This line of research has been followed by Corrius and Zabalbeascoa (2011), Corrius (2012) and Zabalbeascoa and Corrius (2012) revealing various possible ways of rendering L3 in translation (Voellmer and Zabalbeascoa 2014), in particular when L3 happens to coincide with L2. De Higes et al. (2013) deal with the role of L3 in Spanish inmigration films. De Higes Andino (2014a; 2014b) proposed a descriptive and systematic study of the translation of L3 into Spanish, compiling and creating a detailed taxonomy of AVT modes used in professional practice, as well as and especially the ideology involved in putting them into practice. Martínez Sierra et al. (2010) and de Higes et al. (2013) follow this vein and present the results of two stages of a research on the linguistic diversity in Spanish films which star immigrants. While the first stage deals with the original audiovisual texts, the second tackles their subtitled versions in two European languages. Sanz Ortega (2011) presents a descriptive and multimodal methodology to investigate the issue of multilingualism at every stage of the dubbing process and explores the effect of dubbing on both plot and characterization of polyglot films, highlighting the relevance of the role of intermediary languages in this audiovisual translation mode. Valdeón (2005), on the other hand, focuses on power and discourse and studies the representation of languages and cultures in contact in an American situation comedy from a representational and ideational approach. Apart from strictly linguistic issues we may also consider discursive approaches that aim to show how language selection reflects ideology. This kind of pragmatic approach has been applied to studies on dubbing by Martínez Sierra (2008), especially those related to humour. His discursive approach and semiotic analysis of images allow for a holistic understanding of how humour travels between languages and cultures. And finally, research dealing with audiovisual genres and translation has also made its way through academia. These studies attempt to identify the particular features of certain audiovisual genres and relate them to the process of translation. 316

Audiovisual translation

In Spain, Agost (1999) has provided a classification of audiovisual genres, based on Hallidayan principles, with implications for the translation of these genres; this has been followed by Lorenzo, Pereira, and Xoubanova (2003). Other authors have focused more specifically on particular genres; examples include Espasa (2002) on the voice-over of documentaries, Zabalbeascoa (2000), Lorenzo and Pereira (2001b), Hernández Bartolomé (2008), González Vera (2012a) and De los Reyes Lozano (2017) on the dubbing of animation films, Martí Ferriol (2010) on the dubbing and subtitling of independent cinema, Cabanillas (2016) on the dubbing of westerns, and Zabalbeascoa (1996) and Baños-Piñero and Chaume (2009) on the dubbing of TV sitcoms. Multimodality has been a key concept in the understanding of audiovisual translation in general. As far as dubbing is concerned, it is worth mentioning significant contributions by Chaves (2000), Chaume (2004, 2012), Martínez Sierra (2008, 2009), Martí Ferriol (2010), González Vera (2012a), Santamaria (2011), Santamaria, Bassols and Torrent (2012), Santamaria and Brunat (2017), which focus mainly on original texts, Catalan in-house productions) and Martínez Tejerina (2012, 2016). These authors have tried to decodify the various codes of meaning weaved into audiovisual texts and relate audiovisual translation problems to the interaction between these codes and the dialogues (the linguistic code). There are many other topics that have been dealt with dubbed – and also subtitled – texts. For example, one can find many interesting pieces of research on topics such as humour (Zabalbeascoa 1993, 1994, 1996c, 1997a, 2001, 2005, etc.; Mateo 1995; Fuentes Luque 2003, 2010a, etc.; Martínez Sierra 2005, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2014a, 2015a, 2016; Botella 2006; Martínez Tejerina 2012, 2016, as well as in the special and comprehensive issue of MonTI 9, edited by Martínez Sierra and Zabalbeascoa 2017); linguistic variation (Arampatzis 2011, 2013) and Tamayo Masero (2012 and 2014), on language variation and accents; Romero Ramos 2016, on dialects; Ávila Cabrera 2014, 2016; Soler Pardo 2011, 2013, 2015 on taboo language; Mallo Lapuerta 2012, on poetic language); film titles (Fuentes 1997–1998; González Ruiz 2000, 2005; Santaemilia and Soler Pardo 2010, etc.); puns and idioms (Sanderson 2009; Martínez Tejerina 2016); proper names (Hurtado de Mendoza 2009, Martín Fernández 2009); cultural references (Fuentes Luque 2001b; Serrano 2002; Ballester Casado 2003; Igareda 2011a; González Vera 2015; De los Reyes Lozano 2015; etc.); and other less explored topics such as songs (Comes 2010; Brugué 2013) and intertextuality (Rodríguez Espinosa 2001; Lorenzo 2005; Botella 2009, 2010; Lorenzo and Rodríguez 2015). For the time being, Audiovisual Translation does not require a new theory of translation, but it definitely is pushing some translatological theoretical concepts against the ropes. Translation notions and concepts have been tackled in most pieces of research, which need to lean on existing translation theory as foundation upon which to lay their findings. The concepts of method, norm, strategy/technique and constraints have been examined by Goris (1993) and Ballester (2001), who offer the first classifications of translation norms; Rodríguez Espinosa (2000), who analyzes some translation issues and relates them to norms and the domesticationforeignization continuum; Chaves (2000) applies a taxonomy of translation techniques to dubbing for the first time; Gutiérrez Lanza (2005, 2007, 2008a, to name only a few) sets the basis for a powerful descriptive methodology to investigate censorship in dubbed films; Martínez Sierra (2008, 2009) deals with the interaction of audiovisual meaning codes and their implication on the domestication-foreignization continuum (2015b) and also tackles the notion of tendencies in opposition to norms; Martí Ferriol (2010, 2012) puts all these notions in relation to each other, offers a classification of translation norms and techniques applied to AVT, and studies translation methods in a quantitative and qualitative comparison of dubbing and subtitling, revisiting the domestication-foreignization continuum and highlighting the power of constraints in translation solutions; Espasa (2008) examines the concept of audience design in 317

Frederic Chaume

dubbing; Gutiérrez Lanza (2002) applies the concept of patronage to the case of dubbing under authoritarian regimes, Marzà (2009) applies it to the case of dubbing in minority languages, while Baños (2016) applies it to the configuration of the linguistic model of the dubbing register in Spanish. On a similar line, Garnemark (2012, 2015a) applies the concept of institutional constraints to dubbing in Franco’s dictatorship. Most pieces of research were intended to draw norms from quantitative (and sometimes also qualitative) analysis. Therefore, it is somewhat difficult to agree with Gambier, when he refers to the limited piecemeal research available in AVT, since this existing perhaps-fragmented but scientifically analysed research, does help us draw a clear picture of dubbing in Spanish-speaking countries. A new promising research strand related to the dubbing mode is now opening its doors to Spanish scholars: dramatization and performance, in relation to naturalness, in particular. The study of the actual delivery of dubbed dialogue lines has been historically neglected by academics, since translators and dialogue writers are not responsible for the performance aspect. Performance has always been in the hands of voice talents and dubbing directors. However, nowadays, there is an incipient trend to relate the notions of natural dialogues and dubbese to paralinguistic features such as intonation, tone, tonicity, prosody, as well as alternants, differentiators, etc. In this vein, we can find some new insights in the work authored by Palencia Villa (2000, 2002), the articles contained in Montero Domínguez (2017) and most of all in the doctoral thesis produced by Sánchez Mompeán (2017), who conducts an empirical analysis of tonal patterns in a Spanish-dubbed corpus, with the aim of exploring and studying the intonation used on the basis of its naturalness, or lack of it.

Subtitling Almost thirty years after the first volume on subtitling came to light (Laks 1957), Mayoral, Kelly and Gallardo (1986, 1988) once again adapted Titford’s term, ‘constrained translation’, and defined audiovisual translation accordingly. They were the first authors to give an account of subtitling as an AVT mode and to highlight its specificities. Since then, other scholars have continued to define this practice in a number of pioneering contributions, among which we find Mayoral (1983, 1984), Etxebarria (1994), Díaz Cintas (1995), Torregrosa (1996) and Rodríguez Espinosa and Álvarez (1998). Later on, in the new century, Cerón (2001), Leboreiro and Poza (2001), Lorenzo (2001), Gutiérrez Lanza (2001b, who tackles the relation between original script and subtitles), Chaume (2003a – in Catalan – and 2004), Bartoll (2012a – in Catalan) and many others have tried to pinpoint the specificities of this audiovisual translation practice. However, the detailed and meticulous work produced by Díaz Cintas (2001a, 2003) and especially the joint volume published with Aline Remael (Díaz Cintas and Remael 2007) have become seminal reference works on subtitling used by translator trainees and researchers all over the world. Undoubtedly, Díaz Cintas’s contribution to the field of subtitling has been decisive in further developing this specific domain – and AVT in general – into a consolidated area of research. The topics dealt with in subtitling research are the ones already mentioned in dubbing. The history of subtitling – including Spanish-specific aspects – has been tentatively approached by Izard (1992), Gutiérrez Lanza (2001a), Díaz Cintas (2001a, 2003, 2007), and Bartoll (2012a). Díaz Cintas tackles linguistic and professional issues in his extensive work mentioned previously, Zabalbeascoa (2006b) offers an interesting contribution on pragmatics and subtitling, and Bartoll (2012c) discusses how to convey registers and dialects. There is very little research, though, dedicated to the language of subtitling, that special register that, unlike dubbing, does not yet have a coined term, an equivalent expression to ‘dubbese’. Subtitles are frequently criticized for their reluctance to reflect certain orality markers (like dialectal 318

Audiovisual translation

features, for example) and subtitlers justify their (quite often standard) translation solutions by blaming the constraints imposed by the medium and the obligation to reduce the text. Research on subtitling translationese has been taken up by Grup Llengua i Mèdia (2003), Bassols et al. (2004), and Bartoll (2010), all focusing on Catalan. We therefore still lack thorough studies on the language of subtitling in Spanish (as well as in Galician and Basque); the ones available are Miloševski (2013, from Spanish to Serbian), Arias-Badia (2014, from German to Spanish and English), Tonin (2014, from Spanish to Italian), Romero Ramos (2005 and 2011, from Italian to Spanish), and Rica Peromingo (2014, from English to Spanish) among a few others. In subtitling, translation issues are (and have to be) always studied taking into account the restrictions imposed by the medium, the audiovisual constraints that operate and restrict translation solutions. There are indeed studies on generic translation issues, but the interest lies mostly on the specific solutions adopted in this AVT mode. Therefore, we find studies on the subtitling of multilingual movies, mentioned previously in the dubbing section (Corrius and Zabalbeascoa, Zabalbeascoa and Corrius, De Higes, De Higes et al., Martínez Sierra et al., Sanz Ortega, Valdeón, and Diaz Cintas 2016, etc.) as well as Bartoll 2006; on humour (Arnáiz 1998, on humour and gender; Fuentes Luque 2003, Díaz Cintas 2001b); on cultural references (Santamaria 2001, 2010b; Martínez Garrido 2013, from Catalan to English): on proper names (Martínez Garrido 2007); on translation methods, strategies and norms (Martí Ferriol 2010, on the comparison between dubbing and subtitling of independent cinema, a topic already envisaged by Díaz Cintas 1998); on multimodality in subtitling (Díaz Cintas 2001b; Chaume 2004; Martínez Sierra 2012b; Martí Ferriol 2012); on censorship (Scandura 2004, which offers the findings of a survey on audience awareness of subtitling censorship and reception of restrictions such as the use of the so-called español neutro, the artificial Latin American Spanish variation adopted in AVT all over the Americas, Díaz Cintas 2012, which offers a classification of types of censorship in an audiovisual context), etc. Research in subtitling, and not only published in Spanish or produced by Spanish scholars, is now moving towards three promising avenues: 1

The implications of digitalization in the translation process and product, that is, the new issues brought about by technology. Subtitling is so tightly linked to technology that any technical advancement generally has a direct impact on this professional practice (Díaz Cintas 2013b). For instance, it is easy to identify technological advances in subtitling in the newly existing typographical formats and fonts available to translators, in translators’ working conditions, in the audience’s perception of subtitles (enhanced visibility), in the possibility of having access to several languages, source and target languages, etc. The Video on Demand services have implied substantial changes in the way audiovisual products are edited, distributed, commercialized and consumed. In Spanish academic circles, research has focused on the possibilities offered by digitalization and particularly on the development of software and applications than can be useful to professional translators and lecturers. Thus, Matamala (2005b) describes the audiovisual translator’s workstation and the resources available to carry out their job; Roales Ruiz (2014, 2016) critically studies subtitling software from the perspective of translation trainees, detects common pitfalls and significant lacks in them and proposes an integrated model of different programmes and applications for the teaching (and professional practice) of subtitling; González Iglesias (2012) develops a software tool, called Black Box, aimed at the analysis and edition of subtitles, while enabling the processing of large corpora of subtitles; Martí Ferriol (2016) presents a new tool developed to make reading speed calculations (based on Martí Ferriol 2014), and whose results are expressed by means of the two 319

Frederic Chaume

2

3

parameters mostly used in the field: CPS (characters per second) and WPM (words per minute); Granell and Martí Ferriol (2016) summarize the contributions produced in Spain by Spanish scholars on technologies and audiovisual translation. Although the focus is on dubbing, the authors also comment on some subtitling solutions for trainees. On the other hand, Spanish-speaking countries have produced very little research on the impact of machine translation in subtitling, when compared to other European research teams which are now incorporating translation memories to the subtitling process in the cloud. Works worth mentioning are those by Melero, Oliver, and Badia (2006) who developed the multilingual translation service of eTITLE, a European eContent project that has produced web-based tools to assist in the multilingual subtitling of audiovisual material. The advent of digitalization has brought about a new culture, which could be called digital culture. Consumers’ participation as co-creators in the audiovisual production process has increased significantly in the past ten years (Díaz Cintas and Baños-Piñero 2015). The concept of Web 2.0, an inclusive notion for a new, more interactive and dynamic Internet use also invites users to participate in the (creation and) translation of audiovisual content, the generation of new ideas and the interaction of collective intelligence. This invites us to ponder on the concepts of empowerment and intervention. Pérez González (2015) demonstrates how passive consumers have become active consumers or prosumers, since these changes have enabled them to partially take on a fraction of that power and responsibility that traditionally lay in the hands of producers. Orrego-Carmona (2014) focuses on nonprofessional subtitling use in Spain as an efficient way to overcome linguistic barriers and provides a general picture of users’ engagement with audiovisual content, their attitude towards subtitling and non-professional subtitling, and how they manage their expectations and adapt to new conditions. Both digitalization and empowerment converge towards a new way of carrying out subtitling, the so-called creative subtitling – both inter and intralinguistic –, which grants other functions to subtitles other than the simply communicative task typical of standard commercial subtitling. Creative subtitles feature as footnotes or captions placed on any part the screen, creative title words emerging from coffee machines or chimneys, dialogue placed next to the onscreen characters’ mouths, etc. This clearly brings other aspects into the picture, such as multilingual movies and translation, or the concept of accessible filmmaking (Romero Fresco, see below). Creative subtitles have their roots in fansubs (Ferrer Simó 2005, Díaz Cintas y Muñoz 2006; Orrego-Carmona 2015), an increasingly popular phenomenon, both because of the growing communities of people who enjoy foreign, particularly Japanese, products, and because the computer software for home subtitling is readily available to fans across the world, is free of charge and is easy to use. Finally, another subtitling modus operandi which deserves mention is voluntary subtitling, commissioned by certain non-profit associations or crowdsourcing platforms (Díaz Cintas 2013a), such as TED, Universal Subtitles and Khan Academy.

Voice-over Voice-over implies simultaneously broadcasting the audio track with the recording of the original dialogue and the track with the newly recorded translated version. The sound engineer reduces the volume of the original soundtrack and raises the volume of the dubbed track, such that the original text can be heard faintly in the background, below the translated text. In Spanish-speaking territories this mode is widely used for documentaries, interviews, advertorials 320

Audiovisual translation

and infomercials – whereas in other countries, such as Poland, Russia and other former Soviet Union countries (Estonia, Latvia, Belarus, etc.), it is used for fiction films and TV series as well. The original dialogue soundtrack is, by convention, left at a lower volume; perhaps to indicate specifically to the audience that the voice-over is a translation. Contrary to what might be expected, voice-over gives a greater impression of verisimilitude: the sound of the original voice, though heard faintly, seems to lend more credibility to the product. In this case, the dubbing actor reads the translation of the documentary narrator’s lines – or the utterances of people who appear in the documentary – a few seconds after their voices are heard on screen (sometimes, the narrator’s track is deleted; in this case, we can no longer speak about voiceover, but about a kind of off-screen dubbing). The actor waits for a very short while (no more than two or three seconds after the screen character starts speaking) before making his or her entrance, aided by a time code reader (TCR). Since two different soundtracks are involved, the sound engineer can also make adjustments to the dubbing actor’s utterances a posteriori. The final effect in the broadcast is realistic: viewers hear the screen actor for a few seconds before hearing the voice of the dubbing actor at a higher volume, thereby avoiding any difficulties in understanding the message in the target language. AVT scholars have shown an increasing interest in the translation of documentaries over the past decade (Espasa 2002; Mateu 2005) and consequently this has brought about an increasing interest in voice-over. Voice-over has been thoroughly researched by Franco, Matamala and Orero (2010) and more specifically by Orero (2006) when it comes to synchronization (see also Chaume 2003a; Díaz Cintas and Orero 2005). Regardless of the translation mode chosen, this genre involves a series of challenges, which Matamala (2009), in the case of documentaries, describes as identifying and understanding terms, finding the right equivalent, dealing with the absence or the inability to find an adequate equivalent, dealing with denominative variation, choosing between in vivo and in vitro terminology and avoiding wrong transcriptions. Espasa (2002, 2004) discusses cultural aspects in the translation of this genre and relates terminology to the audience for which the translation is designed while providing examples to prove that target audiences determine translators’ choices. Orero (2004, 2005a, 2006, 2007b) explains the professional and technical aspects of this activity and the challenges the translator usually faces. Matamala (2015) has pioneered studies which deal with speech and translation technologies for voice-over. Martín-Mor and Sánchez-Gijón (2016) discuss the introduction of machine translation in the localization of audiovisual products, in general, and more specifically of voice-over documentaries, demonstrating that machine translation can be used to translate audiovisual products containing direct, formal discourse. Finally, voice-over can also be exploited for political purposes. In the case of the Basque language, mention has to be made of the fact that voice-over is used for the translation of Spanish-language documentaries and interviews into Basque, notwithstanding the fact that potential spectators fully understand Spanish. This clearly is a strong political move towards the promotion of the Basque language.

Accessibility The audiovisual translation boom is not limited to the preceding three modes. Translation for enhanced accessibility is now fully integrated in the field of AVT and rightfully redresses an accessibility imbalance which for decades has implied discrimination towards those spectators who were not able to access information and media culture. Today, DVDs are increasingly likely to include subtitling (SDH) and/or audio description (AD) for the aurally or visually 321

Frederic Chaume

impaired. Television channels have taken up the baton, and year after year the number of programmes offering enhanced accessibility increases. Legal guidelines in a growing number of countries are gradually pushing for obligatory subtitles for the deaf; in Spain, for instance, in public and some private TV stations 100% of all broadcasts are now covered by such subtitles, indeed a goal which had to be attained by the end of 2015. Spain has two separate legislative norms for the production of SDH and AD (AENOR 2003, 2005, 2012), Argentina too relies on a decree to make audiovisual content accessible to all (Ley 26.522 de Servicios de Comunicación Audiovisual), likewise Mexico (Lineamientos Generales sobre la Defensa de las Audiencias 2016), Perú (Reglamento de la Ley 29973, Ley General de la persona con discapacidad, Decreto supremo n° 002-2014-MIMP), etc. These legislative initiatives have strongly incremented the volumes of accessibility work in the translation market in a wide range of countries. Films with subtitles for the deaf and hard of hearing can be watched on screens installed in a designated area of certain cinemas, or by wearing special glasses that display the subtitles. On the other hand, audio description is accessed via headphones designed to be used by the blind or visually impaired, or indeed, by anyone who wants to experience the effect. Audiovisual technology therefore offers viewers the possibility to access a film in whichever way they prefer; the same film can be enjoyed by different audiences in different modes using a variety of devices. Accessibility is also expanding to the world of advertising. A growing number of advertisements are now subtitled for the deaf and hard of hearing (Cómitre Narváez, 2016). Audio description still has not penetrated the advertising field on a large scale. There is no doubt that in the coming years we can expect an increase in audio description for advertising due to legal, cultural and economic pressures. Sign language on television deserves a separate discussion, and will not be addressed here. The number of news programmes with sign language interpreters for the hard of hearing is rising. Whether we consider sign language as a language (many countries have officially designated it as so – a tentative list of these countries can be retrieved in Wikipedia) or as a semiotic system accepted by a community of users, we can freely speak of translation (interlingual or intersemiotic, in each case), and therefore identify it as another audiovisual translation mode, since the source text and the translation both ‘appear’ simultaneously on the same screen. Research in accessibility conducted by Spanish-speaking scholars can be primarily divided into (1) research in accessibility to the media, in general terms, and (2) research into the different accessible modes (SDH, AD, respeaking, audiosubtitling, see the following). The earliest works available focus mainly on legal issues, the history of accessibility in the media, professional issues and conventions, the differences between accessible modes and traditional modes and future avenues of research. The articles included in Díaz Cintas, Orero & Remael, 2007 (the first volume intended to offer more visibility to the emerging discipline of accessibility) focus mostly on monolingual subtitling for the deaf and hard-of-hearing (SDH) and audio description (AD); Jiménez Hurtado (2007a) offers the first detailed account of these practices in Spanish, complemented by some articles in Tercedor (2009); Matamala (2006) and Díaz Cintas (2007) discuss the challenges in training; Orero, Pereira and Utray (2007) carry out the first historical study on accessibility in Spain; Díaz Cintas, Matamala and Neves (2010) go a step further and disclose the relationship between AVT and accessibility; Díaz Cintas (2010) focuses on the Spanish media map for AD and SDH; Matamala and Orero (2010) include studies, analyses, tests, validations, resulting data, and their application from the nationwide research on accessibility and usability of subtitles carried out in Spain; whereas articles included in Remael, Orero, and Carroll (2012) discuss the most recent technological developments in the field of AVT and Media Accessibility, showing a multidisciplinary approach 322

Audiovisual translation

that is now widely adopted in the field and which is also highlighted in the plurality of topics included in recent literature. Finally Talaván, Ávila-Cabrera and Costal (2016) offer a current account of accessibility in Spain in a handbook with exercises. An extremely fascinating area of research is the one dedicated to accessible filmmaking, a term coined by Romero Fresco (2013), and which refers to potential ways of integrating AVT and accessibility during the filmmaking process, for instance, through collaboration between filmmakers and translators. Accessible filmmaking addresses all the visual and verbal components that filmmakers must take into account in order to make their films accessible not only to viewers with hearing or visual impairments, but also to spectators in other languages. Further research is highly needed in an applied area that can, at last, easily merge Translation Studies and Film Studies.

Subtitling for the deaf and hard of hearing Subtitling for the deaf and hard of hearing is a mode of translation used to enhance accessibility for people with aural impairment, or for older or foreign audiences. It can broadly be described as a form of intralingual translation (it may also be interlingual, but this is less frequent) that reproduces the characters’ dialogues via subtitles which appear on screen at the same time as they are spoken. Unlike live subtitling (see the following), this mode is used for recorded programmes, and in Spain – though not in Argentina, for example – colours are used to differentiate characters (since a deaf audience cannot recognize the source of a voice-off or of characters speaking with their backs to the viewers/camera, or similarly, of characters mingled in a crowd), sound effects are reproduced (through symbols or onomatopoeically), subtitles for sounds or songs are sometimes placed at the top of the screen (when the dialogue subtitles appear at the bottom), and so on. These subtitles generally are displayed on screen for a longer lapse of time so that they may be followed with greater ease; many deaf people have reading difficulties, such as a slower pace, or other. In fact, the guidelines published by Ofcom (2005, 2006) recommend speeds lower than 180 wpm – 15 cps, the same maximum reading speed proposed by UNE Standard 153010 in Spain (AENOR, 2012). Subtitles can be up to four lines long; these longer ones are more difficult to read, but they give a faithful reproduction of what is said on screen. The concept of faithfulness in subtitle creation is at the heart of huge unsolved debates as to whether subtitles for the deaf should reproduce everything spoken on screen (verbatim), as advocated by groups and associations for the deaf, or whether the information should be condensed, like in conventional subtitling, as proposed by professionals and academics. As is the case of other AVT modes, early research works describe technical and professional aspects. Mention has to be made of the pioneering article by Izard (2001) which tackles technical aspects on TV teletext, Pereira (2005), Tercedor et al. (2006), Lorenzo and Neves (2007), Arnáiz (2007), Zárate (2008, 2010a, 2010b, among others), Utray and Orero (2009), Lorenzo (2010a, 2010b), Pereira (2010), Bartoll and Martínez Tejerina (2010), Utray, Ruiz, and Moreiro (2010), Pérez de Oliveira (2011, focusing on the agents of the process), Civera and Orero (2011), Arnáiz (2012), the review by Lorenzo and Pereira (2012) taking stock of SDH, and last but not least the extensive study by Tamayo (2015), among many others. There is a specific field of research that has drawn the attention of scholars: the needs and characteristics of addressees; such studies are often combined with experiments on reception, as in Báez and Fernández (2010), Zárate (2010a, 2010b), Lorenzo and Pereira (2011), VarelaRomero (2011), Arnáiz (2015), and on the psychological implications of reception of these subtitles, like the studies carried about by Cambra et al. (2008a, 2008b, 2009, 2010a, 2010b, 2013, 2014, 2015) and Romero Fresco (2015a), among others. Zárate and Eliahoo (2014) assess how 323

Frederic Chaume

deaf children (in the UK) read subtitles on TV and carry out an experiment with children aged three to six who were exposed to both broadcast and enhanced subtitles in order to compare their performance in each. More specifically, the experiment consisted in identifying enhancement methods that could help children understand subtitle contents while discerning unfamiliar or difficult words. Tamayo (2015, 2016a, 2016b) has carried out a detailed and extensive study on SDH for children in Spain, analyzing deaf children collectives, subtitles in Spanish TV stations and professional conventions which led to further experimentation in reception, displaying subtitles regulated by new conventions and analyzing the children’s response towards this new system vis-à-vis the previous one (Tamayo and Chaume 2017). The new enhancements introduced included repetition, highlighting of unfamiliar or difficult words through the use of a bigger and different typeface, longer reading time lapse, text reduction, and scrupulous spotting. This pilot study provides some useful information for future empirical-experimental research on subtitling for deaf children. Once conventions and norms had been described, research began to focus on theoretical approaches towards the study of SDH, such as multimodality (Miquel-Iriarte 2014; Tamayo and Chaume 2016). Quality issues  – together with training addressed towards the application of quality standards to the work of future audiovisual translators – has been extensively tackled by Díaz Cintas (2006, 2007, 2010). Romero Fresco (2015) draws on the results of the EU-funded project DTV4ALL, and tackles the issue of quality in the reception of SDH in Europe as a combination of three factors: what viewers think about SDH, to what extent they understand these comprehension levels and how they view them, all the while measuring viewers’ perception with eye-tracking technology. SDH can also be studied in reference to language policy, as in the case of Catalan (Bassols, Rico, and Torrent 2003).

Respeaking Live subtitling or respeaking is another mode that falls somewhere between simultaneous interpreting and audiovisual translation. This is a technique in which subtitles are shown at the bottom of the screen during a live broadcast (Romero Fresco 2011). The interpreters use a computer with voice recognition software (ViaVoice, Dragon Naturally Speaking, etc.) that they have previously trained to recognize their voice, and listen to the live broadcast through headphones (although this method is also used with recorded broadcasts). The interpreter hears the uttered speech and re-speaks it in his or her own words, usually summarising the original contents quite substantially so that the retranslation may fit into the subtitle space that the software program generates when it processes the spoken sentences. The voice recognition program is not able to retrieve and properly decipher the speech directly from the screen for a number of reasons: poor audio quality of the source, background sounds, noisy environments, strong accents, etc. Live subtitling used to be done using shorthand, typing and stenography techniques. Thus, research on respeaking focuses on reading speed, layout, recognition and reception of those subtitles that are produced live for an audience that cannot hear – or understand, in the case of interlingual translation – the audio. Romero Fresco provides a comprehensive overview of this practice in various contributions (2011, but also 2009b, 2010, 2015b, 2015c, 2016, etc.), which have undoubtedly become the worldwide reference for respeaking. Martínez Pérez (2012) also discusses how this professional practice can benefit from theoretical approaches aimed at improving transmission speed. Present trends in respeaking focus mainly on experimental reception studies and technological improvement of voice recognition systems. Various

324

Audiovisual translation

tentative softwares have been developed in Spain, such as Verbio ASR, computer stenotype systems, and CETTICO at Universidad Politénica de Madrid.

Audio description Audio description is a type of semiotic transfer that deserves to be discussed separately. It is intended to enhance accessibility for the blind and visually impaired. In broad terms, parts of film with no dialogue, soundtrack or special effects that are relevant to the plot are identified, thus allowing for the insertion of a voice off commentary that describes what is happening on screen (in other words, a pre-recorded off-stage narration is added to the film’s soundtrack). This description generally includes details about the set, the way the characters are dressed, their actions, gestures etc, thus enabling blind or visually impaired audiences to follow the storyline, while lending coherence to the dialogues throughout the film. According to Díaz Cintas (2008, 7), “AD consists in transforming visual images into words, which are then spoken during the silent intervals of audiovisual programmes or live performances”. Translation studies and, more specifically, audiovisual translation studies now include this practice alongside other modes of audiovisual translation. Whether an intralingual narration should be classified as ‘proper’ translation gives rise to debate. Roman Jakobson defines the decodification and transfer of images into words as intersemiotic translation. This stands to show how a wider, more contemporary and communicative definition of translation can easily encompass this practice. Audio description also includes other partial modes for the visually impaired such as audio introduction (used in film, exhibitions, TV programmes, etc.), audio commentaries for exhibitions, and audiosubtitling, that is, reading subtitles off subtitled foreign films. Research in audio description has also been based on the discussion of historical, technical, professional, linguistic and normative aspects (Hernández-Bartolomé and Mendiluce-Cabrera 2004, on the process and agents and the Spanish system Audesc; Orero 2005b, on professional practice and Spanish standards; Bassols and Santamaria Guinot (2007) on a comparison among guidelines in Spanish, Catalan and English; Rodríguez Posadas 2007, on cohesion; 2010, on the professional process; Orero 2007a, on the European map of AD; Matamala 2007a on live AD; Martínez Tejerina 2008, on layout; Cabeza and Matamala 2008, on opera AD; Cabeza i Cáceres 2010, on opera audio description in Barcelona; Puigdomènech, Matamala, and Orero 2010, on a protocol proposal; Martínez Sierra 2010, on humour; Palomo López 2010, 2016, on the deconstruction of semiotic codes for AD focusing on blind children; Matamala and Remael 2015, on the new genre known as cinema of attractions; Orero 2016, assessing the AD of a famous TV series, and finally Matamala and Orero (2016a) on the research of audiodescription; and a long list of articles and book chapters that can be consulted on the updated online database MAP-Media Accessibility Platform). Although most of these sources offer generic guidelines, most of them agree on promoting objective and neutral AD which restricts the descriptive narration to that which can be seen objectively (Valero Gisbert 2012, 2014–15). Albeit this, there is also a number of scholars who started to advocate for more emotional-oriented descriptions intended at reproducing the powerful and emotional cinematic experience. Bourne and Jiménez (2007); Jiménez, Rodríguez, and Seibel (2010); Matamala and Rami (2009) and Seibel (2007), among others, demonstrate how confusing real audiodescriptions can be when objective descriptions are mingled with subjective comments. Nowadays, attention has turned towards two main streams that can easily benefit from other disciplines: perception and narratology. The former focuses on audience perception and generally relies on an eye-tracker and questionnaires. For example, Fresno Cañada (2012) presents some preliminary findings in viewers’ character perception based on questionnaires of specific

325

Frederic Chaume

relevance to AD. Her point of departure is that spectators picture the situations described by creating multimodal presentations and mental models of the events taking place, the location and time in which they occur and, most of all, the people involved in the story (Fresno Cañada 2016). Orero and Vilaró (2012) carry out an eye-tracking analysis of minor details in films. Fresno Cañada, Castellà, and Soler-Vilageliu (2016) investigate the criteria required to prioritize information. Igareda (2011b) deals with the description of emotions and gestures, and in particular, Ramos Caro (2016) analyzes fifteen film scenes eliciting emotions (specifically, disgust, fear and sadness) and compares the emotional impact produced by two different audiodescribed versions: an objective, mainly descriptive style versus a more subjective, narratological style. As far as narratology is concerned, it is worth mentioning those contributions that deal with the characteristics of the audiodescribed script, together with the efforts to compile AD corpora tagging scenes according to film language narrative and semantic fields (Jiménez, Rodríguez, and Seibel 2010). The audio description of characters, one of the most dealt-with issues in AD guidelines, is also tackled from a formal narratology perspective, analyzing characters in a structured way and identifying relevant character information which needs to be carefully detailed in the descriptions. In this vein, Pérez Payá (2007, 2010), Jiménez Hurtado (2007b), Jiménez Hurtado and Seibel (2009), and Jiménez Hurtado and Soler (2013, offering a corpus analysis) have made substantial contributions proposing ways to combine narratology and AD, ways to describe the story-telling process and what such a process entails for the human mind. Some other pieces of research tackle translation technologies, in particular, machine translation as a tool to improve audio description (Matamala 2016; Matamala and Boix 2016; Fernández-Torné and Matamala 2016). The underlying aim of such attempts is the improvement of quality in AVT. In other Iberian languages, Matamala (2005c, 2007b) reviews the state of the art of AD in Catalan; Matamala and Orero (2007) deal with audiodescribed opera into Catalan; Bassols and Santamaria Guinot (2009) gave guidelines for AD in Catalan; Fernández Torné and Matamala (2015) makes a reception study on Catalan dubbed and audiodescribed films; Matamala and Orero (2016b) describe Catalan AD; Rodríguez (2011) deals with AD in Galician and Deogracias and Amezaga (2016) in the case of the Basque language. When it comes to minor practices such as audiosubtitling, there is scarce research carried out in Spanish, and we can mainly point out Orero (2007c) and Braun and Orero (2010).

Surtitiling Surtitling, a specific form of subtitling for theatre and opera productions, can be both interlingual and intralingual. It enables audiences to understand the characters’ dialogues, or follow the opera storyline. The subtitles are usually projected on a screen placed above the stage (hence the name surtitle) but within the proscenium space; this way the audience sitting in the boxes can follow the play or opera and simultaneously read the subtitles or surtitles offering a translation or transcription of the dramatic text. Other areas of the theatre or opera house with poorer views of the stage are usually served by smaller screens fixed to the back of the seats onto which the subtitles are projected. Spanish-language contributions include pioneering articles by Mateo (2002) on technical, textual and sociological aspects of surtitling; (2007a) on production, reception and technical issues investigated by means of a questionnaire; (2007b) on reception and various global practices in comparison, and last but not least (2012) on opera and musicals. Matamala and Orero (2007) compare different accessible modes for opera translation, while Bartoll (2011, 2012b) deals with surtitling into Catalan. Oncins (2015) 326

Audiovisual translation

investigates live performance surtitling while Mele (2016) carries out an empirical study on the reception of subtitles in the theatres of Madrid.

Game localization The process of videogame localization (VGLOC) encompasses the adaptation of all game assets, not only at a linguistic level, but also at legal, cultural and functional levels, so that the product may maintain its essence when transferred to another culture. Thus, both its gameplay and its playability must be respected for the new foreign user. In this complex process of localization, a fundamental step is the adaptation of on-screen text, via subtitling, and the adaptation of audio assets, especially the ones belonging to cinematic scenes. In sum, VGLOC includes the translation of different assets: resources (menus, etc.), on-screen text and captions, textual graphics, cinematic and acoustic assets, written text (instructions, text on the box), the game web page and the help menu. Localization is a term that can fall under the concept of domestication, a type of translation that mostly takes into account the target culture and recipients, as well as the commercial success of the game; this implies to the total consent on behalf of the industry to adapt every single component that may in the least hinder comprehension or playability. Spanish-speaking scholars have been, once again, pioneers in this academic field. Substantial contributions have been made by Mangiron (2004, 2007a, 2007b, 2011, 2013; Mangiron and O’Hagan 2006, 2013, a seminal book in the discipline accounting for all aspects relating to VGLOC) and Bernal-Merino (2006, 2007, 2008a, 2008b, 2008c, 2009, 2011a, 2011b, 2013 and especially 2015, another seminal book giving an updated account of the VGLOC process as well as discussing controversial issues) as well as Muñoz (2008). Other authors have focused on more traditional issues of AVT, such as humour in VGLOC (Fernández-Costales 2011), transmedia narratives (Pujol Tubau, 2015), and accessibility (Férnandez Costales 2014; Mangiron 2016), who have introduced new methodologies to study this complex process, such as the concept of paratranslation (Méndez 2012). Granell, Mangiron, and Vidal (2017) have published the first handbook of videogame localization in Spanish, reviewing the concept of localization, and illustrate how this process is carried out, step by step, with a vast array of exercises for trainees.

Publicity Another marginal but fascinating field is the translation of publicity, commercials and infomercials. This macro-genre encompasses three different audiovisual translation modes: ads can be dubbed, subtitled, voiced-over or they can be shown untranslated. They can also be adapted to local markets, thus requiring partial or total changes. Spanish-language works worth mentioning include Bueno García (2000), Duro Moreno (2001), Valdés (2004, 2013), Montes (2007), Lorenzo and Pereira (2004), Cruz García (2004, 2018) Cruz García and Adams (2005) and Cruz García and González Ruiz (2010), Fuentes (2010b) and González Ruiz and Cruz García (2010).

Adaptations and remakes Research on adaptations and remakes is normally carried out in the sister discipline of Film Studies. Nevertheless, its intersection with audiovisual translation has been tackled by Spanish scholars Cañuelo (2005, 2009), González Campos (2006), Rodríguez Espinosa (2018) and Díaz Fernández (2012, among many others, especially rich bibliographical compilations). 327

Frederic Chaume

Didactics of audiovisual translation Teaching and training in AVT has grown exponentially since this area has become one of the most popular fields in Translation Studies. The first Spanish-language approaches to the didactics of AVT are provided by Agost, Chaume, Hurtado (1996, 1999); Zabalbeascoa (1999); Izard (2001); the extensive and complete work by Bartrina and Espasa (2001, 2003, 2005); Chaume (2003b, 2008); Lorenzo and Pereira (2004); the reference book edited by Díaz Cintas (2008, containing articles by Chaume on dubbing, Díaz Cintas on subtitling, Bartoll and Orero on online teaching, Matamala on voice-over, Bernal-Merino on VGLOC and Toda on European projects); Bartrina (2009, on online teaching); Marzà (2010) on a proposal to assess audiodescriptions; Arumí and Romero Fresco (2008) and Romero Fresco (2012b) and (2014) on respeaking; Martínez Sierra (2012b, who offers a handbook aimed at training students in the five main AVT modes); Cerezo (2012, who draws a complete map of teachers’, professionals’ and companies’ needs); Cruz, González, and Adams (2007, on SDH and AD), Granell (2011, 2012) on teaching videogame localization; Cerezo and de Higes (2013, also on SDH and AD), and Chaume and Martí Ferriol (2014, on publicity).

Language acquisition by means of audiovisual translation Another area of (mostly experimental) research which is expanding is that related to foreignlanguage acquisition and learning. After some initial sceptical reactions, new interest has recently arisen towards ways in which audiovisual translation can benefit foreign-language learning. The pioneering article by Díaz Cintas (1995) was followed by the contributions by Santamaria (2003) and Vermeulen (2003); however, the Spanish-language reference in this field of research is undoubtedly Talaván Zanón (2006, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013; Talaván and Rodríguez-Arancón, 2014; Talaván and Ávila-Cabrera 2015). There have also been two major projects financed by the European Union with essential research carried out by Spanish scholars (Sokoli 2006, 2015). The use of AD as a language development tool (Palomo 2008; Ibáñez and Vermeulen 2013); the proposals by Sokoli, Zabalbeascoa, and Fountana (2011), Martínez Sierra (2014b) on the use of software, Marzà and Torralba (2015) on incidental learning, Martí Ferriol (2016) on the use of trailers, and the doctoral thesis by Torralba (2016) on language acquisition in bilingual contexts by means of translation for dubbing and subtitling are also worth mentioning. The new PLURITAV project, lead by Martínez Sierra, will delve into language acquisition via AVT from a multilingual standpoint. As we can see, Audiovisual Translation has definitely come of age. An incipient discipline walking on quicksand in the 1990s is now one of the most popular and attractive fields for new and current researchers. After having established what an audiovisual text looks like and how it shapes audiovisual translation operations (Zabalbeascoa, Chaume, see rthe preceding), and after accommodating AVT in the broad discipline of Translation Studies (Zabalbeascoa, Díaz Cintas, Chaume, see previously, Zaro 2001; Toda 2005, etc.) scholars turned their attention to research in AVT (Díaz Cintas, Chaume, Barambones, Martí Ferriol, see the preceding), establishing research lines (Bartrina, Díaz Cintas, Chaume, see previously) and mapping AVT, in an attempt to shape a whole with all the parts belonging to the vast and extremely rich panorama detailed earlier, but which necessarily remains incomplete. 328

Audiovisual translation

Future directions There still is an enormous potential for further research in audiovisual translation which, luckily enough, is mingling with technological innovation, thus reaching high standards and results which ten years ago would not have been envisaged. Presently, fields attracting scholarly attention can be gathered into four broad areas: History of Audiovisual Translation, Audiovisual Translation maps and archival research. We still lack a comprehensive history of AVT. Apart from the urgent need for such research, attention has to be placed on the field of redubbings and resubtitlings (Chaume 2007b) and the reasons behind their production.

Audiovisual translation product research Although Descriptive Translation Studies have aided researchers understand how AVT is shaped in Spanish, we still lack studies on large audiovisual and multimodal corpora. The language of dubbing, also known as dubbese (see earlier), is one of the most successful research fields which fall under the corpus umbrella. The frameworks proposed by Díaz Cintas (2003, 2004, based on Lambert and van Gorp 1985), Chaume (2004, 2012), Gutiérrez Lanza (2005, 2008a), Barambones (2009), and Martí Ferriol (2010, 2012) can result in a helpful tool for researchers starting any descriptive study. Such frameworks take into account the concept of constraints, which characterize audiovisual texts, as well as the specificities of the AVT brief, the way audiovisual translated texts are commercialized and presented to the public, how audiovisual translated texts are received or the different codes of meaning weaved into the audiovisual text and their implications in the translation process. They also deal with the main notions of translation theory, such as strategies, norms, constraints and methods. Any translation issue (songs, film titles, humour, cultural references, intertextuality, language variation, multilingualism – in the new TRAFILM project lead by Zabalbeascoa –, etc.) can be studied under these frameworks. Quantitative and qualitative data are mandatory for a descriptive study (i.e. microtextual contextualized samples plus questionnaires and interviews inquiring about the translation process), the compilation of a catalogue is also recommendable; also, the outline of tentative norms (or tendencies, Martínez Sierra 2008) is the main goal of any descriptive study.

Audiovisual translation process research The 2010s have seen the introduction of process research in AVT. It is true that our discipline relies on interesting preliminary studies on reception (Lorenzo and Pereira 2001; Fuentes 2003, 2010a; González Ruiz and Cruz García 2007; Civera and Orero 2011; Mateo 2007b; Arnáiz 2015, de los Reyes Lozano 2015). However, the introduction of technology has equated research done in AVT with research done in other translation domains, where resources such as eye-trackers had constituted a successful tool in exploring the human brain. Orero and Vilaró (2012) use eye-tracking systems to analyse minor details in film, while Orrego-Carmona (2015) presents a highly interesting study on the reception of amateur subtitles using an eyetracker and succeeds in showing that non-professional subtitles can provide results similar to professional subtitles; he does so by using a robust and replicable experimental methodology; Fernández Torné and Matamala 2015 use machine translation to carry out an audio description experiment; technology can also be used to analyze viewers’ response in the new promising 329

Frederic Chaume

field of accessible filmmaking (the current ITACA project, lead by Granell and Martí Ferriol, can be a good example to demonstrate how this concept is gaining ground in AVT and Film Studies altogether), and also in dubbing, where it would be interesting to discover whether the audience is, in fact, constantly watching the onscreen characters’ lips or if too much attention has historically been placed on lip-syncing. Technology can bring about a huge leap in research but can also help trainees and trainers to learn and teach audiovisual translation taking into account cognitive data, something which has been lacking until now.

Ideological lenses Another good piece of news is the integration of the Cultural Turn into the discipline of audiovisual translation. This generally signifies case studies focused on one film or TV series where the fingerprints of ideology capture researchers’ attention and ideological reasons behind translation solutions are the focal point of interest. Combined studies are also feasible, using DTS methodology to draw ideological conclusions (Gutiérrez Lanza, de Higes, see previously). However, they tend to be particular studies focused on the big issues of the Cultural Turn – mainly censorship (especially after the special number of Meta 57, 2, edited by Díaz Cintas 2012, also Richart Marset 2015), but also patronage (see previously), genetic analysis (Richart Marset 2012, bringing to light the documentary archive generated in each stage and the ideological moves behind each version), intentional use of multilingualism (de Higes 2014a; Vidal Sales 2015), identity (Santamaria 2016), gender (Villanueva Jordán 2015; Garnemark 2015b) and particularly gender stereotypes (González Vera 2012b; Pérez López de Heredia 2015, 2016), etc. Another critical area is that of activism (Pérez-González 2013, 2014, 2016), that is, engagement, civic empowerment and dissent shown in audiovisual translated content, mainly by means of amateur subtitling, produced by ordinary citizens on digital media platforms on the web. This avenue opens the Social Turn in AVT.

Recommended reading In subtitling, the most comprehensive volume written to day is the one authored by Díaz Cintas and Remael (2007), which constitutes a seminal book in this audiovisual translation mode. It provides a solid overview of the world of subtitling and is based on sound research. Although it focuses on generally accepted practice, it also identifies current points of contention, takes regional and mediumbound variants into consideration, and traces new developments that may have an influence on the evolution of the profession. The individual chapters cover the guidelines of good subtitling practice, the linguistic and semiotic dimensions of subtitling, the professional environment, technical considerations, and key concepts and conventions, with self-evaluation exercises for trainees. Díaz Cintas (2004) on the other hand is the Spanish-language reference book in subtitling. In the field of dubbing, Chaume (2012) provides an overview of the world of dubbing based on first-hand experience in the field. This book combines translation practice with other related tasks  – usually commissioned to dialogue writers and dubbing assistants – thus offering a complete introduction to the field of dubbing. It develops diversified skills, presents a broad picture of the industry, engages with the various controversies in the field, and challenges prevailing stereotypes. The individual chapters cover the map of dubbing in the world, the dubbing market and professional environment, text segmentation into takes or loops, lip-syncing, the challenge of emulating oral discourse, the semiotic nature of audiovisual texts, and specific audiovisual translation issues. The book further raises a number of research questions and looks at some of the unresolved challenges of this very specific form of translation. Chaume (2004) is the Spanish-language reference book in classrooms and research. In voice-over, there is still no monograph written in Spanish, therefore, Franco, Matamala and Orero (2010), written by two Spanish scholars, is the set book in this field.

330

Audiovisual translation In SDH and AD Jiménez Hurtado (2007) is a reference for both modes, but especially Jiménez, Rodriguez and Seibel (2010) constitutes a reliable introduction to the theory and practice of audiodescription in Spanish. In VGLOC, O’Hagan and Mangiron (2013), Bernal-Merino (2015), and finally the recent volume in Spanish, Granell, Mangiron and Vidal (2017), constitute the main references in this field.

References AENOR. 2003. Norma UNE 153010: Subtitulado para personas sordas y personas con discapacidad auditiva. Subtitulado a través del teletexto. Madrid: AENOR. ———. 2005. Norma UNE 153020: Audiodescripción para personas con discapacidad visual. Requisitos para la audiodescripción y la elaboración de audioguías. Madrid: AENOR. ———. 2012. Norma UNE 153010: Subtitulado para personas sordas y personas con discapacidad auditiva. Subtitulado a través del teletexto. Madrid: AENOR. Agost, Rosa. 1999. Traducción y doblaje: palabras, voces e imágenes. Barcelona: Ariel. Agost, Rosa and Frederic Chaume. 1996. “L’ensenyament de la traducció audiovisual.” In La enseñanza de la traducción, edited by Amparo Hurtado Albir, 207–12. Castelló: Universitat Jaume I. Agost, Rosa, Frederic Chaume and Amparo Hurtado Albir. 1999. “La traducción audiovisual.” In Enseñar a traducir, edited by Amparo Hurtado Albir, 182–95. Madrid: Edelsa. Arampatzis, Christos. 2011. “La traducción de la variación lingüística en textos audiovisuales de ficción humorística: dialectos y acentos en la comedia de situación estadounidense doblada al castellano.” PhD diss., Universidad de las Palmas de Gran Canaria. ———. 2013. “Las variedades no estándar en la comedia de situación estadounidense y su doblaje al español: un estudio descriptivo.” TRANS: Revista de traductología 17: 85–102. Arias Badia, Blanca. 2014. “Fictional Orality in the English and Spanish Subtitles of Fontane Effi Briest, by RW Fassbinder.” In The Spoken Language in a Multimodal Context: Description, Teaching, Translation, edited by Jenny Brumme and Sandra Falbe, 197–211. Berlin: Frank und Timme. Arnáiz, Carmen. 1998. “El humor de las chicas de Almodóvar. La liberación de la lengua femenina.” International Journal of Iberian Studies 11 (2): 90–100. Arnáiz Urquiza, Verónica. 2007. “Research on Subtitling for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing: Top Secret?” Translation Watch Quaterly 3 (2): 10–25. ———. 2012. “Los parámetros que identifican el subtitulado para sordos. Análisis y clasificación.” MonTI, Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación 4: 103–32. ———. 2015. “Long Questionnaire About SDH in Spain.” In The Reception of Subtitles for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing in Europe, edited by Pablo Romero-Fresco. Berlin: Peter Lang. Arumí, Marta, and Pablo Romero-Fresco. 2008. “A Practical Proposal for the Training of Respeakers.” JoSTrans, The Journal of Specialised Translation 10: 106–27. Ávila-Cabrera, José Javier. 2014. “The Subtitling of Offensive and Taboo Language: A Descriptive Study.” PhD diss., UNED. ———. 2016. “The Subtitling of Offensive and Taboo Language into Spanish of Inglourious Basterds: A Case Study.” Babel 62 (2): 211–32. Ávila, Alejandro. 1997a. El doblaje. Madrid: Cátedra. ———. 1997b. La historia del doblaje. Barcelona: CIMS. Báez Montero, Inmaculada, and Ana María Fernández Soneira. 2010. “Spanish Deaf People as Recipients of Closed Captioning.” In Listening to Subtitles. Subtitles for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, edited by Anna Matamala and Pilar Orero, 25–44. Bern: Peter Lang. Ballester Casado, Ana. 2001. Traducción y nacionalismo: la recepción del cine americano en España a través del doblaje (1928–1948). Granada: Comares. ———. 2003. “La traducción de referencias culturales en el doblaje: El caso de American Beauty (Sam Mendes, 1999).” Sendebar 14: 77–96. Baños, Rocío. 2009. “La oralidad prefabricada en la traducción para el doblaje. Estudio descriptivocontrastivo del español de dos comedias de situación: Siete Vidas y Friends.” PhD diss., Universidad de Granada. ———. 2013. “La compensación como estrategia para recrear la conversación espontánea en el doblaje de comedias de situación.” TRANS: Revista de traductología 17: 71–84.

331

Frederic Chaume ———. 2014. “Orality Markers in Spanish Native and Dubbed Sitcoms: Pretended Spontaneity and Prefabricated Orality.” Meta 59 (2): 406–35. ———. 2016. “Exploring Factors Influencing the Dubbing of TV Series into Spanish: Key Aspects for the Analysis of Dubbed Dialogue.” In Media Across Borders. Localizing TV, Film and Video Games, edited by Andrea Esser, Miguel Ángel Bernal-Merino, and Iain Robert Smith. Oxon/New York: Routledge. Baños, Rocío, and Frederic Chaume. 2009. “Prefabricated Orality: A Challenge in Audiovisual Translation.” Intralinea, Special Issue: The Translation of Dialects in Multimedia. www.intralinea.org/ specials/article/1714. Barambones, Josu. 2009. “La traducción audiovisual en ETB-1: Estudio descriptivo de la programación infantil y juvenil.” PhD diss., Universidad del País Vasco. ———. 2012. Lenguas minoritarias y traducción. La traducción audiovisual en euskera. Castelló de la Plana: Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I. ———. 2017. Mapping the Dubbing Scene. Audiovisual Translation in Basque Television. Bern: Peter Lang. Bartoll, Eduard. 2006. “Subtitling Multilingual Films.” In MuTra – Multidimensional Translation Conference Proceedings. Audiovisual Translation Scenarios, edited by Mary Carroll, Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast, and Sandra Nauert. www.euroconferences.info/proceedings/2006_Proceedings/2006_Bartoll_Eduard.pdf. ———. 2010. “Marcas de oralidad en los subtítulos en catalán de la película Das Leben der Anderen.” In Construir, deconstruir y reconstruir. Mímesis y traducción de la oralidad y la afectividad, edited by Gemma Andújar and Jenny Brumme, 187–217. Berlín: Frank & Timme. ———. 2011. “The Surtitling in Catalan of Classic Foreign Theatre Plays.” In The Surtitling in Catalan of Classic Foreign Theatre Plays, edited by Laura Incalcaterra McLoughlin, Marie Biscio, and Máire Áine Ní Mhainnín, 87–108. Bern: Peter Lang Verlag. ———. 2012a. La subtitulació: Aspectes teòrics i pràctics. Vic: Eumo. ———. 2012b. “La sobretitulació d’obres teatrals.” Quaderns 19: 31–41. ———. 2012c. “Recreating Colloquial German into Catalan in Theatre Plays for Young People.” In Translating Fictional Dialogue for Children and Young People, edited by Martin B. Fischer. Berlin: Frank und Timme. Bartoll, Eduard, and Anjana Martínez Tejerina. 2010. “The Positioning of Subtitles for Deaf and Hardof-Hearing.” In Listening to Subtitles. Subtitles for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, edited by Anna Matamala and Pilar Orero, 69–86. Bern: Peter Lang. Bartrina, Francesca. 2001. “La investigación en traducción audiovisual: interdisciplinariedad y especificidad.” In ¡Doble o nada! Actas de las I y II Jornadas de doblaje y subtitulación, edited by John Sanderson, 27–38. Alicante: Publicacions de la Universitat d’Alacant. ———. 2009. “Teaching Subtitling in a Virtual Environment.” In Audiovisual Translation: Language Transfer on Screen, edited by Jorge Díaz Cintas and Gunilla Anderman, 229–39. Basingstoke/New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Bartrina, Francesca, and Eva Espasa. 2001. “Doblar y subtitular en el aula: el reto hacia la profesionalización mediante la didáctica.” In Trasvases culturales: Literatura, cine, traducción 3, edited by Raquel Merino, Eterio Pajares, and José Miguel Santamaría, 429–36. Vitoria: Universidad del País Vasco. ———. 2003. “Traducción de textos audiovisuals.” In Secuencias. Tareas para el aprendizaje interactivo de la traducción especializada, edited by Maria González Davies, 19–38. Barcelona: Octoaedro. ———. 2005. “Audiovisual Translation.” In Training for the New Millenium, edited by Martha Tennent, 83–100. Amsterdam/New York: John Benjamins. Bassols, Margarida, Josep-Anton Castellanos, Anna Cros, Neus Faura, David Paloma, Albert Rico, Laura Santamaria Guinot et al. 2004. La subtitulació del col·loquial. Barcelona: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Bassols, Margarida, and Laura Santamaria Guinot. 2007. “Las indicaciones lingüísticas para la audiodescripción en inglés, español y catalán.” In Accesibilidad a los medios audiovisuales para personas con discapacidad AMADIS ’06, edited by Belén Ruiz Mezcua y Francisco Utray Delgado. Madrid: Real Patronato sobre Discapacidad. ———. 2009. L’audiodescripció en català. Barcelona: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Bassols, Margarida, Albert Rico, and Anna Torrent. 1997. La Llengua de TV3. Barcelona: Empúries.

332

Audiovisual translation ———. 2003. “La subtitulació per a sords i l’extensió de l’ús social del català.” In Actes del Congrés Europeu sobre Planificació Lingüística: Andorra la Vella, 14, 15 i 16 de novembre de 2001, edited by Generalitat de Catalunya, Departament de Cultura. Andorra. Bassols, Margarida, and Mila Segarra. 2010. El col·loquial dels mitjans de comunicació. Vic: Eumo Editorial. Bernal Merino, Miguel Ángel. 2006. “On the Translation of Video Games.” JoSTrans, The Journal of Specialised Translation 6: 22–36. ———. 2007. “Challenges in the Translation of Videogames.” Revista Tradumàtica 5. www.fti.uab.es/ tradumatica/revista/num5/articles/02/02art.htm. ———. 2008a. “Where Terminology Meets Literature.” Multilingual 19 (5): 42–46. ———. 2008b. “What’s in a Game?” Localisation Focus 6 (1): 29–38. ———. 2008c. “Training Translators for the Video Game Industry.” In The Didactics of Audiovisual Translation, edited by Jorge Díaz Cintas. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ———. 2009. “Video Games and Children’s Books in Translation.” JoSTrans, The Journal of Specialised Translation 11: 234–47. ———, coord. 2011a. “Dossier on Video Game Localisation.” TRANS: Revista de Traductología 15. ———. 2011b. “A Brief History of Game Localisation.” TRANS: Revista de Traductología 15: 11–17. ———. 2013. “The Localisation of Video Games.” PhD diss., Imperial College London. ———. 2015. Translation and Localisation in Video Games: Making Entertainment Software Global. London/New York: Routledge. Botella Tejera, Carla. 2006. “La naturalización del humor en la traducción audiovisual (TAV): Traducción o adaptación? El caso de los doblajes de Gomaespuma: Ali G Indahouse.” Tonos Digital 12. ———. 2009. “El intertexto audiovisual cómico y su traducción. El caso de Family Guy.” Tonos Digital 17. www.um.es/tonosdigital/znum17/secciones/tritonos-2-intertexto.htm. ———. 2010. “El intertexto audiovisual y su traducción: referencias cinematográficas paródicas en Family Guy.” PhD diss., Universidad de Alicante. Bourne, Julian, and Jiménez Hurtado, Catalina. 2007. “From the Visual to the Verbal in Two Languages: A Contrastive Analysis of the Audio Description of The Hours in English and Spanish.” In Media for All: Subtitling for the Deaf, Audio Description and Sign Language, edited by Jorge Díaz Cintas, Pilar Orero, and Aline Remael, 175–88. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Braun, Sabine, and Pilar Orero. 2010. “Audio Description with Audio Subtitling – An Emergent Modality of Audiovisual Localization.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 18 (3): 173–88. Brugué Botia, Lydia. 2013. “La traducció de cançons per al doblatge i l’adaptació musical en pel·lícules d’animació.” PhD diss., Universitat de Vic. Bueno García, Antonio. 2000. Publicidad y traducción. Soria: Vertere. Monográficos de la revista Hermeneus. Cabanillas, Candela. 2016. “La traducción audiovisual en ETB2: Estudio descriptivo del género Western.” PhD diss., Universidad del País Vasco-Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea. Cabeza i Cáceres, Cristòfol. 2010. “Opera Audio Description at Barcelona’s Liceu Theatre.” In New Insights into Audiovisual Translation and Media Accessibility: Media for All 2, edited by Jorge Díaz Cintas, Anna Matamala, and Josélia Neves, 227–37. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi. Cabeza i Cáceres, Cristòfol, and Anna Matamala. 2008. “La audiodescripción de ópera: Una nueva propuesta.” In ULISES: Hacia el desarrollo de tecnologías comunicativas para la igualdad de oportunidades: Retos y perspectivas para sordos signantes, coordinated by Álvaro Pérez-Ugena and Ricardo Vizcaíno-Laorga, 95–106. Madrid: Observatorio de las Realidades Sociales y de la Comunicación. Cambra, Cristina, Aurora Real, and Núria Silvestre. 2008a. “Función de la subtitulación y la interpretación de la imagen en la comprensión de los mensajes televisivos: la comprensión de una serie por parte de los adolescentes sordos.” Cultura y Educación 20 (1): 81–93. ———. 2008b. Millora de la subtitulació dels dibuixos animats de la televisió per afavorir l’aprenetatge de la lectura als infants amb sordesa. Barcelona: Consell de l’Audiovisual de Catalunya (CAC). www.cac.cat/pfw_files/cma/recerca/estudis_recerca/Subtitulaci_i_dibuixos.pdf. ———. 2009. “Análisis de la comprensión por parte del alumnado sordo de los documentos televisivos subtitulados y criterios de mejora.” Quaderns del CAC, 155–59.

333

Frederic Chaume ———. 2010a. “How Deaf and Hearing Adolescents Comprehend a Televised Story.” Deafness & Education International 12 (1): 34–51. ———. 2010b. “Graphical Representations of a Television Series: A Study with Deaf and Hearing Adolescents.” The Spanish Journal of Psychology 13 (2): 763–74. ———. 2013. “The Interpretation and Visual Attention of Hearing Impaired Children when Watching a Subtitled Cartoon.” JoSTrans, The Journal of Specialised Translation 20: 134–46. ———. 2014. “Visual Attention to Subtitles When Viewing a Cartoon by Deaf and Hearing Children: An Eye-Tracking Pilot Study.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 22 (4): 607–17. ———. 2015. “How Useful are Television Subtitles in Helping Deaf Children to Interpret Cartoon Programmes?” In Audiovisual Translation: Taking Stock, edited by Jorge Díaz Cintas y Josélia Neves, 245–60. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Cañuelo Sarrión, Susana. 2005. “Adaptación cinematográfica y traducción: hacia una sistematización de sus relaciones.” In La traducción audiovisual: Investigación, docencia y profesión, edited by Patrick Zabalbeascoa, Laura Santamaría, and Frederic Chaume, 65–79. Granada: Comares. ———. 2009. “Transfer Norms for Film Adaptations in The Spanish-German Context.” In Audiovisual Translation: Language Transfer on Screen, edited by Jorge Díaz Cintas and Gunilla Anderman, 115– 29. Basingstoke/New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Castro Roig, Xosé. 1997. “Sobre la traducción de guiones para televisión en España.” http://xcastro.com/ peliculas.html. Cerezo Merchán, Beatriz. 2012. “La didáctica de la traducción audiovisual en España: un estudio de caso empírico-descriptivo.” PhD diss., Universitat Jaume I. Cerezo Merchán, Beatriz, and Irene de Higes Andino. 2013. “Trabajo colaborativo y desempeño profesional: un caso práctico en la clase de accesibilidad audiovisual.” Hikma 12 (65): 85. Cerezo Merchán, Beatriz, Frederic Chaume, Ximo Granell, José Luis Martí Ferriol, Juan José Martínez Sierra, Anna Marzà, and Gloria Torralba Miralles. 2016. La traducción para el doblaje. Mapa de convenciones. Castelló de la Plana: Universitat Jaume I. Cerón, Clara. 2001. “Punctuating Subtitles: Typographical Conventions and Their Evolution.” In (Multi) Media Translation: Concepts, Practices, and Research, edited by Yves Gambier and Henrik Gottlieb, 173–77. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Chandler, Heather. 2005. The Game Localization Handbook. Massachusetts: Charles River Media. Chaume, Frederic. 1994. “El canal de comunicación en la traducción audiovisual.” In Transvases culturales: Literatura, cine, traducción, edited by Eguíluz et al., 139–47. Vitoria-Gasteiz: Universidad del País Vasco. ———. 2000. “Aspectos profesionales de la traducción audiovisual.” In La traducción y la interpretación en España hoy: Perspectivas profesionales, edited by Dorothy Kelly, 47–84. Granada: Comares. ———. 2001. “La pretendida oralidad de los textos audiovisuales y sus implicaciones en traducción.” In La traducción en los medios audiovisuales, edited by Frederic Chaume and Rosa Agost, 77–88. Castellón de la Plana: Universitat Jaume I. ———. 2003a. Doblatge i subtitulació per a la TV. VIC: Eumo Editorial. ———. 2003b. “Teaching a Course on Audiovisual Translation (Dubbing and Subtitling): Some Didactic Proposals.” In Speaking in Tongues: Language Across Contexts and Users, edited by Luis PérezGonzález, 271–304. Valencia: Universitat de València. ———. 2004. Cine y traducción. Madrid: Cátedra. ———. 2007a. “Quality Standards in Dubbing: A Proposal.” TradTerm 13: 71–89. ———. 2007b. “La retraducción de textos audiovisuales: Razones y repercusiones traductológicas.” In Retraducir: Una nueva mirada, edited by Francisco Ruiz Noguera and Juan Jesús Zaro Vera, 49–67. Málaga: Miguel Gómez Ediciones. ———. 2008. “Teaching Synchronization in a Dubbing Course: Some Didactic Proposals.” In The Didactics of Audiovisual Translation, edited by Jorge Díaz Cintas, 157–67. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ———. 2010. “Traducción audiovisual.” In Diccionario Histórico de la Traducción en España, edited by Luis Pegenaute and Francisco Lafarga, 73–82. Madrid: Gredos. ———. 2012. Audiovisual Translation: Dubbing. London and New York: Routledge. ———. 2013a. “The Turn of Audiovisual Translation. New Audiences and New Technologies.” Translation Spaces 2: 105–23. ———. 2013b. “Panorámica de la investigación en traducción para el doblaje.” Trans, Revista de Traductología 17: 13–34. ———. 2016. “Dubbing a TV Drama Series: The Case of the West Wing.” Intralinea 18.

334

Audiovisual translation Chaume, Frederic, and José Luis Martí Ferriol. 2014. “Teaching Advertising Translation: A Didactic Proposal.” Linguae 1: 75–98. Chaves, María José. 2000. La traducción cinematográfica. El doblaje. Huelva: Publicaciones de la Universidad de Huelva. Chiaro, Delia. 2006. “Verbally Expressed Humour on Screen Reflections on Translation and Reception.” The Journal of Specialised Translation 6: 198–208. Civera, Clara, and Pilar Orero. 2011. “Introducing Icons in Subtitles for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing: Optimising Reception?” In Listening to Subtitles. Subtitles for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, edited by Anna Matamala and Pilar Orero, 59–68. Bern: Peter Lang. Comes i Arderiu, Lluís. 2010. “La traducció i l’adaptació dels termes musicals.” In Tradución para a dobraxe en Galicia, País Vasco, e Cataluña, 185–94. Vigo: Servizo de Publicacións da Universidade de Vigo. Cómitre Narváez, Isabel. 2016. “Sous-titrage publicitaire pour sourds et malentendants enjeux, défis et perspectives d’avenir.” LFE: Revista de lenguas para fines específicos 22 (2): 14–30. Corrius, Monsterrat. 2005. “The Third Language: A Recurrent Textual Restriction that Translators Come Across in Audiovisual Translation.” Cadernos de Traduçao 16: 147–60. ———. 2012. “Traducción audiovisual y multilingüismo. Una aproximación teórica.” In Fotografía de la investigación doctoral en traducción audiovisual, edited by Juan José Martínez Sierra, 49–68. Madrid: Bohodón. Corrius, Montserrat, and Patrick Zabalbeascoa. 2011. “Language Variation in Source Texts and their Translations: The Case of L3 in Film Translation.” Target – International Journal of Translation Studies 23 (1): 113–30. Cruz García, Laura. 2004. “Características diferenciales de la traducción publicitaria.” In Traducción subordinada (III), edited by Lourdes Lorenzo and Ana Pereira, 17–28. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. ———. 2018. “Advertising Across Cultures, Where Translation is Nothing . . . or Everything.” Jostrans 30, 66–83. Cruz García, Laura, and Heather Adams. 2005. “La interacción de los códigos verbal e icónico en textos publicitarios. Implicaciones para la traducción.” In Traducir e Interpretar: Visiones, obsesiones y propuestas, edited by Laura Cruz García, Víctor Manuel González, Ana Monterde, and G. Montesdeoca, 259–68. Las Palmas de Gran Canaria: Servicio de Publicaciones de la ULPGC. Cruz García, Laura, Víctor Manuel González Ruiz, and Heather Adams. 2007. “El encuentro con un nuevo skopos: la formación de traductores en el subtitulado para sordos y la audiodescripción.” In Accesibilidad a los medios audiovisuales para personas con discapacidad. Amadis ’06, edited by Belén Ruiz Mezcua and Francisco Utray Delgado, 185–96. Madrid: Real Patronato sobre Discapacidad. Cruz García, Laura, and Víctor Manuel González Ruiz. 2010. “The Dubbing of TV Advertisements in the Context of Standardised Marketing Strategies.” In Perspectives on Audiovisual Translation, edited by Łukasz Bogucki and Krzysztof Kredens, 147–60. Frankfurt am Mein: Peter Lang. Cuenca, Maria Josep. 2006. “Interjections and Pragmatic Errors in Dubbing.” Meta 51 (1): 20–35. De Higes Andino, Irene. 2014a. “Estudio descriptivo y comparativo de la traducción de filmes plurilingües: El caso del cine británico de migración y diáspora.” PhD diss., Universitat Jaume I. ———. 2014b. “The Translation of Multilingual Films: Modes, Strategies, Constraints and Manipulation in the Spanish Translations of It’s a Free World . . . ” Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series 13: 211–31. De Higes Andino, Irene, Ana Maria Prats-Rodríguez, Juan José Martínez-Sierra, and Frederic Chaume. 2013. “Subtitling Language Diversity in Spanish Immigration Films.” Meta 58 (1): 134–45. Del Águila, María Eugenia, and Emma Rodero Antón. 2005. El proceso de doblaje take a take. Salamanca: Universidad Pontificia de Salamanca. Delabastita, Dirk. 1989. “Translation and Mass-Communication: Film and TV Translation as Evidence of Cultural Dynamics.” Babel 35 (4): 193–218. De los Reyes Lozano, Julio. 2015. “La traducción del cine para niños. Un estudio sobre recepción.” PhD diss., Universitat Jaume I. ———. 2017. “Bringing all the Senses into Play: The Dubbing of Animated Films for Children.” Palimsestes 30: 99–115. Deogracias Horrillo, Marijo, and Josu Amezaga Albizu Josu. 2016. “Los medios de comunicación audiovisuales garantía de diversidad a través de la accesibilidad.” In Actas del I Congreso Internacional Comunicación y Pensamiento. Comunicracia y desarrollo social, 693–713. Sevilla: Egregius. Díaz Cintas, Jorge. 1995. “El subtitulado como técnica docente.” Vida Hispánica 12: 10–14.

335

Frederic Chaume ———. 1998. “The Dubbing and Subtitling into Spanish of Woody Allen’s Manhattan Murder Mystery.” Linguistica Antverpiensia 32: 55–71. ———. 2001a. La traducción audiovisual. El subtitulado. Salamanca: Almar. ———. 2001b. “Aspectos semióticos en la subtitulación de situaciones cómicas.” In Trasvases Culturales: Literatura, Cine, Traducción 3, edited by Raquel Merino, Eterio Pajares, and José Miguel Santamaría, 119–30. Vitoria: Universidad del País Vasco. ———. 2003. Teoría y práctica de la subtitulación. Inglés-español. Barcelona: Ariel Cine. ———. 2004. “In Search of a Theoretical Framework for the Study of Audiovisual Translation.” In Topics in Audiovisual Translation, edited by Pilar Orero, 21–34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ———. 2006. Competencias profesionales del subtitulador y el audiodescriptor. Madrid: CESyA, Centro Español de Subtitulado y Audiodescripción. www.cesya.es/files/documentos/informe_formacion. pdf. ———. 2007. “Por una preparación de calidad en accesibilidad audiovisual.” Trans: Revista de Traductología 11: 45–59. ———. 2008. The Didactics of Audiovisual Translation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ———. 2010. La accesibilidad a los medios de comunicación audiovisual a través del subtitulado y de la audiodescripción. Madrid: Instituto Cervantes, 157–80. http://cvc.cervantes.es/lengua/esletra/ pdf/04/020_diaz.pdf. ———. 2012. “La Manipulation de la Traduction Audiovisuelle / The Manipulation of Audiovisual Translation.” Meta 57 (2). ———. 2013a. “Sobre comunicación audiovisual, internet, ciberusuarios . . . y subtítulos.” In Reflexiones sobre la traducción audiovisual: tres espectros, tres momentos, edited by Juan José Martínez Sierra, 93–107. Valencia: Universidad de Valencia. ———. 2013b. “The Technology Turn in Subtitling.” In Translation and Meaning: Part 9, edited by M. Thelen and B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, 119–32. Maastricht: Zuyd University of Applied Sciences. ———. 2016. “Multilingüismo, traducción audiovisual y estereotipos: el caso de Vicky Cristina Barcelona.” Prosopopeya: Revista de crítica contemporánea 9 (2014–15): 135–61. Díaz Cintas, Jorge, and Rocío Baños Piñero. 2015. “Audiovisual Translation in a Global Context.” In Audiovisual Translation in a Global Context: Mapping an Ever-Changing Landscape, edited by Rocío Baños Piñero and Jorge Díaz Cintas, 1–10. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Díaz Cintas, Jorge, and Pablo Muñoz. 2006. “Fansubs: Audiovisual Translation in an Amateur Environment.” JoSTrans, The Journal of Specialised Translation 6: 37–52. Díaz Cintas, Jorge, and Pilar Orero. 2005. “Voice-Over.” In Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics, edited by E. K. Brown, R. E. Asher, and J. M. Y. Simpson, 477–80. Oxford: Elsevier. Díaz Cintas, Jorge, and Aline Remael. 2007. Audiovisual Translation: Subtitling. London/New York: Routledge. Díaz Cintas, Jorge, Pilar Orero, and Aline Remael. 2007. Media for All. Subtitling for the Deaf, Audio Description, and Sign Language. Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi. Díaz-Cintas, Jorge, Anna Matamala, and Josélia Neves. 2010. “Media for All: New Developments.” In New Insights into Audiovisual Translation and Media Accessibility, edited by Jorge Díaz-Cintas, Anna Matamala, and Josélia Neves, 11–22. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Díaz Fernández, José Ramón. 2012. “Henry V en la pantalla.” In Shakespeare en la imaginación contemporánea: Revisiones y reescrituras de su obra, edited by Ángeles de la Concha, 45–65. Madrid: UNED. Dolç, Mavi, and Laura Santamaria Guinot. 1998. “La traducció de l’oralitat en el doblatge.” Quaderns. Revista de traducció 2: 97–105. Duro Moreno, Miguel. 2001. Traducir publicidad o el arte de pasar hambre. Granada: Comares. Eguíluz, Federico, Raquel Merino, Vickie Olsen, Eterio Pajares, and José Miguel Santamaría. 1994. Trasvases Culturales: Literatura, Cine, Traducción. Vitoria: Universidad del País Vasco. Espasa, Eva. 2002. “Traducir Documentales: Paisajes Híbridos.” In Traductores para todo, edited by John Sanderson, 29–40. Alicante: Universidad de Alicante. ———. 2004. “Myths About Documentary Translation.” In Topics on Audiovisual Translation, edited by Pilar Orero, 183–97. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ———. 2008. “Big Brother is Watching You: Diseño de audiencia y traducción audiovisual.” In Películas antiguas, subtítulos nuevos, edited by John Sanderson, 69–80. Alicante: Publicacions de la Universitat d’Alacant.

336

Audiovisual translation Etxebarria, Igone. 1994. “Doblaje y subtitulación en Euskal Telebista.” In Transvases culturales: literatura, cine, traducción, coordinated by Federico Eguíluz et al., 191–7. Vitoria: Universidad del País Vasco. Fernández Costales, Alberto. 2011. “Adapting Humor in Video Game Localization.” Multilingual 122. ———. 2014. “Translating Fun for All: Promoting Accessibility in Video Games.” In Fun for All, edited by Carme Mangiron, Pilar Orero, and Minako O’Hagan, 45–66. Berlin: Peter Lang. Fernández-Torné, Anna, and Anna Matamala. 2015. “Text-to-Speech vs. Human Voiced Audio Descriptions: A Reception Study in Films Dubbed into Catalan.” Jostrans, The Journal of Specialised Translation 24: 61–88. ———. 2016. “Machine Translation and Audio Description? Comparing Creation, Translation and PostEditing Efforts.” SKASE: Journal of Translation and Interpretation 9 (1): 64–87. Ferrer Simó, María. 2005. “Fansubs y scanlations: la influencia del aficionado en los criterios profesionales.” Puentes 6: 27–44. ———. 2016. “La gestión de los proyectos de traducción audiovisual en España. Seis estudios de caso.” PhD diss., Universitat Jaume I. Fodor, István. 1976. Film Dubbing: Phonetic, Semiotic, Esthetic and Psychological Aspects. Hamburg: Helmut Buske. Fontcuberta i Gel, Joan. 2001. “La traducción en el doblaje o el eslabón perdido.” In La traducción para el doblaje y la subtitulación, edited by Miguel Duro, 299–314. Madrid: Cátedra. Franco, Eliana, Anna Matamala, and Pilar Orero. 2010. Voice-Over Translation: An Overview. Bern: Peter Lang. Fresno Cañada, Nazaret. 2012. “Experimenting with Characters: An Empirical Approach to the Audio Description of Fictional Characters.” In Audiovisual Translation and Media Accessibility at the Crossroads Media for All 3, edited by Aline Remael, Pilar Orero, and Mary Carroll, 147–71. Amsterdam: Rodopi. ———. 2016. “Carving Characters in the Mind. A Theoretical Approach to the Reception of Characters in Audio Described Films.” Hermeneus 18: 59–92. Fresno Cañada, Nazaret, Judit Castellà, and Olga Soler-Vilageliu. 2016. “What Should I Say? Tentative Criteria to Prioritize Information in the Audio Description of Film Characters.” In Researching Audio Description: New Approaches, edited by Anna Matamala and Pilar Orero, 143–68. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Fuentes Luque, Adrián. 2001a. “Aspectos profesionales y técnicos de la traducción audiovisual, con especial referencia al caso de España.” Trans 5: 143–52. ———. 2001b. “Consideraciones sobre la traducción de las referencias culturales subordinadas.” In Trasvases culturales: literatura, cine y traducción 3, edited by Eterio Pajares, Raquel Merino, Laura Santamaría, and J. M. Zarautz. Gipuzkoa: Servicio Editorial de la Universidad del País Vasco. ———. 2003. “An Empirical Approach to the Reception of AV Translated Humour. A Case Study of the Marx Brothers’ ‘Duck Soup’.” The Translator: Studies in Intercultural Communication 9 (2): 293–306. ———. 2010a. “On the (Mis/Over/Under/) Translation of the Marx Brothers’ Humour.” In Translation, Humour and The Media, edited by Delia Chiaro, 175–92. London/New York: Continuum International Publishing Group. ———. 2010b. “Audiovisual Advertising: Don’t Adapt to the Text, Be the Text.” In New Insights into Audiovisual Translation and Media Accessibility, edited by Jorge Díaz Cintas, Anna Matamala, and Josélia Neves, 41–50. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi. ———. 2012. “La historia de la traducción audiovisual en Latinoamérica: aproximación a su investigación.” In Lengua, cultura y política en la historia de la traducción en Hispanoamérica, edited by Francisco Lafarga Maduell (dir.) and Luis Pegenaute (dir.), 77–82. Vigo: Academia del Hispanismo. ———. 2017. “Nollywood Stands Up: Mapping Nigeria’s Audiovisual Sector.” In Translation and the Postcolony, edited by Kobus Marais and Ilse Feinauer, 130–53. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Gambier, Yves. 2003. “Introduction: Screen Transadaptation: Perception and Reception. Special Issue on Screen Translation.” The Translator 9 (2): 171–90. García González, Marta, and María Teresa Veiga Díaz. 2011. “Screen Translation as a Language Planning Tool: An Analysis of Galician Dubbed Animated Films.” In Between Text and Receiver: Translation and Accessibility, edited by Elena Di Giovanni, 117–42. Bern: Peter Lang.

337

Frederic Chaume Garnemark, Rosario. 2012. “Institutional Constraints on Translation: Ingmar Bergman, Francoist Censorship and the ‘Apertura’.” In Translation and the Reconfiguration of Power Relations: Revisiting Role and Context of Translation and Interpreting, edited by Beatrice Fischer, and Matilde Nisbeth Jensen, 53–68. Berlin/Münster/Wien/Zürich/London: LIT Verlag. ———. 2015a. Ingmar Bergman y la censura cinematográfica franquista. Reescrituras ideológicas (1960–1967). Santander: Shangrila Textos Aparte. ———. 2015b. “Female Sexuality as Cultural Blockage in Ingmar Bergman’s 1960s Spanish Reception.” Journal of Scandinavian Cinema 5 (2): 109–14. Gómez Capuz, Juan. 2001. “La interferencia pragmática del inglés sobre el español en doblajes, telecomedias y lenguaje coloquial: una aportación al estudio del cambio lingüístico en curso.” Tonos Digital, Revista Electrónica de Estudios Filológicos 2. http://www.tonosdigital.com. González Campos, Miguel Ángel. 2006. Adaptaciones a la pantalla de “The Tempest” de William Shakespeare. Málaga: Universidad de Málaga. González-Iglesias, J. David. 2012. “Desarrollo de una herramienta de análisis de los parámetros técnicos de los subtítulos y estudio diacrónico de series estadounidenses de televisión en DVD.” PhD diss., Universidad de Salamanca. González Ruiz, Víctor. 2000. “La traducción del título cinematográfico como objeto de autocensura: el factor religioso.” In Investigating Translation, edited by Allison Beeby, Doris Ensinger, and Marisa Presas, 161–69. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ———. 2005. “Traducción e ideología en el ámbito de los medios audiovisuales: el caso de los títulos cinematográficos.” In La traducción audiovisual: investigación, enseñanza y profesión, 127–38. Granada: Comares. González Ruiz, Víctor, and Laura Cruz García. 2007. “Other Voices, Other Rooms? The Relevance of Dubbing in the Reception of Audiovisual Products.” Linguistica Antverpiensia New Series 6: 219–33. ———. 2010. “The Dubbing of TV Advertisements in the Context of Standardised Marketing Strategies.” In Perspectives on Audiovisual Translation. Frankfurt am Mein: Peter Lang. González-Vera, Pilar. 2012a. “Traducción comunicativa, semiótica y pragmática. El caso de Antz, Shrek, Shrek 2 y Shark Tale.” In Fotografía de la investigación doctoral en traducción audiovisual, edited by Juan José Martínez Sierra, 183–98. Madrid: Bohodón. ———. 2012b. “The Translation of Linguistic Stereotypes in Animated Films: The Case of Dreamworks Films.” Jostrans, The Journal of Specialised Translation 17a: 104–23. ———. 2015. “Food for Thought: The Translation of Culinary References in Animation.” Íkala, Revista de Lenguaje y Cultura 20 (2): 247–64. Goris, Olivier. 1993. “The Question of French Dubbing: Towards a Frame for Systematic Investigation.” Target 5 (2): 169–90. Granell, Ximo. 2011. “Teaching Video Game Localisation in Audiovisual Translation Courses at University.” JoSTrans, The Journal of Specialised Translation 16: 185–202. ———. 2012. “La traducción de videojuegos: retos de una formación especializada.” In Estudios de traducción e interpretación vol. II: Entornos de especialidad, edited by José Luis Martí Ferriol and Ana Muñoz Miquel, 25–34. Castellón de la Plana: Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I. Granell, Ximo, and José Luis Martí Ferriol. 2016. “Tecnologías de la información y la comunicación para el doblaje.” In La traducción para el doblaje. Mapa de convenciones, edited by Cerezo Merchán, Beatriz, Frederic Chaume, Ximo Granell, José Luis Martí Ferriol, Juan José Martínez Sierra, Anna Marzà, and Gloria Torralba Miralles, 123–46. Castelló de la Plana: Universitat Jaume I. Granell, Ximo, Carme Mangiron, and Núria Vidal. 2017. La traducción de videojuegos. Sevilla: Bienza. Gutiérrez Lanza, Camino. 2001a. Traducción y censura de textos cinematográficos en la España de Franco: doblaje y subtitulado inglés-español (1951–1975). León: Universidad de León, Servicio de Publicaciones. ———. 2001b. “La subtitulación inglés-español de textos audiovisuales: la transcripción intralingüística del diálogo original como paso previo a la traducción.” In El subtitulado: (inglés-español/gallego), edited by Ana María Pereira Rodríguez and Lourdes Lorenzo García, 111–45. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. ———. 2002. “Spanish Film Translation and Cultural Patronage: The Filtering and Manipulation of Imported Material During Franco’s Dictatorship.” In Translation and Power, edited by Maria Tymoczko and Edwin Gentzler, 141–59. Amherst/Boston: University of Massachusetts Press.

338

Audiovisual translation ———. 2005. “EDT basados en corpus textuales informatizados: perfeccionamiento metodológico en TRACEci.” In La traducción audiovisual. Investigación, enseñanza y profesión, edited by Patrick Zabalbeascoa Terrán, Laura Santamaría Guinot, and Frederic Chaume, 87–98. Granada: Comares. ———. 2007. “La labor del equipo TRACE: metodología descriptiva de la censura en traducción.” Represura 4. www.represura.es/represura_4_octubre_2007_articulo2.html. ———. 2008a. “Traducción inglés-español y censura de textos cinematográficos: definición, construcción y análisis del Corpus 0/Catálogo TRACEci (1951–1981).” In Traducción y censura en España (1939–1985). Estudios sobre corpus de cine, narrativa y teatro, edited by Raquel Merino, 197–240. León: Universidad de León/Vitoria: Universidad del País Vasco. http://hdl.handle.net/10612/4298. ———. 2008b. “Doblajes políticamente inocuos en la España de Franco: una cuestión de género?” Represura 5. ———. 2011. “Censors and Censorship Boards in Franco’s Spain (1950s–1960s): An Overview Based on the TRACE Cinema Catalogue.” In Translation and Opposition, edited by D. Asimakoulas and M. Rogers, 305–20. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. http://hdl.handle.net/10612/4297. ———. 2012. “Censorship and TV Dubbing in Spain: From Movie of the Week to Estrenos TV.” In Lengua, traducción, recepción: en honor de Julio César Santoyo – Language, translation: To honor Julio César Santoyo, Vol. 2, edited by Rosa Rabadán, Trinidad Guzmán, and Marisa Fernández, 223–5. León: Universidad de León. ———. 2014. “English-Spanish Subtitling and Dubbing (1960s and 1970s): Voices of Suspense in Polanski’s Repulsion.” In The Voices of Suspense and Their Translation in Thrillers, edited by Susanne M. Cadera and Anita Pavić Pintarić, 275–87. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi. Hernández-Bartolomé, Ana. 2008. “La traducción audiovisual en el cine de animación: Análisis de la traducción de la oralidad por medio de los marcadores del discurso convencionales.” PhD diss., Universidad de Valladolid. Hernández-Bartolomé, Ana, and Gustavo Mendiluce-Cabrera, G. 2004. “Audesc: Translating Images into Words for Spanish Visually Impaired People.” Meta 49 (2): 264–77. Hurtado de Mendoza, Isabel. 2009. “Translating Proper Names into Spanish: The Case of Forrest Gump.” In New Trends in Audiovisual Translation, edited by Jorge Díaz Cintas, 70–82. Bristol, Buffalo, and Toronto: Multilingual Matters. Ibáñez Moreno, A., and A. Vermeulen. 2013. “La audiodescripción como técnica aplicada a la enseñanza y aprendizaje de lenguas para promover el desarrollo integrado de competencias.” In New Directions on Hispanic Linguistics, edited by Rafael Orozco, 258–87. Baton Rouge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Igareda, Paula. 2011a. “Categorización temática del análisis cultural: una propuesta para la traducción.” Íkala, revista de lenguaje y cultura 16 (27): 11–32. ———. 2011b. “The Audio Description of Emotions and Gestures in Spanish-Spoken Films.” In Audiovisual Translation in Close-Up: Practical and Theoretical Approaches, edited by A. Serban, Anna Matamala, and J. M. Lavaur, 223–38. Bern: Peter Lang. Izard, Natàlia. 1992. La traducció cinematogràfica. Barcelona: Publicacions de la Generalitat de Catalunya. ———. 1998. “Traducció audiovisual i creació de models de llengua en el sistema cultural català: estudi de cas del doblatge d’Helena, quina canya!” PhD diss., Universitat Pompeu Fabra. ———. 2001. “La subtitulación para sordos del teletexto en televisión Española.” In La traducción subordinada II: el subtitulado (inglés-español/gallego), edited by Lourdes Lorenzo and Ana Pereira, 147–68. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. ———. 2006. “Traducció d’audiovisuals, creació de models de llengua i normalització lingüística a Catalunya.” Revista del Col·legi Oficial de Doctors i Llicenciats en Filosofia i Lletres i en Ciències de Catalunya 125: 88–100. Barcelona: Col·legi Oficial de Doctors i Llicenciats en Filosofia i Lletres i en Ciències de Catalunya. Jiménez Hurtado, Catalina. 2007a. Traducción y accesibilidad. Subtitulación para sordos y audiodescripción para ciegos: nuevas modalidades de Traducción Audiovisual. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. ———. 2007b. “La Audiodescripción desde la representación del conocimiento general. Configuración semántica de una gramática local del texto audiovisual.” Linguistica Antverpiensia 6: 345–56. ———. 2010.

339

Frederic Chaume Jiménez Hurtado, Catalina, Ana Rodríguez, and Claudia Seibel, eds. 2010. Un corpus de cine. Teoría y práctica de la audiodescripción. Granada: Tragacanto. Jiménez Hurtado, Catalina, and Claudia Seibel. 2009. Accesibilidad e inclusión en los textos multimodales: la audiodescripción de la imagen dinámica, 87–109. Granada: Tragacanto. Jiménez Hurtado, Catalina, and Silvia Soler. 2013. “Multimodality, Translation and Accessibility: A Corpus-Based Study of Audio Description.” Perspectives 21 (4): 577–94. Laks, Simon. 1957. Le sous-titrage des films. Sa technique. Son esthétique. París: Les impressions rapides. Lambert, J. and van Gorp, H. 1985. “On Describing Translations.” In The Manipulation of Literature, edited by Theo Hermans, 42–53. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Larrinaga, Asier. 2007. “Euskarazko bikoizketaren historia.” Senez itzulpen-aldizkaria 34: 83–103. Leboreiro Enríquez, Fernanda, and Jesús Poza Yagüe. 2001. “Subtitular: toda una ciencia  .  .  . y todo un arte.” In La traducción para el doblaje y la subtitulación, coordinated by Miguel Duro Moreno, 315–23. Madrid: Cátedra. Lecuona, Lourdes. 1994. “Entre el doblaje y la subtitulación: la interpretación simultánea en el cine.” In Transvases culturales: literatura, cine, traducción, edited by Federico Eguíluz et al., 279–85. Vitoria, Universidad del País Vasco. Lorenzo, Lourdes. 2000. “Características diferenciales de la traducción audiovisual (I). El papel del traductor para el doblaje.” In Traducción subordinada I: el doblaje (inglés-español/galego), edited by Lourdes Lorenzo and Ana Pereira, 17–28. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. ———. 2001. “Características diferenciales de la traducción audiovisual (II). El papel del traductor de subtítulos.” In El subtitulado: (inglés/español/gallego), coordinated by Ana María Pereira Rodríguez and Lourdes Lorenzo García, 11–18.Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. ———. 2005. “Funcións básicas das referências intertextuais e o seu tratamento na tradución audiovisual.” Quaderns. Revista de traducció 12: 133–50. ———. 2010a. “Subtitling for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children in Spain: A Case Study.” In Listening to Subtitles. Subtitles for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, edited by Anna Matamala and Pilar Orero, 115–38. Berna: Peter Lang. ———. 2010b. “Criteria for Elaborating Subtitles for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children in Spain: A Guide of Good Practice.” In Listening to Subtitles. Subtitles for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, edited by Anna Matamala and Pilar Orero, 139–47. Berna: Peter Lang. Lorenzo, Lourdes, and Ana Pereira, eds. 2000. Traducción subordinada I: el doblaje (inglés-español/ galego). Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. ———. 2001a. Traducción subordinada II: el subtitulado (inglés-español/galego). Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. ———. 2001b. “Doblaje y recepción de películas infantiles.” In La traducción. Estrategias profesionales, edited by I. Pascua Flebes, 193–203. Las Palmas de Gran Canaria: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. ———, eds. 2004. La traducción subordinada III: traducción y publicidad. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. ———. 2011. “Deaf Children and Their Access to Audiovisual Texts: Educational Failure and the Helplessness of the Subtitler.” In Between Text and Receiver: Translation and Accessibility, edited by Elena Di Giovanni, 185–202. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. ———. 2012. “Subtitulado para sordos: un reto y una necesidad: pasado, presente y futuro del SPS en España.” In Reflexiones sobre la traducción audiovisual, coordinated by Juan José Martínez Sierra, 109–23. Valencia: Universitat de Valencia. Lorenzo, Lourdes, and Josélia Neves. 2007. “La subtitulación para s/Sordos, panorama global y prenormativo en el marco ibérico.” TRANS: Revista de Traductología 11: 95–114. Lorenzo, Lourdes, Ana Pereira, and María Xoubanova. 2003. “The Simpsons/Los Simpson: Analysis of an Audiovisual Translation.” The Translator (Screen Translation) 9 (2): 269–91. Lorenzo, Lourdes, and Beatriz Rodríguez. 2015. “La intertextualidad en los textos audiovisuales: el caso de Donkey Xote.” Ocnos: revista de estudios sobre lectura 13: 117–28. Mallo Lapuerta, Ana. 2012. “Modificaciones discursivas y pragmáticas de la fase de traducción en el doblaje cinematográfico del francés al español. El caso de Cyrano de Bergerac (Jean-Paul Rappeneau).” PhD diss., Universidad de Valladolid. Mangiron, Carme. 2004. “Localizing Final Fantasy – Bringing Fantasy to Reality.” LISA Newsletter 13 (1): 3.

340

Audiovisual translation ———. 2007a. “Video Games Localisation: Posing New Challenges to the Translator.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 14 (4): 306–23. ———, ed. 2007b. “Localització de videojocs.” Revista Tradumàtica 5. www.fti.uab.es/tradumatica/ revista/num5/Sumari.htm. ———. 2011. “Accesibilidad a los videojuegos: estado actual y perspectivas futuras.” TRANS. Revista de Traductología 15: 53–57. ———. 2013. “Subtitling in Game Localisation: A Descriptive Study.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 21 (1): 42–56. ———. 2016. “Game Accessibility for the Blind: Current Overview and the Potential.” In Researching Audio Description: New Approaches, edited by Anna Matamala and Pilar Orero, 75–95. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Mangiron, Carme, and Minako O’Hagan. 2006. “Game Localisation: Unleashing Imagination with ‘Restricted’ Translation.” JoSTrans, The Journal of Specialised Translation 6: 10–21. –——. 2013. Game Localization: Translating for the Global Digital Entertainment Industry. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Martí Ferriol, José Luis. 2009. “Herramientas informáticas disponibles para la automatización de la traducción audiovisual (‘revoicing’).” Meta 54 (3): 622–30. ———. 2010. Cine independiente y traducción. Valencia: Tirant lo Blanch. ———. 2012. El método de traducción. Castelló de la Plana: Universitat Jaume I. ———. 2014. “Subtitle Reading Speed: A New Tool for its Estimation.” Babel 59 (4): 406–20. ———. 2016. “El tráiler cinematográfico y la subtitulación en la didáctica de lenguas: Aplicación práctica en la combinación lingüística alemán – español.” Revista de Lenguas para Fines Específicos 22 (2): 124–9. Martín Fernández, C. 2009. “Traducción de los referentes culturales en el doblaje se la serie Erase una vez el hombre . . . al español.” Entreculturas 1: 275–83. www.entreculturas.uma.es/. Martín Mor, Adrián, and Pilar Sánchez-Gijón. 2016. “Machine Translation and Audiovisual Products: A Case Study.” JoSTrans, The Journal of Specialised Translation 26: 172–86. Martínez Garrido, Gemma. 2007. “La traducción de los nombres propios en el subtitulado cinematográfico: análisis de la traducción de nombres propios del catalán/castellano en versiones subtituladas en inglés.” Interlingüística 18 (Actas del XXII Encuentro Internacional de Jóvenes Lingüistas). Sevilla: Universidad de Sevilla. ———. 2013. “Minority Languages and Film Subtitling: An Empirical Study Based on the Translation of Culture-Bound Elements from Catalan into English.” Cultus 6: 109–24. Martínez Pérez, Juan. 2012. “Applying a Punctuation-Based Segmentation to a New Add-On Display Mode of Respoken Subtitles.” In Audiovisual Translation and Media Accessibility at the Crossroads: Media for All 3, edited by Aline Remael, Pilar Orero, and Mary Carroll. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Martínez Sierra, Juan José. 2005. “Translating Audiovisual Humour. A Case Study.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 13 (4): 289–96. ———. 2006. “La manipulación del texto: sobre la dualidad extranjerización/familiarización en la traducción del humor en textos audiovisuales.” Sendebar 17: 219–31. ———. 2008. Humor y traducción. Los Simpson cruzan la frontera. Castelló de la Plana: Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I. ———. 2009. “El papel del elemento visual en la traducción del humor en textos audiovisuales: un problema o una ayuda?” TRANS: Revista de Traductología 13: 139–48. ———. 2010. “Approaching the Audio Description of Humour.” Entreculturas 2: 87–103. ———. 2012a. Reflexiones sobre la traducción audiovisual. Tres espectros, tres momentos. Valencia: Universitat de Valencia. ———. 2012b. Introducción a la traducción audiovisual. Murcia: Editum. ———. 2014a. “Dubbing or Subtitling Humour: Does It Really Make Any Difference?” In Translating Humour in Audiovisual Texts, edited by Luigi De Rosa, 311–32. Oxford: Peter Lang. ———. 2014b. “The Use of Audiovisual Translation Software in Second Language Teaching.” Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Translation Studies 74–85. ——–. 2015a. “Una aproximació descriptiva als aspectes restrictius del doblatge de l’humor.” Translation Journal 18: 4. ———. 2015b. “Revisiting Toury. Translation Tendencies.” SKASE: Journal of Translation and Interpretation 8: 26–59.

341

Frederic Chaume ———. 2016. “La traducción del humor en textos audiovisuales. Los chistes como prototipos.” Babel 62 (4): 573–601. Martínez Sierra, Juan José, José Luis Martí Ferriol, Irene de Higes Andino, Ana Maria Prats Rodríguez and Frederic Chaume. 2010. “Linguistic Diversity in Spanish Immigration Films. A Translational Approach.” In Polyglot Cinema. Migration and Transcultural Narration in France, Italy, Portugal and Spain, edited by Verena Berger and Miya Komori, 15–29. Berlin: LIT. Martínez Sierra, Juan José, and Patrick Zabalbeascoa. 2017. MonTI, Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación 9. The Translation of Humour. La traducción del Humor. Alicante: Universitat d’Alacant, Universitat de València, Universitat Jaume I. Martínez Tejerina, Anjana. 2008. “El tamaño importa y la posición también. Estudio piloto sobre el formato de los subtítulos para sordos.” In ULISES: Hacia el desarrollo de tecnologías comunicativas para la igualdad de oportunidades: Retos y perspectivas para sordos signantes, edited by Álvaro Pérez-Ugena and Coromina and Ricardo Vizcaíno Laorga, 85–92. Madrid: Observatorio de las Realidades Sociales y de la Comunicación. ———. 2012. “La interacción de los códigos en doblaje: juegos de palabras y restricciones visuales.” MonTI, Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación 4: 155–80. ———. 2016. El doblaje de los juegos de palabras. Barcelona: UOC. Marzà, Anna. 2009. “La traducció audiovisual de l’animació a RTVV.” Quaderns divulgatius 36: 31–48. ———. 2010. “Evaluation Criteria and Film Narrative. A Frame to Teaching Relevance in Audio Description.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 3 (18): 143–53. ———. 2016. “La naturalitat en la traducció per al doblatge. El cas dels marcadors d’intensificació.” PhD diss., Universitat Jaume I. Marzà, Anna and Frederic Chaume. 2009. “The Language of Dubbing: Present Facts and Future Perspectives.” In Analysing Audiovisual Dialogue, edited by Mari Freddi and Maria Pavesi, 31–39. Bologna: CLUEB. Marzà, Anna, Frederic Chaume, Gloria Torralba, and Ana Alemany. 2006. “The Language We Watch: An Approach to the Linguistic Model of Catalan in Dubbing.” Mercator Media Forum 9: 14–25. Marzà, Anna, and Gloria Torralba. 2013. “Las normas profesionales de la traducción para el doblaje en España.” Trans. Revista de Traductología 17: 35–50. ———. 2015. “Incidental Language Learning Through Subtitled Cartoons: Is It Possible in a Dubbing Country?” In Subtitles and Language Learning, edited by Y. Gambier, A. Caimi, and C. Mariotti, 199–220. Berna: Peter Lang. Marzà, Anna and Ana Maria Prats. 2018. La llengua perifèrica. El doblatge a les televisions públiques valenciana i balear. Vic: Eumo. Mason, Ian. 1989. “Speaker Meaning and Reader Meaning: Preserving Coherence in Screen Translating.” In Babel. The Cultural and Linguistic Barriers between Nations, edited by Rainer Kolmel and Jerry Payne, 13–24. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press. Matamala, Anna. 2005a. “Converses espontànies o converses prefabricades? Les interjeccions en comèdies de situació catalanes i doblades.” Estudios Catalanes. Revista internacional de lengua, literatura y cultura catalanas 3: 65–77. ———. 2005b. “La estación de trabajo del traductor audiovisual: Herramientas y Recursos.” Cadernos de Tradução 2 (16): 251–68. ———. 2005c. “Live Audiodescription in Catalonia.” Translating Today 4: 9–11. ———. 2006. “La accesibilidad en los medios: aspectos lingüísticos y retos de formación.” In Sociedad, integración y televisión en España, edited by R. Pérez-Amat and Á. Pérez-Ugena, 293–306. Madrid: Laberinto. ———. 2007a. “La audiodescripción en directo.” In Traducción y accesibilidad: la subtitulación para sordos y la audiodescripción para ciegos, edited by A. Jiménez, 121–32. Berlín: Peter Lang. ———. 2007b. “Audio Description in Catalonia.” Translation Watch Quarterly 3 (2): 37–48. ———. 2008a. “Del guió a la pantalla: trets de l’oral col·loquial en la ficció televisiva.” Caplletra 44: 141–68. ———. 2008b. “La oralidad en la ficción televisiva: análisis de las interjecciones de un corpus de comedias de situación originales y dobladas.” In La oralidad fingida, edited by J. Brumme, S. Carsten, and A. Zaballa, 81–94. Frankfurt/Madrid: Vervuert/Iberoamericana. ———. 2009. “Main Challenges in the Translation of Documentaries.” In In So Many Words: Translating for the Screen, edited by Jorge Díaz Cintas, 112–26. London: Multilingual Matters.

342

Audiovisual translation ———. 2010. “Translations for Dubbing as Dynamic Texts. Strategies in Film Synchronization.” Babel 56 (2): 101–18. ———. 2015. “Speech and Translation Technologies for Voice-Over and Audio Description: Final Results of the ALST Project.” Paper given at the 6th International Conference Media for All, September 16–18, 2015, Sydney (Australia). ———. 2016. “The ALST Project: Technologies for Audio Description.” In Researching Audio Description. New Approaches, edited by Anna Matamala and Pilar Orero, 269–84. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Matamala, Anna, and Carla Boix. 2016. “Accessibility and Multilingualism: An Exploratory Study on the Machine Translation of Audio Descriptions.” Trans 20: 11–24. Matamala, Anna, and Naila Rami. 2009. “Análisis comparativo de la audiodescripción española y alemana de ‘Good-Bye Lenin’.” Hermeneus 11: 249–66. Matamala, Anna, and Aline Remael. 2015. “Audio-Description Reloaded. An Analysis of Visual Scenes in 2012 and Hero.” Translation Studies 8 (1): 63–81. Matamala, Anna, and Pilar Orero. 2007. “Accessible Opera in Catalan: Opera for All.” In Media for All. Subtitling for the Deaf, Audio Description, and Sign Languages, edited by Jorge Díaz Cintas, Pilar Orero, and Aline Remael, 201–14. Amsterdam: Rodopi. ———. 2010. Listening to Subtitles. Subtitles for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing. Bern: Peter Lang Verlag. ———. 2016a. Researching Audio Description. New Approaches. London: Palgrave Macmillan. ——–. 2016b. “Audio Description from a Catalan Perspective.” In Syntolkning. Forskning och Praktik, edited by Jana Holsanova, Cecilia Wadensjö, and Mats Andrén. Lund: Lund University Cognitive Studies. Mateo Martínez-Bartolomé, Marta. 1995. La traducción del humor. Las comedias inglesas en español. Oviedo: Universidad de Oviedo. ———. 2001. “Performing Musical Texts in a Target Language: The Case of Spain.” Across Languages and Cultures 2 (1): 31–50. ———. 2002. “Los sobretítulos de ópera: dimensión técnica, textual, social e ideológica.” In Traductores para todo: actas de las III Jornadas de Doblaje y Subtitulación de la Universidad de Alicante, edited by John D. Sanderson, 51–74. Alicante: Publicacions de la Universitat d’Alacant. ———. 2007a. “Surtitling Today: New Uses, Attitudes and Developments.” Linguistica Antverpiensia 6: 135–54. ———. 2007b. “Reception, Text and Context in the Study of Opera Surtitles.” In Doubts and Directions in Translation Studies, edited by Yves Gambier, Miriam Shlesinger, and Radegundis Stolze, 169–82. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ———. 2012. “Music and Translation.” In Handbook of Translation Studies 3, edited by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer, 115–21. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Mateu, J. 2005. “La innovació en la traducció de documentals.” Quaderns divulgatius 26.Mayoral, Roberto. 1984. “La traducción y el cine. El subtítulo.” Babel: revista de los estudiantes de la EUTI 2 (mayo): 16–26. ———. 1993. “La traducción cinematográfica, el subtitulado.” Sendebar 4: 45–68. Mayoral, Roberto, Dorothy Kelly and Natividad Gallardo. 1986. “Concepto de traducción subordinada (cómic, cine, canción, publicidad). Perspectivas no lingüísticas de la traducción (I).” In Pasado, presente y futuro de la lingüística aplicada en España. Actas del III Congreso Nacional de Lingüística Aplicada, edited by Francisco Fernández, 95–105. Valencia: Universitat de València. Mayoral, Roberto, Dorothy Kelly and Natividad Gallardo. 1988. “Concept of Constrained Translation. Non-Linguistic Perspectives of Translation.” Meta 33 (3): 356–67. Mele, Antonia. 2016. “La sobretitulación teatral: Estudio descriptivo de las convenciones profesionales en España.” PhD diss., Universitat Jaume I. Melero, Maite, Antoni Oliver, and Toni Badia. 2006. “Automatic Multilingual Subtitling in the eTITLE project.” Translating and the Computer 28: 10. Méndez González, Ramón. 2012. “Traducción & paratraducción de videojuegos: textualidad y paratextualidad en la traducción audiovisual y multimedia.” PhD diss., Universidade de Vigo. Miloševski, Tanja. 2013. “Habla oral en los subtítulos televisivos y los subtítulos de aficionados: el caso de la traducción de la serie Los Serrano del español al serbio.” Sendebar 24: 73–88.

343

Frederic Chaume Miquel, Marta. 2014. “Can You See What I Read? Multimodal Information in Films with Subtitles for the Deaf & Hard of Hearing.” In Subtitling and Intercultural Communication. European Languages and Beyond, edited by Beatrice Garzelli and Michaela Baldo, 341–56. Pisa: Edizioni ETS. Montero Domínguez, Xoán. 2006. “Achegas para a tradución de productos destinados á dobraxe cara ao galego.” Viceversa 12: 112–20. ———. 2008. Experiencias profesionales de un traductor de textos audiovisuales para la TVG, 371–79. Barcelona: PPU. ———, ed. 2010. A Tradución para a dobraxe en Galicia, País Vasco e Cataluña. Experiencias investigadoras e profesionais. Universidade de Vigo: Servizo de Publicacións. ———, ed. 2017. El doblaje. Nuevas vías de investigación. Granada: Comares. Montes Fernández, Antonia. 2007. Traducción y globalización. Análisis y perspectivas del fenómeno publicitario (español-alemán-inglés). Granada: Comares. Muñoz-Sánchez, Pablo. 2008. “En torno a la localización de videojuegos clásicos mediante técnicas de romhacking: particularidades, calidad y aspectos legales.” JoSTrans, The Journal of Specialised Translation 9: 80–95. Myers, Lora. “The Art of Dubbing.” Filmmakers Newsletter 6 (6): 56–58. Neves, Josélia. 2005. “Audiovisual Translation: Subtitling for the Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing.” PhD diss., University of Roehampton. Ofcom. 2005. Subtitling – An Issue of Speed? London: Office of Communications. Ofcom. 2006. Television Access Services – Review of the Code and Guidance. London: Office of Communications. Oncins, Estel·la. 2015. “The Tyranny of the Tool: Surtitling Live Performances.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 23 (1): 42–61. Orero, Pilar. 2004. “The Pretended Easiness of Voice-Over Translation of TV.” JoSTrans, The Journal of Specialised Translation 2: 76–96. ———. 2005a. “La traducción de entrevistas para voice-over.” In La traducción audiovisual: investigación, enseñanza y profesión, edited by Patrick Zabalbeascoa, Laura Santamaria Guinot, and Frederic Chaume, 213–22. Granada: Comares. ———. 2005b. “Audio Description: Professional Recognition, Practice and Standards in Spain.” Translation Watch Quarterly 1 (1): 7–18. ———. 2006. “Synchronization in Voice-Over.” In A New Spectrum of Translation Studies, edited by José María Bravo, 255–64. Valladolid: Publicaciones de la Universidad de Valladolid. ———. 2007a. “Sampling Audio Description in Europe.” In Media for All. Subtitling for the Deaf, Audio Description, and Sign Languages, edited by Jorge Díaz Cintas, Pilar Orero, and Aline Remael, 111– 26. Amsterdam: Rodopi. ———. 2007b. “Voice-Over: A Case of Hyper-Reality.” MuTra 2006-Audiovisual Translation Scenarios: Conference Proceedings. www.euroconferences.info/proceedings/2006_Proceedings/2006_Orero_ Pilar.pdf. ———. 2007c. “Audiosubtitling: A Possible Solution for Opera Accessibility in Catalonia.” TradTerm 13: 135–49. ———. 2016. “Audio Describing the TV Series The West Wing: Towards a Coherent Practice.” Intralinea 18. Orero, Pilar, Ana Pereira and Francisco Utray. 2009. “The Present and Future of Audio Description and Subtitling for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing in Spain.” Meta 54 (3): 248–63. Orero, Pilar, and Anna Vilaró. 2012. “Eye-Tracking Analysis of Minor Details in Films for Audiodescription.” MonTI, Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación 4: 295–319. Orrego-Carmona, David. 2015. “The Reception of (Non) Professional Subtitling.” PhD diss., Universitat Rovira i Virgili. Palencia Villa, Rosa María. 2000. “El doblaje cinematográfico: factores de eficacia desde la recepción.” Revista Latina de Comunicación Social 25: 16. ———. 2002. “La influencia del doblaje audiovisual en la percepción de los personajes.” PhD diss., Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Palomo López, Alicia. 2008. “Audio Description as Language Development and Language Learning for Blind and Visual Impaired Children.” In Thinking Translation: Perspectives from Within and Without, edited by R. Hyde Parker and K. Guadarrama García, 113–34. Boca Raton, FL: Brown Walker Press.

344

Audiovisual translation ———. 2010. “The Benefits of Audio Description for Blind Children.” In New Insights into Audiovisual Translation and Media Accessibility: Media for All 2, edited by Jorge Díaz Cintas, Anna Matamala, and Josélia Neves, 213–26. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi. ———. 2016. “Seeing Films Through Your Ears. A Descriptive and Comparative Study of Audio Description for Children in the UK and Spain.” PhD diss., Universitat Jaume I. Pereira, Ana. 2000. “Doblaje y traducción en España y en Galicia: su historia.” In Traducción subordinada (I). El doblaje, edited by Lourdes Lorenzo and Ana Pereira, 7–16. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. ———. 2005. “El subtitulado para sordos: estado de la cuestión en España.” Quaderns: Revista de traducció 12: 161–72. ———. 2010. “Criteria for Elaborating Subtitles for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Adults in Spain: Description of a Case Study.” In Listening to Subtitles. Subtitles for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, edited by Anna Matamala and Pilar Orero, 87–114. Bern: Peter Lang. Pérez de Oliveira, Almudena. 2011. “El subtitulador para sordos en las principales cadenas de televisión en España.” In Between Text and Receiver: Translation and Accessibility, edited by Elena Di Giovanni, 217–26. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Pérez-González, Luis. 2007. “Appraising Dubbed Conversation: Systemic Functional Insights into the Construal of Naturalness in Translated Film Dialogue.” The Translator 13 (1): 1–38. ———. 2013. “Amateur Subtitling as Immaterial Labour in Digital Media Culture: An Emerging Paradigm of Civic Engagement.” Convergence 19 (2): 157–75. ———. 2014. Audiovisual Translation. Theories, Methods and Issues. Abingdon: Routledge. ———. 2016. “The Politics of Affect in Activist Amateur Subtitling: A Biopolitical Perspective.” In Citizen Media and Public Spaces: Diverse Expressions of Citizenship and Dissent, edited by Mona Baker and Bolette B. Blaagaard, 118–35. London/New York: Routledge. Pérez López de Heredia, María. 2015. “Traducción y globalización de estereotipos de género en televisión: una imagen panorámica.” In La traducción. Nuevos planteamientos teórico-metodológicos, edited by María Azucena Penas, 261–84. Madrid: Síntesis. ———. 2016. “Translating Gender Stereotypes: An Overview on Global Telefiction.” Altre Modernità: Rivista di studi letterari e culturali, Nº. Extra 1: 166–81. Pérez Payá, María. 2007. “La audiodescripción: traduciendo el lenguaje de las cámaras.” In Traducción y accesibilidad. Subtitulación para Sordos y audiodescripción para ciegos: nuevas modalidades de Traducción Audiovisual, edited by Catalina Jiménez Hurtado, 81–91. Franfurt am Mein: Peter Lang. ———. 2010. “Recortes de cine audiodescrito: el lenguaje cinematográfico en Taggetti. Imagen y su reflejo en la audiodescripción.” In Un corpus de cine. Teoría y práctica de la audiodescripción, edited by Catalina Jiménez Hurtado, Ana Rodríguez, and Claudia Seibel, 111–79. Granada: Tragacanto. Prats Rodríguez, Ana Maria. 2014. “Estudi descriptiu i comparatiu del model de llengua del doblatge al català: el cas de les series d’animació i d’anime al sistema televisiu balear.” PhD diss., Universitat Jaume I. Puigdomènech, L., A. Matamala, and P. Orero. 2010. “Audio description of Films: State of the Art and a Protocol Proposal.” In Perspectives on Audiovisual Translation, edited by Lukasz Bogucki and Krysztof Kredens, 27–44. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Pujol Tubau, Miquel. 2015. “La representació de personatges a través del doblatge en narratives transmèdia. Estudi descriptiu de pel·lícules i videojocs basats en El senyor dels anells.” PhD diss., Universitat de Vic – Universitat Central de Catalunya. Ramos Caro, Marina. 2016. “Testing Audio Narration: The Emotional Impact of Language in Audio Description.” Perspectives 24 (4): 606–34. Remael, Aline, Pilar Orero, and Mary Carroll. 2012. Audiovisual Translation and Media Accessibility at the Crossroads. Media for All 3. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi. Rica Peromingo, Juan Pedro. 2014. “La traducción de marcadores discursivos (DM) inglés-español en los subtítulos de películas: un estudio de corpus.” JoSTrans, The Journal of Specialised Translation 21: 177–99. Richart Marset, Mabel. 2012. Ideología y traducción. Por un análisis genético del doblaje. Madrid: Biblioteca Nueva. ———. 2015. “La censura de la corrección política: la traducción audiovisual a escena.” Quaderns de filologia. Estudis literaris 20: 237–57.

345

Frederic Chaume Rico, Albert. 2007. “La llengua catalana i els registres col·loquials a les sèries de producció aliena de TV3.” In Actes del tretzè Col· loqui internacional de llengua i literatura catalanes, Vol. 2, edited by Miriam Cabré, 385–92. Barcelona: Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. Roales Ruiz, Antonio. 2014. “Estudio crítico de los programas de subtitulación profesionales. Carencias en su aplicación para la didáctica. Propuesta de solución mediante conjunto de aplicaciones integradas.” PhD diss., Universidad de Salamanca. ———. 2016. “Los programas informáticos de subtitulación en la enseñanza/aprendizaje de la TAV dentro del ámbito universitario: una propuesta de evaluación.” Entreculturas 7–8: 761–74. Rodríguez Espinosa, Marcos. 2000. “Subtitulado y doblaje como procesos de domesticación cultural.” In La traducción para el doblaje y la subtitulación, edited by Miguel Duro Moreno, 103–18. Madrid: Cátedra. ———. 2001. “Intertextualidad doblaje-subtitulado en ‘Sed de mal’ de Orson Welles.” In El subtitulado: (inglés-español/gallego), edited by Ana Pereira, Lourdes Lorenzo, 223–36. ———. 2018. “Traducción, censura y memoria: Citizen Kane, de Orson Welles, en Hispanoamérica y España.” In Traducir a los clásicos: entornos y contextos, edited by Juan Jesús Zaro and Salvador Peña, 356–71. Granada: Comares. Rodríguez Espinosa, Marcos, and Sergio Álvarez. 1998. “Dificultades técnicas y culturales del subtitulado.” In II Estudios sobre Traducción e Interpretación, edited by M. Rodríguez and A. Álvarez, Vol. 2: 707–16. Málaga, Servicio de Publicaciones de la Diputación de Málaga (CEDMA). Rodríguez, Cecilia. 2011. “La audiodescripción en Galicia: panorama actual a través del cortometraje audiodescrito. Illa Pedra (Adriana Páramo 2010).” MA diss., Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Rodríguez Posadas, Gala. 2007. “La audiodescripción: parámetros de cohesión.” In Traducción y accesibilidad, edited by Catalina Jiménez Hurtado, 93–109. Bern: Peter Lang. ———. 2010. “Audio Description as a Complex Translation Process: A Protocol.” In New Insights into Audiovisual Translation and Media Accessibility: Media for All 2, edited by Jorge Díaz Cintas, Anna Matamala, and Josélia Neves, 195–211. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi. Romero Ramos, Mª Guadalupe. 2005. “La traducción de dialectos geográficos y sociales en la subtitulación: mecanismos compensatorios y tendencia a la estandarización.” In Trasvases Culturales: Literatura, Cine, Traducción, vol. 4, 243–59. Vitoria: Universidad del País Vasco. ———. 2010. “Un estudio descriptivo sobre la traducción de la variación lingüística en el doblaje y la subtitulación: las traducciones de Il Postino.” PhD diss., Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. ———. 2011. “When the Orality is Less Prefabricated: An Analytical Model for The Study of Colloquial Conversation in Audiovisual Translation.” In Subtitles and Subtitling. Audiovisual Translation and Its Didactic Applications in Foreign Language Teaching, edited by L. McLoughing and M. Biscio, 19–54. New Trends in Translation. Bern: Peter Lang Publishers. ———. 2016. “Traducir el dialecto en el doblaje: del conservadurismo a la transgresión.” In Traducción, interpretación y estudios interculturales, edited by Lucía Molina and Laura Santamaria Guinot, 109–25. Granada: Comares. Romero-Fresco, Pablo. 2006. “The Spanish dubbese. A case of (un)idiomatic Friends.” Jostrans, 6: 134–51. ———. 2009a. “Naturalness in the Spanish Dubbing Language: A Case of Not-So-Close Friends.” Meta 54 (1): 49–72. ———. 2009b. “More Haste Than Speed: Edited Versus Verbatim Respoken Subtitles.” Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics 6: 109–33. ———. 2010. “Comprehension and Reading Patterns of Respoken Subtitles for the News.” In New Insights into Audiovisual Translation and Media Accessibility: Media for All 2, edited by Jorge Díaz Cintas, Anna Matamala, and Josélia Neves. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi. ———. 2011. Subtitling Through Speech Recognition. London/New York: Routledge. ———. 2012a. “Accessible Filmmaking: Joining the Dots Between Audiovisual Translation, Accessibility and Filmmaking.” JoSTrans, The Journal of Specialised Translation 20: 201–23. ———. 2012b. “Respeaking in Translator Training Curricula Present and Future Prospects.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 6 (1): 91–112. ———. 2012c. “Quality in Live Subtitling: The Reception of Respoken Subtitles in the UK.” In Audiovisual Translation and Media Accessibility at the Crossroads. Media for All 3, edited by Aline Remael, Pilar Orero, and Mary Carroll. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi.

346

Audiovisual translation ———. 2012d. “Dubbing Dialogues . . . Naturally: A Pragmatic Approach to the Translation of Transition Markers in Dubbing.” Monti 4: 181–205. ———. 2013. “Accessible Filmmaking: Joining the Dots Between Audiovisual Translation, Accessibility And Filmmaking.” Jostrans 20: 201–23. ———. 2014. “Respeaking in Translator Training Curricula.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 6 (1): 91–112. ———. 2015a. The Reception of Subtitles for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing in Europe. Berlin: Peter Lang. ———. 2015b. “Respeaking.” In The Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, edited by Franz Pöchhacker. London/New York: Routledge. ———. 2015c. “Accuracy Rate in Live Subtitling: The NER Model.” In Audiovisual Translation in a Global Context: Mapping an Ever-Changing Landscape, edited by Rocío Baños Piñero and Jorge Díaz Cintas. Basingstoke/New York: Palgrave Macmillan. ———. 2016. “Accessing Communication: The Quality of Live Subtitles in the UK.” Language & Communication 49: 56–69. Sánchez Mompeán, Sofía. 2017. “The Rendition of English Intonation in Spanish Dubbing.” PhD diss., Universidad de Murcia. Sande García, José Manuel. 2011. “Una historia del doblaje en España.” In Between Text and Receiver: Translation and Accessibility, edited by Elena Di Giovanni, 89–102. Bern: Peter Lang. Sanderson, John. 2009. “Strategies for the Dubbing of Puns with One Visual Semantic Layer.” In New Trends in Audiovisual Translation: Language Transfer on Screen, edited by Jorge Díaz Cintas, 123– 33. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Santaemilia, José, and Betlem Soler Pardo. 2010. “Els títols dels films de Quentin Tarantino: una perspectiva multilingüe,” Quaderns, 17: 167–82. Santamaria Guinot, Laura. 1998. “Sèries de producción aliena.” In La llengua de televisió de Catalunya. Materials per a l’anàlisi, edited by Neus Faura, David Paloma, and Anna M. Torrent, 95–102. Bellaterra: Servei de Publicacions de la UAB. ———. 2000. “Cultural References in Translation: Informative Contribution and Cognitive Value.” In Beyond the Western Tradition: Essays on Translation Outside Standard European Languages. Translation Perspectives XI, edited by Marilyn Gaddis Rose, 415–26. Binghamton: Center for Research in Translation, State University of New York at Binghamton. ———. 2001. “Función y traducción de los referentes culturales en subtitulación.” In El subtitulado: (inglés-español/gallego), edited by Ana Pereira and Lourdes Lorenzo, 223–36. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. ———. 2003. “Les TIC i la didàctica de la traducció audiovisual.” In VII Jornadas de Traducció a Vic Interficies: Apropant la pedagogia de la traducció a les llengües estrangeres.Vic: Eumo. ———. 2010a. “El col˙ loquial de la ficció. La caracterització de la parla dels joves.” Llengua i ús: revista tècnica de poĺıtica lingǘıstica 49: 78–89. ———. 2010b. “The Translation of Cultural Referents: From Reference to Mental Representation.” Meta 55 (3): 516–28. ———. 2016. “Filmmaking: Cultural Referents, Terminology and Identity.” In Traducción, Interpretación y Estudios interculturales, edited by Lucía Molina and Laura Santamaria Guinot, 109–25. Granada: Editorial Comares. ———. 2017. “Multimodalidad, diálogos y doblaje.” In El Doblaje. Nuevas vías de investigación, edited by Xoán Montero, 39–48. Granada: Comares. Santamaria Guinot, Laura., M. Bassols, and A. M. Torrent. 2011. “Television Programs for Teenagers and the Use of Multimodality in Knowledge Popularisation.” Journal of Journalism and Mass Communication 1 (2): 123–35. Santamaria Guinot, Laura, and Gemma Brunat. 2012. “Discurs televisiu i multimodalitat.” In en La divulgació en els nous formats televisius, coordinated by Margarida Bassols, 133–52. Bellaterra: Servei de Publicacions de la UAB. Sanz Ortega, Elena. 2011. “Subtitling and the Relevance of Non-Verbal Information in Polyglot Films.” New Voices in Translation Studies 7: 19–34. Scandura, Gabriela. 2004. “Sex, Lies and TV: Censorship and Subtitling.” Meta 49 (1): 125–34. ———. 2015. “El español neutro del doblaje de programas infantiles y juveniles: ¿un caso de estandarización o de censura?” MA Thesis, Universitat Jaume I.

347

Frederic Chaume Seibel, Claudia. 2007. “La audiodescripción en Alemania.” In Traducción y accesibilidad. Subtitulación para sordos y audiodescripción para ciegos: nuevas modalidades de Traducción Audiovisual, edited by Catalina Jiménez Hurtado, 167–78. Frankfurt am Mein: Peter Lang. Serrano Fernández, Luis. 2002. “Back to the Future en España. La traducción de los elementos culturales inglés-español en la película Regreso al Futuro.” TRANS: Revista de Traductología 6: 197–214. http://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=266766. Snell-Hornby, Mary. 1988. Translation Studies. An Interdiscipline. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Sokoli, Stavroula. 2006. “Learning via Subtitling (LvS). A Tool for the Creation of Foreign Language Learning Activities Based on Film Subtitling.” MuTra Proceedings 2006 – Multidimensional Translation: Audiovisual Translation Scenarios, Copenhagen: University of Copenhagen. www.sub2learn.ie/ downloads/2006_sokoli_stravoula.pdf. ———. 2015. “ClipFlair: Foreign Language Learning through Interactive Revoicing and Captioning of Clips.” In Subtitles and Language Learning, edited by Yves Gambier, Annamaria Caimi, and Cristina Mariotti, 127–48. Bern: Peter Lang. Sokoli, Stavroula, Patrick Zabalbeascoa, and Maria Fountana. 2011. “Subtitling Activities for Foreign Language Learning: What Learners and Teachers Think.” In Audiovisual Translation: Subtitles and Subtitling. Theory and Practice. New Trends in Translation Studies, 9, edited by Laura Incalcaterra McLoughlin, Marie Biscio, and Máire Áine Ní Mhainnín, 219–42. Berna/Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Soler Pardo, Betlem. 2011. “Swearing and Translation: A Study of the Insults in the Films of Quentin Tarantino.” PhD diss., Universitat de València. ———. 2013. “Translating and Dubbing Verbal Violence in Reservoir Dogs. Censorship in the Linguistic Transference of Quentin Tarantino’s (Swear)Words.” JoSTrans, The Journal of Specialised Translation 20: 144–55. ———. 2015. On the Translation of Swearing into Spanish: Quentin Tarantino from Reservoir Dogs to Inglourious Basterds. Newcastle upon Thyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Talaván, Noa. 2006. “Using Subtitles to Enhance Foreign Language Education.” Porta Linguarum 6, 41–52. www.ugr.es/~portalin/articulos/PL_numero6/indice.pdf. ———. 2007. “Learning Vocabulary Through Authentic Video and Subtitles.” TESOL-SPAIN Newsletter 31: 5–8. ———. 2009. “Aplicaciones de la traducción audiovisual para mejorar la comprensión oral de inglés.” PhD diss., Universidad de Educación a Distancia (UNED). ——–. 2010. “Subtitling as a Task and Subtitles as Support: Pedagogical Applications.” In New Insights into Audiovisual Translation and Media Accessibility, edited by Jorge Díaz Cintas, Anna Matamala, and Josélia Neves, 285–99. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi. ———. 2011. “A Quasi-Experimental Research Project on Subtitling and Foreign Language Acquisition.” In Audiovisual Translation Subtitles and Subtitling. Theory and Practice, edited by Laura Incalcaterra McLoughlin, Marie Biscio, and Máire Áine Ní Mhainnín, 197–217. Berna: Peter Lang. ———. 2013. La subtitulación en el aprendizaje de lenguas extranjeras. Barcelona: Octaedro. Talaván, Noa, and José Javier Ávila-Cabrera. 2015. “First Insights into the Combination of Dubbing and Subtitling as L2 Didactic Tools.” In Subtitles and Language Learning, edited by Yves Gambier, Annamaria Caimi, and Cristina Mariotti, 149–72. Bern: Peter Lang. Talaván, Noa, José Javier Ávila-Cabrera, and Tomás Costal. 2016. Traducción y accesibilidad audiovisual. Barcelona: UOC. Talaván, Noa, and Pilar Rodríguez-Arancón. 2014. “The Use of Reverse Subtitling as an Online Collaborative Language Learning Tool.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 8 (1): 84–101. www. tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1750399X.2014.908559. Tamayo Masero, Ana. 2012. “La traducción del slang en Jackie Brown (Tarantino, 1997).” Fòrum de Recerca 17: 791–811. ———. 2014. “Translating Slang for Dubbing: A Descriptive Case Study of Jackie Brown (EnglishSpanish).” Linguae 1: 315–40. ———. 2015. “Estudio descriptivo y experimental de la subtitulación en TV para niños sordos. Una propuesta alternative.” PhD diss., Universitat Jaume I. ———. 2016a. “Formal Aspects in SDH for Children in Spanish Television: A Descriptive Study.” Estudios de Traducción 6: 109–28.

348

Audiovisual translation ———. 2016b. “Reading Speed in Subtitling for Hearing Impaired Children: An Analysis in Spanish Television.” JoSTrans, The Journal of Specialised Translation 26: 275–94. Tamayo Masero, Ana, and Frederic Chaume. 2016. “Los códigos de significación del texto audiovisual: implicaciones en la traducción para el doblaje, la subtitulación y la accesibilidad.” Linguae 3: 301–36. ———. 2017. “Subtitling for d/Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Children: Current Practices and New Possibilities to Enhance Language Development.” Brain Sciences 7 (75): 1–13. Tercedor, Maribel. 2009. Materiales multimedia para todos. Inclusión y accesibilidad en educación. Granada: Tragacanto. Tercedor, Maribel, Pilar Lara Burgos, Dolores Herrador Molina, Irene Márquez Linares, and Lourdes Márquez Alhambra, L. 2006. “Subtitulamos para todos? Propuesta de criterios para una subtitulación accesible.” In Accesibilidad a los medios audiovisuales para personas con discapacidad. AMADIS ’06, edited by Belén Ruiz Mezcua y Francisco Utray Delgado, 83–93. Madrid: Real Patronato sobre Discapacidad. Titford, Christopher. 1982. “Subtitling-Constrained Translation.” Lebende Sprachen 27 (3): 113–16. Toda, Fernando. 2005. “Subtitulado y doblaje: Traducción especial(izada).” Quaderns. Revista de traducció 12. Tonin, Raffaella. 2014. “Un poquito de por favor: La sfida dell’oralità alle limitazioni del sottotitolo.” Cuadernos AISPI 4: 213–28. Torralba, Gloria. 2016. “L´aprenentatge de llengües a través de la traducció audiovisual: la subtitulació com a eina per a l’adquisició de lèxic en llengua estrangera.” PhD diss., Universitat Jaume I. Torralba, Gloria, Anna Marzà, and Frederic Chaume. 2012. “El modelo de lengua del doblaje: las unidades fraseológicas en las traducciones de RTVV.” In Lenguas especializadas, fijación y traducción, edited by Pedro Mogorrón Huerta and Salah Mejri (dir.), 65–79. Alicante: Universitat d’Alacant. Torregrosa, Carmen. 1996. “Subtítulos: traducir los márgenes de la imagen.” Sendebar 7: 73–88. Utray Delgado, Francisco, Ana Pereira, and Pilar Orero. 2009. “The Present and Future of Audio Description and Subtitling for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing in Spain.” Meta: Translators’ Journal 54 (2): 248–63. Utray Delgado, Francisco, B. Ruiz, and J. A. Moreiro. 2010. “Maximum Font Size for Subtitles in Standard Definition Digital Televison.” In Listening to Subtitles. Subtitles for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, edited by Anna Matamala and Pilar Orero, 59–68. Bern: Peter Lang. Valdeón, Roberto. 2005. “Asymmetric Representations of Languages in Contact: Uses and Translations of French and Spanish in Frasier.” Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series 4: 279–94. ———. 2011. “Dysfluencies in Simulated English Dialogue and Their Neutralization in Dubbed Spanish.” Perspectives. Studies in Translatology 19 (3): 221–32. ———. 2015. “The (Ab)Use of Taboo Lexis in Audiovisual Translation: Raising Awareness of Pragmatic Variation in English-Spanish.” Intercultural Pragmatics 15 (3): 363–85. Valdés, Cristina. 2004. La traducción publicitaria: Comunicación y cultura. Bellaterra: Barcelona/Castelló de la Plana/Valencia/Aldea Global. ———. 2013. “Advertising Translation.” In The Routledge Handbook of Translation Studies, edited by Carmen Millán and Francesca Bartrina, 303–16. Oxon/New York: Routledge. Valero Gisbert, María. 2012. “La intertextualidad fílmica en la audiodescripción (AD).” Intralinea 14. ———. 2014–2015. “Reflexiones sobre la creación de la imagen mental a través de la audiodescripción (AD).” Prosopopeya, 9, Traducción, ideología y poder en la ficción audiovisual 219–31. Varela Romero, M. S. 2011. “Subtitulado para sordos: Camino hacia una normativa. Análisis del éxito comunicativo de Chicken Run (Evasión en la granja) y Pinocho 3000.” In Between Text and Receiver: Translation and Accessibility, edited by Elena Di Giovanni, 247–59. Bern: Peter Lang. Vermeulen, Anna. 2003. “La traducción audiovisual en la enseñanza de idiomas.” Actas del Segundo Congreso Internacional de Español para Fines Específicos, 159–68. http://cvc.cervantes.es/ensenanza/ biblioteca_ele/ciefe/pdf/02/cvc_ciefe_02_0014.pdf. Vidal Sales, Cristina. 2015. “Familiarmente extraños: construcción de la alteridad latinoamericana en el doblaje español.” In Traducción y representaciones del conflicto desde España y América. Una perspectiva interdisciplinar, edited by Icíar Alonso Araguás, Alba Páez Rodríguez, and Mario Samaniego Sastre, 143–55. Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca. Villanueva Jordán, Iván. 2015. “You Better Werk. Camp Representations of Rupaul’s Drag Race in Spanish Subtitles.” Meta 60 (2): 376–376.

349

Frederic Chaume Voellmer, E., and P. Zabalbeascoa. 2014. “How Multilingual Can a Dubbed Film Be? Is It a Matter of Language Combinations or National Traditions?” Linguistica Antverpiensia 13: 233–50. Zabalbeascoa, Patrick. 1993. “Developing Translation Studies to Better Account for Audiovisual Texts and Other New Forms of Text Production.” PhD diss., Universitat de Lleida. ———. 1994. “Factors in Dubbing Television Comedy.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 2 (1): 89–99. ———. 1996a. “In Search of a Model that will Work for the Dubbing of Television Comedy.” In Actes del I Congrés Internacional sobre Traducció i Interpretació. Barcelona, edited by Miquel Edo, 350– 66: Bellaterra: UAB. ———. 1996b. “La traducción de la comedia televisiva: implicaciones teóricas.” In A Spectrum of Translation Studies 1, edited by Purificación Fernández Nistal and José María Bravo Gozalo, 173–201. Valladolid: Universidad de Valladolid. ———. 1996c. “Translating jokes for dubbed television situation comedies.” The Translator 2 (2): 235–57. ———. 1997a. “Dubbing and the nonverbal dimension of translation.” In Nonverbal Communication and Translation: New Perspectives and Challenges in Literature, Interpretation and the Media, edited by Fernando Poyatos, 314–32. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ———. 1997b. “La didáctica de la traducción: Desarrollo de la competencia traductora.” In Aproximaciones a la traducción, edited by Antonio Gil de Carrasco and Leo Hickey. Madrid: Instituto Cervantes. https://cvc.cervantes.es/lengua/aproximaciones/zabalbeascoa.htm. ———. 2000. “Contenidos para adultos en el género infantil: el caso del doblaje de Walt Disney.” In Literatura infantil y juvenil: tendencias actuales en investigación, edited by Lorenzo García, L. and Ana M. Pereira Rodríguez, 19–30. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. ———. 2001. “La traducción del humor en textos audiovisuales.” In La traducción para el doblaje y la subtitulación, edited by Miguel Duro, 251–63. Madrid: Cátedra. ———. 2005. “Humour and Translation, an Interdiscipline.” Humor: International Journal of Humor Research 18 (2): 185–207. ———. 2006a. “Els dilemes de TVC: models de llengua, espontaneïtat, versemblança.” Revista del Col·legi Oficial de Doctors i Llicenciats en Filosofia i Lletres i en Ciències de Catalunya 125: 72–86. ———. 2006b. “The Curse of Conflicting Norms in Subtitling: A Case Study of Grice in Action.” In Research on Translation for Subtitling in Spain and Italy, edited by John Sanderson, 49–63. Alicante: Publicacions de la Universitat d’Alacant. ———. 2008a. “Contradiccions i paradoxes del català oral de ficció.” Revista del Col·legi Oficial de Doctors i Llicenciats en Filosofia i Lletres i en Ciències de Catalunya 129: 78–84. ———. 2008b. “La credibilidad de los diálogos traducidos para audiovisuales.” In La oralidad fingida, edited by J. Brumme, S. Carsten, and A. Zaballa, 157–75. Frankfurt/Madrid: Vervuert/Iberoamericana. ———. 2010. “La Oralidad perdida: o cuando el texto escrito es más oral que el audiovisual: el caso de Trainspotting.” In Construir, deconstruir y reconstruir, edited by Gemma Andújar and Jenny Brumme, 141–60. Berlin: Frank und Timme. Zabalbeascoa, Patrick, Natàlia Izard and Laura Santamaria. 2001. “Disentangling Audiovisual Translation into Catalan from the Spanish Media Mesh.” In (Multi) Media Translation: Concepts, Practices and Research, edited by Yves Gambier and Henrik Gottlieb, 101–11. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Zabalbeascoa, Patrick, and Montserrat Corrius. 2012. “How Spanish in an American film is rendered in Translation. Dubbing Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid in Spain.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 22 (2): 1–16. Zabalondo, Beatriz. 2005. “Bikoizketa euskaraz.” In Trasvases Culturales: Literatura, Cine, Traducción 4, edited by Merino, Raquel, Eterio Pajares, and José Miguel Santamaría, 297–305. Vitoria: Universidad del País Vasco. ———. 2011. “El euskera en los medios – Los medios del euskera.” In Endangered Languages: Voices and Images, edited by Marleen Haboud and Nicholas Ostler, 113–19. Hungerford: Foundation for Endangered Languages. Zárate, Soledad. 2008. “Subtitling for Deaf Children on British Television.” The Sign Language Translator and Interpreter 2 (1): 15–34. ———. 2010a. “Bridging the Gap between Deaf Studies and AVT for Deaf children.” In New Insights into Audiovisual Translation and Media Accessibility: Media for All 2, edited by Jorge Díaz Cintas, Anna Matamala, and Josélia Neves, 159–73. Ámsterdam/Nueva York: Rodopi.

350

Audiovisual translation ———. 2010b. “Subtitling for Deaf Children.” In Perspectives on Audiovisual Translation, edited by Łukasz Bogucki and Krzysztof Kredens, 107–22. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Zárate, Soledad, and Joseph Eliahoo. 2014. “Word Recognition and Content Comprehension of Subtitles for Television by Deaf Children.” JosTrans, The Journal of Specialised Translation 21: 133–52. Zaro Vera, Juan Jesús. 2001. “Perspectiva social del doblaje y la subtitulación. Una aplicación de los conceptos de Pierre Bourdieu.” In La traducción para el doblaje y la subtitulación, coordinated by Miguel Duro Moreno, 47–64. Madrid: Cátedra.

351

18 LOCALIZATION AND LOCALIZATION RESEARCH IN SPANISH-SPEAKING CONTEXTS Miguel A. Jiménez-Crespo

Introduction The digital revolution in the twentieth century has had a profound impact on the professional world of translation, and by extension, on Translation and Interpreting studies. Landmarks such as the emergence of the Internet in the 1970s, personal computing in the 1980s, and the World Wide Web in the 1990s, have resulted in a dramatic change from a world of printed texts to a digital paradigm. Each day, vast amounts of digital texts are produced, distributed, localized or accessed by end users via computers, smartphones, tablets or digital devices. For those living in non-English speaking contexts, these digital devices often contain localized software products, web browsers, apps or user interfaces. The Internet continues to permeate everyday lives. In Spain, Internet access is available to 76.9% of the population, while the penetration rate of the Internet in Latin America is 68%; in Central America it is 53% (InternetWorld Stats 2017). Nevertheless, in some countries such as Costa Rica, the Internet reaches as much as 86.8% of its citizens. In addition, Spanish is currently the third language with the most users in the Internet behind English and Chinese (InternetWorldStats 2017). In this context, consumption of web content translated into Spanish and their associated translation processes will continue to increase. This chapter deals with localization, a by-product of this digital revolution, helping expand the reach of digital content and enabling all sorts of communication exchanges across sociocultural and sociolinguistic communities. It represents a process that involves a complex technological, textual, communicative and cognitive process by which source interactive digital texts undergo modifications with the goal of being used in different linguistic and sociocultural contexts than those of production. Jiménez-Crespo (2008, 40) defined it as: una modalidad de traducción que comprende un complejo proceso textual, comunicativo, cognitivo y tecnológico por el que un texto en formato digital y en un entorno interactivo se modifica para su uso en una lengua y contexto sociocultural de recepción distintos a los originales, siempre según las expectativas de la audiencia a la que se dirija y las especificaciones o grado de localización que encargue el iniciador. (Jiménez-Crespo 2008, 40)

352

Localization and localization research

[A translation modality that involves a complex textual, communicative, cognitive and technological process by which a digital text in an interactive environment is modified to be used in a language and sociocultural context different from those of production. The process is always guided by the expectation of the intended audience and the specification or localization degree requested by the initiator.] Localization is often defined in published research in the discipline using seminal industry publications, such as those released by the now disappeared Localization Industry Standard Association (LISA) as a process that involves “taking a product and making it linguistically and culturally appropriate to the target locale (country/region and language) where it will be used and sold” (LISA 2004, 13). The organization that filled the void left by LISA, the Globalization and Localization Association (GALA), defines localization as a process with “[t]he goal is to provide a product with the look and feel of having been created for the target market to eliminate or minimize local sensitivities” (GALA 2011). Scholars provided critical analyses of industry definitions of localization (Pym 2004), including overviews of both industry and TS definitional efforts (Jiménez-Crespo 2013a, 12–19). Primarily, these scholars argue that localization simply represents a translation modality with specific procedural and technological processes, in line with other modalities related to audiovisual translation, such as process of subtitling or dubbing of movies and television products. Localization processes have historically emerged in the realms of software for personal computing in the United States (Esselink 2000; Parra 1999). Over the years it has progressively expanded to include websites (Jiménez-Crespo 2013a), videogames (Bernal Merino 2015), smartphone/tablet apps (Roturier 2015; Serón-Ordoñez and Martin-Mor 2017) and other small devices. The study of all these interrelated areas within Translation Studies makes up a subdiscipline that has been referred to as “Localization Studies” (Remael 2011; JiménezCrespo 2013a). This sub branch has been a productive area within Translation Studies within what is known as the “translation turn” in the discipline, a process by which: [T]ranslation theories begin to incorporate the increasingly evident impact of technology, in turn providing a relevant theoretical framework to language and translation technology researchers. (O’Hagan 2013, 513) This digital revolution has been a frequent locus of research for Spanish scholars given the consolidation of digital technologies in modern societies and in the practice of translation. In the twenty-first century, the “interrelationship between translation and technology is only deepening” (O’Hagan 2013, 503), and consequently, the “widespread technological impact on translation is only likely to increase” (ibid, 514). Technology keeps developing at a quantum speed, and the demands made on the professional translator do not show any signs of abating, quite the opposite: “in today’s market, the use of technology by translators is no longer a luxury but a necessity” (Bowker and Corpas Pastor 2015, np). It goes without saying that translation technologies are a requirement for localization. Two areas have emerged as the most productive research trends in Spanish contexts, web localization and videogame localization. This chapter will focus mainly on web localization, although references to research into software and videogame localization will also be included.

353

Miguel A. Jiménez-Crespo

Localization Localization types and And Translation Studies Translation Studies Research

Software Localization

Web Localization

Videogame Localization

Small device Localization

App localization

Figure 18.1  Different areas of research in Localization Studies, adapted from Jiménez-Crespo (2011c, 4)

The reasons are twofold. Web localization is considerably the modality that has attracted the most attention among Spanish researchers, and it represents the modality with the highest volume of business of all localization processes. Web localization surpassed the market share of software localization in the early 2000s (LISA 2004; Jiménez-Crespo 2008), resulting in a “lucrative, dynamic and interprofessional field, often involving marketing, design, software engineering, as well as linguistic processes” (Pym 2011, 410). Localization in general appears as one of the main engines of growth for the language service industry (GALA 2016),1 with the language-technology industry amounting to almost thirty billion dollars. In Spain, a 2015 industry survey identified web localization as the process with the highest volume of business (Rico et al. 2016). In his earlier publications, Jiménez-Crespo defined web localization by means of extending Hurtado’s (2001) synthetic approach to the definition of general translation. It was defined as “the linguistic, textual, communicative, cognitive and technological process by which multimodal web texts are transformed to be used by a different sociocultural and sociolinguistic community over the Internet” (Jiménez-Crespo 2013a, 20). This provided a solid foundation and incorporated web localization as a practice under the umbrella or superordinate term ‘translation’, as audiovisual scholars had done for decades with other practices such as dubbing or subtitling (Mayoral 1997; Remael 2011). Nevertheless, new textual and communicative practices and their related translation-related phenomena have emerged, such as user-generated content, crowdsourcing and volunteer translation (Jiménez-Crespo 2017a), as well as the intersection of human- and machine-translated content that more and more frequently are combined in websites. Novel digital genres and textual practices continually defy the limits of what can, and cannot, be considered web localization, such as the localization of 140 character tweets in the social platform Twitter or user updates on Facebook that offer instant machine translation (MT), all the way to a MT localization of a website in which fans can post-edit the resulting text (Aikawa, Yamamoto, and Ishahara 2013). These new translational practices are blurring the lines between ‘translation proper’ and the prototype of what the industry and society understand as web localization. The question then has emerged about how to delimit the fuzzy line between web localization as a mainstream service offered by language providers and the translation of any type of digital textual types and genres that circulates through the WWW. In this context, Jiménez-Crespo (2016) has suggested the extension of Halverson’s (1999) prototype approach to (not) defining ‘translation’, to web localization. This prototype 354

Localization and localization research

approach allows, he argues, to characterize any translational phenomenon observed on the web, (i.e., the translation of a tweet and its subsequent dissemination into different languages by volunteer fans), more or less at the core of what members of any society or professional or research community conceive as the web localization prototype. In doing so, the words of Halverson (1999, 20) resonate: “prototype will relieve our discipline from a lot of unnecessary discourse and dissensions [on the definition of translation] that can never be resolved”. While software and videogame localization appear as more clearly defined and delimited processes, the massive amounts of information circulating through the Internet and the WWW made difficult the delimitation and definition of web localization. This approach entailed the identification of core characteristics that can be currently located around the centre of the web localization ‘prototype’. This exercise identified what web localization represents within the wider network of translation-related phenomena. The following list includes the core prototypical features from the more central in the prototype to the least. 1

2 3

4 5

6

7

8

Web localization operates exclusively on digital web genres, such as a corporate website, a promotional website, a social networking website or a dating website. The notion of web genre refers to those genres that are used “exclusively” on the web (Santini et al. 2011; Jiménez-Crespo 2013a, 79). Websites are “complex genres” (Jiménez-Crespo 2013a, 74) as they can include exemplars of other genres in their hyperlinked structures, such as a recipe, a piece of news or a status update. Nevertheless, translating just one of these simple genres that can be included in the structure of a website does not represent an instance of a prototypical web localization process. Web localization entails primarily the translation of texts in html or xml format. Web localization is a digital WWW mediated activity. However, not necessarily all Internet mediated communications that are the object of translational activities are part of it, such as chat or email translation (O’Hagan and Ashworth 2003). Web localization revolves around the translation of interactive hypertexts. Web localization entails a specific set of technological and management processes not shared with other translation practices (web content management systems and other webspecific technologies). Web localization is a challenging new process in which a myriad of translation types (i.e. technical, legal, promotional, etc.) and modalities converge (multimedia translation and subtitling can be part of a web localization process). Web localization entails human intervention. An instant translation of a website using any MT widget places in websites without any post-editing or human intervention might not be considered in the industry as an exemplar of the prototype. Web localization in the industry encompasses both professional and non-professional or crowdsourced models.

The core features described here can be displayed by central exemplars of what a web localization process might be. They can also help identify other practices and processes that are not considered as web localization in industry and research communities and that fall outside the fuzzy boundaries of the web localization prototype. 355

Miguel A. Jiménez-Crespo

Historical perspective The origins of localization can be traced back to the emergence of personal computing and software in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Such technologies started to become popular among users that did not possess programming skills and, as a result, many US computing companies set off to address their needs in a comprehensive manner. Once companies such as Sun Microsystems, Oracle or Microsoft were successful in popularizing their products in the US, they turned their eyes towards international markets. The initial targets were Japan and the so-called FIGS countries (France, Italy, Germany and Spain). Therefore, economic reasons can be identified as the main drive behind the emergence and evolution of localization. These initial attempts resulted in the emergence of the now consolidated ‘localization industry’, the fastest growing sector in translation to date, a market that in 2013 amounted to over $3 billion worldwide. By the 1980s and 1990s, this industry had expanded to cover all sorts of digital texts that billions around the world use on a daily basis, including videogames, apps and web texts created for distribution in the WWW with all sorts of scripts and dynamic interactive features (Torres del Rey and Rodríguez 2014). This expansion increased exponentially thanks to the mobile revolution, an age of ubiquitous connectivity and a digital society that cannot be understood without the rise of social media. Web localization and videogame localization appeared after years of successful efforts in software products. Consequently, processes developed for software localization were modelled to the specifics of digital hypertexts (Mata Pastor 2007; Jiménez-Crespo 2013a) or interactive videogames (O’Hagan and Mangiron 2014). It is now recognized that the different areas within localization described in Figure 18.1 are distinct translation modalities that require specific skills from those of translators (Mata 2007). For example, web localization requires a lower degree of technological competence than software localization (Esselink 2006; Jiménez and Tercedor 2012), while videogame localization involves also components closely linked to audiovisual translation. Thus, this latter modality involves processes from literary, software and audiovisual translation (Pérez Fernández 2010). In the historical continuum, web localization brought the largest expansion to the localization industry, a fact that is hardly surprising considering the over 3.3 billion Internet users (Internetstats 2017) and the almost 1.03 billions active websites in June 2016 (Internet Live Stats 2017). As previously said, Spanish is the third language on the Internet, and localization from English into Spanish and vice versa continues to increase. While in most technology-oriented domains translations tend to flow from English into Spanish, all sorts of web business, institutional and tourism content is now translated from Spanish into English due to the status as lingua franca of the latter. Part of the growth of the localization industry and its associated research rests in the rise of a wide range of new conventionalized forms of texts, the so-called “digital genres” (Santini et al. 2011). These software, webs or apps genres are commonplace in modern societies, such as word processors or web browsers that need localization. The WWW has been without any doubt the most fertile breeding ground for some of the most recognizable genres in modern societies, such as social networking sites, corporate websites, news websites, search engines, e-commerce websites, etc. (Jiménez-Crespo 2013a, 95–100). As part of this evolution, there is what is known as a “funnel effect”: as more and more content is produced and circulated around the world, the translation needs communities around the world nowadays greatly surpasses the capacities of the professional market (Gambier 2014). This has also led to the development of novel approaches such as post-editing MT (Guerberof 2008), translation crowdsourcing and online volunteer community translation (Fernández Costales 2012; Jiménez-Crespo 2015, 2017a). This latter phenomenon sparked a new research 356

Localization and localization research

trend starting in 2007 when Facebook and many other social networking websites started to crowdsource the localization of their websites to users. The first Spanish version of Facebook was translated in a day when the crowdsourcing process was initially opened to Stanford University students that year. From the perspective of Translation Studies (TS), Jiménez-Crespo defines translation crowdsourcing as “collaborative translation processes performed through dedicated web platforms that are initiated by companies or organizations and in which participants collaborate with motivations other than strictly monetary” (Jiménez-Crespo 2017a). This process is slightly different from what it is referred to as ‘online collaborative translations’, which are self-initiated by web-based communities and whose motivations are nonmonetary in nature. This process involves the localization by fans of websites, romhacking or collaborative localization of videogames (Muñoz Sánchez 2008; Díaz Montón 2011), as well as open software (Diaz Fouçes 2009).

Research issues and methods in Spanish-speaking contexts In terms of research in Spanish-speaking contexts, scholars started to engage in localization research during the late 1990s. Initially, researchers such as Mayoral Asensio located software localization within the wider paradigm of what was referred to as “constrained” or “subordinate” translation (Mayoral Asensio 1997). It was proposed that this type of translation included localization, multimedia and audiovisual translation. Soon after, Parra (1999) published the first article on the main research issues into software localization, followed by others that attempted to delimit and define this object of study (i.e. Arevalillo 2000). The first Spain-based journal to publish a monograph on localization was Tradumática, edited by the research group by the same name based at the Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona. This issue included articles on software, web, and videogame localization, as well as general articles on internationalization and localization management. The first edited volume on localization published by Spanish scholars appeared in 2005 (Reineke 2005) and included chapters dedicated to the same topics as those in the first Tradumática issue described previously, primarily from an industry and practical perspective. In terms of web localization, few TS scholars have attempted to fill the relative lack of research in first decade of the twentieth century as a distinct process from software or videogame localization. The early 2000s saw the first journal articles specialized in web localization, with several scholars in Spain directing their attention to this new translation modality (Bolaños Medina 2003; Mata Pastor 2005; Jiménez-Crespo 2008). The first PhD dissertations studying web localization were defended, such as those by Bolaños Medina (2003), Renau Renau (2004), Jiménez-Crespo (2008) and Fernández Costales (2010). Similarly, a number of PhD dissertations delved into the localization of videogames (Pérez Fernández 2010; Méndez González 2012; Bernal Merino 2013). On the other hand, the first granted research project for the study of web localization was DIGALTT (Bolaños et al. 2006). Several issues of Tradumática focused on the different sub-branches of localization, such the 2007 issue on videogame localization and the 2010 special issue on web localization. The latter included new emerging aspects that have become attractive areas of research nowadays, such as web accessibility, crowdsourcing and post-editing MT for web context. Spanish scholars pioneered the first book – length projects on web localization (Jiménez-Crespo 2013a) and videogame localization (O’Hagan and Mangiron 2014; Bernal Merino 2015). Other journals based in Spanish universities also devoted special issues to localization, such as the 2011 special issue on videogame localization of the journal TRANS edited by Bernal-Merino. Largescale research projects also started to emerge since 2015, such as the COMINTRAD project on 357

Miguel A. Jiménez-Crespo

international trade, translation and localization in Spain (Medina Reguera 2016). This project focused on web localization as a primary platform for the internationalization of Spanish companies through an analysis of the translation localization efforts of over 13,000 companies. It can be argued that probably the most productive research directions into web localization in Spanish-speaking contexts has been the descriptive study of digital genres. Despite having different end goals, they all use the notion of ‘web genre’ as a point of departure. This trend was historically inspired in part by research on the intersection of Discourse Analysis approaches and Translation Studies at the University Jaume I in Spain (Izquierdo and Montalt 2002; García Izquierdo 2005), where one of the first PhD dissertations on web localizations was completed (Renau Renau 2004). This approach, combined with corpus-based methodologies (Baker 1995; Laviosa 2002), has been used to research differences between translated texts and spontaneously produced ones. The differences identified at multiple levels (i.e. lexical, syntactic, discursive, pragmatic, etc.) are explained by the fact that translation is a communicative act which is shaped by its own goals, pressures and context of production, upon which several specific constraints operate, such as social, cultural, ideological, or cognitive (Baker 1999, 285), as well as technological ones (Jiménez-Crespo 2011a). It is therefore understood that localized websites are the result of a distinct process that results in translated products with different characteristics. Following the several scholars that have coined terms for this process such as “third code,” or “the language of translation” (Baker 1995), localized websites can be said to show a specific “language of localization” (Jiménez Crespo 2008, 2009a) different from that of spontaneously produced websites. For example, issues such as intratextual coherence (Jiménez-Crespo 2009b) and technological constraints are more significant in localized texts than in those translated in a linear fashion. This combination of descriptive genre and corpus – based approaches initially focused on different subgenres of the Spanish ‘corporate website genre’, such as those related to computing business websites (Bolaños 2003; Bolaños et al. 2005) and websites of tile manufacturers (Renau Renau 2004). Some of the initial studies employed parallel corpus methodology, comparing and contrasting the source websites with their localized counterparts or comparing Spanish websites with non-localized US corporate websites. The localization direction was Spanish into English since Spanish websites normally localized their sites into the international lingua franca. Jiménez-Crespo followed this trend and, from a genre perspective, also produced a series of studies on the general “corporate website” genre (Jiménez-Crespo 2008, 2009a, 2009b, 2010b, 2012). He used a comparable corpus methodology, comparing the Spanish localized version of all the Fortune 500 companies in the US with a representative corpus of non-translated corpus websites in Spain from all business sectors. The unit of analysis moved from the web page to the entire website, and his corpora included complete websites rather than certain specific pages such as the homepage or product pages. His studies provided a theoretical foundation for the study of web localization, as well as descriptive quantitative studies focused on genre-based macrostructural contrastive analyses, lexical analyses, issues of web localization quality and the impact of web localization process in target texts. Other studies delved into “translation universals” (Baker 1995) and “tendencies in translation” (Chesterman 2004) such as conventionalization (Jiménez-Crespo 2009a) or explicitation (Jiménez-Crespo 2011b). These studies attempted to shed light on the descriptive study of translation universals in a new translation modality and novel genres. The significance of these studies relies on the fact that if these features of translation are probably generally present in translations, then any texts that result from new translation processes, such as localization or even crowdsourcing web localization (Jiménez-Crespo 2016), will also have to show them. These studies did not confirm the conventionalization hypothesis, although they supported the 358

Localization and localization research

explicitation hypothesis, both in a study that focused on navigation menus of corporate websites (2011a) and in a product-based study where eighty subjects participated in a translation experimental task that involved the translation of navigation menus (Jiménez-Crespo 2016). Another corpus-based study by Jiménez-Crespo (2009a) showed that corporate localized websites displayed lower levels of intratextual coherence at the lexical and syntactic level than similar spontaneously produced ones. A wide range of other studies on different subgenres of the corporate website have ensued, with an increasing number of studies delving into corporate websites related to the wine industry in Spain (Sánchez Nieto 2009; Sánchez Barbero 2010), hotels and tourism websites (Suau Jiménez 2015), automobiles (Rodríguez Tapia 2015) and the agriculture-food industry websites in Andalusia (Medina Reguera and Ramírez 2015). This last study identified that one of the most recurrent issues in the product sections of these companies is the omission or lack of content localization. This is a recurring issue and it is consistent with findings in nonprofit websites (Jiménez-Crespo 2012) related to loss in localization. These effects can be explained by economic constraints related to the dynamic and ever-growing nature of websites as opposed to other finite and linear printed texts. For example, the study by Jiménez-Crespo identified that the ‘news’ or ‘press’ section is the most likely to disappear in localized websites since dynamic sections of websites involve ongoing localization processes to handle any updates or added content rather than a one-time localization process. In addition to the extensive research that has been conducted on corporate website subgenres, other web genres that have been the object of research in Spanish contexts are institutional websites (Fernández Costales 2010; Mapelli 2008), social networking sites (Pérez and Carreira 2011; Jiménez-Crespo 2013b, 2016) and non-profit websites translated into Spanish in the US (Jiménez-Crespo 2012). The focus of research in web localization is not restricted to corpus studies of the most localized web genres. Different components of the web localization process have also been the object of research, such as image localization (Mata Pastor 2009), cultural aspects (Tercedor 2005), the localization of dynamic websites (Torres del Rey and Rodríguez 2014) and web localization strategies related to different geographical varieties of Spanish (Jiménez-Crespo 2010b). A special mention should be made to research into the intersection of localization and web accessibility. In this area, some studies have taken a purely descriptive approach (Gutiérrez and Martínez 2010; Tercedor 2010), while other empirical studies have employed a corpusbased methodology (Tercedor and Jiménez 2008; Tercedor 2010). Rodríguez Vázquez (2015, 2016) has also pioneered an experimental process-based approach to the study of accessibility (i.e. Rodríguez Vázquez 2016). Corpus-based studies into web accessibility have shown that the frequency of localization of alt image tags for visually impaired users is consistently lower in localized texts than in non-translated ones (Tercedor and Jiménez-Crespo 2008), pointing at the necessity of training future localizers and industry key players in this area. It is worth mentioning that Spanish scholars have produced most of the research into this important aspect of the overall localization process. Quality in web localization has also been an issue of interest in published literature. This focus on quality by TS scholars is mainly due to the dynamic nature of web localization and the differences between translation for print and for web dissemination. Issues such as the role of the globalization, internationalization and localization processes and their impact on end products have been brought to the surface. Studies have focused on the different aspects that could improve quality assurance in web localization, such as functionalist perspectives (Jiménez-Crespo 2009c), a proposal of error typologies (Jiménez-Crespo 2011a), error analysis in case studies (Pérez and Carreira 2011; Diéguez Morales and Rodríguez 2011), the quality of 359

Miguel A. Jiménez-Crespo

terminology in web localization (Diéguez Morales 2008), and the proposal of dynamic quality evaluation models for this translation modality (Jiménez-Crespo 2013a, 127–31). Crowdsourcing and online collaborative translations have also been the objective of an increasing amount of research in Spanish contexts. Several Spanish scholars have delved into the theoretical underpinnings of crowdsourcing (i.e. Fernández Costales 2012; Jiménez-Crespo 2015, 2017a), while an up-and-coming research area involves corpus-based and experimental research combining corpus- and cognitive-based approaches (Jiménez-Crespo 2013b, 2016). One of the questions that experimental studies have tackled is whether crowdsourcing processing has an impact on the end products. It has been shown, for example, that the translation method impacts the final translation. In the study by Jiménez-Crespo (2016) it was shown that when social networking sites are translated by subjects by means of selecting or voting on existing translation proposals as happens in Facebook and other sites, rather than translating segments by themselves from scratch, the resulting productions are consistently more explicit and display different lexical and syntactic features (Jiménez-Crespo 2016). This bears clear implications for cognitive-based approaches, more so in an era where machine translation and translation memory have become integrated and more and more processes involve selecting matches, post-editing or evaluating translation memory matches. Finally, another fruitful area of research in Spanish contexts is the pedagogy and training of localization. The main areas of research have been directed towards proposals that facilitate the teaching of web (Bolaños 2004; Diaz Fouçes 2004), software (Mata 2007) and videogame localization (Vela Valido 2011). Few empirical studies have been conducted in this area, with the sole exception of the study by Jiménez-Crespo and Tercedor (2012) in which they have attempted to map the acquisition of web localization competence.

Future directions The continuing evolution of digital technologies means that new and unexplored research areas will continue to emerge. As previously mentioned, in the twenty-first century, the “interrelationship between translation and technology is only deepening” (O’Hagan 2013, 503). Several emerging areas will continue to attract the attention of scholars in Spanish contexts, such as the crowdsourcing of website localization (Jiménez-Crespo 2015, 2017a). Other trends of interest will continue to be the web localization of different web genres or subgenres (i.e. the web genre corporate website or its subgenres: banking websites, websites of tourist operators, etc.) depending on the different areas of interest around the Spanish-speaking world. Areas such the merging of mobile apps and web localization (Jiménez-Crespo 2017b; Plaza Lara 2017) are and will continue to be of research interest given the increasing shift from computers to smartphones and tables to access web content.

Recommended reading Bernal-Merino, Miguel A. 2015. Videogame Localization. New York-London: Routledge. Monograph on videogame localization that provides a practical and theoretical background with multiple examples and illustrations in the Spanish-English combination. Jiménez-Crespo, Miguel A. 2011b. “The future of universal tendencies in translation: explicitation in web localization.” Target 23: 3–25. This empirical paper explores the “language of translation” or, as referred to in the paper, the “language of localization”, from a corpus-based approach. The significance of the study relies on the fact that since localization is a relatively novel approach, localized texts represent a specific textual

360

Localization and localization research population that deserves to be studies in its own right. Since localized texts are the product of a specific process with distinct constraints, they could help test and confirm-reject proposed general tendencies of translated language. Jiménez-Crespo, Miguel A. 2013. Translation and Web localization. London: Routledge. The first monograph exclusively dedicated to web localization. It offers a comprehensive approach to this phenomenon and a foundation for students and researchers interested in researching web localization. The background studies that led to this monograph are based on the English-Spanish combination; multiple examples and illustrations are offered. It includes a dynamic framework to assess quality in web localization and a didactic proposal for web localization training. Jiménez-Crespo, Miguel A. 2017a. Crowdsourcing and online collaborative translations: expanding the limits of Translation Studies. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. The first monograph dedicated to crowdsourcing and online collaborative translation. Since the first object of crowdsourcing practices were websites, software and videogame localization, this publication offers a comprehensive theoretical framework to study collaborative localization processes. Reineke, Detlef. 2005. Traducción y Localización. La Palmas de Gran Canaria: Anroart Ediciones. The first Spanish edited collection on localization. It includes chapters on software, web, and videogame localization, as well as general articles on internationalization and localization management.

Note 1 GALA 2016. Translation and Localization industry facts and Data. www.gala-global.org/industry/ industry-facts-and-data

References Aikawa, Takako, Kentaro Yamamoto, and Hitoshi Isahara. 2013. “The Impact of Crowdsourcing Postediting with the Collaborative Translation Framework.” In Proccedings of JapTAL 2012, Advances in Natural Language Processing 7614, 1–10. Berlin: Springer. http://research.microsoft.com/ pubs/172592/JapTal2012.pdf. Arevalillo, Juan José. 2000. “La localización: conceptos, nuevas tecnologías y requisitos del nuevo traductor de informática. ” In Traducción y nuevas tecnologías: herramientas auxiliares del traductor. Encuentros en torno a la traducción IV, edited by Carmen Valero and Isabel la Cruz, 1–9. Alcalá de Henares: Universidad de Alcalá. http://bscw.rediris.es/pub/nj_bscw.cgi/d120230/Conferencia%20 localizaci%C3%B3n%20(Juanjo,%20Hermes).pdf. Baker, Mona. 1995. “Corpora in Translation Studies: An Overview and Some Suggestions for Future Research.” Target 7 (2): 223–43. ——–. 1996. “Corpus-based Translation Studies: The Challenges that Lie Ahead.” In Terminology, LSP and Translation: Studies in Language Engineering in Honor of Juan C. Sager, edited by Harold Somers, 175–86. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ———. 1999. “The Role of Corpora in Investigating the Linguistic Behaviour of Professional Translators.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 4 (2): 281–98. Bernal-Merino, Miguel A. 2013. “The Localisation of Video Games.” PhD diss., Imperial College, London, UK. ———. 2015. Translation and Localization in Videogames. New York/London: Routledge. Bolaños Medina, Alicia. 2003. “Dificultades y estrategias de la localización de sitios web comerciales del inglés al español.” In Internet in linguistics, translation and literary studies, edited by Santiago Posteguillo et al., 241–52. Castellón: Universitat Jaume I. ———. 2004. “Propuesta metodológica para la didáctica de la localización de sitios WEB.” In Traducción, lenguas, literaturas. Sociedad del conocimiento. Enfoques desde y hacia la cultura, edited by Sonia Bravo Utrera, 22–45. Las Palmas: Universidad de Las Palmas. Bolaños Medina, Alicia et al. 2005. “Analysing Digital Genres: Functionality in Corporate Websites of Computer Hardware.” Iberica 9: 123–47. www.aelfe.org/documents/07-Ib9-BolanosEtAl.pdf.

361

Miguel A. Jiménez-Crespo ———. 2006. “Estrategias de localización de sitios web a partir del análisis contrastivo inglés/ español. de un corpus de páginas de multinacionales informáticas.” In Studies in Contrastive Linguistics: Proceedings of the 4th International Contrastive Linguistics Conference, edited by Cristina Mourón and Teresa I. Moralejo, 115–23. Santiago de Compostela: Universidad de Santiago de Compostela Publicacións. Bowker, Lynn, and Gloria Corpas. 2015. “Translation Technology.” In The Oxford Handbook of Computational Linguistics, edited by Russlan Mitkov. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfor dhb/9780199573691.013.007. Carmona, Alejandro, and Zaika Ait Saadi. 2015. “Elementos de contextualización para la justificación de la no traducción de un sitio web corporativo: el sector agroalimentario en España.” InTRAlinea: Online Translation Journal 17: 1–8. Chesterman, Andrew. 2004. “Beyond the Particular”. In Translation Universals: Do they exist?, edited by Anna Mauranen and Pekka Kujamäki, 33-50. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Díaz-Fouçes, Oscar. 2004. “Localizaçao de páginas da Internet na Formaçao de Tradutores.” ­Confluéncias – Revista de Traduçao Científica e Técnica 1. http://confluencias.net/n1/fouces.pdf. ———. 2009. Traducir (con) software libre. Granada: Comares. Diaz Montón, Diana. 2011. “La traducción amateur de videojuegos al español.” TRANS 15: 69–82. Diéguez, María I. 2008. “Análisis terminológico de sitios web localizados del inglés al español: uso de técnicas de amplificación y elisión.” Tradumàtica 6. www.fti.uab.es/tradumatica/revista/num6/ articles/09/9.pdf Dieguez, María I., and Rosa M. Lazo. 2011. “El español de Internet: aciertos y errores en sitios web localizados del inglés.” Onomázein 24: 299–326. Esselink, Bert. 2000. A Practical Guide to Localization. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ———. 2006. “The Evolution of Localization.” In Translation Technology and its Teaching, edited by Anthony Pym, Alexander Perekstenko, and Bram Starink, 21–30. Tarragona: Intercultural Studies Group. Férnandez Costales, Alberto. 2010. “Traducción, localización e internacionalización. El caso de las páginas web universitarias.” PhD diss., Universidad de Oviedo, Spain. ———. 2012. “Collaborative Translation Revisited: Exploring the Rationale and the Motivation for Volunteer Translation.” Forum – International Journal of Translation 10: 115–42. GALA. 2011. “What Is Localization?” [Online]. www.gala-global.org/what-localization. Gambier, Yves. 2014. “Changing Landscape in Translation.” International Journal of Society, Culture and Language 22. http://ijscl.net/pdf_4638_8301154b3bfe303a6e1c541f62c4e18a.html. García Izquierdo, Isabel, ed. 2005. El género textual y la traducción. Reflexiones teóricas y aplicaciones pedagógicas. Berna: Peter Lang. García Izquierdo, Isabel, and Vicent Montalt. 2002. “Translating into Textual Genres.” Linguistica Antverpiensa 1: 135–43. Gutierrez y Restrepo, Emmanuelle, and Loic Martínez Normand. 2010. “Localization and Web Accesibility.” Tradumática 8. www.fti.uab.es/tradumatica/revista/num8/articles/10/10art.htm. Halverson, Sandra. 1999. “Conceptual Work and the ‘Translation’ Concept.” Target 11: 1–31. Hurtado, Amparo. 2001. Traducción y Traductología. Introducción a la traductología. Madrid: Cátedra. InterenetWorldStats. 2017. “Internet Usage Statistics: The Internet Big Picture.” Accessed March  2. www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm. Jiménez-Crespo, Miguel A. 2008. “El proceso de localización web: estudio contrastivo de un corpus comparable del género sitio web corporativo.” PhD diss., University of Granada, Spain. ———. 2009a. “Conventions in Localization: A Corpus Study of Original vs. Translated Web Texts.” JoSTrans 12: 79–102. ———. 2009b. “The Effect of Translation Memory Tools in Translated Web Texts: Evidence from a Comparative Product-based Study.” Linguistica Antverpiensia 8: 213–32. ———. 2009c. “The Evaluation of Pragmatic and Functionalist Aspects in Localization: Towards A Holistic Approach to Quality Assurance.” The Journal of Internationalization and Localization 1: 60–93. ———. 2010a. “The Intersection of Localization and Translation: A Corpus Study of Spanish Original and Localized Web Forms.” TIS: Translation and Interpreting Studies 5: 186–207. ———. 2010b. “Web Internationalization Strategies and Translation Quality: Researching the Case of ‘International’ Spanish.” Localization Focus – The International Journal of Localization 8: 13–25.

362

Localization and localization research ———. 2011a. “A Corpus-based Error Typology: Towards a More Objective Approach to Measuring Quality in Localization.” Perspectives 19: 315–38. ———. 2011b. “The Future of Universal Tendencies in Translation: Explicitation in Web Localization.” Target 23: 3–25. ——–. 2011c. “To Adapt or Not to Adapt in Web Localization: A  Contrastive Genre-based Study of Original and Localized Legal Sections in Corporate Websites.” Jostrans 15: 2–27. ———. 2012. “Loss or Lost in Localization: A Corpus-based Study of Original and Localized Non-profit Websites.” JoSTrans 17: 136–65. ———. 2013a. Translation and Web Localization. London: Routledge. ———. 2013b. “Crowdsourcing, Corpus Use, and the Search for Translation Naturalness: A Comparable Corpus Study of Facebook and Non-Translated Social Networking Sites.” TIS: Translation and Interpreting Studies 8: 23–49. ———. 2015. “Collaborative and Volunteer Translation.” In Researching Translation and Interpreting, edited by Claudia Angelelli and Brian Baer, 58–70. New York/London: Routledge. ———. 2016. “What Is (Not) Web Localization.” Journal of Internationalization and Localization 31: 38–60. ———. 2017a. Crowdsourcing and Online Collaborative Translation: Expanding the Limits of Translation Studies. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ———. 2017b. “Mobile Apps and Translation Crowdsourcing: The Next Frontier in the Evolution of Translation.” Tradumática 14: 75–84. http://revistes.uab.cat/tradumatica/article/view/167/pdf_31. Jiménez-Crespo, Miguel A., and M. Tercedor. 2012. “Applying Corpus Data to Define Needs in Localization Training.” META: Translator´s Journal 58 (2): 998–1021. Laviosa, Sara. 2002. Corpus-based Translation Studies. Amsterdam: Rodopi. LISA. 2004. Localization Industry Primer, 2nd ed. Geneva: The Localization Industry Standards Association. Mapelli, Giovanna. 2008. “Las marcas de metadiscurso interpersonal de la sección ‘turismo’ de los sitios web de los ayuntamientos.” In Lingue, culture, economia: comunicazione e pratiche discorsive, edited by Maria Vittoria Calvi, Giovanna Mapelli, and Javier Santos, 173–90. Milano: Franco Angeli. Mata Pastor, Manuel (2005). “Localización y traducción de contenido web.” In Traducción y Localización, edited by Detlef Reineke, 187-252. La Palmas de Gran Canaria: Anroart Ediciones. Mata Pastor, Manuel. 2009. “Algunas pautas para el tratamiento de imágenes y contenido gráfico en proyectos de localización (1) y (2).” Entreculturas 1: 533–69. Mayoral, Ricardo. 1997. “Sincronización y traducción subordinada: de la traducción audiovisual a la localización de software y su integración en la traducción de productos multimedia.” In Proceedings of the First Symposium on Multimedia Localization, edited by Ricardo Mayoral and Antonio Tejada. Granada: Departamento de Lingüística Aplicada a la Traducción e Interpretación. www.ugr. es/~rasensio/docs/Multimedia_.pdf. Mendez Gonzalez, Ramón. 2012. “Traducción & Paratraducción de videojuegos. Textualidad y paratextualidad en la traducción audiovisual y multimedia.” PhD diss., Universidade de Vigo. Muñoz Sánchez, Pablo. 2008. “En torno a la localización de videojuegos clásicos mediante técnicas de romhacking: particularidades, calidad y aspectos legales.” JoSTrans 9: 80–95. O’Hagan, Minako. 2013. “The Impact of New Technologies on Translation Studies: A Technological Turn?” In Routledge Handbook of Translation Studies, edited by Carmen Millán-Varela and Francesca Bartrina, 503–18. London: Routledge. O’Hagan, Minako, and David Ashworth. 2003. Translation-Mediated Communication in a Digital World. Clevendon: Multilingual Matters. O’Hagan, Minako, and Carme Mangiron. 2014. Videogame Localization, Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Medina Reguera, Ana M., ed. 2016. Traducción y localización para el comercio internacional y el marketing multilingüe. Colección Interlingua, 165. Granada: Editorial Comares. Medina Reguera, Ana M., and Cristina Ramírez. 2015. “La localización de la sección ‘productos’ en sitios web de empresas exportadoras agroalimentarias.” InTRAlinea: Online Translation Journal. www.intralinea.org/print/article/2151. Parra, Joan. 1999. “Perspectivas de la investigación en localización de software.” Perspectives 7: 231–39. Pérez, Estefanía, and Oliver Carreira. 2011. “Evaluación del modelo de crowdsourcing aplicado a la traducción de contenidos en redes sociales: Facebook.” In La Traductología actual: Nueva vías de investigación en la disciplina, edited by Elisa Calvo Encinas et al., 99–118. Granada: Comares.

363

Miguel A. Jiménez-Crespo Pérez Férnandez, Lucila M. 2010. “La localización de videojuegos (inglés-español): aspectos técnicos, metodológicos y profesionales.” PhD diss., University of Malaga, Spain. Plaza Lara, Cristina. 2017. “Introducción a la localización de sitios web optimizados para dispositivos móviles.” Tradumática 14: 36–42. http://revistes.uab.cat/tradumatica/article/view/171/pdf_26. Pym, Anthony. 2004. The Moving Text: Localization, Translation and Distribution. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ———. 2011. “Website Localization.” In The Oxford Handbook of Translation Studies, edited by Kirsten Malmkjaer and Kevin Windle, 410–24. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Reineke, Detlef. 2005. Traducción y localización. La Palmas de Gran Canaria: Anroart Ediciones. Remael, A. 2011. “Audiovisual Translation.” In Handbook of Translation Studies, edited by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer, 12–17. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Renau Renau, Maria L. 2004. “La página web de la industria cerámica-azulejera: un estudio descriptivo y su aplicación en la enseñanza de inglés para la informática.” PhD diss., University Jaume I. Rico, Celia et al. 2016. Análisis del mercado de la traducción en España (2014–2015). Madrid: Universidad Europea. Rodriguez-Tapia, Sergio. 2015. “Fundamentos teórico-metodológicos para la descripción microestructural contrastiva inglés-español de un corpus de sitios web corporativos sobre automoción.” Moenia 21: 187–210. Rodriguez Vazquez, Sergio. 2015. “A Controlled Language-based Evaluation Approach to Ensure Image Accessibility During Web Localisation.” Translation Spaces 4 (2): 187–215. ———. 2016. “Assuring Accessibility During Web localisation: an Empirical Investigation on the Achievement of Appropriate Text Alternatives for Images.” PhD diss., Universite de Geneve. Switzerland. Roturier, Johann. 2015. Localizing Apps: A Practical Guide for Translators and Translation Students. New York/London: Routledge. Sánchez Barbero, C. 2010. “Las páginas web de las bodegas. Una aproximación Textual.” Vino, Lengua y traducción 2: 335–52. Sanchez-Nieto, María T. 2009. “El realce totalizador en español y en alemán. Un estudio retórico-contrastivo y descriptivo de traducciones de sitios web corporativos de bodegas.” Viceversa. Revista galega de traducción 1: 87–118. Santini, Marina et al. 2011. “Riding the Rough Waves of Genres on the Web: Concepts and Research Questions.” In Genres on the Web, edited by Alexander Mehler, Serge Sharoff, and Marina Santini, 3–29. New York: Springer. Serón-Ordoñez, Inmaculada, and Adria Martin-Mor. 2017. “Traducción y dispositivos mobiles.” Special Issue, Tradumatica 14. http://revistes.uab.cat/tradumatica/issue/view/n14. Suau Jiménez, Francisca. 2015. “Traducción de calidad de webs hoteleras: discurso interpersonal e implicación del cliente.” Onomazein 32: 152–70. Tercedor, Maribel. 2005. “Aspectos Culturales en la localización de productos multimedia.” Quaderns. Revista de Traducció 12: 151–60. ———. 2010. “Translating Multimodalities: Towards Inclusive Web Localization.” Tradumática, 8. www.fti.uab.es/tradumatica/revista/num8/articles/09/9art.htm. Tercedor, Maribel, and Miguel A. Jiménez-Crespo. 2008. “Accesibilidad web, imágenes y traducción técnica.” In Accesibilidad a los medios audiovisuales para personas con discapacidad, edited by Catalina Jiménez Hurtado and Ana Rodríguez Domínguez, 123–28. Madrid: Real Patronato de Discapacidad. Torres del Rey, Jesus, and Emilio Rodriguez. 2014. “La localización de webs dinámicas: objetos, métodos, presente y futuro.” Jostrans 21: 153–76. Vela Valido, Jennifer. 2011. “La formación académica de los traductores de videojuegos en España: retos y propuestas para docentes e investigadores.” Trans. Revista de Traducción 15: 89–102.

364

19 TRANSLATION OF HISPANIC COMICS AND GRAPHIC NOVELS1 Javier Muñoz-Basols and Enrique del Rey Cabero

Introduction In this chapter, we show how translation has contributed to the international dissemination of Hispanic comics and graphic novels. We begin by explaining the main reasons for the recent success of comics and graphic novels in the Hispanic world and by outlining some of the particularities of this medium in the Iberian and Latin American contexts. We then apply a multimodal perspective to selected issues that arise in the translation of this type of literature, namely: the adherence to the original narrative, the translation of cultural references, and the visual adaptation of the original. We focus our analysis on the translation of one of the most internationally successful recent Spanish graphic novels, Paco Roca’s Arrugas (2007), which demonstrates graphic literature’s ability to go beyond its traditional role of entertainment and to address a wide public by exploring complex themes. Finally, we offer some new avenues for future research in what promises to be a fertile field of inquiry.

An overview of Hispanic comics and graphic novels The distinction between the terms comic and graphic novel is still a matter of scholarly debate, for it is not clear if these labels refer to a format, a movement, or both (see Trabado Cabado 2013). Broadly speaking, the term graphic novel is currently used to designate longer (often one-shot) comics published in book format, mainly addressed to adults and with authorial and artistic intentions. In this chapter, however, we will use the terms comic and graphic novel interchangeably, together with the umbrella term graphic literature, which comprises comic strips, comics, graphic novels and even illustrated books. This breadth of definition reflects the fact that authors are continuously blurring the lines of standard classifications and developing new ways of combining text, images and formats into a hybrid art form (Meskin 2009, 219) to reach a wider public. This section presents an overview of the comic and graphic novel scene in the Iberian Peninsula, followed by some insights regarding the Latin American context. We will thus demonstrate how graphic literature throughout the Spanish-speaking world has been fuelled

365

Javier Muñoz-Basols and Enrique del Rey Cabero

by the appearance of new authors and publishers, and how translation activity is inextricably linked to the production and distribution of comics and graphic novels.

The Iberian Peninsula To understand graphic literature in the Iberian context, it is important to consider not only publications in the Spanish language, but also those in the three other official languages of Spain, namely, Basque, Catalan and Galician, as well as Portuguese,2 in view of the geographic proximity and translation activity between all these languages. In these linguistic and cultural traditions, graphic literature has enjoyed an expansion akin to the one in Spanish, since in some cases books are published simultaneously in several languages of the Iberian Peninsula. Thus, in this section, we will offer some insights into the multilingual landscape of the Iberian Peninsula in order to present a complete picture of its graphic production. The turn of the twenty-first century witnessed a boom in graphic literature in the Iberian Peninsula. As Muñoz-Basols and Muñoz-Calvo (2017, 652–53) explain: Despite the fact that Spain has enjoyed a long tradition of cartoonists and illustrators, the graphic genres have taken much longer to establish themselves in the Spanish marketplace and with the Spanish public than in other countries (France, Belgium, Japan, etc.), where this type of literature has always had a significant presence. Nonetheless, graphic literature has in the last decade seen a development in terms of the genre’s status that has given it a prestige comparable to that of the narrative. Furthermore, its growth has been fuelled by a “new understanding of literacy” (Leber-Cook and Cook 2013, 28) whereby the image and the visual arts have been acquiring a more predominant, even preponderant (Meskin 2007, 369), role in the configuration of meaning. This change in literacy practices has also led to graphic literature becoming an “intergenerational phenomenon transcending its traditional function of providing entertainment primarily for children and young adults, while expanding its reach to readers of all ages” (Muñoz-Basols and Muñoz-Calvo 2017, 652), i.e. going beyond the traditional role that had been assigned to this medium. Indeed, with the rise of the graphic novel in Spain, comics found new voices and new audiences, demonstrating thereby the ability of the medium to tell stories dealing with many different themes ranging from the economic crisis (see Muñoz-Basols and Massaguer Comes 2018) to the history of the Spanish Civil War (see Harris and del Rey Cabero 2015). Some figures are helpful in showing the ability of this medium to deal with complex social themes: the number of comics and graphic novels which could be generically categorized as drama has doubled in the past five years, from 169 in 2013 to 399 in 2017, clearly finding a market. Interestingly, they have surpassed the number of titles of a satirical and humorous nature (292 in 2013 vs. 259 in 2017) as noted in the latest Informe (Tebeosfera Cultural Association 2018, 50). In Spain, the move towards the long format and complex topics of the graphic novel was led mainly by small publishers, such as Astiberri Ediciones, Sins Entido, De Ponent, and Ediciones La Cúpula. At the same time, more established publishers joined in – Ediciones B, Lumen, Norma Editorial, Reservoir Books – viewing graphic novels as an opportunity to increase their overall market share. Graphic literature has also led to the organization of numerous meetings, symposia, international shows and exhibits, prizes, grants and competitions. In terms of the cultural legitimation of the medium, perhaps the most important event in the last decade has been the creation of the Premio Nacional del Cómic, awarded since 2007 to the best Spanish comic of the year 366

Hispanic comics and graphic novels

by the Spanish Ministry of Culture. This prize has increased the visibility of comics by incorporating them into a broader programme of national prizes in fields such as literature, history and music. In addition, comics have become increasingly present in bookselling chains and in independent bookshops (no longer being confined to specialized stores), media (newspapers reviews, television), on the internet (through websites like Tebeosfera), in public libraries (which have considerably extended their comics catalogues in recent years), and in universities3 (through the organization of conferences and increased research into graphic literature, including a rise in PhD theses). Although data is scarce, the total number of published comics reached 3,507 titles in 2017, a notable increase compared to 2013 (2,558 titles) (Tebeosfera Cultural Association 2018, 4). However, these figures should be interpreted carefully. As Pons (2011) explains, the increase in the number of published titles in the early 2000s was not reflected in sales volumes, with the result that the comics industry suffered enormously during the recent crisis. Even before the crisis, many Spanish authors had opted to pursue their career in more prosperous markets, mainly France, Belgium and the United States, and only publish in Spain once they had been published abroad. Our case study of Paco Roca’s Arrugas (2007) later in this chapter is an example of this phenomenon. Even though the author is originally from Spain, his graphic novel first appeared in French so that it could reach more readers and enjoy a wider market and distribution. Translation has contributed to the dissemination of Iberian graphic literature. Even though the Spanish comics industry continues to be dominated by foreign-language translations, which account for around 75% of all published material (Tebeosfera Cultural Association 2018, 43), the number of Spanish works translated into foreign languages, especially English, has increased in recent years. As Mazur and Danner recognize, “the deficit [of a global perspective on comics] is gradually being corrected  – important foreign works are being increasingly translated” (2014, 7). For instance, an influential anthology of new contemporary Spanish authors published in 2013 was released in English by Fantagraphics as Spanish Fever. Stories by the New Spanish Cartoonists (2016), which includes, among others, excerpts of works by established authors such as Paco Roca, Miguel Gallardo, David Rubín, and Miguel Ángel Martín and newcomers like José Domingo, Ana Galvañ, Álvaro Ortiz and Sergi Puyol. Some of the authors promoted it at the 2017 Small Press Expo, one of the leading independent comics festivals celebrated every year in the United States. Moreover, online comics platforms offer new possibilities by allowing simultaneous publication in various languages. This is the case of The Panel Syndicate, which has issued works such as The Private Eye by Brian K. Vaughan, Marcos Martín and Muntsa Vicente, available in English, Spanish, Catalan and Portuguese, or Universe! by Albert Monteys, available in English, Spanish and Catalan. Some of the leading comic artists in Spain have also collaborated with Oxfam to start a free app (available in Spanish, Catalan, French and English) that includes short stories dealing with International Development and Foreign Aid, later compiled in the book Viñetas de vida (2014), published by Astiberri. It has also become a trend among very small and avant-garde publishers, such as Ediciones Valientes, to include a proprietary translation of the text below each panel or at the bottom of each page in published comics, in the manner of subtitles. The language chosen is generally English, which allows for the broader dissemination of the work to foreign readers. As we see, in addition to the role played by professional translators, the authors of graphic literature have themselves participated actively in the translation of their own works from and into the languages of the Iberian Peninsula. They have also collaborated closely with translators in translations into other world languages. 367

Javier Muñoz-Basols and Enrique del Rey Cabero

Latin America The Latin American context is obviously much more diverse than the Iberian one. In addition to a book market that has always been rather small by most European standards, there are also significant differences among the countries of this region. Brazil, Argentina and Mexico are by far the biggest markets (see Merino 2003, 2016). Therefore, it is not surprising that, historically, most of the production comes from “Argentina, Brazil, Mexico and Cuba, and while other countries do have comic scenes, they are not quite as big as this quartet” (Pilcher and Brooks 2005, 208). However, as we will explain later on, flourishing markets in other countries, such as Chile and Colombia, have emerged in recent decades. Although Brazilian comics are interesting and dynamic, we will leave out Brazil and limit our review to Hispanic comics (for a recent anthology of Brazilian comics, see Coutinho and Reichstul 2015). Argentinean comics represent, without doubt, the most important tradition within the Latin American continent. They originated at the beginning of the twentieth century with strips in magazines such as Viruta y Chicharrón and Caras y Caretas and the country’s output subsequently contributed greatly to comics worldwide with prestigious international authors, such as Alberto and Enrique Breccia, Carlos Trillo, José Muñoz and Carlos Sampayo. Some of these comics and series produced in the twentieth century are still popular today. El Eternauta, originally published as a series in the 1950s by Hector Germán Oesterheld and Francisco Solano López and later continued by many others, has become one of the most iconic comics of the region, and is considered one of the first examples of the graphic novel in Latin America. This highly political science-fiction story anticipates the rule of the same military junta that arrested and killed Oesterheld. In recent decades, there has been a great interest in recovering the original stories and presenting them as a graphic novel, re-edited in Spanish and translated into French (2008), Italian (2011), Portuguese (2011) and, most recently, English (2015) and German (2016). Joaquín Salvador Lavado Tejón, better known as Quino, is another well-known Latin American author, and one of the most celebrated graphic humourists in the Spanish-speaking world, as well as in the many countries where his works have been translated. Undoubtedly, his most famous comic strip is Mafalda, published throughout the 1960s and 1970s and about a little girl who constantly puzzles friends and adults with impertinent comments and questions about life and politics. Mafalda has been widely translated and is enormously popular in Latin America and in many parts of Europe, notably Spain, Italy and France. As is often the case, the English edition of the series came out relatively late (2004) as Mafalda & Friends. Nevertheless, the Argentinean comics scene remains one of the continent’s most dynamic, as shown by the number of young authors publishing in recent years (for a recent anthology, see Sainz 2015). The history of the Argentinean comics market is interesting, as it crashed during the 1980s, much like the Spanish one (for a comparison between the two industries, see Gandolfo, Turnes, and Vilches 2017a, 2017b). The new century has seen the arrival of many new talents. This happened not only in Argentina (although leading authors, such as Liniers, Maitena, Lucas Varela, Pablo de Santis, Jorge González, Decur and Julieta Arroquy, still come from this country), but also in countries such as Mexico (Edgar Clement, Jesús Cossio, Inés Estrada), Colombia (Jim Pluk, El Señor), Peru (Martín López Nam) and Chile (Sol Díaz). There appears to be a great mobility of artists throughout the Spanish-speaking world. For instance, Ecuadorians Alberto Montt and Power Paola moved to Chile and Colombia, respectively, and Martín López Nam to Spain, where he founded the independent publishing house Ediciones Valientes, which has helped to spread the work of Latin American authors in Spain and Europe. In fact, in many Latin American countries, there is no consolidated comic book industry, and the production of comics in places like Colombia has remained largely artisanal (Suárez and Uribe-Jongbloed 2016). Similar to the case of Iberian authors, many Latin American authors have chosen to migrate to countries with strong markets like France or the United States. 368

Hispanic comics and graphic novels

In Mexico, comic books enjoyed a wide readership but proved controversial due to their content, which was often censored (Rubenstein 1998). As Duncan and Smith explain (2009, 303), it is interesting to note that in the case of Mexico, where comics are commonly known as historietas, it was precisely the language barrier between the Spanish-speaking Mexico and the English-speaking United States that led to the success and development of a distinctive Mexican comics industry in the early 1920s. As they argue, “getting comics to Mexican publishers for translation and reprinted seemed to be a low priority for American syndicates” (Duncan and Smith 2009, 303). The industry, once thriving, suffered a setback in the 1980s due to competition with other media such as television. In the 1990s, however, there was a rise in the publication of fanzines and underground comics by publishing houses and associations, such as Gallito Comics and Taller del Perro. Edgar Clément’s Operación Bolívar (published in 1993 and 1994 in Gallito Comics), considered the first Mexican graphic novel, was published in this context and showed influences both from American comics and Mexican history and iconography. Nowadays, we also find Mexico and the Southern part of the United States as significant settings in foreign works that portray linguistic phenomena such as code-switching and bilingualism. A case in point is Jessica Abel’s La Perdida, which explores the story of an American girl in Mexico by depicting both American and Mexican characters. Spanish is used only the first time someone speaks, and a note with the translation is included in those cases. Thereafter, the Mexican characters speak in English, between square brackets, while certain words that have a Mexican-Spanish flavour are kept and explained in a glossary. The translation into Peninsular Spanish published by Astiberri complicates things further, as the English part was translated into Peninsular Spanish and the rest was reverted into Mexican Spanish. On the other hand, Barrier by Brian K. Vaughan, Marcos Martín and Muntsa Vicente is a series set on the US-Mexican border, where the characters speak in both Spanish and English without any translations or notes. In the afterword to the first issue, Vaughan himself invites the readers to check Google Translate, but later clarifies that it may not be necessary since the comic is addressed to all readers, including those “who aren’t fluent in either/any of the languages featured” (Vaughan, Martín, and Vicente 2015). Obviously, Latin American comics have been influenced by the powerful North American industry, which still dominates most of the translations in the market. However, both European comics (particularly Franco-Belgian comics) and manga have also been present in the region. There is also an increasing mutual influence among publications from different countries within the region, thanks to better distribution. Together with more experienced publishing houses, such as Ediciones de la Flor in Argentina, and transnational Spanish companies working on both continents, there has been an enormous growth in independent publishers, such as the Peruvian Contracultura (also a bookshop). Another example is the Mexican Sexto Piso, which opened a branch in Madrid. It should also be noted that in countering the traditional lack of resources and circulation of a given work, the presence of the authors on the internet through blogs and websites has been a key factor in the conception of new projects. As Guerra remarks, The possibility of offering independent material to readers without the need to spend a lot of money, as well as reaching out dozens of projects similar to your own ones, has generated regional communication networks which have simplified the interaction between creators, agents, intermediaries and readers. (2011, 45) Finally, the creation and growth of festivals such as Entreviñetas (Colombia), as well as the celebration of the first Salón de Cómic at the 2017 Guadalajara International Book Fair (the 369

Javier Muñoz-Basols and Enrique del Rey Cabero

second largest in the world after Frankfurt’s), have also contributed to the increasing popularity and internationalization of the medium in the region. Although Estudios y crítica de la historieta (University of Cordoba, Argentina) is the only active journal dedicated exclusively to comics, there seems to be an increasing interest in the study of this medium in academia. The recent boom of comics and graphic novels in Latin America is already receiving critical attention, both locally and internationally (King and Page 2017).

Research issues and methods Comics and graphic novels have finally found their place in academia as an interdisciplinary field studied from the perspective of disciplines such as cultural studies, philosophy, sociology, narratology, semiotics and visual culture studies. As Federico Zanettin points out, “about 30 years after the establishment of Translation Studies as an academic field [. . .], it seems almost surprising that relatively little has been written on the translation of comics, which enjoy a wide readership and whose history is much intertwined with translation” (2008, 19). The annual number of academic publications on this subject has more than doubled in the last five years in Spain, from 96 titles in 2011 to 216 in 2016 (Tebeosfera Cultural Association 2018, 59). In addition, comics and graphic novels have started to reach every bookstore and a wider audience of people of all ages, and to cover a vast range of formats and topics. In this section, we first explain how multimodality contributes to the reading experience, while constituting an inherent component of graphic literature that explains some of its less apparent features. Secondly, we analyze some of the principal factors that affect the translation of comics and graphic novels as a result of multimodality.

Understanding multimodality A common denominator of graphic literature is its multimodal quality. The binomial composition created by the semantic duality of text and image allows authors to use an array of different textual and visual stimuli to serve the narrative (Muñoz-Basols and Muñoz-Calvo 2015, 164–5). Multimodality, i.e. “the use of several semiotic modes in the design of a semiotic product or event, together with the particular way in which these modes are combined” (Kress and Van Leeuwen 2001, 20), is one of the key ingredients of graphic literature in view of the different types of techniques that can be used to convey meaning both on paper and on the screen. In fact, it is the presence of multimodality in graphic literature, with linguistic, typographic, pictographic and pictorial components, that allows readers to enjoy a wide range of sensations in such a way as to provide immediacy. In contrast to what is commonly believed, the reading of comics is both a complex and sophisticated process; rather than only linear, comics foster readings that can be holistic, multidirectional and multilinear (del Rey Cabero 2019). Through its visual appeal, the inference process that takes place during the reading includes a number of stages and sub-stages starting from the moment readers hold a copy of the comic in their hands (Yus 2006). In some cases, the creation of a comic can also include the development of a book trailer, which may function as a “multimodal extension” of the printed book, i.e., “the use of audiovisual media that broadens and/or complements an author’s work [. . .] by creating relations of intertextuality” (Muñoz-Basols and Massaguer Comes 2018, 125). Consequently, the relationship between text and image in this type of literature has recently inspired research in the field of cognitive studies from the point of view of “blending” (Fludernik 2015), or the confluence of different modes (conceptual, visual and verbal), which has been dubbed “multimodal fusion” (Lin and Chiang 2015, 138). This process is also seen in the mixture of formats that 370

Hispanic comics and graphic novels

occurs in “fusion texts”, i.e. comics, graphic novels and picture books (Evans 2013, 239). Because of their visual evocativeness, some researchers have also incorporated eye-tracking techniques into the analysis of comics and graphic novels (Cohn 2013a; Cohn and Campbell 2015). However, graphic literature also uses a number of multisensorial techniques (see Hague 2014) to convey a narrative to an audience, and this includes cultural parameters, such as the very format of the book: The relationship between the verbal and the visual modes may also be investigated in the context of comic book formats, which are sometimes transformed in the process of adaptation for a new readership in a different culture. Be it an American superhero comic book, a French album, the Italian Bonelli format or a Japanese manga, comic book formats are firmly grounded in the traditions of particular cultures, which pertains to size, reading direction, font and the use of colours. All these aspects may be modified for a new target readership, which may in turn have consequences for how a particular text is perceived and interpreted. (Borodo 2015, 23) Reading direction should also be taken into account. This is behind the refusal of many Japanese publishers to grant translation rights: the mirror-inversion of images may involve substantial changes to the story. Although comic formats are in some cases “transformed in the process of adaptation for a new readership in a different culture” (Borodo 2015, 26), each comic tradition is different, ranging from the album in France to the comic book in the United States (see Lefèvre 2013).4 For this reason, we need to perceive these books as a medium in which such elements as size, cover, format, style, colour or layout of the page may also play an important role in terms of how the author (in agreement with the publisher) conceives the book and its narrative, and how it is expected to be received by its audience. As Mary Snell-Hornby indicates (2009, 44), it is the multisemiotic dimension that operates in the configuration of comics, which use different graphic sign systems, that is, verbal and non-verbal. As we will see next, some of these verbal and non-verbal components may contribute to the message and even determine the translatability of a given text into another language.

Translating multimodality From the point of view of the translation of graphic literature, genres such as manga or anime have contributed to a greater visibility of this type of literature and to its dissemination in translation (Cromer and Clark 2007, 578). However, the translation of comics and graphic novels is characterized as “constrained translation” (Mayoral, Kelly, and Gallardo 1988) due to spatial limitations such as speech balloons and panels, which impose additional restrictions depending on the language (Evans 2016, 321). For instance, German often presents a challenge if there is not much space within the balloon, since words can be much longer than in other languages, as they often combine different grammatical categories, e.g., “Bye” vs. “Auf Wiedersehen” (Höchemer 2011). Likewise, translating between Japanese and a European language can impose additional problems since the speech bubbles are configured for a different type of writing. In some cases, the text needs to be condensed to fit the space, and this can even affect the typography used for this purpose (O’Sullivan 2013; Evans 2016, 321). However, rather than being an obstacle, the visual elements play “an auxiliary role in the translation process” (Borodo 2015, 25). Thus, in translation, new visual material may be added or visual material already present may be deleted. Visual language is culturally specific, and not every tradition shares the same visual metaphors (Cohn 2013b). 371

Javier Muñoz-Basols and Enrique del Rey Cabero

Technology has made it easier to translate and adapt books into other languages. However, some authors still prefer to adopt a traditional approach in the design of their works by introducing the text themselves rather than using a computer. The use of a special typography may be pictorial in nature, something that is especially evident, for instance, in the use and translation of onomatopoeia. Also, comic balloons are often written by hand or using a font based on the author’s particular writing style. In some cases, authors are required to copy the text of the translations of their works, even if they do not speak the language. As Muñoz-Basols and Muñoz-Calvo (2015, 180–1) explain: Las distintas técnicas tipográficas, pictográficas y pictóricas al servicio de la expresión y de la narración poseen una función comunicativa y significativa. El estilo de la letra, su composición, trazado (tamaño y grosor), la repetición de los signos de exclamación o interrogación, los colores utilizados, etc., transmiten significado y emociones. El propio recuadro de la viñeta (o su falta de marco) entra dentro del lenguaje no verbal de este arte secuencial. La forma, tamaño y número de viñetas por página son aspectos igualmente importantes para determinar la estrategia narrativa, marcar el ritmo de la lectura y captar la atención del lector. [The various typographic, pictographic and pictorial techniques in the service of expression and narration have a communicative and meaningful function. The font, the composition of the text, design (size and thickness), the repetition of exclamation and question marks, the colours, etc., all transmit meaning and emotion. The border of the panel itself (or the lack of a border) can be considered part of the non-verbal language of this sequential art. Likewise, the shape, size and number of panels per page are important aspects for defining the narrative strategy, the rhythm of reading, and for capturing the reader’s attention.] As we can see, the hybrid nature of the medium leads to the use of a wide array of textual and visual techniques. Creating a new work now commonly involves a collaboration between authors and scriptwriters, as this allows designers to focus on the visual aspect while also being able to have a say in the text that will accompany the images. All of these aspects need to be taken into account by translators, who need to understand, interpret and account for the visual components while also attempting to convey the linguistic aspects, thereby making the essence of the original accessible to new audiences. In so doing, the translator needs to have sufficient “intercultural competence” (Muñoz-Basols and Muñoz-Calvo 2015, 181) to recreate the original message as accurately as possible, all the while exposing the reader to the aesthetic, intellectual and emotional impact of the original.

A case study of the translation of graphic literature As we have explained, multimodality is one of the defining elements of graphic literature. Indeed, the different techniques employed – linguistic, typographic, pictographic and ­pictorial  – all contribute to evoking an array of meanings and sensations in the reader. Given that this is typically a well thought-out and conscious process on the author’s part, it needs to be actively incorporated into any translation that adapts the original meaning into another language. First and foremost, it is important to understand comics as the combination of the binomial text-image, which, in many cases, is inextricably linked to the message of the work. To illustrate the achievements and limitations of translating graphic literature, we have selected Paco Roca’s Arrugas (2007). As we will show, this is one of the most 372

Hispanic comics and graphic novels

interesting examples of recent Hispanic graphic novels because it was first published as a translation from Spanish into French. For this translation, the author was able to provide some input to the French translator, such as the convenience of using proper names and expressions that are characteristic of older people. The French translation was soon followed by the appearance of the graphic novel in Spanish, the language in which the book had originally been written and the usual language of publication for Paco Roca. This unconventional graphic novel, which focuses on the topic of Alzheimer’s disease, is also a meaningful example because of the impact it has had in reaching many different cultures through translation.

The impact of Arrugas (2007) on the comics scene Paco Roca is currently one of the best-selling and most internationally known Spanish authors. However, it was his book Arrugas (2007), now in its 14th edition, which helped him make a name for himself on the comics scene. The book was awarded the Premio Nacional del Cómic in 2008 and received a number of other national and international awards. However, the book was first published in French by the publisher Delcourt under the title of Rides (2007) (Rodríguez Abella 2016, 137). This may sound surprising, but as Díaz de Guereñu (2011, 217) remarks, it is quite common that, due to the lack of a consolidated local industry, some Spanish artists publish first with foreign companies. Thus, we read their work in Spanish only later, once it has reached the Iberian market. In these larger markets, namely, the Franco-Belgian and in the United States, a number of Spanish artists’ works are very successful (for instance, the series Blacksad, by Juanjo Guarnido and Juan Díaz Canales). The acceptance of the book for publication in Spanish was, in fact, a pleasant surprise for Paco Roca, who considered Arrugas a less commercial project because of its subject matter (Díaz de Guereñu 2014, 153). The story takes on themes that had never been dealt with before in Iberian comics, such as Alzheimer’s disease, senility and dementia [. . .]. The story takes place in an old people’s home with its main character, Emilio, an elderly man suffering from Alzheimer’s, formerly a bank manager, who has been taken there by his family. As soon as he arrives he meets his roguish roommate Miguel, a bachelor with no children, whose sharp sense of irony and humour counteracts the sadness, boredom and tragedy that typify the day-to-day reality of the hermetic, hopeless universe that these characters live in. (Muñoz-Basols and Muñoz-Calvo 2017, 660) Roca’s graphic novel shares its social undertones with María y yo by Miguel Gallardo, an autobiographical work which deals with the Gallardo’s daughter’s autism. The two works were published in 2007 by Astiberri and hailed as examples of the medium’s maturity in Spain by enabling readers to “ ‘visualize’ complex social themes that we encounter in our daily lives and which are based on human experience” (Muñoz-Basols and Muñoz-Calvo 2017, 653). Both graphic novels were successfully adapted into cinematic form, Arrugas as an animated film in 2011, distributed with the title Wrinkles (and later premiered in many countries, including the US where it is also available on Netflix), and María y yo as a documentary in 2010. The authors promoted their works extensively through various tours and jointly described these experiences in a collective album (World Emotional Tour, published also by Astiberri in 2009). Arrugas’s success has no precedent among Spanish graphic novels: since its appearance, 373

Javier Muñoz-Basols and Enrique del Rey Cabero

besides the French version, Rides (2007), it has been translated into many languages, including Italian, Rughe (2008) (see Rodríguez Abella 2016); Dutch, Rimpels (2009); Finnish, Ryppyjä (2010); Japanese, 皺 [Shiwa] (2011); Catalan, Arrugues (2012); German, Kopf in den Wolken (2013); Portuguese, Rugas (2013); Basque, Zimurrak (2014); Galician, Engurras (2014); UK English, Wrinkles (2015); US English, Wrinkles (2016), Chinese, 皱纹 [Zhòuwén] (2016), Turkish, Kirişikliklar (2018) and Korean, 주름 [Juleum] (2018). Since the publication of Arrugas, most of Paco Roca’s subsequent graphic novels have been published in Spanish first, by Astiberri.

Some examples of the translation of Arrugas (2007) We will use selected examples from Arrugas (2007) to illustrate some of the challenges faced by its translators. We will also show how these challenges were resolved in the different languages studied, and identify which linguistic, stylistic, visual and cultural implications were in play during the translation process. Our brief corpus comprises examples from Rides (Delcourt 2007) in French, the language in which the book first appeared; Arrugas (Astiberri 2007) in Spanish, the language in which the author normally publishes; 皺 [Shiwa] (ShoPro Books 2011) in Japanese, which is an example of a non-Indo-European language; and Wrinkles (Knockabout 2015) in UK English, a language that has the potential for allowing many readers to access the text. In all the languages that the book has been translated into so far, the title is a rather literal translation of the original. In German, however, the possible literal equivalents, Falten or Runzeln, were replaced by a more creative title, Kopf in den Wolken (Reprodukt 2013), literally, “head in the clouds”. The publisher decided that this option would better serve their marketing purposes (Höchemer 2011). It is worth mentioning that while the 2011 translation into Japanese was based on the Spanish version of the book, the 2015 translation into UK English took the French version as the source text, despite the recognition that the book had garnered in Spanish and the acclaimed Spanish animation film, which, in 2012, among other prizes, had won the Goya Award for the Best Adapted Screenplay and the Best Animated Film. In 2016, Fantagraphics Books commissioned a US English translation, also entitled Wrinkes but based on the Spanish version and published with a different cover from the one normally used in other translations. In an interview, the translator, Erica Mena, explains that, while she was aware that another translation had appeared in English a year before, she did not want to read it in order not to be influenced by it (Comics alternative interview 2016). Fantagraphic’s Wrinkles was nominated for an Eisner award in the category of “U.S. edition of international material” and has opened the doors of the American market for Roca, as Fantagraphics also published his graphic novel Twists of Fate (Los surcos del azar) in 2018. However, here we will be making reference to the first translation into English because of its parallelisms with the French book. Finally, the fact that Arrugas (2007) was translated into Japanese in 2011, four years after its first publication, and before it appeared English or other Iberian or European languages, speaks volumes about this graphic novel’s wide-ranging international impact. Japan is one of the principal exporters of comics around the world, but foreign comics are rarely translated into Japanese. For instance, it is interesting that the reading direction of the book was maintained as it was in the original and was not changed by mirroring or flipping it, i.e., from left-to-right into right-to-left. Also, no changes were introduced in the artwork, as we will discuss next. For the analysis that follows, we have selected examples that illustrate three common problems encountered by the translators of comics and graphic novels, namely, the adherence to 374

Hispanic comics and graphic novels

the original narrative, the translation of cultural references and the visual adaptation of the original.

Adherence to the original narrative In this scene (Figure 19.1), one of the nurses invites Emilio, the protagonist, to throw a ball as a form of exercise. To illustrate some of the effects of Alzheimer’s disease on a patient, the author decided to change the spelling of the word pelota to talope, altering the order of the syllables to emulate Emilio’s state of mind. French (2007)

PRENEZ LA BALLE ET PASSEZ-LA

LA QUOI?

LA BALLE, PASSEZ-LA. ALLEZ!

Spanish (2007)

TOMA LA TALOPE Y PÁSALA.

¿EL QUÉ?

LA TALOPE, PÁSALA, RÁPIDO.

Japanese (2011)

このボールをまわし てね

え、なにを？

このボールよ、早 く！

English (2015)

TAKE THE BALL AND PASS IT.

THE WHAT?

THE BALL, PASS IT. GO!

While this narrative choice on the part of the author is, in our view, crucial for the scene, as it alters the reading experience and establishes a connection with the protagonist, neither the French word balle nor the English ball contain this twist. It is important to note that the translator of the English version might not have been aware of this, as she translated from the

Figure 19.1  Arrugas. Astiberri Ediciones, 2007, 30. © 2007 Guy Delcourt Productions-Paco Roca. By permission of Astiberri Ediciones.

375

Javier Muñoz-Basols and Enrique del Rey Cabero

French version (which decided not to recreate this effect) instead of the original Spanish. As for the Japanese version, even though we know that it was translated from Spanish, the translation did not adhere to the Spanish form; it was translated as ボール [Booru], a loanword from English (ball), and used without any changes in the Japanese characters. Although a plausible reason for this might be those differences in the writing system that might make it more difficult to modify the syllables in Japanese, the consequence was that the effect of Alzheimer’s on Emilio’s mind is lost in translation. While we may see in the images that Emilio is puzzled, the reader in Japanese, French and English needs to rely on the images, as the text is not sufficient to portray his puzzlement of not understanding the name of the object due the memory loss provoked by Alzheimer’s. Interestingly, the German translator opted for changing the spelling of the word from the German Ball to Llab, although, as he acknowledges in his blog, “[La palabra] no queda tan ilustrativa como la palabra española de tres sílabas [talope] [The word is not as illustrative as the three-syllable Spanish word (talope)]” (Höchemer 2011).

Translation of cultural references Cultural references are among the most common problems in translation, and even more so in the translation of graphic literature, as these may involve a combination of text and image. In this example (Figure 19.2), in which a Christmas menu is displayed, one might expect to find differences across languages and cultures. French (2007)

Menu de Nöel Toasts de saumon Dinde aux marrons Salade et fromage Bȗche glacée & chocolats

Spanish (2007)

MENÚ NOCHEBUENA PRIMER PLATO: ENTREMESES GAMBAS Y CIGALAS SEGUNDO PLATO: CORDERO ASADO POSTRE: TARTA DE MANZANA Y TURRÓN

Japanese (2011)

クリスマス・メニュー 前菜　盛り合わせ 小エビとアカザエビ メイン　ラム肉のグリル デザート　リンゴのタルトとトゥロン* ＊トゥロン：アーモンド、クルミ、糖蜜などで作るクリスマス用の菓子

English (2015)

Christmas Menu Salmon on Toast Turkey with Chestnut stuffing Salad and Cheese Yule log & Chocolates

376

Figure 19.2  Arrugas. Astiberri Ediciones, 2007, 54. © 2007 Guy Delcourt Productions-Paco Roca. By permission of Astiberri Ediciones.

Javier Muñoz-Basols and Enrique del Rey Cabero

As we see, the English translation followed the French version very closely by including an equivalent for the typical French Christmas dessert, bȗche glacée (commonly known as bȗche de Noël). As the author himself explains, he changed the menu “para que fuese un menú de [Nochebuena] típico francés” [so that it was a typical French Christmas Eve menu] (García 2008). The Spanish menu, however, is composed of typical Spanish dishes for this festivity: entremeses (appetisers), gambas (shrimp), cordero (lamb), and turrón (a traditional Christmas sweet). Once again, the Japanese translation followed the literal Spanish, probably due as well to the fact that there is no traditional Christmas menu in Japan as such. With turrón being unfamiliar to many Japanese speakers, the translators deemed it necessary to insert an explanatory footnote, *トゥロン：アーモンド、クルミ、糖蜜などで作るクリ スマス用の菓子, [To~uron: aamondo, kurumi, toomitsu nado de tsukuru kurisumasu-yoo no kashi] (literally, turrón: Christmas sweet made with almonds, walnuts, and molasses, etc.). This is an example of how translators sometimes resort to further clarifications in order to convey the cultural references in a text, even though a footnote may divert the reader’s attention from the main text for a moment.

Visual adaptation of the original This last example serves to illustrate how translating a graphic novel may also require changing the visual aspects of the narrative. In these scenes (Figure 19.3), we see that Emilio has some labels attached to his clothes, which helps him remember the names of different garments. French (2007)

Drawing on label + Chaussure

[Blank labels in drawing] REGARDE, TU VOIS ? J’AI AJOUTÉ DES DESSINS AUX ÉTIQUTTES POUR QUE TU PUISSES RECONNAITRE CHAQUE CHOSE.

Spanish (2007)

Drawing on label + Zapato

[Marked labels in drawing] MIRA ¿VES? HE AÑADIDO A LAS ETIQUETAS UNOS DIBUJOS PARA QUE PUEDAS SABER QUÉ ES CADA COSA.

Japanese (2011)

Drawing on label + Zapato

[Marked labels in drawing] ほらラベルに絵もつけたぞ。これでど の言葉がなにを指すかわかる

English (2015)

Drawing on label + Shoe

[Blank labels in drawing] LOOK, YOU SEE? I’VE ADDED DRAWINGS TO THE LABELS SO THAT YOU CAN RECOGNISE EVERTHING.

378

Figure 19.3  Arrugas. Astiberri Ediciones, 2007, 86. © 2007 Guy Delcourt Productions-Paco Roca. By permission of Astiberri Ediciones.

Javier Muñoz-Basols and Enrique del Rey Cabero

Figure 19.3  (Continued)

As we can see, the typography of the original chaussure and the last part of the word cravat in French has been adapted to the English shoe and tie. Clear evidence of how the French version of the graphic novel was used as far as the images are concerned can be seen in the use of blank labels hanging from Emilio’s clothes in both versions. Another piece of evidence is the fact that the French title, Rides, was printed as such on the spine of the book. On the contrary, we see that the Japanese translation used the Spanish as the source text: the labels are marked with the names of the different garments like in Spanish, e.g., the Japanese version reproduces the Spanish word zapato. Not adapting the original visually might have been motivated by various reasons, either by a desire not to alter the original typography or design of the letters or by the fact that the word is complemented by a drawing that reinforces the sense that one is reading a foreign graphic novel. In some cases, changes in the visual components of the panels may be requested by the editors when a book is published in a particular language. As Paco Roca explains, when the book was published in French, he had to make some changes to customize some scenes to French culture upon the request of the editor: Cuando Emilio tiene el flashback y vuelve al aula donde estudió de niño, en la versión española había un crucifijo y un mapa de Europa. Me dijeron que el crucifijo lo quitase, porque Francia era laica desde hacía mucho tiempo, y que el mapa de Europa tal vez podría cambiarlo por uno francés. [When Emilio has the flashback and goes back in time to the classroom where he had studied as a child, in the Spanish version there was a crucifix and a map of Europe. I was told to remove the crucifix, because France is a secular country, and that I should change the map of Europe to a map of France.] (García 2008) However, it is interesting to note that although the crucifix that was eliminated in the French version reappeared in the Spanish version, the map of France was left unchanged (p.  11).

380

Hispanic comics and graphic novels

These sorts of choices demonstrate the importance of the image in the translation and adaptation of comics in a way that differs from regular literary translation. Finally, on a related note, we can mention that most instances of onomatopoeia have been translated into their respective languages except for Japanese; surprisingly, they appear as in the Spanish book, both in the language and the design of the letters used to convey the sounds of a scene. However, the fact that the image complements the text and the narrative may make it sufficiently clear for the Japanese reader to understand the scene. Some examples are the ones used to convey pain, Aïe (Fr.), Ay (Sp.) and Ouch (Eng.) (p. 35), or to convey the sound of colliding objects, such as tap and plaf (Fr. and Sp.), which became snap and donk (Eng.) (p. 63). Nonetheless, even if there is a lack of linguistic and visual adaptation of onomatopoeias, these examples illustrate the types of decisions that translators of graphic literature need to make, as well as the kind of interpretive work that is often demanded of the readers of translated comics.

Conclusions and future directions Translation occupies a prominent role in the production and distribution of comics and graphic novels within the Hispanic world. Although it is becoming less common for Spanish-speaking authors to resort to publishing their works in other languages first, translation is increasingly important for the dissemination of those works. Yet as we have explained, translating graphic literature requires a deep understanding of multimodality and the confluence of the linguistic, typographic, pictographic and pictorial components that come into play in the production of a work. Hence, we have deemed it necessary to include a brief case study to illustrate the types of decisions translators of comics and graphic novels need to make when translating graphic novels and to show that these may vary considerably compared to non-multimodal texts. This may entail a need to be more resourceful and more aware of any other versions or translations of a work in order to make informed decisions when translating. Possible avenues for future research include studying the involvement of Spanish-speaking authors in the translation of their own works into other languages, both within the Iberian Peninsula and in Latin America. To this end, it may be worth exploring reception theory in connection with the authors’ involvement in the translations. Another line of research might deal with non-official translations brought about by fansubbers or subtitlers, or by other collaborative translations (Valero-Porras and Cassany 2016; Valero-Porras 2018), and how these may also contribute to or affect the dissemination of a work. The increasing importance of scanlation, i.e., scanning, translating and distributing unofficial editions by amateurs, may already be orienting the decisions of professional translators (Ferrer Simó 2005), and studying this in the context of graphic literature may be another area with potential for future research. Translation continues to play a key role in today’s crowded literary landscape. Iberian and Latin American authors of graphic literature are ever more conscious of the need to promote their own work, even if they need to publish it first in a language that they are not familiar with. In this context, translation can be expected to remain a prerequisite for the internationalization of Hispanic comics and graphic novels as a means to make them accessible to new audiences.

Recommended reading Borodo, Michał. 2015. “Multimodality, Translation and Comics.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 23 (1): 22–41.

381

Javier Muñoz-Basols and Enrique del Rey Cabero Borodo offers an introduction to multimodality and explores how both the visual and verbal modes are involved in comics translation, illustrating the process through an analysis of Polish translations of the comic Thorgal. Kaindl, Klaus. 2010. “Comics in Translation.” In The Handbook of Translation Studies, edited by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer, 36–40. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Kaindl offers a succinct overview of the field, from the rise of research on comics within Translation Studies to a description of the essential issues that should be taken into account when translating comics. Reyns-Chikuma, Chris, and Julie Tarif, eds. 2016. “Translation and Comics.” Special Number of TranscUlturAl 8.2. This special Issue of TranscUlturAl, a magazine of translation and cultural studies, contains an introduction about comics and translation, as well as articles and case studies in English, Spanish and French on various topics such as manga scanlation and the concept of fidelity in comics translation. Zanettin, Federico, ed. 2008. Comics in Translation. London/New York: Routledge. Zanettin provides one of the most comprehensive introductions to comics and translation in his preliminary chapter. The book also incorporates other general aspects such as the role of the comics translator as a semiotic investigator and several case studies, including a chapter on the translation of onomatopoeia in Spanish.

Notes 1 We are greatly indebted to Astiberri Ediciones and to Paco Roca for answering our questions and granting us permission to use his work. We are also grateful to Manami Morimoto and Thomas Jo Johansen for their comments and help with the Japanese translations, and to Brigid Maher and Pawel Adrjan for their valuable suggestions. Javier Muñoz-Basols acknowledges funding from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation as part of the project ‘Digital Identities and Cultures in Language Education / Identidades y culturas digitales en la educación lingüística’ (EDU2014-57677-C2-1-R). 2 There are close links between the Portuguese comics industry and both the Spanish and Brazilian scenes due to cultural and linguistic connections. However, for reasons of space, we will not be able to cover the vibrant Portuguese market here (for a recent anthology, with translations into English, see Corradi 2014). 3 Although more slowly than in other countries, e.g., France and the UK, comics scholarship is starting to emerge in Spain. There is an increasing number of conferences (e.g., Unicómic, organized by the University of Alicante, will reach its twentieth edition in 2018). Besides, in recent years, more studies and monographs have been published, and new associations (Tebeosfera and the more recent Plataforma Académica sobre el Cómic en Español (PACE) are just two examples) and academic journals (Cuadernos de Cómic) have been created. 4 There has been an international rise in comics published as book-objects with original formats, such as Building Stories by Chris Ware, a work made up of fourteen different printed works packaged in a box set. These kinds of specific formats cannot be ignored when adapting them into other languages/ markets.

References Borodo, Michał. 2015. “Multimodality, Translation and Comics.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 23 (1): 22–41. Cohn, Neil. 2013a. “Navigating Comics: An Empirical and Theoretical Approach to Strategies of Reading Comic Page Layouts.” Frontiers in Psychology 4: 1–15. ———. 2013b. The Visual Language of Comics: Introduction to the Structure and Cognition of Sequential Images. London: Bloomsbury. Cohn, Neil, and Hannah Campbell. 2015. “Navigating Comics II: Constraints on the Reading Order of Comic Page Layouts.” Applied Cognitive Psychology 29 (2): 193–99.

382

Hispanic comics and graphic novels “Comics Alternative Interviews: Erica Mena.” 2016. http://comicsalternative.com/comics-alternativeinterviews-erica-mena/. Corradi, Alberto, ed. 2014. Quadrinhos: Sguardi sul fumetto portuguese/Looks on Portuguese comics. Quarto d’Altino/Lisbon: MiMiSOl Edizioni/Chili Com Carne. Coutinho, Rafael, and Clarice Reichstul, eds. 2015. O Fabuloso Quadrinho Brasileiros de 2015 – Uma Antologia. São Paulo: Editora Veneta. Cromer, Michael, and Penney Clark. 2007. “Getting Graphic with the Past: Graphic Novels and the Teaching of History.” Theory and Research in Social Education 35 (4): 574–91. del Rey Cabero, Enrique. 2019. “Beyond Linearity: Holistic, Multidirectional, Multilinear and Translinear Reading in Comics.” The Comics Grid: Journal of Comics Scholarship 9 (1): 5. doi: http://doi. org/10.16995/cg.137. Díaz de Guereñu, J. M. 2011. “El comic español desde 1995.” ARBOR 187 (2): 209–20. ———. 2014. Hacia un cómic de autor: A propósito de Arrugas y otras novelas gráficas. Bilbao: Publicaciones de la Universidad de Deusto. Duncan, Randy, and Matthew J. Smith. 2009. The Power of Comics: History, Form and Culture. London: Continuum. Evans, Janet. 2013. “From Comics, Graphic Novels and Picturebooks to Fusion Texts: A New Kid on the Block!” Education 3–13 41 (2): 233–48. ———. 2016. “Comics and Translation.” In The Routledge Companion to Comics, edited by Frank Bramlett, Roy Cook, and Aaron Meskin, 319–27. London/New York: Routledge. Ferrer Simó, María Rosario. 2005. “Fansubs y scanlations: la influencia del aficionado en los criterios profesionales.” Puentes 6: 27–43. Fludernik, Monika. 2015. “Blending in Cartoons: The Production of Comedy.” In The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Literary Studies, edited by Lisa Zunshine, 155–75. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gandolfo, Amadeo, Turnes, Pablo, and Gerardo Vilches. 2017a. “Historia de dos industrias: un debate en torno a la historieta argentina y española.” CuCo, Cuadernos de Cómic 9: 109–39. ———. 2017b. “Historia de dos industrias: un debate en torno a la historieta argentina y española II.” CuCo, Cuadernos de Cómic 8: 103–30. García, Santiago. 2008. “Entrevista a Paco Roca.” [Interview with Paco Roca] Guía del cómic. www. guiadelcomic.es/paco-roca/entrevista-2008-garcia.htm. ———, ed. 2016. Spanish Fever: Stories by the New Spanish Cartoonists. Lake City Way, WA: Fantagraphics. Guerra, Pablo. 2011. “Panorama de la historieta en Iberoamérica.” In El cómic invitado a la biblioteca pública, 36–51. Bogotá: Centro Regional para el Fomento del Libro en América Latina y el Caribe (CERLALC). Hague, Ian. 2014. Comic and the Senses. A Multisensory Approach to Comics and Graphic Novels. London: Routledge. Harris, Sarah D., and Enrique del Rey Cabero. 2015. “The Spanish Civil War in Comics: A Conversation on Spanish Comics, Remembrance and Trauma Featuring Enrique del Rey Cabero and Sarah D. Harris.” Comics Forum. https://comicsforum.org/2015/04/27/the-spanish-civil-war-in-comics-aconversation-on-spanish-comics-remembrance-and-trauma-by-sarah-d-harris-and-enrique-del-reycabero-part-1/. Höchemer, André. 2011. “De Señores y Senioren – la traducción de ‘Arrugas’.” Diario de un alemol/ Tagebuch eines Alemols. www.diariodeunalemol.com/es/2013/09/10/von-senores-und-senioren%E2%80%93-die-ubersetzung-von-%E2%80%9Ekopf-in-den-wolken%E2%80%9C/. King, Edward, and Joanna Page. 2017. Posthumanism and the Graphic Novel in Latin America. London: UCL Press. Kress, Gunther, and Theo van Leeuwen. 2001. Multimodal Discourse: The Modes and Media of Contemporary Communication. London: Arnold. Leber-Cook, Alice, and Roy T. Cook. 2013. “Stigmatization, Multimodality and Metaphor: Comics in the Adult English as a Second Language Classroom.” In Graphic Novels and Comics in the Classroom: Essays on the Educational Power of Sequential Art, edited by Carrye Kay Syma and Robert G. Weiner, 23–34. Jefferson, NC: McFarland. Lefèvre, Pascal. 2013. “La importancia de ser publicado.” In La novela gráfica. Poéticas y modelos narrativos, edited by José Manuel Trabado Cabado, 83–102. Madrid: Arco/Libros.

383

Javier Muñoz-Basols and Enrique del Rey Cabero Lin, Tiffany Ying Yu, and Wen-yu Chiang. 2015. “Multimodal Fusion in Analyzing Political Cartoons: Debates on U.S. Beef Imports into Taiwan.” Metaphor and Symbol 30 (2): 137–61. Mayoral, Roberto, Dorothy Kelly, and Natividad Gallardo. 1988. “Concept of Constrained Translation. Non-Linguistic Perspectives of Translation.” Meta 33 (3): 356–67. Mazur, Dan, and Alexander Danner. 2014. Comics: A Global History, 1968 to the Present. London: Thames & Hudson. Merino, Ana. 2003. El cómic hispánico. Madrid: Cátedra. ———. 2016. “Comics in Latin America.” In The Routledge Companion to Comics, edited by Frank Bramlett, Roy Cook, and Aaron Meskin, 70–8. London/New York: Routledge. Meskin, Aaron. 2007. “Defining Comics?” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 65 (4): 369–79. ———. 2009. “Comics as Literature?” British Journal of Aesthetics 49 (3): 219–39. Muñoz-Basols, Javier, and Marina Massaguer Comes. 2018. “Social Criticism Through Humour in the Digital Age: Multimodal Extension in the Works of Aleix Saló.” European Comic Art 11 (1): 107–28. Muñoz-Basols, Javier, and Micaela Muñoz-Calvo. 2015. “La traducción de textos humorísticos multimodales.” In La traducción: Nuevos planteamientos teórico-metodológicos, edited by María Azucena Penas Ibáñez, 159–84. Madrid: Síntesis. ———. 2017. “Human Memory and the Act of Remembering in Contemporary Iberian Graphic Novels.” In The Routledge Companion to Iberian Studies, edited by Javier Muñoz-Basols, Laura Lonsdale, and Manuel Delgado, 652–70. London/New York: Routledge. O’Sullivan, Carol. 2013. “Introduction: Multimodality as Challenge and Resource for Translation.” JoSTrans 20: 2–14. www.jostrans.org/issue20/art_osullivan.php Pilcher, Tim, and Brad Brooks. 2005. The Essential Guide to World Comics. Foreword by Dave Gibbons. London: Collins and Brown. Pons, Álvaro. 2011. “La industria del comic en España: Radiografía de ¿un mito o una realidad?” [The Comics Industry in Spain. Analysis of a Myth or a Reality?] ARBOR 187 (extra 2) 265–73. Roca, Paco. 2007a. Arrugas. Bilbao: Astiberri. ———. 2007b. Rides. Translated by Carole Ratcliff. Paris: Delcourt. Rodríguez Abella, Rosa María. 2016. “Las marcas de la oralidad en la novela gráfica Arrugas (Análisis de su traducción al italiano).” MonTI. Monografías de traducción e interpretación Special Issue 3: 131–55. Rubenstein, Anne. 1998. Bad Language, Naked Ladies, and Other Threats to the Nation: A Political History of Comic Books in Mexico. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Sainz, José, ed. 2015. Informe: Historieta argentina del siglo XXI [Report. Argentinean Comics from the 21st Century]. Rosario: Editorial Municipal de Rosario. http://www.emr-rosario.gob.ar/libro/informe/ Snell-Hornby, Mary. 2009. “What’s in a Turn? On Fits, Starts and Writhings in Recent Translation Studies.” Translation Studies 2 (1): 41–51. Suárez, Fernando, and Enrique Uribe-Jongbloed. 2016. “Making Comics as Artisans: Comic Book Production in Colombia.” In Cultures of Comics Work, edited by Casey Brienza, and Paddy Johnston, 51–64. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Tebeosfera Cultural Association/Asociación Cultural Tebeosfera. 2018. “La industria del cómic en España en 2017.” [Spanish Comics Industry in 2017]. Accessed May 15, 2018. www.tebeosfera.com/ anexos/informe_tebeosfera_2017.pdf. Trabado Cabado, José Manuel. 2013. “La novela gráfica en el laberinto de los formatos del cómic.” [The Graphic Novel in the Maze of Formats of the Comic]. In La novela gráfica. Poéticas y modelos narrativos, edited by José Manuel Trabado Cabado, 11–61. Madrid: Arco/Libros. Valero-Porras, María José. 2018. “La construcción discursiva de la identidad en el fandom. Estudio de caso de una aficionada al manga.” PhD diss., University Pompeu Fabra. Valero-Porras, María José, and Daniel Cassany. 2016. “ ‘Traducción por fans para fans’: organización y prácticas en una comunidad hispana de scanlation.” Bid: Textos universitaris de biblioteconomia i documentació 37. http://bid.ub.edu/es/37/cassany.htm Vaughan, Brian K., Marcos Martín, and Muntsa Vicente. 2015. “Barrier.” The Panel Syndicate. Accessed August 15, 2016. http://panelsyndicate.com/comics/barrier. Yus, Francisco. 2006. “Inferring from Comics: A Multi-Stage Account.” Quaderns de Filologia: Estudis de Comunicació 3: 223–49. Zanettin, Federico. 2008. “Comics in Translation: An Overview.” In Comics in Translation, edited by Federico Zanettin, 1–32. London/New York: Routledge.

384

Hispanic comics and graphic novels

Translations (Italian) Roca, Paco. 2008. Rughe. Translated by Alessandra Papa. Latina: Tunué. (Dutch) Roca, Paco. 2009. Rimpels. Translated by Laurent Letzer. ‘s-Hertogenbosch: Silvester Strips. (Finnish) Roca, Paco. 2010. Ryppyjä. Translated by Anu Partanen. Helsinki: WSOY. (Japanese) Roca, Paco. 2011. 皺 [Shiwa]. Translated by Kosei Ono and Nana Takagi. Tokyo: ShoPro Books. (Catalan) Roca, Paco. 2012. Arrugues. Translated by Adriana Plujà. Bilbao: Astiberri. (German) Roca, Paco. 2013. Kopf in den Wolken. Translated by André Höchemer. Berlin: Reprodukt. (Portuguese) Roca, Paco. 2013. Rugas. Translated by Joana Neves. Lisboa: Bertrand Editora. (Basque) Roca, Paco. 2014. Zimurrak. Translated by Bego Montorio Uribarren. Bilbao: Astiberri. (Galician) Roca, Paco. 2014. Engurras. Translated by María Isabel Soto López. Santiago de Compostela: El Patito Editorial. (UK English) Roca, Paco. 2015. Wrinkles. Translated by Nora Goldberg. London: Knockabout. (US English) Roca, Paco. 2016. Wrinkles. Translated by Erica Mena. Lake City Way, WA: Fantagraphics Books. (Chinese) Roca, Paco. 2016. 皱纹 [Zhòuwén]. Translated by Lu Jun. Zhejiang Sheng: Zhejiang People’s Fine Arts Publishing House. (Turkish) Roca, Paco. 2018. Kirişikliklar. Translated by Pınar Savaş. Izmir: Tudem Yayın Grubu. (Korean) Roca, Paco. 2018. 주름 [Juleum]. Translated by Hyun Joo Kim. Seoul: Joongang Books.

385

20 JOURNALISTIC TRANSLATION María José Hernández Guerrero

Introduction In the Spanish-speaking world, translation in news organizations is known as ‘traducción periodística’, that is ‘journalistic translation’, a broad concept that includes not only news translation, but also the translation of all journalistic genres. This type of translation is determined by the characteristics of journalistic discourse and by the professional field in which it is used: journalism. Print, digital and audiovisual media, press syndicates, news agencies and other communication companies influence both the way in which the translation process is carried out and how journalistic messages are redrafted for a specific audience. However, one distinctive feature stands out: purely linguistic tasks are secondary to the task of providing information. For this reason, journalistic translation has been defined as a type of specialized translation heavily influenced by the processes and demands of journalism and by the linguistic framework specific to each cultural community. These factors influence how translations are carried out (Hernández Guerrero 2005b, 159). In news production, translation is one of the journalistic skills needed for the production of new content. In other words, it is not considered a task separate from journalism but rather an integral part of it. The news producers’ work consists of generating news, which may involve translation, understood in different ways. These do not always coincide with the traditional concept of translation since the aim of the target text is not always to reproduce an original text but rather to use it in order to produce information for the specific medium which publishes it (Hernández Guerrero 2009, 31). For this reason, the term ‘journalistic translation’ may encompass various types of translation, and translation may be used flexibly according to the functional needs of each medium.

Historical perspective From its very beginnings, journalism has been closely connected to translation, either in publications which are in fact translated newspapers, or in publications which alternate the translation of articles with their own journalistic production. The first examples of journalism in Spain appear in the fifteenth century. Among the first documented cases of translation in the 386

Journalistic translation

press, we find Gazeta romana, y relacion general, de auisos de todos los Reynos y Prouincias del mundo (published by Juan Serrano de Vargas in Seville in 1618) and three issues of the Gazeta de Roma (printed in Valencia by Felipe Mey between 1618 and 1621) which, according to Espejo Cala (2013, 79), were probably translated from Italian. In fact, studies on the Spanish press in the eighteenth century (Guinard 1973; Sáiz 1983) make constant references to the use of translation. This emphasis on translation would only increase in the nineteenth century. The traditional use of translation in Spanish journalism has been detailed by Hernando (1999, 132–33), who points out that the newspapers at that time “mostly tried, through the use of translation, to bring the readership closer to interesting events in other countries”. The few available studies on the role of translation in the history of Spanish‑speaking journalism have mainly addressed the role of translation in shaping national identity or in disseminating literature, as is the case of the work of the research group HISTAL, directed by Georges L. Bastin of the University of Montreal, on the role of translation in the construction of a Latin American identity in the first journalistic publications in the area – especially in the Venezuelan pro-independence press of the beginning of the nineteenth century (Bastin 2003; Bastin and Iturriza 2008; Bastin, Navarro, and Iturriza 2010; Iturriza 2008; Navarro 2014). This is also true of the studies that analyze the role of the Spanish periodical press as a vehicle for disseminating translated literature in the nineteenth (Lafarga Maduell, Palacios Bernal, and Saura Sánchez 2002; Giné and Domínguez 2004; Giné and Hibbs 2010) and in the twentieth centuries (De Toro and Cancelo 2008). There is, of course, a long tradition of studies based on the analysis of translated journalistic texts which address linguistic, lexical and cultural aspects from various perspectives. However, this type of approach, while necessary and interesting, sidelines the study of journalistic translation as a specific professional practice in itself and ignores an indisputable reality: the use of translation by communication companies is governed by their own practices within the journalistic framework. These practices determine the processes involved in journalistic translation and its function. Research on journalistic translation begins in the 1990s, coinciding with a considerable surge in Translation Studies. Researchers and experienced practitioners mainly from Argentina and Spain – two countries in which translation plays an important role in the journalistic world – using very diverse approaches, started to analyze the characteristics of journalistic translation and publish groundbreaking works in this field. The first contributions to the field consist of descriptive accounts from the point of view of experienced practitioners. These contributions begin to delineate the main operations involved in the process of journalistic translation. They insist that the main objective of journalistic translation is the rapid transmission of information in a clear way so that it can be communicated effectively to the readership. For example, Tapia (1992), drawing on his experience at the newspaper Clarín, lists the main factors determining the work of the journalist‑translator: 1 2 3 4 5

The main objective of journalist‑translators is to transmit information. Journalist‑translators translate for a mass audience. Consequently, a clear and direct language needs to be used. Journalist‑translators translate for a specific geographical, temporal and cultural context. Their job is also conditioned by the medium in which they work. Journalist‑translators are subject to important limitations of time and space. Journalist‑translators are usually re-translators and proofreaders. 387

María José Hernández Guerrero

At the same time, a number of researchers have investigated the nature of translation in the media and have discussed some of the elements which characterize it. Hernández Guerrero (1997), who focuses on the written press, emphasizes the invisibility of translation, the importance of economic factors and media alliances on the increase in translation, the collective production process – which implies the participation of other people apart from the journalist‑ translator, such as the editor‑in‑chief, who affect the final form of the translated text –, and the different strategies of translation depending on the needs of the news medium. Based on the analysis of a series of translated texts published by the Spanish newspaper El País and the Américas magazine, García González (1998, 988) concludes that journalistic translation is determined by extralinguistic and linguistic contexts associated with the journalistic profession. The first has to do, primarily, with limitations of time and space. The second covers both the special features of this type of discourse in general and the different journalistic genres in particular. For his part, Campos Pardillos (1998), in a study based on a total of twenty Spanish news broadcasts on Euronews, finds important changes in translated news, which would depend on the expectations of the new audience. He also stresses the journalist‑translator’s complex role: [T]he facts themselves only play a secondary role, to such an extent that there is no visible source language text, and the translator is no longer a mediator, but even a creator, which entails a certain danger that, as we have seen, the general message might change dramatically. (1998, 67–8) To these first studies, we must add the invaluable input provided by several doctoral theses. Fox (1993), in The Role of Translation and Interpretation in the Shaping of a Reader’s View of World Events – the Press and the Falklands War, stresses the role of translation in the transmission of ideologies. As mediators between reality and the readers, journalist‑translators play a key role. “It is their telling and treatment of events that leads readers to understand those events in one way or another” (1993, 4). For his part, González Rodríguez (1999), in La traducción en la prensa: “El País 1995” [Translation in the Press: El País 1995], presents the first quantitative approach that analyzes the weight of translation in a prestigious newspaper over one year’s period. Using authentic data, collected in a laborious and detailed daily monitoring of all the sections of El País, González Rodríguez, besides quantifying the number of translations, calls attention to the importance of the process in this medium. González Rodríguez highlights the economic factors and points out that large communication groups make use of translation in order to offer one journalistic product in different linguistic markets. This helps reduce the costs of news production. In Spanish communication studies, translation has rarely been explored with the exception of Hernando (1999). This communication scholar offers an analysis of the presence of translation in the Spanish press from the eighteenth century. Hernando stresses its invisibility and emphasizes a relevant aspect: the “double mediation” that is common to journalistic translation and which therefore makes it susceptible to greater manipulation. Communication companies mediate first between the facts and the recipients. The subsequent translation of this news represents a double mediation. In the last few years of the twentieth century, two practical handbooks written by practitioners and teachers of journalistic translation were published. In these handbooks they delve into the ins and outs of how to produce a journalistic translation, which are exemplified by means of translated texts and commentaries. The first of these is La traducción del texto 388

Journalistic translation

periodístico [Translating a Journalistic Text] by Grupo Iris (1996). This handbook includes twenty journalistic texts translated from French to Spanish and five from Spanish to French. The translations and comments were carried out by students in the Master’s degree in Translation at the University of Alicante in Spain. This work, written by Florentino Heras and Francisco Ramón Trives, provides a comprehensive introduction to the role of translation in the press. The comments on the translations mainly deal with the difficulties in translating this type of text and describe strategies to correctly overcome them. The second handbook following this hands‑on approach is Manual de traducción periodística (del español al árabe): textos e introducción teórica [A Handbook of (Spanish‑Arabic) Journalistic Translation: Texts and Theoretical Introduction] (Gutiérrez de Terán 1997). Gutiérrez de Terán, a professor at the Autonomous University of Madrid, worked as a translator for two years in the Arabic section of the Spanish news agency EFE. His handbook is divided into two parts. The theoretical part is structured in three blocks dedicated to the language used by the press, the features of journalistic translation and the journalistic text. One of the most relevant points of the book is his perception of journalistic translation as an example of “a deforming reality” which almost always results in ethical problems (1997, 17). The practical part offers the Arabic translations of twenty‑eight texts from the main Spanish newspapers, organized according to the text type: agency reports, news and features by correspondents, interviews, editorials and opinion pieces. These first critical analyses outline the main features of journalistic translation and show that in this professional practice the journalistic factors related to time, space, genre, editorial policy and economic alliances between large communication groups are as important as the linguistic and cultural aspects involved in the process of interlingual transfer. A  significant increase in journalistic translation research occurs at the beginning of the twenty‑first century with approaches that make use of interdisciplinary models and systematically analyze the use of translation on the part of communication companies.

Research issues in journalistic translation Descriptive Translation Studies, which has been at the base of many empirical studies of this professional practice in the framework of global communication, has been particularly influential. Another relevant Translation Studies paradigm is Functionalism because of its target‑oriented approach to the production of journalistic texts. In addition to these approaches, we must also keep in mind the importance of approaches that were developed as part of the so-called Cultural Turn in Translation Studies, and which study factors such as market, power, ideology, identity, manipulation and so on. The study of these factors is necessary to better understand the complexity of translation in communication companies. The phenomenon of translation in general, and journalistic translation in particular, is linked to social institutions (in this case media companies) that determine the selection, production and distribution of the translations, and thus the strategies used when translating. For this reason, research on journalistic translation has required an interdisciplinary approach reflecting the range of factors that come into play in the dissemination of information on an international scale. The first publications specifically devoted to the study of journalistic translation in the Hispanic world appeared at the beginning of the twenty-first century. The following section includes a critical review of the main research in this area of enquiry. It is organized in two parts: first, research monographs, edited collections and special issues of specialized journals; and second, journal articles and other contributions. 389

María José Hernández Guerrero

Research monographs, edited collections and special issues of specialized journals La traducción periodística [Journalistic Translation], edited by Cortés Zaborras and Hernández Guerrero (2005), is the first work to address the reality of journalistic translation as a professional practice. This introductory collection combines theory with practical examples of the various aspects of journalistic translation. The editors discuss the convergence of two decisive factors: the use of a specific discourse – journalistic language – and the existence of specific professional practices. The works included in this volume deal with aspects such as the characteristics of journalistic discourse, the structure of an article, newspaper language and the different genres found in the press (Hernández Guerrero 2005a). Other chapters examine the nature of translation in the press with special attention devoted to extralinguistic factors such as time and space, which determine the media’s editorial policies or the invisibility of translation (García González 2005; Hernández Guerrero 2005b). The ideological footprint (Carbonell and Madouri 2005) and the influence of the different communication channels on the way in which translations are carried out are also studied, including empirical studies on specific publications such as Sur in English (Taillefer de Haya 2005), the Spanish edition of Le Monde Diplomatique (Cortés Zaborras and Turci Domingo 2005) and the Culture supplements in Le Monde and El País (Cortés Zaborras 2005). Finally, also worthy of mention are two practitioners who reflect on their professional experience as translators in the Spanish news agency EFE (García Suárez 2005) and in the Spanish newspaper El Mundo (Vidal 2005). The collection El texto de opinión de la prensa escrita. Su tratamiento en la traducción [Opinion text in the written press. Its treatment in translation] was also published in 2005. Edited by Ramírez (2005a), it contains some contributions dealing with the translation of opinion texts from a discursive point of view. The authors are interested in the problems derived from translating opinion texts into Spanish from German (Giersiepen 2005), French (García López 2005) and English (Ramírez 2005b). Although they each approach the problem from a different perspective, the studies show that these columns share a number of features such as the same objectives and functions, their evaluative and appellative character and their idiolectal nature. The difference between languages comes from oral conventions and what García López (2005, 52) calls “cultural interest points”, in other words, subjects that attract attention in a given culture. Of special interest in this volume are the reflections of López Guix (2005) on his experience as a translator for the Spanish newspaper La Vanguardia. Traducción periodística y literaria [Journalistic and Literary Translation], edited by Argentinian scholars Badenes and Coisson (2007), includes contributions devoted to the role of the journalist‑translator as a “bridge between cultures and transmitter of messages” (Badenes 2007, 89) and to the translation of opinion pieces (Coisson 2007a). The translation techniques used in journalistic translation and how this type of translation enriches translators’ training (Stinson de Quevedo 2007, originally published in English: Stinson de Quevedo 2001) are also touched upon, as is the translation of interviews (Coisson 2007b). In 2009, two publications make an important contribution to this research avenue: Translation in Global News by Esperanza Bielsa and Susan Bassnett and Traducción y periodismo [Translation and Journalism] by María José Hernández Guerrero. Bielsa and Bassnett’s book focuses on the study of translation in large news agencies and evaluates the influence of translation in the transmission of the global news flow. The authors examine how the news agencies, powerful organizations within the international news market, conceive and use translation. One of the most interesting features of this book is the ethnographic approximation that allows the authors to observe and describe these companies from within, providing an insider’s view. 390

Journalistic translation

They also interviewed the professionals working for these agencies. This was done at the Latin American regional offices of AFP and IPS in Montevideo and at Reuter’s central office in London. Bielsa and Bassnett show that information does not remain fixed. Not only are there multiple linguistic alterations but also ideological and cultural changes and other manipulations made by the receiving communication companies. The translation practices described in this book show that in journalism translation functions as a rewriting process at the service of international news transmission. On the other hand, Hernández Guerrero’s Traducción y periodismo studies the use of translation in the Spanish press. Translation, which is necessary for the circulation of news and is a common practice in journalism, has two distinctive features: its ‘invisibility’ (that is, there are few indications to the readers that they are reading a translation) and its ‘transparency’ (in other words, localized texts which flow and are adapted to the reader). The book examines the characteristics and constraints of translation in journalism, and reviews the role of journalist‑translators and of other agents involved in the process of news production. Hernández Guerrero proposes the binary opposition of “stable” versus “unstable” sources in order to differentiate translational approaches to source texts (2009, 43–6). Stable sources do not allow much room for adaptation, omission or addition of information, as is the case with editorials and opinion columns, whereas an unstable source  – news articles, interpretative texts and interviews – is a text that is not considered final, that is, it can be modified at a later stage. In the case of unstable sources, any intermediary agent playing a part in the production process will update and recontextualize it to serve its new purpose. It is common for the journalist‑translator to abbreviate or expand the texts by omitting or adding information in the rewriting process. The author also offers different examples of common rewriting in journalistic translation including compiled translation, fragmented translation or rewriting stricto sensu. As Hernández Guerrero (2009, 119) indicates, the rise of translation in journalism is not only due to ideological questions but also to questions of economy given that it is less costly to translate information than to produce it. In 2010 Roberto A. Valdeón edited Translating Information. This collection, with chapters by scholars from many different institutions in Europe, includes contributions by Bielsa, Hernández Guerrero and Carbonell (Valdeón 2010a). Bielsa (2010) examines translation practices in news agencies and compares two models: the leading global agency Agence France Press and Inter Press Service, an alternative news agency. Hernández Guerrero (2010a) analyzes translated news in El Mundo and describes its translation practices and policy, while Carbonell (2010) uses a critical approach to analyze journalistic texts and shows the ideological factors that influence journalistic translation. Valdeón has also served as guest‑editor of special issues devoted to journalistic translation such as “Translating Information in the Post‑Industrial Society”, a special issue of Across Languages and Cultures (Valdeón 2010b) and, above all, “Translation and Journalism”, a special issue of Meta (Valdeón 2012a), which includes contributions by the main researchers in this research area. He is also author of an entry in the third volume of John Benjamins’ Handbook of Translation Studies, “Information, Communication, Translation” (Valdeón 2012c, 66–72), in which he argues that these three areas of research have much to say to each other, and points out the immense potential for future interdisciplinary research. Finally, Traducción, medios de comunicación, opinión pública [Translation, Mass Media, Public Opinion], edited by Martín Ruano and Vidal Claramonte (2016), reflects on the main changes that are transforming the processes of translation in the context of global communication. Their objective is to draw attention to the complex dynamics that shape the news and cultural discourses today as well as the formation and negotiation of identities. The studies 391

María José Hernández Guerrero

included in this book deal with diverse fields (the press, the cinema, literary works). The first part of the book is composed of five chapters devoted to journalistic translation. In the first chapter, Bielsa (2016a) defends a cosmopolitan approach and suggests that the research on journalistic research should focus on interdisciplinary models which include social theories, translation studies and communication sciences. Valdeón (2016a) examines the concept of gatekeeping and points out that translation in the communication sphere involves an important gatekeeping component that takes place at two different levels: an institutional level and an individual level. His proposals lead to significant reflections on the concept of fidelity in the professional world. Hernández Guerrero (2016) offers an empirical study on the role of translation in Project Syndicate, a news service focused solely on producing and delivering high‑quality commentaries to a global audience. Her chapter analyzes the dominant position of a communications industry that controls all aspects of the international flow of information. It does this both for commercial and ideological reasons. Bazzi (2016) questions the way in which international media transmit and construct biased discourse in the Middle East, concentrating on a translation case from the Lebanese media. Finally, Páez Rodríguez (2016) studies the role of (non)translation, a linguistic phenomenon that has gained ground in Spanish fashion and beauty magazines for women in recent years.

Articles and other contributions To the works previously mentioned, we must add a growing number of articles and other contributions discussing journalistic translation. In terms of content and themes, these works can be grouped into the following categories: •

•

General studies focusing mainly on technical issues such as time and space constraints, translational strategies and the use of translation by the various media (Stinson de Quevedo 2001; Hernández Guerrero 2005b, 2006a, 2008a, 2011a; García González 2005; Alonso 2006; Kelly 2006). The recontextualization of information and transedition – a particular combination of editing and translating which implies reorganizing, adding information, eliminating passages considered irrelevant for the new reader, introducing titles, etc. – have also been the object of analysis (Hernández Guerrero 2013). In this regard, the translation of headlines has been of particular interest, mostly due to the substantial changes in their translation. Headlines serve three functions: they move people to read the text, they provide a succinct view of the content and they serve to identify the article. For this reason, headlines are key segments of the text. The numerous articles on the translation of headlines, from different languages and in different media (Reque de Coulon 2002; Samaniego Fernández et  al. 2003: García González 2004; Hernández Guerrero 2004; Valdeón 2007c; Andújar Moreno 2006; Vella Ramírez and Martínez López 2012), have shown that many factors (informative, linguistic, cultural, ideological, commercial . . .) have an influence on their translation and the transformations they undergo as well as the tendency to create new headlines instead of translating them. In general, journalistic translation involves quite a few transformations in order to adapt the translated texts to the target readership, e.g. the rewriting of partial or complete news stories (Hernández Guerrero 2006b, 2012a). As a result, translation in this area can be described as a complex process of journalistic rewriting. As is the case in other translation areas, case studies have been a very productive approach. These works provide analysis of the use of translation in different mass media, show the translational or editorial processes and, at the same time, describe the professional 392

Journalistic translation

practices typical of each of them. Some researchers have focused on the case of the news channel CNNenEspañol, e.g. Gallardo Camacho (2005), who discussed his professional experience in the CNN headquarters in the US, and Valdeón (2005a), who studied the strategies used in the production of texts, influenced by the American source texts and embedded in the ideology of the source text culture. Valdeón (2005b, 2005c) has also examined the Internet news service of the BBC, i.e. BBC Mundo, created for a Spanish‑ speaking readership. In the case of the Euronews Internet portal, Valdeón (2009) analyzes how international news is covered from a European perspective by using concepts from narrative theory. Frías Arnés (2005), who used an ethnographic approach, studies the case of El País English Edition. More recently, Hernández Guerrero has examined the case of The Huffington Post and its editions in various languages, focusing particularly on the translation of journalistic blogs (2015) on the one hand, and on the case of Mediapart, an independent French online news medium which also has English and Spanish editions (2017) on the other. Studies focusing on the translation of different journalistic genres have been particularly fruitful and have shown the different translational practices characteristic of each of these genres. This line of research has concentrated on the translation of informative and argumentative journalistic genres. •

Informative texts. Publications cover a wide range of aspects, from translation in news agencies (Baya Essayani 2005; Bielsa 2007) to the translation of scientific news (Hernández Guerrero 2008b) to the role of translation in news production (Valdeón 2012b). News production and the ideological implications of the choices and changes effected in the target versions has been the object of several works, e.g. Valdeón (2007a) has studied the ideological manipulation of texts published on the Internet by CNN in its English and Spanish versions from a critical discourse analysis perspective; Valdeón (2007b) has covered the ideological implications of the lexical choices made in the texts by analyzing Spanish reports in BBC Mundo and CNN en Español, and also (Valdeón 2008) the translational and editorial procedures within BBCMundo’s news web. Studies based on the comparison of culture‑specific items have shown the ideological bias introduced by journalist‑translators via translation and the role of translation in situations of conflict (Linder 2014; Valdeón 2011). Other studies examine the role of ideology and identity in translated news drawing on framing a concept in communication studies (Valdeón 2013, 2014, 2016b) or study the concept of translation in communication studies (Valdeón 2018).

On the other hand, the journalistic interview, which uses translation extensively, has been analyzed by Hernández Guerrero, paying particular attention to the translations of this mode of news presentation involving a complex process of recontextualization of the information in order to suit the interests of the media themselves and of their audience, e.g. the interviews translated in El Mundo (Hernández Guerrero 2010b) and the selection process and rewriting in the case of an interview translated in El País (Hernández Guerrero 2011b). Generally speaking, most of the works previously outlined focus on media such as news agencies, the written press and news websites. However, the importance of news translation in audiovisual media is an area that has not received much academic or professional attention so far. In the Spanish context, only Pilar Orero (an audiovisual translation scholar) has analyzed the use of voice‑over, the leading audiovisual translation mode in Spain when people speaking 393

María José Hernández Guerrero

other languages appear live on TV broadcasts. Orero focuses on the revoicing of TV interviews (2004, 2005), on the translation of live interviews (2009) and on the translation of TV news through voice‑over (Darwish and Orero 2014). These studies point to the fact that these translations are far from being a faithful reproduction of the original. Nor are they objective news reporting. •

•

The translation of argumentative journalistic genres has been widely investigated. Martín Ruano (2003) and Guerrero Moral (2005) have used the “Revista de Prensa”, a section in El País newspaper, to study how a translated text can be influenced by the publisher’s opinions regarding specific topics, and how these fragmented translations affect the original information. Andújar Moreno (2009), who analyzes the translation of newspaper editorials using texts from Le Monde Diplomatique translated into Spanish and Catalan, concentrates on the argumentative strategies and translation techniques used by the writers. Hernández Guerrero (2008c) focuses on the study of the translation of opinion columns by analyzing texts from El País and El Mundo, and presents data on the number of translations, languages of the original texts and the way in which the translations are carried out. In another piece of research, Hernández Guerrero (2012b), through an analysis of the opinion sections of El País, concludes that the translation policies of this newspaper support its editorial line. For his part, Valdeón addresses the distinction “stable” versus “unstable” sources in two papers (2015a, 2016c), working on the translated economic columns of Paul Krugman, originally published in the New York Times and in Spanish by El País. Applying a framing approach, this researcher notes that, although the stable/ unstable distinction might be a good starting point, the variety of texts we are likely to encounter in news media will probably give way to a larger and more flexible taxonomy of source and translated texts. Finally, some researchers have relied on sociological theories. Post‑structuralist theories have given rise to several investigations in Translation Studies in general, and journalistic translation in particular. The concepts initially developed by Foucault and his analysis of the relationship between power and discourse have been especially relevant. Translation researchers, drawing on concepts from philosophy, communication theory, cultural identity and ideology, have created an extensive interdisciplinary methodological framework. Related works include those by Vidal Claramonte (2012), based on the uses of language in the translation of texts related to the world of fashion and the marketing of products in women’s magazines. In these texts many words are not translated. The author posits that these untranslated words are indeed translations, as she argues that the original words are maintained in English or French because they provoke sensations we would not have if they were rendered to the readers in Spanish. Páez Rodríguez (2013, 2015, 2016) has also analyzed this phenomenon in Spanish women’s magazines.

On the other hand, and also from a post‑structuralist perspective – combined with contributions from communication studies –, Paula Batista (2016) examines how the Brazilian identity is represented in news translated and published in the digital Spanish and Brazilian Portuguese versions of El País. She also studies the interface between communication and interest groups. Drawing mainly on Bourdieu’s theoretical framework, Hernández Hernández (2015, 2017) examines the influence of the dynamics of the Mexican journalistic field in the construction of the professional identity of the individuals involved in Le Monde diplomatique en español. Finally, Bielsa (2016a, 2016b) proposes a methodological approach from the point of view of cosmopolitan social theory. The author argues that the new cosmopolitanism favours a new 394

Journalistic translation

perception of the significance of multilingualism and translation, and also forces us to ask innovative questions about the cultural and social role of translation. Bielsa stresses that it is necessary to empirically examine to what extent the news can become a space of cosmopolitan openness to others.

Future directions Translation Studies, as we commented earlier, only recently started paying attention to the area of journalistic translation. As Valdeón states (2015b, 634): “If Translation Studies is a young discipline, news translation research is in its infancy”. Given the state of journalistic translation today, a number of areas are singled out for further research. First, economic globalization has meant the concentration of media companies in a few groups that virtually dominate the information market in the western world. At the same time, the world of journalism and the media have experienced an authentic digital revolution. The communicative framework of recent emerging forms of journalism is very different from that of traditional media. The use of translation in this new context, which has grown exponentially, has barely been explored. Translation in digital journalism and its new forms such as citizen journalism, blogs, independent media and so on is an area where more empirical research is needed. Furthermore, citizens’ loss of confidence in mainstream media has brought about burgeoning alternative media whose objective is the freedom of the press. Though they are much less visible and infinitely less powerful, they use translation as a tool which multiplies the echo of their messages and gives them more online influence. Parallel to this phenomenon is the appearance of networks of volunteer translators who collaborate with these initiatives. In the Spanish‑speaking world, little has been published about these new forms of translation in news outlets (Juris 2004; Pérez González 2010; Talens 2010a, 2010b) to date. Second, journalistic translation is part of a juncture of very specific political and economic interests. With a communications industry controlling the flow of international news not only for economic reasons but also for ideological purposes, news has become a strategic and global product that is distributed and sold in a trading system controlled by the large corporations. Using short‑term alliances and agreements, they work together for specific activities and to increase the sale of their products. In the case of cybermedia, national and linguistic borders move and are diluted. In this context, translation can help news organizations reach new audiences, and have significant social impact. As translation researchers have already pointed out, to study the complexity of translation in mass media, journalistic translation research needs an interdisciplinary methodological framework combining translation studies with disciplines such as communication studies, social theories, media studies and so on. This will enable them to report on, among other aspects, the role of translation in the shaping of the discourse spread by the media and, above all, in the emergence of a global public opinion; the translation policies of the media; and the power relations involved in the dissemination of news messages. Third, most research into journalistic translation consists of product‑based studies. Generally speaking, there is a lack of studies on process‑oriented journalistic translation that could provide valuable information on the journalists’ new practices, especially now that we are witnessing a transformation of digital journalistic models and the emergence of the new multilingual platforms. At the same time, they could examine in greater depth the profile of the professionals carrying out these translations and the skills needed. These studies would be beneficial for both Translation Studies and Communication Studies. Finally, research in journalistic translation can contribute enormously to the existing debate on the traditional notion of translation and the need to widen it to include other phenomena. 395

María José Hernández Guerrero

Practices such as transediting, journalistic rewriting, localization and recontextualization have prompted most researchers to point out the need to expand or redefine central concepts such as equivalence, fidelity and authorship (e.g. Bielsa 2007, 144; Hernández Guerrero 2009, 99–101; Valdeón 2016a, 49).

Recommended reading Hernández Guerrero, María José. 2009. Traducción y periodismo [Translation and Journalism]. Bern: Peter Lang. This monograph offers a comprehensive overview of journalistic translation practices in Spain, which can be applied to other languages and contexts. The book provides a general description of its characteristics as well as of the way journalistic texts are translated, and covers the main factors to be considered in this field. Valdeón, Roberto A., ed. 2012. Translation and Journalism. Special Issue of Meta 57 (4). A special edition of the journal dedicated to journalistic translation, comprising thirteen papers written by a group of international researchers in this field. The papers, in English, French and Spanish, encompass a wide range of subjects from multiple perspectives. Valdeón, Roberto A. 2015. “Fifteen Years of Journalistic Translation Research and More.” Perspectives 23 (4): 634–62. A comprehensive survey article reporting on research into journalistic translation at an international level covering the last years of the twentieth century and the first fifteen years of the twenty-first century.

References Alonso, María. 2006. “Reflexiones periódicas.” Vasos comunicantes, 34. http://revistavasoscomuni cantes.blogspot.com.es/2011/04/vasos-comunicantes-numero-34.html. Andújar Moreno, Gemma. 2006. “La traduction français-espagnol des titres journalistiques du Monde Diplomatique: un exemple de tension entre adéquation et acceptabilité.” Translation Journal 10 (3). www.bokorlang.com/journal/37titres.htm. ———. 2009. “Traducir la argumentación en editoriales de prensa: de las estrategias argumentativas a las técnicas traductoras.” Hermeneus 11: 51–80. Badenes, Guillermo. 2007. “El texto periodístico y su traductor.” In Traducción periodística y literaria, edited by Guillermo Badenes and Josefina Coisson, 85–9. Córdoba, Argentina: Comunicarte. Badenes, Guillermo, and Josefina Coisson, eds. 2007. Traducción periodística y literaria. Córdoba, Argentina: Comunicarte. Bastin, Georges L. 2003. “Por una historia de la traducción en Hispanoamérica.” ÍKALA 8 (1): 193–217. Bastin, Georges L., and María Gabriela Iturriza. 2008. “La traducción como elemento creador de identidad en la prensa independentista de Venezuela (1802–1822).” TRANS. Revista de Traductología 12: 81–94. Bastin, Georges L., Aura Navarro, and María Gabriela Iturriza. 2010. “La prensa independentista venezolana (1808–1822) desde la traducción.” In De independencias y revoluciones, edited by Gastón Lillo and José Leandro Urbina, 193–213. Santiago de Chile: LOM Ediciones. Baya Essayani, Moulay-Lahssan. 2005. “Traducción de textos periodísticos: español-árabe: diez años de experiencia en una agencia internacional de noticias.” In El español, lengua de cultura, lengua de traducción: aspectos teóricos, metodológicos y profesionales, edited by Miguel Ángel García Peinado et al., 405–14. Granada: Atrio. Bazzi, Samia. 2016. “El papel de la traducción en la deconstrucción y construcción de los discursos sectarios en Oriente Próximo.” In Traducción, medios de comunicación, opinión pública, edited by María Rosario, Martín Ruano, and África Vidal Claramonte, 73–98. Granada: Comares. Bielsa, Esperança. 2007. “Translation in Global News Agencies.” Target 19 (1): 135–55. ———. 2010. “Translating News: A Comparison of Practices in News Agencies.” In Translating Information, edited by Roberto A. Valdeón, 31–49. Oviedo: Ediuno.

396

Journalistic translation ———. 2016a. “La traducción en los medios de comunicación: una perspectiva cosmopolita.” In Traducción, medios de comunicación y opinión, edited by María Rosario Martín Ruano, and África Vidal Claramonte, 17–34. Granada: Comares. ———. 2016b. “News Translation: Global or Cosmopolitan Connections?” Media Culture Society 38 (2): 196–211. Bielsa, Esperança, and Susan Bassnett. 2009. Translation in Global News. London: Routledge. Campos Pardillos, Miguel Ángel.1998. “Beyond Bilingual Broadcasting: The Case of Euronews.” In Actas de los III Encuentros en torno a la Traducción: Nuevas tendencias y aplicaciones en la traducción, edited by Carmen Valero and Isabel De La Cruz, 61–9. Universidad de Alcalá de Henares. Carbonell, Ovidi. 2010. “Análisis de pautas de traducción ideológica en el discurso periodístico.” In Translating Information, edited by Roberto A. Valdeón, 87–123. Oviedo: Ediuno. Carbonell, Ovidi, and Khadija Madouri. 2005. “Las huellas de la ideología. Terrorismo e Islam en los medios de comunicación.” In La traducción periodística, edited by Carmen Cortés Zaborras, and María José Hernández Guerrero, 199–235. Cuenca: Ediciones de la Universidad de Castilla–La Mancha. Coisson, Josefina. 2007a. “Periodismo de opinión y pragmática.” In Traducción periodística y literaria, edited by Guillermo Badenes, and Josefina Coisson, 99–114. Córdoba, Argentina: Comunicarte. ———. 2007b. “El desafío de traducir entrevistas: entre la oralidad y el texto escrito.” In Traducción periodística y literaria, edited by Guillermo Badenes and Josefina Coisson, 125–37. Córdoba, Argentina: Comunicarte. Cortés Zaborras, Carmen. 2005. “La traducción en Le Monde des Livres y en Babelia.” In La traducción periodística, edited by Carmen Cortés Zaborras and María José Hernández Guerrero, 391–443. Cuenca: Ediciones de la Universidad de Castilla–La Mancha. Cortés Zaborras, Carmen, and María José Hernández Guerrero, eds. 2005. La traducción periodística. Cuenca: Ediciones de la Universidad de Castilla–La Mancha. Cortés Zaborras, Carmen, and Isabel Turci Domingo. 2005. “La edición española de Le Monde Diplomatique.” In La traducción periodística, edited by Carmen Cortés Zaborras and María José Hernández Guerrero, 289–378. Cuenca: Ediciones de la Universidad de Castilla–La Mancha. Darwish, Ali, and Pilar Orero. 2014. “Rhetorical Dissonance of Unsynchronized Voices: Issues of Voiceover in News Broadcasts.” Babel 60 (2): 129–44. De Toro Santos, Antonio R., and Pablo Cancelo López. 2008. Teoría y práctica de la traducción en la prensa periódica española (1900–1965). Vertere, Monográficos de la revista Hermeneus 10. Soria: Diputación de Soria. Espejo Cala, Carmen. 2013. “Gacetas y relaciones de sucesos en la segunda mitad del XVII: una comparativa europea.” In Géneros editoriales y relaciones de sucesos en la Edad Moderna, edited by Pedro M. Cátedra, 71–88. Salamanca: SEMYR/Universidad de Salamanca. Fox, W. Olivia. 1993. “The Role of Translation and Interpretation in the Shaping of a Reader’s View of World Events – the Press and the Falklands War.” PhD diss., University of Barcelona. Frías Arnés, José Francisco. 2005. “Traducción y periodismo: El País English Edition.” Puentes 5: 39–46. Gallardo Camacho, Jorge. 2005. “El redactor-traductor en los grandes medios de comunicación con mercados multilingües: caso CNN.” Zer. Revista de Estudios de Comunicación 19: 77–87. García González, José Enrique. 1998. “Peculiaridades de la traducción periodística: contextos lingüístico y extralingüístico.” In II Estudios sobre Traducción e Interpretación, vol. III, edited by Leandro Félix Fernández and Emilio Ortega Arjonilla, 981–89. Málaga: Diputación Provincial de Málaga. ———. 2004. “La traducción de los titulares periodísticos del inglés al español: Análisis contrastivo.” In Acerca de la traducción y la interpretación. Proceedings of the II Congreso de traducción e interpretación, edited by Verónica Pacheco Costa, 56–62. CEADE: Sevilla. ———. 2005. “Palabra, espacio y tiempo.” In La traducción periodística, edited by Carmen Cortés Zaborras, and María José Hernández Guerrero, 137–54. Cuenca: Ediciones de la Universidad de Castilla–La Mancha. García López, Rosario. 2005. “El texto de opinión francés. El artículo o comentario: perspectiva traductológica.” In El texto de opinión en la prensa escrita. Su tratamiento en la traducción, edited by Ana Sofía Ramírez, 51–61. Las Palmas de Gran Canaria: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. García Suárez, José Enrique. 2005. “Noticias de agencia: algunos problemas planteados en la traducción español-árabe.” In La traducción periodística, edited by Carmen Cortés Zaborras, and María José Hernández Guerrero, 175–97. Cuenca: Ediciones de la Universidad de Castilla–La Mancha.

397

María José Hernández Guerrero Giersiepen, Cristina. 2005.”El texto de opinión alemán. La columna en la prensa alemana.” In El texto de opinión en la prensa escrita. Su tratamiento en la traducción, edited by Ana Sofía Ramírez, 33–49. Las Palmas de Gran Canaria: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. Giné, Marta, and Yolanda Domínguez, eds. 2004. Prensa hispánica y literatura francesa en el siglo XIX. Pequeñas y grandes ciudades. Lleida: Universitat de Lleida. Giné Marta, and Solange Hibbs, eds. 2010. Traducción y cultura. La literatura traducida en la prensa hispánica (1868–98). Bern: Peter Verlag. González Rodríguez, Antonio. 1999. “La traducción en la prensa: El País 1995.” PhD diss., Complutense University of Madrid. Grupo Iris. 1996. La traducción del texto periodístico. Alicante: Club Universitario. Guerrero Moral, Elvira. 2005. “Traducción en prensa: el caso de la Revista de Prensa de El País.” Puentes 5: 17–27. Guinard, Paul J. 1973. La Presse Espagnole de 1737 à 1791. Paris: Centre de Recherches Hispaniques. Gutiérrez de Terán, Ignacio. 1997. Manual de traducción periodística (del español al árabe): textos e introducción teórica. Madrid: CantArabia. Hernández Guerrero, María José. 1997. “La traducción en la prensa: los artículos de opinión.” In El papel del traductor, edited by Esther Morillas and Juan Pablo Arias, 319–40. Salamanca: Colegio de España. ———. 2004. “La traducción de los titulares periodísticos.” In Le français face aux défis actuels: Histoire, langue et culture, vol. 2, edited by Javier Suso López, and Rodrigo López Carrillo, 271–81. Granada: Universidad de Granada. ———. 2005a. “La traducción de los géneros periodísticos.” In La traducción periodística, edited by Carmen Cortés Zaborras and María José Hernández Guerrero, 89–135. Cuenca: Ediciones de la Universidad de Castilla–La Mancha. ———. 2005b. “Prensa y traducción.” In La traducción periodística, edited by Carmen Cortés Zaborras and María José Hernández Guerrero, 157–75. Cuenca: Ediciones de la Universidad de Castilla–La Mancha. ———. 2006a. “Técnicas específicas de la traducción periodística.” Quaderns: Revista de Traducció 13: 125–39. ———. 2006b. “El recurso a la traducción compilada en la prensa escrita.” In Traducción y multiculturalidad, edited by Pilar Blanco García and Pilar Martino Alba, 365–72. Madrid: Instituto Universitario de Lenguas Modernas y Traductores: Universidad Complutense de Madrid. ———. 2008a. “La traducción periodística en los diarios españoles de información general.” In Actas del III Congreso Internacional de la Asociación Ibérica de Estudios de Traducción e Interpretación: La traducción del futuro: mediación lingüística y cultural en el siglo XXI, vol. 2, edited by Luis Pegenaute et al., 359–68. Barcelona: PPU. ———. 2008b. “La traducción de la información científica en la prensa española: el diario El Mundo.” Sendebar 19: 167–88. ———. 2008c. “Los artículos de opinión traducidos en la prensa escrita: el trasvase transcultural de la opinión.” In La traducción, factor de cambio [Translation, an Agent of Change], edited by María José Hernández Guerrero and Salvador Peña Martín, 93–113. Bern: Peter Lang. ———. 2009. Traducción y periodismo. Bern: Peter Lang. ———. 2010a. “Las noticias traducidas en el diario El Mundo: el trasvase transcultural de la información.” In Translating Information, edited by Roberto A. Valdeón, 51–86. Oviedo: Ediuno. ———. 2010b. “Translated Interviews in Printed Media – A Case Study of the Spanish Daily El Mundo.” Across Languages and Cultures 11 (2): 217–32. ———. 2011a. “Presencia y utilización de la traducción en la prensa española.” Meta 56 (1): 101–18. ———. 2011b. “La traducción de entrevistas en la prensa española. Análisis de una entrevista traducida en el diario El País.” In Traducir en la Frontera [Translating at the Border], edited by Susana Cruces Colado et al., 955–67. Granada: Atrio. ———. 2012a. “La actividad traductora en la prensa escrita: el recurso a la reescritura.” In Telar de traducción especializada, edited by Pilar Martino Alba and Christiane Lebsanft, 69–78. Madrid: Dykinson. ———. 2012b. “La traducción al servicio de una línea editorial: la primavera árabe en el diario El País.” Meta 57 (4): 960–76.

398

Journalistic translation ———. 2013. “Traducción y divulgación científica: Las revistas semanales de la prensa española.” Skopos 3: 63–73. ———. 2015. “La traducción en The Huffington Post.” Hermeneus 17: 111–36. ———. 2016. “Traducción y opinión pública global: el caso de Project Syndicate.” In Traducción, medios de comunicación, opinión pública, edited by María Rosario Martín Ruano and África Vidal Claramonte, 53–72. Granada: Comares. ———. 2017. “Translation in New Independent Online Media: The Case of Mediapart.” Perspectives 25 (2): 294–307. Hernández Hernández, Tania P. 2015. “Traducción y escritura de la primera edición de Le Monde diplomatique en español (1979–1987): agentes, capitales e influencias.” Mutatis Mutandis Revista Latinoamericana de Traducción 8 (2): 529–46. ———. 2017. “Translation, a Hybrid Form of Capital: The Translators of Le Monde diplomatique en español (1979–1988).” Perspectives 25 (3): 509–20. Hernando, Bernardino M. 1999. “Traducción y periodismo o el doble y misterioso escepticismo.” Estudios sobre el mensaje periodístico 5: 129–41. Iturriza, María Gabriela. 2008. “Traducción de la prensa extranjera e intertextualidad en el periodo preindependentista de la Gaceta de Caracas.” TRANS. Revista de Traductología 8: 94–120. Juris, Jeffrey S. 2004. “Indymedia: de la contra información a la utopía informacional.” In La red es de todos: cuando los movimientos sociales se apropian de la red, edited by Víctor Manuel Marí Sáez, 154–77. Madrid: Editorial Popular. Kelly, Dorothy. 2006. “The Translation of the News.” Translation Watch Quarterly 2 (1): 5–6. Lafarga Maduell, Francisco, Concepción Palacios Bernal, and Alfonso Saura Sánchez, eds. 2002. Neoclásicos y románticos ante la traducción. Murcia: Universidad de Murcia. Linder, Daniel. 2014. “La Generación Atrapada: Spain’s Economic Hardships in El País in English and PressEurop EN.” Perspectives 22 (3): 388–403. López Guix, Juan Gabriel. 2005. “Traducir para la prensa escrita: reflexiones de un traductor.” In El texto de opinión en la prensa escrita: Su tratamiento en la traducción, edited by Ana Sofía Ramírez, 105–18. Las Palmas de Gran Canaria: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. Martín Ruano, María Rosario. 2003. “Hacia un análisis de la traducción fragmentada: el caso de las revistas de prensa.” In Actas del I Congreso Internacional de la Asociación Ibérica de Estudios de Traducción e Interpretación, edited by Ricardo Muñoz, 141–60. Granada: AIETI. Martín Ruano, María Rosario, and África Vidal Claramonte, eds. 2016. Traducción, medios de comunicación, opinión pública. Granada: Comares. Navarro, Aura. 2014. “Las intervenciones del sujeto traductor en la Gaceta de Caracas (1808–1822).” PhD diss., Université de Montréal. Orero, Pilar. 2004. “The Pretended Easiness of Voice-over Translation of TV.” The Journal of Specialised Translation 2: 76–96. ———. 2005. “La traducción de entrevistas para voice-over.” In La traducción audiovisual: investigación, enseñanza y profesión, edited by Patrick Zabalbeascoa, Laura Santamaria, and Frederic Chaume, 213–22. Granada: Comares. ———. 2009. “Voice-over in Audiovisual Translation.” In Audiovisual Translation: Language Transfer on Screen, edited by Gunilla Anderman and Jorge Díaz Cintas, 130–9. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Páez Rodríguez, Alba. 2013. “La influencia del inglés y del francés en la prensa femenina publicada en España: la (no) traducción como herramienta ideológica.” In Traducir la Cultura, vol. 8, edited by Emilio Ortega, 1343–58. Granada: Comares. ———. 2015. “Translation and Asymmetry: Denaturalising the Use of English as a Sign in Spanish Women’s Magazines.” Global Journal for Research Analysis 4 (6): 249–50. http://theglobaljournals. com/gra/file. php?val=Ju ne_2015_1435727325__93.pdf. ———. 2016. “Análisis de la (no) traducción en las revistas de moda y belleza españolas desde la teoría del contrapunto: lenguas y capitales en la construcción de un discurso de autoridad.” In Traducción, medios de comunicación, opinión pública, edited by María Rosario Martín Ruano and África Vidal Claramonte, 99–118. Granada: Comares. Paula Batista, Renilse. 2016. “Traducción y periodismo: La identidad brasileña en la prensa digital española El País.” PhD diss., University of Salamanca.

399

María José Hernández Guerrero Pérez González, Luis. 2010.“Ad-hocracies of Translation Activism in the Blogosphere. A Genealogical Case Study.” In Text and Context, edited by Mona Baker, Maeve Olohan, and María Calzada Pérez, 259–87. Manchester: St Jerome. Ramírez, Ana Sofía, ed., 2005a. El texto de opinión de la prensa escrita. Su tratamiento en la traducción. Las Palmas de Gran Canaria: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. ———. 2005b. “El texto de opinión inglés: El editorial del periódico.” In El texto de opinión de la prensa escrita: Su tratamiento en la traducción, edited by Ana Sofía Ramírez, 63–75. Las Palmas de Gran Canaria: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. Reque de Coulon, Ana. 2002. “Análisis de estrategias y procedimientos de traducción utilizados en los títulos de la versión española de Le Monde diplomatique.” Hermeneus 4: 147–59. Sáiz, María Dolores. 1983. Historia del Periodismo en España.1: Los orígenes. El siglo XVIII Madrid: Alianza Editorial. Samaniego Fernández, Eva et al. 2003. “Contexto, cotexto y traducción: los titulares de prensa.” In La traducción y la interpretación en un entorno global, edited by Pilar Castaño Miñambres et al. Madrid: Universidad Europea de Madrid. Edición en CD-ROM. Stinson de Quevedo, Mirta. 2001. “Journalistic Translation: Some Basic Assumptions.” Bitácora: Revista de la Facultad de Lenguas 7 (4): 115–22. ———. 2007. “La traducción periodística – Premisas básicas.” In Traducción periodística y literaria, edited by Guillermo Badenes and Josefina Coisson, 91–7. Córdoba, Argentina: Comunicarte. Taillefer de Haya, Lidia. 2005. “La edición en inglés de un periódico español: Sur in English.” In La traducción periodística, edited by Carmen Cortés Zaborras and María José Hernández Guerrero, 259–87. Cuenca: Ediciones de la Universidad de Castilla–La Mancha. Talens, Manuel. 2010a. “Traducción y compromiso.” In El español, lengua de traducción para la cooperación y el diálogo, edited by Luis González and Pollux Hernúñez, 119–28. Madrid: ESLETRA. http://cvc.cervantes.es/lengua/esletra/pdf/04/016_talens.pdf. ———. 2010b. “The Languages of Tlaxcala: A Short History of a Long Walk.” In Compromiso social y Traducción/Interpretación, edited by Julie Boéri and Carol Maier, 19–24. Granada: ECOS, Traductores e Intérpretes por la Solidaridad. Tapia Sasot de Coffey, María Josefina. 1992. “La traducción en los medios de prensa.” Babel 38 (1): 59–63. Valdeón, Roberto A. 2005a. “The CNNenEspañol News.” Perspectives 13 (4): 255–67. ———. 2005b. “The ‘Translated’ Spanish Service of the BBC.” Across Languages and Cultures 6 (2): 195–220. ———. 2005c. “Media Translation en BBC-Mundo Internet Texts.” Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses, Special Issue on Translation Studies 51: 105–19. ———. 2007a. “Political and Sexist Bias in News Translation: Two Case Studies.” TRANS. Revista de Traductología 11: 231–43. ———. 2007b. “Ideological Independence or Negative Mediation: BBC Mundo and CNNenEspañol’s (Translated) Reporting of Madrid’s Terrorist Attacks.” In Translating and Interpreting Conflict, edited by Myriam Salama-Carr, 99–118. Amsterdam: Rodopi. ———. 2007c. “Translating News from the Inner Circle: Imposing Regularity across Cultures.” Quaderns 14: 155–7. ———. 2008. “Anomalous News Translation: Selective Appropriation of Themes and Texts in the Internet.” Babel 54 (4): 299–326. ———. 2009. “Euronews in Translation: Construction a European Perspective of/for the World.” Forum 7 (1): 123–53. ———, ed. 2010a. Translating Information. Oviedo: Ediuno. ———, ed. 2010b. “Translating Information in the Post-Industrial Society.” Across Languages and Cultures Special Issue 11 (2). ———. 2011. “Enbedding Anglocentric Perceptions of the World: The Falkland-Malvinas Binomial in the News.” Meta 56 (1): 63–80. ———, ed. 2012a. Translation and Journalism. Special Issue of Meta 57 (4). ———. 2012b. “From the Dutch Corantos to Convergence Journalism: The Role of Translation in News Production.” Meta 57 (4): 850–65. ———. 2012c. “Information, Communication, Translation.” In Handbook of Translation Studies 3, edited by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer, 66–72. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

400

Journalistic translation ———. 2013. “Intersemiotic Translations of News Texts: The Case of the Culture Section of El País English Edition.” In Culture and Power: Identity and Identification, edited by Ángel Mateos-Aparicio Martín-Albo and Eduardo de Gregorio-Godeo, 245–58. Newcastle Upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. ———. 2014. “From Adaptation to Appropriation: Framing the World Through News Translation.” Linguaculture 5 (1): 51–62. ———. 2015a. “(Un)stable Sources, Translation and News Production.” Target 27 (3): 440–53. ———. 2015b. “Fifteen Years of Journalistic Translation Research and More.” Perspectives 23 (4): 634– 62. doi:10.1080/0907676X.2015.1057187. ———. 2016a. “Traducción periodística y gatekeeping.” In Traducción, medios de comunicación, opinión pública, edited by María Rosario Martín Ruano and África Vidal Claramonte, 35–51. Granada: Comares. ———. 2016b. “The Construction of National Images Through News Translation.” In Interconnecting Translation Studies and Imagology, edited by Luc Van Doorslaer, Peter Flynn and Joep Leerssen, 219–37. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ———. 2016c. “Translating Stable Sources in Times of Economic Recession: The Paul Krugman’s Columns in the New York Times and El País.” Babel 62 (1): 1–20. ———. 2018. “On the Use of the Term ‘Translation’ in Journalism Studies.” Journalism 19 (2): 252–69. Vella Ramírez, Mercedes, and Ana Belén Martínez López. 2012. “Análisis de estrategias y procedimientos traductológicos utilizados por ‘El País’ en la traducción de títulos de prensa del español al inglés.” Sendebar 23: 177–206. Vidal Claramonte, África. 2012. “El lenguaje de las revistas femeninas españolas: la (no) traducción como ideología.” Meta 57 (4): 1029–45. Vidal, José Manuel. 2005. “Algunas vivencias de un traductor de prensa.” In La traducción periodística, edited by Carmen Cortés Zaborras and María José Hernández Guerrero, 379–90. Cuenca: Ediciones de la Universidad de Castilla–La Mancha.

401

21 TOURISM, TRANSLATION AND ADVERTISING Elizabeth Woodward-Smith

Introduction According to UNWTO (United Nations World Tourism Organization), tourism comprises “the activities of persons travelling to and staying in places outside their usual environment for not more than one consecutive year for leisure, business and other purposes”. The term also refers to the industry providing passenger transport services, vehicle hire, accommodation, food and beverage services, entertainment and conference services, as well as the management of visitors through travel agencies. All this commercial activity is dependent on the promotion or encouragement of visits via different types of discourse present in tourism advertising. Tourism brings material changes to destinations in cultural, social and physical ways in order to accommodate visitors and their needs. One of the necessary adaptations is a linguistic adjustment, in that foreign languages “are considered as basic skills required by the tourist industry for its smooth, efficient running and by tourists for ‘getting by’ successfully” (Phipps 2007, 16). However, and without specifying any country in particular, tourism management recognizes it needs to address a “skills-shortage in languages” and that “to be a good host, these days, is to be able to speak words of welcome – be it on websites, in tourist brochures, and as tour guides – in languages that are comprehensible, and even native to the tourists. To be a good host (. . .) is to also be a translator (16)”. This chapter will consider whether the words of welcome found in interaction with tourists in Spain are mediated adequately through translated discourse. The options for obtaining information today are multiple: guidebooks, leaflets, TV advertisements, magazine articles and websites. In order to promote a destination to possible visitors, just as with other consumer products advertised, the content and form of such sources should be appealing, easy to assimilate, sufficiently informative and, though basically truthful, they also have to be persuasive, projecting a favourable image, and awakening the potential visitor’s curiosity. UNWTO also recommends making such information accessible to users who may have disabilities or special needs, and for this purpose some advice is given in a recent publication (UNWTO Recommendations 2016). The introduction to this manual states that private and public enterprises must deliver “accurate, relevant and timely information to customers, prior to, during and even after the journey”, since ensuring that the information is accessible is the “key to communicating successfully with visitors”. Unfortunately, there is no 402

Tourism, translation and advertising

mention of linguistic accessibility or linguistic quality in translated tourist material, which, in our opinion, are also key to successful communication, since accuracy and relevance are major objectives in translated informative texts. The authors of the publication fail to mention the effect of the frequent mistranslations circulating within the tourism industry. Making faulty translations available to people with special needs is hardly likely to improve accessibility, comprehension or quality. The manual was published with the collaboration of the Spanish organization ONCE, Foundation for Cooperation and Social Inclusion of People with Disabilities, and the European Network for Accessible Tourism (ENAT). Perhaps it would have been beneficial for the tourism industry and for the translating profession to also recommend quality control in cultural and linguistic content. Guidebooks vary in terms of quality and quantity of information; some could be said to follow the nineteenth-century tradition of Baedeker, or the early twentieth-century Michelin Guides, while others such as the modern Lonely Planet Guides are likely to appeal to younger travellers with fewer resources and more practical objectives. They typically contain city maps, historical notes on monuments, their opening times and admission fees, and advice on places to eat. Since such books have to be bought, they are usually acquired after the initial decision on the destination has been taken. Therefore, the preliminary free materials (mainly Internet, but also brochures and leaflets available at travel agencies and official tourism offices in the country of residence), play a major role in persuading and attracting the visitor, or as some sources say “seducing” the potential tourist. Since competition between countries and locations is fierce, the persuasive techniques used have much in common with the advertising of consumer goods. Consequently, this chapter will combine an overview of research into the peculiarities of translation in both tourism and advertising. However, it should be noted that the translation of adverts often involves varying degrees of adaptation from the original, from minor details to practically the whole of the content. The reason for this is that experience has proved that uniform advertising strategies do not work equally well in all countries, languages and cultural contexts. Products fulfilling basic needs may need only slight adaptations to body copy, but products situated higher up in the hierarchy of human needs tend to be culture specific and may, therefore, require more adaptation to particular cultural contexts. Values, attitudes and expectations vary considerably from one human group to another, and, consequently, modern advertising tries to adapt and to keep up to date with cultural idiosyncrasies and sociological change (Woodward and Eynullaeva 2009). The translator involved in producing appropriate advertising body copy may find it is more viable to rewrite the original, while still adhering to the main lines of the commissioning brief, than to try to produce a more faithful translation which contradicts the sociocultural characteristics of the target audience. It could be said, therefore, that translators of tourist texts and those working on advertising texts operate under different conditions; the former are expected to be as faithful as possible to the informative elements in the source text (ST), with its limitations in terms of space and coordination with images, though parenthetical explanations or paraphrasing may be added for clarity in the resulting target text (TT); the latter professionals enjoy more freedom to be creative in adapting the basic line of the advertising brief in order to produce a culturally and linguistically acceptable TT. Both types of translation require a high level of linguistic proficiency in both languages, in addition to broad knowledge of the cultural contexts and customs of the speakers of each of the two languages, but advertising translation also demands mastery of convincing and persuasive discourse (Dávila-Montes 2008). It would be logical to suppose that both kinds of translation are valued for the effort involved in combining cultural sensitivity with accurate linguistic output, but, according to the literature reviewed in this chapter, the professional field of tourist text translation is undervalued, and 403

Elizabeth Woodward-Smith

the multiple examples of mistranslation constitute a source of frustration for translators and linguists in general (Durán Muñoz 2011, 2012). With regard to advertising translation, we have no proof, but we assume that it is valued by marketing and advertising agencies, for the simple reason that publicity campaigns are expensive and can represent a disaster for the brand image if an inappropriate message is associated with it and broadcast on a national or global scale via television and Internet. The repercussions of a failed campaign due to contradictory linguistic and cultural content are more likely to encourage more care being taken to ensure a viable product image and message. However, as we will see below, substandard tourist translation is more common, perhaps because those ‘guilty’ of ordering and producing it think it will suffice and fulfil the objective, because tourists themselves rarely openly complain to their hosts about strange, confusing or inappropriate translations.

Historical perspective on tourism: “Spain is Different” In order to trace Spain’s modern development as an economy dependent on tourism, we must go back some sixty years in history. On the geopolitical front, an alliance had been signed with the US in 1953, and, consequently, bilateral relations were formalized with the arrival of American economic and military aid. In the 1960s General Franco’s regime joined international organisms and this was the beginning of a new period (“apertura”) of economic and diplomatic interaction with the rest of Europe. The most visible effect of this opening up was the development of tourism as the country’s major industry (MNCA). Spain discovered that the country had an unlimited supply of something which sun-starved northern Europeans were happy to pay to come and enjoy: the sunny climate and beautiful (Mediterranean) beaches. If, in addition, the cost was considerably less than in other comparable destinations, then Spain became an excellent holiday option for many millions of ordinary travellers attracted by the “exotic” nature of this unfamiliar place. The economic regeneration of the country was planned together with a series of political measures, one of which was the creation of the Ministry of Information and Tourism which was charged with controlling Spain’s image abroad, promoting Spain as a desirable tourist destination, as well as monitoring its representation in the press, literature, cinema, theatre, television and advertising (MNCA). The famous and highly successful slogan invented by the ministry at this time was “Spain is Different”, which, perhaps due to its ambiguity, as with all effective slogans, is still remembered today. By effective we mean attention-getting, for whatever reason, and above all memorable. Until Spain became a parliamentary democracy, on the death of Franco in 1975 and with the promulgation of the constitution (1978), Spaniards were aware of the ambiguous meaning, and used the slogan, together with a shrug of their shoulders, to ironize about all that was antiquated, illogical or idiosyncratic in their country, in comparison to what they could then see was current in neighbouring countries (Balfour and Quiroga 2007). Official tourism slogans have come and gone since the 1960s, but nothing has had such a profound and long-lasting influence as “Spain is Different”; admittedly, it is difficult to come up with something short, catchy and meaningful. Some slogans, such as the following, had a very short life due to their being either incomprehensible or rather tame: Spain. Everything under the sun. Smile! You are in Spain! Spain marks. Spain is what you want. Spain is what you need. 404

Tourism, translation and advertising

Inevitably, the surge of foreign visitors to Spain brought radical changes in customs, values and society, and the landscape of the former fishing villages of the Mediterranean coast was quickly transformed by mass tourism. Commercial contact with the influx of foreign visitors caused an urgent need for locals with adequate language skills to deal with tourists’ needs. Due to Spain’s virtual closure to the outside world until the normalization of relations in the 1960s, the only foreign language usually taught in Spanish schools had been French, and it must be said that the methods used were both rudimentary and inefficient, producing a lack of communicative competence, and a general (though false) feeling of the inadequacy of Spanish speakers in learning foreign languages. When the tourism boom began, most of the tourists descending on Spain were found to be either native or non-native speakers of English, and so an urgent need arose for English-language skills in the tourism industry. In 1960 official language schools (Escuela Oficial de Idiomas: EOI) were created in Barcelona, Valencia and Bilbao, based on the model of the first such school in Madrid (Escuela Central de Idiomas). In a similar way, the first private tourism school opened in Madrid in 1957, followed by officially recognized public centres (Escuela Oficial de Turismo) in Madrid, and in the rest of Spain from 1963 onwards. According to the Escuela Universitaria de Turismo de Murcia (EUTM), the rapid development of tourism in Spain in the 1960s and the multiplication of jobs in the tourism sector made it necessary to organize and regularize the training of those who would be working in companies and organisms related to the industry. At first, these schools awarded a diploma without official recognition in the education system, but which enabled holders to work as Técnicos en Empresas Turísticas (specialists in tourism). In 1980 this qualification was upgraded to university diploma level with a duration of three years, and from 2010 onwards it is a full four-year university degree. Graduates must be competent in English and either French or German. With regard to the training of professional translators, the university centres (Escuelas Universitarias de Traducción e Interpretación) established in the 1980s offered three-year diploma courses, and in 1991 these studies and centres were transformed into five-year degree courses awarded by faculties of translation and interpreting. In 2010 they were updated as four-year courses in line with the specifications of the Bologna Process for degree awards within the European Higher Education Area. According to a historical outline supplied by the University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria (ULPGC), the relatively recent creation of translation and interpreting degree studies is due to the fact that until the 1980s translation was often carried out by laypersons, who, though they may have had linguistic skills, did not have specific training in translation techniques, nor necessarily sufficient knowledge of the cultures involved. The resulting dubious standard of translation brought disrepute to anyone who might have been working in the field, whatever their capability. In any case, would-be translators had to train themselves with limited official resources available. The only training they could find was from the EOI, but such schools were never intended or able to train competent translators, since they provided only linguistic knowledge without the cultural and specialized skills necessary for translation tasks (ULPGC). There was growing social demand for professional translators able to guarantee a reputable end product, and today those trained in Spanish faculties can become sworn translators certified by the Spanish foreign ministry. Universities situated in tourist destinations were further stimulated by the growing demand for linguistic mediation in commercial, maritime and touristic fields. This was particularly true in the Canary Islands, given their geographical situation at the confluence of commercial activity between Europe, Africa and America (ULPGC), but the development of tourism in other areas of Spain, especially, though not exclusively, on the Mediterranean coast, also encouraged the creation of faculties providing the required training. Today there are public and private faculties all over 405

Elizabeth Woodward-Smith

Spain offering translation and interpreting degrees, as well as combination degrees in translation with interlinguistic mediation, modern languages with translation, translation and interpretation with applied languages, or translation with intercultural communication. Forty years on, the opportunities for appropriate training are now much greater, and there is ever growing demand for specialized translation services. However, as revealed in the following paragraphs, not all specialities enjoy the same prestige.

Research issues in tourism translation A quick glance at a handful of Spanish translating agencies advertising their services via Internet reveals that the types of specialist translation usually offered are technical, scientific, legal, economic, medical, pharmaceutical, or for web pages. We find truisms such as “a good translation should never seem like a translation”, and to this end, customers are assured that not only are translations into English carried out by native English-speakers, but that they are also carefully checked by specialists in the field, such as lawyers or engineers. Tariffs vary according to the presumed difficulty of the subject matter, as well as word-count and urgency. Some Internet offers combine automatic translation with human translators, with the tariff varying according to how much human input takes place. On one such web page, the author of this chapter consulted the conditions for a hypothetical thousand-word text in the category advertised as travel and tourism, from Spanish to English. The result consisted of three offers: Basic (automatic translation and rapid human check), ready within twenty-four hours; Professional (one human translator and quality control), ready in two working days; Premium (two human translators and quality control), ready in two-and-a-half working days. The tariff increased from the Basic option, doubling for the Professional one, and tripling for the Premium option. These conditions were found to be the same for all the thirty-eight types offered in this particular company, except for the category of legal documents/contracts, which was the most expensive variety in the Professional and Premium options. What this informal research reveals is that basic, inexpensive and rapid translations can be obtained if customers are willing to accept minimum human intervention, and if a speedy delivery is important, although the websites in question do warn that the most economic option is not recommended for publication. Judging from the high incidence of faulty tourist translations observed by linguists and translators, it can only be assumed that this particular type of client does not value accuracy, prioritizes speed and minimum cost, and that a very basic, though sometimes misleading, level of communication with the prospective tourist is considered sufficient. The proliferation of inadequate, confusing and non-native-sounding translations continues to give rise to a large number of scholarly publications on the topic, some of which will be referred to in the following pages. This begs the question of who actually reads and acts on a translated text. A literary text in translation will, for example, receive reviews from literary critics, and its success as a convincing representation of the original work will be reflected in sales, from the point of view of the publisher, and prestige in terms of the translator’s skill. For this reason, literary translation is usually subjected to a high degree of quality control, with translators often specializing in an author’s works, and consequently acquiring the prestige of being considered the foreign author’s voice in a particular language. This is not always true, however with regard to children’s literature where a speedy delivery to bookshops is often a commercial priority, rather than quality translation (Luna and Montero 2006; Woodward-Smith 2011). Nonetheless, returning to the matter of the addressees of translated discourse, mistranslations in medical or legal texts, for example, are detected by the final recipients, (doctors and lawyers, and fortunately not patients or litigators) before any transcendental action is taken or 406

Tourism, translation and advertising

harm done. Tourism texts, however, do not have to pass the test of expert final recipients since they apparently pass directly to the public domain where they are consumed by tourists, most of whom are not specialists in the art, history, gastronomy or cultural quirks of the country they are being invited to visit, though they easily detect grammatical errors, or odd turns of phrase in their native language. The effect on potential visitors when they encounter a faulty or strange piece of translated information is probably a mixture of surprise, incomprehension, amusement and misinformation, but they have no recourse to complaint, and if they are likely to visit the country or region anyway, they trust to being able to resolve their perplexity in situ. This situation hardly encourages high standards for the translation of texts in the domain of tourism, and those guilty of offering partial or confusing information range from small businesses to official organisms, from unintentionally amusing signs posted in hotel rooms, or strange-sounding menus, to peculiar explanations of local customs, or simply non-translation of idiosyncratic elements. It is tempting to think that the cheapest version possible is often the preferred option, precisely because high standards have not been demanded. Much needs to be done, therefore, to impress on businesses and organisms in the tourism sector that they owe it to visitors to inform them as accurately as possible through translated material, and that though their economic results might not reflect this qualitative improvement in the supply of information, they should be aware that foreign tourists are more likely to take away with them a positive impression of their enterprise, together with the country, its people and culture, enabling them to recommend them to others. In terms of training, translators need to be competent in many skills, and perhaps the speciality of translation for the tourism industry ought to figure more prominently on the curriculum of university degree curricula, hopefully producing a roll-over effect on supply and demand. Kelly (2005, 158) cites a survey carried out in Granada which revealed that none of the tourism entities consulted used professional translators for their promotional material, but resorted to individuals with varying levels of knowledge of foreign languages, people from marketing departments, or receptionists. In all cases it was an invisible activity, impossible to attribute to any concrete source. The author highlights the fact that the tourism sector willingly invests in professional services for designing and producing advertising, but seems oblivious to the fact that translations are being supplied by unqualified sources, with the resulting substandard, and frequently incomprehensible and/or hilarious, informative texts. An insightful document produced by the Directorate-General for Translation in the European Commission differentiates the skills and tasks involved in web translation as opposed to the translation of legal texts produced by the EU, since the latter demands “extreme precision and absolute concordance between the different language versions”, while the former requires “readability, brevity, and intercultural comprehension” (EU 2009, 3). Since the web is a primary information source when citizens are actively looking for specific information, the EU Directorate-General attaches great importance to providing relevant information which must be digestible and should address the public’s concerns: “its language must mirror the language of the general public. Otherwise, people will look for information on other sites, which may be inaccurate or even hostile to the EU” (EU 2009, 8). Unfortunately the ethics supporting this interaction with the public are lacking in a significant number of tourism promotion sites on the Internet, published by private companies and even official organisms such as tourist boards or autonomous regional governments. All those participating in the touristic translation process should realize, as the European Commission does, that if they do not give prospective clients or visitors what they are looking for, or if they provide only partial or erroneous information, people may look elsewhere, or lose interest. The rest of the EU document on web translation is useful reading for all web translators, dealing with such topics as terminology, style, cultural 407

Elizabeth Woodward-Smith

habits, or localizing to match reader attitudes. The document argues that an adequate finished product is achieved through careful and sensitive trediting on the part of the translating team, who obviously enjoy a significant advantage in that they have the unreserved support of their superiors, the Directorate-General, which is not always the case with translators working individually under pressure to produce results as quickly and as economically as possible. While recognizing that legal, medical or technical texts are important categories enjoying a constant demand for translation, a country such as Spain, which is highly dependent on tourism as a part of its economy, ought to hold translation of tourism material in high esteem, but this is not always the case. The tourism translation sector is greatly undervalued in Spain, in spite of this type of translation being much more complicated than is generally assumed. There seems to be an assumption that because tourism is connected to leisure, and not something more ‘serious’ or life-threatening such as medicine or law, it does not require much effort, precision or attention. In fact it requires knowledge and sensitivity in diverse cultural domains including history, architecture, art, gastronomy and many others. One of the aims of this chapter is to see how tourism translation has been approached by translators, and how it is valued by the industry today. The second aim, as the title suggests, is to examine how advertising relates to translators and the implementation of their skills in Spain. Both tourism and advertising discourse share similarities in that the language aims at being persuasive. They are, however, dealt with in entirely different ways in terms of techniques. It has already been mentioned that translators of travel guides and tourism web pages need many skills and varied knowledge. Indeed cultural references are the trickiest part of tourism texts, but translators would also benefit from knowing the cultural profile of the presumed reader, thus being able to provide an adequate approach to cultural content. In addition translators need sensitivity to decide what requires translating, and what does not. Part of this last skill includes handling proper names, but according to Harris (2004, 74) this is a relatively neglected topic in translation teaching, since it is often assumed that they do not need to be translated. On the one hand, he notes, there is an accepted rule that there are ‘famous names’, with long-established variants in every language, and on the other, there are names of minor importance which should not be tampered with. Harris maintains that in practice proper names are such a real problem for translators that they are the subject of many research papers, informal internet discussions and monographs (74). In tourism translation proper names obviously occupy a prominent place, carrying a large part of the information for potential visitors, and there is a dilemma for the translator over how familiar the addressee can safely be presumed to be with all the names referring to places, people, food and events characteristic of such discourse. There must obviously be a balance between translating absolutely every name, and not translating any. It often happens, for example, that first-time visitors to Santiago de Compostela initially fail to make the connection between Saint James, the biblical figure in whose honour the city developed, and the city’s name because tourist leaflets omit this fact. However, prospective visitors must also decipher garbled informative texts such as the following: The Way of Saint James has been, and keeps on being, definitely, the most ancient route, more busy and more celebrated of the old continent. Santiago also has shared the attraction of the hikers and walkers of all time but, besides, has created a route, has done a Way. To Santiago and to Galicia can arrive of a lot of ways. But the best form to come is by the Way of Saint James. (Camino de Santiago 2018) 408

Tourism, translation and advertising

Admittedly, in spite of the faulty syntax and lexical choices, the general meaning filters through. However, the worrying aspect is that this extract is taken from an official web page commissioned by a tourist board depending on a regional government (Xunta de Galicia), also carrying the logotypes of the European Union, and other official sponsors. It demonstrates the lack of attention to detail, and inadequate quality control, often found in this field of translation. We can only assume it was done by a person (or a machine) without the necessary skills. We are tempted to ask if nobody proof-reads the final version before it is published. It may be the result of cost-cutting, of finding the cheapest way possible of getting the job done quickly, since no competent professional translator would submit such a piece of work. This appears to respond to the argument that the final addressee will manage to understand anyway, is unable to protest, and so even an amateur version will suffice. Yet the impression left by careless translation of tourist information, even if it is not vital, is always negative. Foreigners reading faulty translations may have the impression that Spanish translators know little about mediating between cultures, and will be unaware of how the translation came to be published. This is frustrating for qualified translators who are inevitably sharing the blame for the shoddy work of others. Valdeón (2009) deals precisely with a sample of regional tourist board texts focusing on the relevance of the information they contain, cultural assumptions, the communicative purpose of such texts, and, inevitably, their shortcomings. He concludes that the production of such materials promoted by official public bodies would benefit from a multidisciplinary approach, combining the skills and knowledge of specialists from different fields. Fuentes Luque (2005) also addresses the issue of how Spain’s image is projected abroad, suggesting that translators should not be merely linguistic mediators, but intercultural analysts with a role in creating an image of their country. The author points out that all too often the resulting foreign language campaigns rely too heavily on translating linguistic content, with greater or lesser success, and omitting key factors concerning the potential addressees of institutional advertising. Studies and academic papers on different examples of unacceptable translations are continually submitted to journals and conferences, but the message does not seem to be reaching those businesses and organisms responsible for publishing the substandard tourist material, probably because they do not access such sources. Martín Sánchez (2011, 571) comes to the conclusion that tourism translation should be considered a speciality, since over the last decades it has become increasingly common to find a growing body of bibliography on the language of tourism. Specialized language, she states, shares certain characteristics with ordinary language, such as morphology, syntax or word formation, but a specialized variety also has its own terminology, as well as particular syntactic, stylistic, pragmatic and functional characteristics. Fields such as geography, economy, sociology and psychology contribute components to the content and purpose of tourism texts, thus obliging the translator to be aware of multiple aspects, all of which implies that tourism translation ought to be classed as a speciality, if only for the fact that it covers many interrelated disciplines, rather than a particular discipline in depth. Durán Muñoz (2012) treats tourist translation as specialized discourse and suggests possible ways of improving the quality of these texts. The term “quality” has different meanings for different authors and sources, and while there are organisms which have published norms concerning quality and codes of practice in translation services, the meaning of “quality” is often closely related to “adequacy” (104). This implies that the target text should fit the target culture so that there is communicative equivalence between the source text and the final result, with both texts functioning in the same way. Adequacy, like appropriateness, is a dynamic concept, adapting itself to the translation brief. In order to produce quality, the translator needs to bear in mind the communicative context, the addressee, and the pragmatic objective. The 409

Elizabeth Woodward-Smith

author sums up the question of adequacy and quality by stating that readers should not notice any difference between the translated text and a similar one published in their own language, except for the obvious references to the foreign culture. Nobs Federer (2006) chose a suggestive title for her analysis of the translation of tourist leaflets, questioning the level of quality demanded by tourists. She deals with the parameters which should be fulfilled by a translation, namely acceptability, adequacy and efficiency, as well as the right combination of functionality and faithfulness to the source text. Her survey of German-speaking visitors to Granada examined their expectations regarding tourist brochures and leaflets translated into their language from Spanish. Although the survey was on a very small scale, and those consulted were not chosen at random, it did reveal some interesting indications concerning the reception of tourist discourse in translation. The author found that the tourists’ main concern was to receive information, followed by the stimulation of their interest; they were less responsive to the advertising of services and facilities. As to the form, more than two thirds did not notice anything odd in the language and style of the translations. However, the interviewees varied in age, level of education, length of time in Spain, and number of previous visits, and so according to these variables some of them did notice oddities or defects in the translation while others were less sensitive. Those German-speakers with the highest level of studies were the most demanding, being most annoyed by grammatical errors, unusual style, spelling mistakes and, in general, a lack of comprehensibility. The author concludes that the translation of tourist leaflets should be carried out by professionals to ensure quality and so that addressees do not tire and give up reading the text due to the multiple errors it contains. When a brochure or leaflet is discarded because it is virtually incomprehensible, or even annoying, it is not a cost-effective method of promoting tourism and defeats its own aim. Another interesting survey was carried out by Soto Almela (2013) with regard to the Spanish-English translation of cultural terms in tourism texts and the reception of this information by English-speakers. This author confirms the general tendency of low esteem for the genre of tourist translation, and considers that the cultural and linguistic mediation carried out in the tourism industry does not reach acceptable levels because the translation skills required are usually underestimated, with the result that poorly qualified people submit translations of dubious quality, containing linguistic errors and in which cultural concepts are frequently incomprehensible for visitors. The author’s aim was to obtain data concerning the priorities of a group of “Anglophone users” with regard to the translation of cultural terms found in tourist brochures describing the Murcia region (235). The objective was to ascertain the understanding by the addressees of tourist brochures of certain cultural terms presented to them using different translation techniques: (1) Domestication and foreignization; (2) Explicitness; and (3) Omission. For this purpose he drew up a survey which he used with twenty-eight Englishspeakers, although he recognized that the scale was very small and the individuals were not chosen at random. However, taking into account that it is very often difficult to have access to a large number of foreign visitors willing to collaborate when they arrive on holiday with the intention of relaxing, the survey makes up for its modest scale in terms of the depth of preparation involved in designing the detailed items it contained. From authentic tourist publications in circulation the author extracted ten cultural terms likely to cause comprehension difficulties for foreign visitors (and possibly, we might add, for Spanish natives from other parts of the country): zarangollo, paparojotes, galán de noche, Caballos del Vino, Bando de la Huerta, etc. Given that the original texts varied as to which of the translation techniques for such terms had been used, Soto Almelo also provided versions with the other techniques for each example taken from the brochures. In this way, the addressees of the survey were asked to choose which of the options brought them closer to understanding the cultural concept: the 410

Tourism, translation and advertising

one used by the publishers or one of the other possibilities added by the researcher, although they were unaware of the manipulation carried out. The results showed that, with regard to cultural terms, the translations published by official organisms in the Murcia region did not fulfil their informative function, since the cultural content of such terms was not clearly transmitted in the target culture, and, therefore, the addressees preferred the researcher’s manipulated options using different translation techniques. The author concludes that this modest experiment points to the fact that more research is needed on how tourism publications are received by visitors and on how effective they are as communicative instruments. The syllabus for tourism translation made available by Serrano Lucas (2012) on the Open Courseware platform of her university allows us to confirm some of the points dealt with so far in this chapter. Firstly, the content of tourist texts must be reformulated, taking into account the function of the original text, and proper names need to be handled with care, adjusting the strategy in each particular case (3). Serrano reminds us that when a tourism text is translated, automatically the addressee changes. The author illustrates this fact with a clear example, taken from Fischer (2000): if a leaflet promoting San Sebastián to Spanish natives says “Escápese hacia el norte” (Escape to the north), readers in a country to the north of Spain will not be attracted to this destination, since they are already in the north, and the translator’s reformulation will have to take this into account (5). Secondly, Serrano discusses the poor quality of many tourism translations, placing the blame on the lack of professionalization and inexperience of those carrying out this work, in combination with tight deadlines, poor remuneration, and the low esteem with which it is considered by clients in the tourism sector (7). Apart from being experts on many related topics, tourism translators also need to be aware of register. Lorenzi Zanoletty (2005) carried out an analysis of tourism texts of varied types and found that such texts tend to include examples of colloquial language, associated with the street language of young people, rather than an educated or more standard register, especially when the content is related to leisure, cultural events and eating out. So as to maintain the pragmatic implications of colloquial language, and for the resulting text to be acceptable to target readers, the author comes to the conclusion that translators often have to carry out an intercultural adaptation, thus acting as creators of tourist texts in the target language, localizing their version to adapt it to the language usage of potential readers (184). An article by Suau Jiménez (2012) on the reception of tourist advertising pays special attention to institutional websites, which, as we saw above, are often guilty of publishing badly translated information. The author refers to the contemporary tourist as “el turista 2.0”, by which she means that travellers increasingly manage their own trips through Internet sites, rather than more traditional channels, and so websites have acquired much more importance in recent years. It is, therefore, important to apply “specific linguistic and visual mechanisms and strategies” so as to fulfil the persuasive objective of tourism websites (143). The article refers to the interlinguistic differences between English and Spanish, and the underlying sociocultural context, which means that rhetorical and interpersonal functions are realized in different ways in each language, and that when dealing with persuasive and descriptive discourse on tourism websites, it is important to take this into account in the creation and translation of the content, in order for the end product to be considered of sufficient quality and accuracy (152). Postigo (2007) believes that the importance of tourism in Spain should place the translation of touristic texts in the same category as that of legal, socio-economic or technical ones (319). The author carries out an analysis of three kinds of texts related to tourism: electronic sources compiled by regional and local government bodies, and the state chain of hotels; documents used by companies in their dealings with consumers purchasing leisure and tourism activities and services; and miscellaneous texts informing about Spanish culture, habits and heritage 411

Elizabeth Woodward-Smith

(321). Part of her research is concerned with the legal conditions attached to hotel reservations and package holidays published by Spanish websites. Although the translations she analyzes are generally acceptable, she finds slight nuances which can cause ambiguity, or syntactic differences which can lead to different interpretations and misunderstandings, leading in turn to legal and contractual disputes (324). In her conclusions she emphasizes that properly qualified professional translators must be present in the tourist industry in order to facilitate communication and to mediate between cultures, “yet Spanish companies and institutions are not fully conscious of that need” (328).

Research issues in advertising translation An overview of research published on the translation of advertising does not reveal the same level of frustration as in commentaries on the mistranslations abounding in the tourism industry. In general, authors analyze techniques used to produce successful adverts, or less successful ones, suggesting alternatives, and discussing the difficulties involved in cultural transfer. Cómitre Narváez (2002), for example, deals with how optimal communicative effectiveness can be achieved via strategic use of techniques in order to fulfil the persuasive objective of advertising. Localization in the translation of advertising texts is a necessity, rather than an option. In a comprehensive article, De Mooij (2014) describes the translation of advertising and the multiple problems it involves. She subtitles the article, significantly, as “Painting the Tip of an Iceberg”, remarking that “advertising is not made of words, but made of culture” (180), and concludes that Anglo-European bias has meant that attention has until recently been centred on body copy on the assumption that as a written text it can be translated. This, however, is not necessarily possible, since culture is now understood to influence people’s perception, memory and communication styles. Her recommendation is that “if advertising is translated at all, the translator should closely co-operate with the copywriter/art director team and not only translate, but also advise about culture-specific aspects of both languages” (196). The article referred to in the previous paragraph is part of a monographic issue of the international journal on advertising translation (The Translator 10 (2): 2004). The articles published in this issue, later published online (2014), deal with, for example, the evolution of translation theory with regard to the particular challenges posed by advertising translation (Munday 2014). An article by Ho (2014) adds another dimension to the text transfer and cultural adaptation strategy of advertising translation, proposing conversion between “different mindsets, characterized by different kinds of cultural psychology”. The author suggests that in this type of translation “the strategy of ‘intentional betrayal’ [. . .] often achieves excellent results”. A further article included in the journal issue examines how the same brand and product have been adapted to suit the domestic needs of consumers in distinct cultural settings in Europe, Asia and South America (Millán-Varela 2014). The author’s analysis of this example of advertising discourse shows how a combination of specific local needs and the company’s global aspirations has shaped the advertising, focusing not only on the body copy but on culture and ideology, as well as visual and semiotic elements (see also Corpas Pastor et al. 2002). With regard to the globalization and adaptation of screen advertisements, Valdés Rodríguez (2001, 2007) and Valdés Rodríguez and Fuentes Luque (2008) explore, among other elements, the narrative coherence, adequacy, and cultural acceptability of audiovisual translation, in which adaptations must take into account many other factors apart from the actual body copy, such as portraying relevant character types uttering meaningful messages for the target audience. In our postmodern world, advertising involves hyper-textuality and multimodality, 412

Tourism, translation and advertising

aiming to sell not only products but also ways of life (Calzada Pérez 2005). Translation studies should therefore focus research on both printed advertising texts and audiovisual messages. Occasionally, successful translation businesses give insights into what constitutes good practice in the marketing of products in foreign languages. One such example was provided in an interview with a professional translator about his experience in translating marketing content into Spanish (Smartling 2015). García-Arista, the interviewee, confirms that the best campaigns are those that balance global and local aspects of marketing a particular product, and that consumers tend to believe positive clichés about themselves: “Spain is no exception to the rule. Flattery worked well”. He also points out that Spanish-speaking countries must not be lumped together linguistically nor contextually: What can be considered polite or neutral in one variant of Spanish may be inappropriate in other [sic], and the countries in the client’s list often encompass a wide range of varieties. Neutral Spanish is an attempt made by translators to select words that would be understood or best suited to the widest possible international target audience. It’s a cost-effective solution (. . .), but it works better in academic or technical texts. When the text is more casual, as it happens with marketing content, neutral Spanish poses a greater challenge to the translator. (Smartling 2015) Regarding literal versus more meaningful translation, García-Arista believes that a literal translation in marketing leads inevitably to “a complete loss of effectiveness”. Copywriting is such a dynamic activity that new terms are coined continuously while old ones are abandoned, requiring the translator to work with a constantly changing frame of reference. Relevant topics must be researched in order to bridge the cultural gap since this is “the key of context-aware translation” (Smartling 2015). Getting the meaning right is not enough: the target audience has to feel that the message, presented in the kind of language they are familiar with, is meant for them. This requirement is pertinent, of course, to both advertising and tourism translation except that in the case of the latter, clients need to be encouraged to demand better standards, and to be prepared to invest in good quality translation carried out by professionals.

Future directions Enríquez Aranda (2009) reflects on tourism translation and the appropriate training of university graduates in Spain. She maintains that although tourism is of vital importance to the Spanish economy, and though texts on tourism are widely used as practice material in degree courses, there seems to be little research into the precise nature of the professional activity taking place. She asks if it is general, or is it in fact specialized translation, and how should it be approached (and encouraged, perhaps) in translation and interpreting faculties? One possible future direction could be to promote such research in the hope that by focusing on this particular specialization, a more visible niche can be created for an important aspect of the tourism industry. There can be no doubt that a visitor’s first impressions of a new country and culture are perceived through a linguistic filter which can be more or less transparent, depending on the quality of the translation supplied in response to the tourist’s needs. Fuentes Luque (2017) reflects that it is difficult to know how much business is lost to the travel industry through not informing foreign visitors adequately in their own linguistic and cultural frames of reference. Perhaps more surveys could be carried out on incoming tourists to find out how well informed they are about their destination, how they acquired such information, and if they 413

Elizabeth Woodward-Smith

encountered contradictions. The author reasons that quality tourism requires quality products, and therefore positive satisfaction levels can only be achieved by providing correct and appropriate translations of all the texts tourists are likely to encounter before and during their stay in Spain. A concerted effort needs to be made to promote more awareness of the importance of accurate and culturally adequate translations on the part of businesses, large and small, and especially official organisms at all levels. The latter have a moral obligation to lead the way and set an example, but first they need to be made aware of the situation. To this end, there is a need to carry out more research on the standard of the translations supplied to tourists, their effect on visitors’ perceptions of the services offered, and ways in which the final result can be improved. However, it is not enough to publish such findings in academic settings and specialized journals, and much less merely as anecdotal evidence. The problems detected should be brought directly to the attention of the tourism industry itself, and especially official tourist boards, a task which could be aided by professional associations such as ASETRAD (Spanish association of translators, editors and interpreters) or ANETI (Association of Translation and Interpreting Companies). Faulty translations reflect negatively on the profession as a whole, and if tourism translation is to be dignified as an essential quality product, just as important as excellent food and accommodation, individual translators will need to make an effort to combine forces and make their observations known on a general scale to those who can influence policy. The fact that most translators consider themselves ‘freelance’, working generally in an isolated way, means that they are unlikely to make a public nuisance of themselves by protesting at the flawed and misleading translations which abound in tourist areas and on Internet. Nevertheless, quality is unlikely to improve if it is not demanded by translation professionals. Finally, an initiative undertaken by the Spanish secretary of state for tourism, the Comprehensive National Tourism Plan (PNIT) 2012–2015, states, among other objectives, that it is essential for there to be better coordination between all the participants in the construction of Spain’s brand image, that tourism is a key sector in this initiative, and that there is a marketing strategy for strengthening Spain’s brand image. The plan states that “todos los recursos y estrategias deberán pivotar en torno a la figura del cliente”, (all resources and strategies should be focused on the client). We could argue that the translation of tourist material plays a key role mediating between the destination and the client, that professional translators are thus participants in the marketing process, and that more positive results could be achieved if their work were recognized as an economically viable speciality.

Recommended reading Cómitre Narváez, Isabel, and José MaríaValverde Zambrana. 2014. “How to Translate Culture-Specific Items: A  Case Study of Tourist Promotion Campaign by Turespaña.” The Journal of Specialised Translation 21: 71–112. Culture-specific items (CSI), a source of frequent mistranslations, omissions and misunderstandings, are the focus of this article on tourist texts. The authors present a review of the theoretical framework dealing with cultural aspects. They examine possible procedures for translating CSIs, taking into account external and internal constraints, and illustrate their arguments with reference to the Spain marks publicity campaign. Fuentes Luque, Adrián. 2016. “Branding and Selling a Country Through Translated Tourism Advertising: Spain’s Image.” Revista de Lenguas para fines Específicos 22 (2): 84–103. This article combines the topics of tourism and advertising, dealing with the problem of projecting the desired image in translated texts, while avoiding stereotypes and acting as cultural mediator. Valdés Rodríguez, M. Cristina. 2004. La traducción publicitaria: Comunicación y cultura (Aldea Global). Valecia: Publicacions de la Universitat de Valencia.

414

Tourism, translation and advertising This work brings together advertising and communication between cultures by analyzing adverts transposed to another language. Via concrete examples the author examines the different options for dealing with the multiple difficulties of this field of specialized translation, making for a comprehensive manual for both experienced translators and students of translation studies.

References Adab, Beverly, and Cristina Valdés, eds. 2004. The Translator. Studies in Intercultural Communication 10 (2): 161–77. Introduction to Key Debates in the Translation of Advertising Material. Taylor and Francis Online. www.tandfonline.com/toc/rtrn20/10/2?nav=tocList. Balfour, Sebastian, and Alejandro Quiroga. 2007. The Reinvention of Spain: Nation and Identity Since Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Calzada Pérez, María. 2005.  “Proactive Translatology vis a vis Advertising  Messages.” Meta 50 (4). doi:10.7202/019912ar. Camino de Santiago. 2018. “The Way of Saint James. I Want Galicia, I Want Camino.” Xunta de Galicia. www.caminodesantiago.gal/en/inicio. Cómitre Narváez, Isabel. 2002. “Contraintes et normes de traduction du texte publicitaire: un compromis stratégique.” Trans 6: 161–77. Corpas Pastor, Gloria, Adela Martínez García, María Carmen, and Amaya Galván, eds. 2002. En torno a la traducción-adaptación del mensaje publicitario. Málaga: Universidad de Málaga. Dávila-Montes, José. 2008. La traducción de la persuasión publicitaria [The translation of persuasion in advertising]. New Cork/Ontario: Edwin Mellen Press. De Mooij, Marieke. 2014. “Translating Advertising: Painting the Tip of an Iceberg.” The Translator: Studies in Intercultural Communication 10 (2): 179–98. Durán Muñoz, Isabel. 2011. “Tourist Translations as a Mediation Tool: Misunderstandings and Difficulties.” Cadernos de Tradução 1 (27): 29–49. ———. 2012. “Caracterización de la traducción turística: Problemas, dificultades y posibles soluciones.” Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 7: 103–13. Enríquez Aranda, María Mercedes. 2009. Sobre el discurso turístico y la traducción: A propósito de la obra de Marie-Ange Bougnot: Le Discours Touristique ou la réactivation du locus amoenus. Granada: Comares. EU. 2009. “Web Translation as a Genre.” European Commission Directorate-General for Translation. www.termcoord.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Web_translation_as_a_genre.pdf. EUTM. “Escuela Universitaria de Turismo. Historia.” www.um.es/web/turismo/contenido/centro/ conocenos/historia. Fischer, Martin B. 2000. “La traducción inversa de textos turísticos como ejercicio para fomentar la competencia lingüística.” ELE Espéculo. http://webs.ucm.es/info/especulo/ele/alcala.html. Fuentes Luque, Adrián, ed. 2005. La traducción en el sector turístico. Granada: Editorial Atrio. ———. 2017. “An Approach to Analysing the Quality of Menu Translations in Southern Spain Restaurants.” Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 38 (2): 177–88. Harris, Brian. 2004. “The Translation of Names.” In A New Spectrum of Translation Studies, edited by José María Bravo, 73–92. Valladolid: Universidad de Valladolid. Ho, George. 2014. “Translating Advertisements Across Heterogeneous Cultures.” The Translator: Studies in Intercultural Communication 10 (2): 221–43. Kelly, Dorothy. 2005. “Lest Periko Ortega give you a sweet ride . . . o la urgente necesidad de profesionalizar la traducción en el sector turístico: Algunas propuestas para programas de formación.” In La traducción en el sector turístico, edited by Adrián Fuentes Luque, 155–70. Granada: Editorial Atrio. Lorenzi Zanoletty, René. 2005. “Del registro al género: Problemas de traducción de expresiones coloquiales en textos específicos del sector turístico.” Quaderns de Filología. Estudis Lingüístics X: 173–86. Luna Alonso, Ana, and Silvia Montero Küpper, eds. 2006. Tradución e política editorial de literatura infantil e xuvenil. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. Martín Sánchez, Teresa. 2011. “Dificultades de traducción en textos turísticos.” In Del texto a la lengua: La aplicación de los textos a la enseñanza-aprendizaje del español L2-LE, edited by Javier de Santiago Guervós, Hanne Bongaerts, Jorge J. Sánchez Iglesias, and Marta Seseña Gómez, 571–83. Salamanca: Asociación para la Enseñanza del Español como Lengua Extranjera.

415

Elizabeth Woodward-Smith Millán-Varela, Carmen. 2014. “Exploring Advertising in a Global Context. Food for Thought.” The Translator: Studies in Intercultural Communication 10 (2): 245–67. MNCA. “Spain Is Different: Tourism and apertura in 1960s Spain.” Museo Nacional Centro de Arte Reina Sofía. www.museoreinasofia.es/sites/default/files/salas/informacion/425_eng_web.pdf. Munday, Jeremy. 2014. “Advertising: Some Challenges to Translation Theory.” The Translator: Studies in Intercultural Communication 10 (2): 199–219. Nobs Federer, Marie-Louise. 2006. La traducción de folletos turísticos ¿Qué calidad demandan los turistas? Albolote, Granada: Comares. Phipps, Alison. 2007. Learning the Arts of Linguistic Survival. Languaging, Tourism, Life. Tourism and Cultural Change Series: 10. Clevedon: Channel View (Multilingual Matters). PNIT. “Comprehensive National Tourism Plan 2012–2015.” Ministry of Energy, Tourism and the Digital Agenda. www.minetad.gob.es/turismo/en-US/PNIT/Paginas/que-es-PNIT.aspx. Postigo Pinazo, Encarnación. 2007. “The Language of Tourism/Leisure: The Translation in English and Spanish of Documents related to Leisure Activities.” In Proceedings of the Maastricht Session of the 4th International – Lódz Duo Colloquium on Translation and Meaning, Part 7, edited by Marcel Thelen and Barbara Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, 319–29. Maastricht: Maastricht School of International Communication. www.uma.es/hum892/Publicaciones/Postigo_2007g.pdf. Serrano Lucas, Lucía-Clara. 2012. “La traducción de los textos turísticos.” Tema 3. Traducción para el turismo y el ocio I (Francés). Universidad de Murcia: Open Courseware. http://ocw.um.es/ humanidades/traduccion-para-el-turismo-y-el-ocio. Smartling. 2015. “How to Translate Marketing Content into Spanish.” January 2, 2015. www.smartling. com/blog/translating-marketing-content-to-spanish/. Soto Almela, Jorge. 2013. “La traducción de términos culturales en el contexto turístico español-inglés: recepción real en usuarios anglófonos.” Quaderns. Revista de Traducció 20: 235–50. Suau Jiménez, Francisca. 2012. “El turista 2.0 como receptor de la promoción turística: estrategias lingüísticas e importancia de su estudio.” Pasos. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural 10 (4): 143–53. ULPGC. “Historia de la Facultad de Traducción e Interpretación de la Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria.” www.fti.ulpgc.es/facultad_historia.php. UNWTO. 2016. “Recommendations on Accessible Information in Tourism.” World Tourism Organization. http://cf.cdn.unwto.org/sites/all/files/docpdf/accesibilidad2016webennuevo.pdf. Valdeón, Roberto A. 2009. “Info-Promotional Material Discourse and Its Translation: The Case of the Asturian Tourist Board Texts.” Across Languages and Cultures 10 (1): 21–47. Valdés Rodríguez, Cristina. 2001. “Extranjerización y adaptación en la traducción de espots publicitarios.” In La traducción en los medios audiovisuales, edited by Frederic Chaume Varela and Rosa María Agost Canós, 183–92. Castelló de la Plana: Universitat Jaume I. ———. 2007. “A Complex Mode of Screen Translation: The Case of Advertisements on Spanish Television.” Lingistica Antverpiensia 6: 277–94. Valdés Rodríguez, Cristina, and Adrián Fuentes Luque. 2008. “Coherence in Translated Television Commercials.” European Journal of English Studies 12 (2): 133–48. Woodward-Smith, Elizabeth. 2011. “Sociocultural References in Context: The School Story Subgenre.” The Grove. Working Papers on English Studies 18: 243–64. http://revistaselectronicas.ujaen.es/index. php/grove/article/view/1252/1041. Woodward-Smith, Elizabeth, and Ekaterina Eynullaeva. 2009. “A Cross-Cultural Study of the Translation and Adaptation of Advertisements for Beauty Products.” Perspectives: Studies in Translation Theory and Practice 17 (2): 121–36.

416

22 ETHICS AND TRANSLATION Alberto Fuertes

Introduction Prior to the introduction of Descriptive Translation Studies in Spain, discussions around translation ethics hinged on the notion of fidelity and were usually with reference to literary translation. This resulted in right-or-wrong positions around the notion of equivalence, favouring source-oriented approaches. Such approaches crystallized in various prescriptive theories that ensued from translation criticism. Rather than describing what translators did and the reasons underlying translators’ choices, translation scholars focused on what translators did wrong. Skopos theory and Descriptive Translation Studies brought in a turning point in translation reflection: the 1990s saw dualist notions of translation being progressively abandoned. This opened up new avenues of research on the interface between translation and ethics. Research within Translation Studies has generally left prescriptive theories behind and has focused more on translators themselves. Attention is paid to the translator’s idea of what is right and wrong in the practice of translation through the analysis of their actions and decisions, their deontological codes and the context in which their work is developed. Contributions in this area can be categorized into three different camps: deontology, literary ethics and social ethics or activism. Research on deontology (professional ethics) abounds, especially from the 2000s, and is mostly with reference to legal and institutional translation settings, with some innovative work on the role of interpreters in healthcare, in prisons and in court. Little new research has been done on literary ethics, an area concentrating the most traditional discussions, but there is some work worth mentioning. The newest discussions on ethics and translation revolve around social ethics, which has been developed internationally but was crystallized in the Granada Declaration (2010). As to the ethics of the profession, Spain seems to have led the way as far as regulations of the duties of translators are concerned. During the colonial period, interpreters and translators used their skills as mediators as a way to keep their pre-conquest social status or even improve it. Interpreters were regarded as important and valuable among both the conquerors and the native population. This status resulted in mediators abusing the local population, which ultimately forced the Crown to pass laws clarifying the salary and duties of interpreters. A total of fourteen laws were passed over the course of a century (1529–1619) and a professional ethical code was defined (Valdeón 2014, 81). Such laws and regulations included “prohibiting 417

Alberto Fuertes

interpreters from receiving gifts from interested parties, from giving biased renditions, from having contact with interested (Amerindian) parties before court sessions, or from lacking in ‘fidelity, Christianity and goodness’ ” (Pym 2000, 152–3). According to Valdeón, the passing of these laws suggests an increased professionalization of interpreters and mediators and “provides evidence that the monarchy was aware of the unethical behaviour of some court interpreters” (2014, 82). Although deontological codes have developed parallel to the professionalization of translation and interpreting in legal and institutional settings, nowadays there are numerous associations of translators in different fields of specialization that have adopted different codes of ethics to educate their members regarding ethical principles and standards in the practice of the profession. The Asociación Profesional de Intérpretes Judiciales y Jurados (APTIJ) [Professional Association of Judicial and Sworn Translators] and the Asociación Española de Traductores, Correctores e Intérpretes (ASETRAD) [Spanish Association of Translators, Copy-Editors and Interpreters] work for the defence of the translation profession in institutional contexts while others like the separate branch for book translators of the Asociación Colegial de Escritores (ACETT) [Collegiate Association of Writers] see to the protection of translator’s rights in the publishing industry in both Spain and Hispanic Latin America. All of them provide translators with the relevant legislation in their professional field as well as with a deontological framework of good practices. A special mention should be made of the Associació Professional de Traductors i Intèrprets de Catalunya (ATIJC) [Association of Professional Legal Translators and Interpreters of Catalonia], which publishes a periodical bulletin that denounces bad practice in the profession, and Centro Virtual Cervantes’s digital journal El Trujamán [The Dragoman], which includes a section on the profession where professional translators’ reflections on good practices are given visibility.

Translation criticism and ethics The interface between translation and ethics has not always been addressed in a direct way. Prior to the last decade of the twentieth century, it was rather an implicit concern in theoretical discussions on the different aspects of the translation process, with the notion of fidelity as the point of departure. While translation had been looked at mainly from the perspective of linguistics for the most part of the twentieth century, it started to take shape as an independent discipline in Spain around 1965 with the publication of Francisco Ayala’s Problemas de la traducción [Problems in Translation] (Santoyo 1987, 14). During the 1980s, the consolidation of Translation Studies as a separate discipline and its introduction into university programmes boosted research interest in translation, although theoretical discussions of translation had been frequent from the 1970s. Scholars kept focusing on theoretical discussions of translation, fidelity and dualist notions of equivalence, and research in this area usually involved the application of those theories to translation criticism as one of the applied branches of Translation Studies. Translation criticism was not new to Spanish scholars. As early as in 1920, Astrana Marín, known nowadays for his translations into Spanish of Shakespeare, published El Libro de los plagios [The Book of Plagiarism], a book that set out to expose some of the scandals of Spanish literary scholars, including translation scandals. The book was not just an account of cases of plagiarism in Spanish letters at the time, but it also tackled issues such as translation plagiarism and translation quality. Astrana felt entitled to evaluate translations based on errors that he usually related to lack of competence in the start language. In doing so, he applied a source-oriented conception of equivalence. This normative approach to translation, which could be seen as the result of an attitude of moral superiority together with a certain sense of 418

Ethics and translation

professional ethics, was the usual way to address translation criticism in Spain until the last two decades of the twentieth century. Scholars taking prescriptive approaches to translation criticism at the time include Alfredo Elías in “Traducir es interpretar” [To Translate is to Interpret] (1941), Nicolás González Ruiz in “Doctrina de la traducción” [The Doctrine of Translation] (1942), Miguel Dolç in “Técnica y práctica de la traducción” [The Method and Practice of Translation] (1966), José Alsina in “Teoría de la traducción” [Theory of Translation] (1967) and Miguel Cordero del Campillo in “Sobre la traducción” [On Translation] (1969). All of them shared a source-oriented view of what was right in translation while emphasizing the importance of avoiding literalism in favour of target-language correctness and style. This emphasis was obviously the result of the confinement of translation discussions to literary translation and the concept of fidelity. Despite the obvious predominance of source-oriented views on translation, there was still room for other approaches. Jaume Tur (1974) addressed the importance of a more descriptive approach to translation criticism, one that took into account not just the product in itself but its context of production. In other words, he wanted to put translators under the spotlight by considering how their constraints and motivations affected the end product. Even if descriptive approaches were not inexistent, they were still scarce and so most theoretical discussions on the nature of translation at the time drew on perpetuated assumptions on what translation should be. The prescriptive way in which translation criticism was approached was permeated with ethical concerns and concepts of translator competence (what a translator should know to be a good translator) and good/bad dichotomies were frequently used in discussing translation quality. Indeed, translation criticism would seem to have nurtured theoretical discussions on translation and not the other way around. True, some Spanish translation scholars argued that it should be so. García Yebra (1982) claimed that translation criticism was actually a theory of what a translation should be, articulated in the maxims “decir todo lo que diga el original, no decir nada que el original no diga, y decirlo todo con la corrección y naturalidad que permita la lengua a la que se traduce” [to say everything that is in the original, to say nothing but what the original states, and to say it in as correct and natural a way as the target language allows for] (43). García Yebra calls translations outside this precept as bad or mediocre translations, whereas translators adhering to these maxims are described as “excellent”. His examples of bad practice in translation include omissions and alterations, which could stem from a lack of competence in various areas, including cultural ignorance, transference problems or poor reading skills in the start language. Other possible motivations or reasons stemming from the context in which the translations were produced are left out of the picture. One of the first and most explicit forays into translation and ethics in Spain is Santoyo’s El delito de traducir [The Crime of Translating] (1985). Santoyo touches upon many of the ethical concerns of Spanish translation scholars by resorting to the concept of fidelity more often than not. He outlines an ethics of translation based on the idea that readers are clients with expectations to be met as to the fidelity of translations. When fidelity is compromised, translations are said to be defective and therefore not worth the money spent on them. Santoyo’s focus was once again on literary translation and the notions of equivalence and competence seemed to be at the centre of the discussion. However, he did not limit his account of “the crimes of translators” to a source-oriented notion of equivalence, but he also saw intertextuality (i.e. mediated translations, plagiarism, etc.) and censorship as key concepts. Thus, concern about the way translations were produced was not just looked at from the point of view of quality and translation competence, but was expanded into issues such as the choice of the start text or its conscious manipulation to suit personal or political agendas. Plagiarism was also criticized and rejected as intellectual theft perpetrated in detriment of the non-plagiarising translator. 419

Alberto Fuertes

Translation studies and ethics The advent of descriptivism in Translation Studies brought in new avenues of research in translation and ethics from the 1990s. The first articles specifically on the ethics of translation and translators are reflections in the form of essays and descriptions of the professional practice of translation. In the twenty-first century, there has been a rise in empirical research on the translation profession in relation to professional ethics and deontological codes, with very innovative studies being published in recent years. Contributions in the area of literary ethics and social ethics are scarce, but interesting research has been done in both areas.

Deontology Deontology has concentrated most research on ethics in Spain in recent decades. While much of this research has focused on translation and interpreting in legal and institutional settings, there is also room for other areas of specialization such as medicine or sign language. We can divide research on deontology into three areas: the ethics of translators, the ethics of interpreters and oral mediators, and codes of ethics as such. Special mention should be made of new research on the ethics of pedagogy in interpreter training. The first contributions on professional ethics include essays and articles published throughout the 1990s and into the early twenty-first century, such as Peña’s call for a pragmatic approach to the ethics of translation (1993) and his proposal for a professional ethics of translation (1998), where the author points at the necessity of an ethical approach combined with linguistics in the field of translation studies; Moya’s ideas on the ethics of translators (1998) and his critical essay on the rights and duties of translators as depicted by García Yebra (2002); and Mayoral’s “Las fidelidades del traductor jurado” [The Sworn Translator’s Fidelities] (1999), which, along the lines of previous research on literary ethics, hinges on the notion of fidelity in his approach to the profession of sworn translation. Mayoral describes the tension between invisibility and active mediation inherent in the activity of sworn translators, while emphasizing the importance of serving the truth. There are more recent works like Marina’s article on the ethics of translation (2007), which offers a reflection on the factors influencing translation in Latin America in the context of language variation, and Jiménez Liebanas’s reflections on a deontology of translation (2009), which draw on Peña (1998) to offer a general view of education in ethical values in professional translation. More descriptive works on the ethics of translators in legal settings include Martín Ruano’s “La transmisión de la cultura en traducción jurídica” [The Transfer of Culture in Legal Translation] (2005), which focuses on the realm of decision-making in legal translation by looking into the ethical, ideological and political implications of translation decisions. Translation is seen as being able to introduce alternative ways to handle cultural specificity in a culturally diverse society. Martin and Taibi (2010) point to the deficiencies in legal translation and interpreting services in Spain and describe the institutional discursive strategies put into practice in building condemnatory narratives through the way information and translations are presented. In recent years, Martin Ruano has published articles on the conflicts arising from legal translation and identity in multilingual contexts (2012, 2015b) as well as on new critical approaches to deontology (2015a), which relate to the work of key referents such as Tosi (2003) in translation in multilingual settings and Minda (1995) as far as postmodern approaches to the law are concerned. Work on translation in medical settings includes Alvárez Díaz’s article on the translation of clinical trial protocols and its ethical implications (2008), where the author sets 420

Ethics and translation

out to develop an ethical foundation based on Diego García’s ideas on medical ethics, applying them to the translation of a multicentre clinical trial protocol. As the author, co-author or editor of many works directly dealing with ethics, Valero is one of the main promoters of research on public-service interpreting. Some of her contributions include “El mediador interlingüístico en los servicios públicos” [The Interlingual Mediator in the Public Services] (2001), where she depicts the activity of interlanguage mediators and discusses their role, the ethical principles underlying their task and the influence of culture and other extralinguistic factors affecting their mediation; “Ética, TISP y redes sociales” [Ethics, Public Service Interpreting and Translation (PSIT) and Social Networks] (2008), coauthored by Cedillo, where the authors draw on the basic principles of a code of ethics (fidelity, impartiality, confidentiality and integrity) to explore the extent to which interpreters follow those principles, concluding that interpreters have trouble in maintaining impartiality; “La comunicación con mujeres extranjeras en la cárcel” [Communicating with Foreign Women in Jail] (2014), co-authored with Mojica, which studies communication barriers in interactions between women in prison and law enforcement agents in Spain; “Ética e ideología en TISP en situaciones de conflicto en el siglo XXI” [Ethics and Ideology in Public Service Interpreting in twenty-first -century Conflicts] (2014), co-authored with Vitalaru, which serves as an introduction to the volume (Re)considerando ética e ideología en situaciones de conflicto [(Re) visiting Ethics and Ideology in Situations of Conflict] by offering a review of the state of the art in research on the consequences of globalization on the work of translators and interpreters; finally, Valero’s article on the ethics of interpreters in the context of gender-based violence (2016) co-authored with Cedillo, investigates qualitative aspects of the interactions between foreign victims of domestic violence and service providers and interpreters to look into the ethical dilemmas arising from such interactions. Baixauli is opening new avenues of research as the main contributor to work on ethics and interpreting in prisons. His works include his doctoral dissertation (2012), which analyzes penitentiary interpreting from an ethical perspective, and an article deriving from his dissertation (2013), where he gives a thorough description of the setting of prison interpreting based on his own observations together with different data-collection tools to determine the factors that influence the activity of interpreters in prisons. Baixauli concludes that prior comprehension of the setting is essential to the adoption of an adequate ethical approach to the task. Other research in this area includes the work of Martínez-Gómez (2014), whose article on the issue of interpreting in prison settings follows a survey-based research design to offer an overview of the way different prison systems handle communication between foreign-born inmates and staff, to conclude that prison systems are still highly dependent on ad hoc measures and natural interpreters. While Martínez-Gómez does not address ethical issues directly, she raises awareness of the need for professionalization in the sector of prison interpreting. As regards medical interpreting, Araujo-Lane and Phillips (2003) have contributed with an article on the importance of pre-sessions in avoiding misplacement of loyalties and misunderstandings as to the role of the interpreter in the medical session. In sign language, Burad (2008) sets out to define the foundations of an ethos for the profession of sign interpreting. Brander has fostered research on the ethics of the teaching of interpreting with two contributions: “Ética y didáctica de la interpretación” (2011), where the author explores various ethical approaches to translation and interpreting didactics in an attempt to justify the need for the study of ethics in the training of translators and interpreters in higher education, and “Quality and Ethics in Interpreter Education” (2013), an article on quality in interpreting education from the point of view of external Applied Ethics. 421

Alberto Fuertes

Work on codes of ethics includes Lobato’s pioneering doctoral dissertation on the deontology of legal and sworn translation (2007a), part of which was later adapted as the book chapter “Deontología de la traducción” [Deontology of Translation] (2007b), which analyzes similarities in different codes of ethics for translation and interpreting from a variety of countries. Along these lines, Ortega and Lobato (2008) discuss different codes of ethics and point to the necessity of creating a deontological code governing legal translation and interpreting practice in the European Union.1 Other interesting contributions are Baixauli’s “El código deontológico, una herramienta profesionalizante para la interpretación en servicios públicos” [The Deontological Code: A Profession-oriented Tool for Community Interpreting] (2008) and his article on the ethics of medical interpreting (2014), the latter of which offers an in-depth analysis of codes of ethics for medical interpreting with a view to determining their applicability to cross-cultural ethical dilemmas. Beyond purely academic research, the Spanish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation published a White Paper on the state of the translation profession in 2012. This document was elaborated by the members of the Red de Intérpretes y Traductores de la Administración Pública (RITAP) [Spanish Network for Public Service Interpreting and Translation] in collaboration with ASETRAD and ATPIJ and it comprises data on the practice of the translation profession in Spain, together with recommendations as to the improvement of the status of the profession. This joint effort ultimately aims at the development of international norms for institutional translation and interpreting.

Literary ethics The evolution of research in literary ethics has been parallel to the evolution of reflection on ethics and translation as a whole. Prior to the introduction of Translation Studies in Spain, the first discussions on the issue hinged on dualist notions of equivalence and they were linked to translation criticism, which was almost exclusively circumscribed to literary translation. Towards the two last decades of the twentieth century, such views on translation and ethics started to wane favouring more descriptive views, while the range of approaches broadened to include the translation professionals and social activism in ethical discussions. The first manifestation of the abandonment of traditional approaches to literary ethics came in a volume entitled Ética y política de la traducción literaria [Translation Ethics and Policy of Literary Translation] edited by Carbonell i Cortes (2004a), which he opens with an article analyzing foreignizing positions around translation, and specifically criticizes Venutti’s ideas on the issue, which he terms as prescriptive. While he agrees that translators should present the Otherness as is, he is concerned that exaggerating foreign features as a way of promoting cultural resistance amounts to accommodating the Other to the stereotypes of the dominant culture, which defeats foreignization’s purpose. In the same volume, Guiaro tackles the issue of ethics in literary translation through the analysis of the translation into Spanish of three novels by David Lodge. The function and translation of quotes within texts is looked into and the responsibility of translators in successfully handling them is discussed. Paradoxically, the volume also includes an article by Connolly where the author criticizes descriptivist approaches to translation criticism at the time, and he defends the need to reintroduce right-orwrong criteria to make translation criticism operational. In the same year, Camps i Olivé edits and publishes a volume entitled Ética y política de la traducción en la época contemporánea [Translation Ethics and Policy at Present] (2004), which focuses on translation policies and ethics, and the visibility of translators. The volume emphasizes the need to abandon ideas of

422

Ethics and translation

fidelity and betrayal in translation and move towards a new conception of translation as a dialogue between translator, text, author and their respective cultural traditions. Unfortunately, contributions to the camp of literary ethics in recent years have been fragmentary, the most salient ones being those of Vidal (2007a), who analyzes different postcolonial, plurilingual texts to explore the role of language and translation in presenting the existence of the other; Bueno (2010), who examines the work of translators from different religious orders to investigate how ethics distinguishes their activity from other kinds of translations; and Hernández Alonso (2012), who, along the lines of Vidal (2007a), explores the role of writers as translators of their own work in postcolonial literature in Portuguese. In the area of ideology, politics and censorship, the TRACE research group (Traducción y censura [Translation and censorship]), which comprises researchers from the Universidad de León and the Universidad del País Vasco, have produced numerous thesis on the matter as well as numerous books and articles. Their research focuses on censorship in Francoist Spain in different literary manifestations including theatre, narrative, poetry and cinema, and it addresses different issues including self-censorship, the official mechanisms of censorship, and the legislation used to enforce it. The volume Traducción y censura, inglés-español 1939–1985 [Translation and censorship, English-Spanish] (2000), edited by Rabadán, is a good point of departure for anyone who is interested in this camp. Recent contributions to the field include Gutiérrez Lanza (2011), Merino-Alvárez (2015) and Gómez Castro and Pérez López de Heredia (2015).

Social ethics Research on social ethics and translation has seen some attempts to initiate debate on the issue prior to the Granada Declaration (2010). Vidal and Martín Ruano (2003) approach the discourse on legal translation from Translation Theory, Law and Philosophy to explore new post-structuralist views on translation and justice; and Vidal (2009) explores the new role of translators and interpreters in the context of globalization to question translators’ authority, the idea of what “responsible” translation is, and the ethical limits of the role of translators. The “Granada Declaration” (2010) is an explicit call for action on the part of translators, interpreters and translation researchers to reverse their role as tools in colonization, in social, economic, political and gender domination, and in globalization in order to become instruments at the service of society as a whole. The declaration was made by the participants of the 1st International Forum on Social Activism in Translation and Interpreting, held in Granada from 28th to 30th April 2007. The Granada declaration, however, has not been the first reaction to globalization on the part of Hispanic translators. In 2006, the Tlaxcala network of translators for linguistic diversity, which was founded in 2005 by a group of cyberactivists, published the Tlaxcala Manifesto. The manifesto is a declaration against imperialism, and specifically the kind of modern imperialism that the United States of America and the English language represent. English is not condemned for its status as a lingua franca, but for its potential to transmit the ideology of superiority associated to imperial languages, as is evident from the large amounts of translations from English into subordinate languages that are produced nowadays and the lack of translations in the opposite direction. The signers of the manifesto take the stand of “deimperializing the English language by publishing in all possible languages (including English) the voices of writers, thinkers, cartoonists and activists who nowadays write their original texts in languages that the domineering empire’s influence do not allow to be heard” in the hopes

423

Alberto Fuertes

that this will make the world more diverse, promoting both multilingualism and translation multidirectionality to fight world views as represented through the imperialist use of English. Following the Granada Declaration, research in social ethics is still scarce and includes Castro Vazquez’s article on gender issues in translation (2010), where the author demands the use of non-sexist language in an attempt to promote a linguistic reform which will open way to the subsequent social reform; and Fernández Gil’s contributions on the effects of translation on historical memory: a book (2013) presenting an interesting view on translation as rewriting, as a recontextualization that can alter the memory of historical events to adjust it to political, ideological and economic interests; and an article (2014) which, through the analysis of Holocaust literature translations, further explores the idea of translation as a catalyser of changes in the collective memory. In both these works, Fernández Gil raises awareness of the potential of translation to change world views.

Future directions Recent research in deontology and professional ethics has opened interesting pathways of intellectual discussion. Gender issues (Valero and Mojica 2014; Valero and Cedillo 2014), conflict situations (Valero and Vitalaru 2014) and prison interpreting (Baixauli 2012, 2013) are some of the areas offering new avenues for empirical studies on ethics and mediation, as well as others such as the ethics of translation teaching, in line with Brander’s work (2011, 2013). As pointed out, research on literary ethics and relations with the other has dropped in recent years, and the field of social ethics and activism is yet to be developed, but efforts are being made to foster research in these areas. The research group Traducción, Ideología, Cultura [Translation, Ideology, Culture], based in Salamanca, is currently working on ethics, minoritized literature and globalization, and Vidal appears as one of the main contributors with books on literary translation, power relations and the representation of the Other (2007b, 2010, 2012, 2017). López Ponz has also recently published a book on the problem of translation in the context of power relations and minoritized literature (2014). These research directions seem to be the most promising ones in a world where minorities and social activism are more and more vocal of identity issues resulting from globalization and capitalism. Ethics has been a key concept in the development of Feminist Translation Studies first and, more recently, of Queer Studies, and has opened an interesting area to develop in Spanish Translation Studies. Articles on the matter include Mira’s (1999), which explores the conflicts arising from the translator’s faithfulness to current political values in translating homosexuality or Santaemilia’s volume on Gender, Sex and Translation (2005), where different approaches to the translation of sex as a political act are presented. Along these lines, Audiovisual Translation Studies have touched upon the issue very recently including articles by Díaz Cintas (2012), Pérez-González (2014) and Martínez Pleguezuelos (2016), among others, where the authors explore manipulation as to issues related to sex and homosexuality. One of the areas of ethics and translation in which research has been virtually inexistent is that of translators as authors and the duties they contract as such. The first piece of research specifically on the area is “The Duties of Translators under the ‘Compulsory License’ System of the Universal Copyright Convention”, by the Panamanian writer Díaz Lewis in 1956, but nothing has been done since in Spanish Translation Studies. Considering the incidence of plagiarism as a translation strategy in Spain during the twentieth and twenty-first centuries (Fuertes 2015), the new modalities of collaborative translation arising from online communication, fansub communities in audiovisual translation and the ethical problem of distributing

424

Ethics and translation

unauthorized translations or subtitles, as well as the blurry notion of authorship in translation memories, this area seems to offer very promising research opportunities.

Recommended reading Valero Garcés, Carmen, ed. 2014. (Re)considerando ética e ideología en situaciones de conflicto. [(Re) visiting Ethics and Ideology in Situations of Conflict]. Alcalá de Henares: Universidad de Alcalá de Henares. This recent volume is a must for all those who desire to do research on interpreting and ethics. It includes the latest research on the new challenges interpreters have to face in the context of the growing imbalances ensuing from globalization. Baixauli Olmos, Lluís. 2013. “A Description of Interpreting in Prisons: Mapping the Setting Through an Ethical Lens.” In Interpreting in a Changing Landscape: Selected Papers from Critical Link 6, edited by Christina Schäffner, Krzysztof Kredens and Yvonne Fowler, 45–60. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. This article offers a description of interpreting in prisons. It presents a detailed account of the factors influencing the work of prison interpreters and their impact on their practice and ethics. It can be a good starting point for researchers interested in interpreting in settings other than courts of justice, since it also reports on the data collection tools used in the study. Camps i Olivé, Assumpta, ed. 2004. Ética y política de la traducción en la época contemporánea. [Translation Ethics and Policy at Present]. Barcelona: PPU (Promociones y Publicaciones Universitarias). This collection of articles offers a reflection on contemporary literary translation from various languages and perspectives. The common threads are translation policies and literary ethics, and translators’ visibility is at the centre of the discussion. The articles emphasize the need to abandon the idea of translation as betrayal by presenting it as a dialogue between the translator and text, the author, and the textual and cultural tradition they belong to. The volume’s interest lies in the fact that it is one of the first manifestations of the abandonment of prescriptivism in translation criticism and of the new direction literary ethics research has taken in regard to translation. Lobato Patricio, Julia. 2007. “Deontología de la traducción: análisis general de los elementos comunes a diversos códigos de ética que regulan el ejercicio profesional de la traducción y la interpretación en distintos países.” [Deontology of Translation: A General Analysis of the Common Issues in Various Ethical Codes Governing the Professional Practice of Translation and Interpreting in Different Countries.] In Traducción y mediación cultural: reflexiones interdisciplinares, edited by María del Carmen Balbuena Torezano and Angeles García Calderón, 225–32. Granada: Atrio. This article offers a detailed account of the different ethical codes and laws governing translation and interpreting internationally. The article also offers an analysis and comparison of said codes and laws, and it can be useful as reference material on the subject.

Note 1 Such a code came into being in 2013 through the EULITA association. The EULITA code of ethics of legal interpreters and translators derives directly from the principles defined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, December  1948 (Articles 1–11); The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, November 1950 (Articles 5 and 6); The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (2000/C 364/01), CHAPTER III – Articles 20–21, CHAPTER VI – Articles 47–50; and Directive 2010/64/EU of the European Parliament and Council of 20 October 2010 on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings.

References Alsina, José. 1967. “Teoría de la traducción.” In Literatura griega, 425–44. Barcelona: Ariel. Álvarez Díaz, Jorge Alberto. 2008. “Aspectos éticos de la traducción de los protocolos de ensayos clínicos.” Panace@ 9 (27): 77–82.

425

Alberto Fuertes Araújo-Lane, Zarita, and Vonessa A. Phillips. 2003. “Ethics and Medical Interpretation: The Value of a Pre-Session.” The ATA Chronicle 32 (9). Astrana Marín, Luis. c. 1920. El libro de los plagios. Madrid: Revista Hispano-Americana Cervantes. Baixauli Olmos, Lluís. 2008. “El código deontológico, una herramienta profesionalizante para la interpretación en servicios públicos: National Standard Guide for Community Interpreting Services.” Revista de la Facultad de Humanidades y Lenguas Modernas 11: 75–83. ———. 2012. “La interpretació als serveis públics des d’una perspectiva ètica: la deontologia professional i l’aplicació al context penitenciari.” PhD diss., Univerity Jaume I. ———. 2013. “A Description of Interpreting in Prisons. Mapping the Setting through an Ethical Lens.” In Interpreting in a Changing Landscape: Selected Papers from Critical Link 6, edited by Christina Schäffner, Krzysztof Kredens, and Yvonne Fowler, 45–60. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ———. 2014. “Redescubriendo los códigos de conducta para la ISP médica: cultura, dilemas y papel profesional.” Panace@ 15 (40): 198–217. Bránder de la Iglesia, María. 2011. “Cuando la teoría es práctica: ética y didáctica de la interpretación.” In En las vertientes de la traducción e interpretación del/al alemán, edited by Silvia Roiss, Carlos Fortea Gil, Angeles Recio Ariza, Belén Santana López, Petra Zimmerman, and Iris Holl, 521–36. Leipzig: Frank & Timme. ———. 2013. “Does it Pay to Be Good? Quality and Ethics in Interpreter Education.” In Quality in Interpreting: Widening the Scope. Volume 2, edited by Rafael Barranco Droege, Esperanza Macarena Pradas Macías, and Olalla García Becerra, 255–74. Granada: Comares. Bueno García, Antonio. 2010. “Ética y estética de la traducción monástica. Los traductores y lingüistas franciscanos españoles del árabe y el hebreo.” Translationes 2: 25–38. Burad, Viviana. 2008. Ética y procedimiento profesional para intérpretes de lenguas de señas. Mendoza: Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Camps i Olivé, Assumpta, ed. 2004. Ética y política de la traducción en la época contemporánea. Barcelona: PPU. Carbonell i Cortés, Ovidi, ed. 2004a. Ética y política de la traducción literaria. Málaga: Miguel González Pena. ———. 2004b. “La ética del traductor y la ética de la traductología.” In Ética y política de la traducción literaria, edited by Ovidi Carbonell i Cortés, 17–45. Málaga: Miguel Gómez Peña. Castro Vázquez, Olga. 2010. “Non-Sexist Translation and/in Social Change: Gender Issues in Translation.” In Translation/Interpreting and Social Activism, edited by Julie Boéri and Carol Maier, 106–20. Granada: ECOS. Connolly, David. 2004. “Crítica de la crítica de la traducción literaria: Posibles criterios para la crítica de traducciones de poesía.” In Ética y política de la traducción literaria, edited by Ovidi Carbonell i Cortés, 61–74. Málaga: Miguel Gómez Peña. Cordero del Campillo, Miguel. 1969. “Sobre la traducción.” Las Ciencias 34 (4): 273–80. Díaz Cintas, Jorge. 2012. “Clearing the Smoke to See the Screen: Ideological Manipulation in Audiovisual Translation.” Meta 57 (2): 279–93. Díaz Lewis, Juan O. 1956. “The Duties of Translators Under the ‘Compulsory License’ System of the Universal Copyright Convention.” Babel 2 (1): 19–23. Dolç, Miguel. 1966. “Técnica y práctica de la traducción.” In Didáctica de las Lenguas Clásicas, 65–75. Madrid: Publicaciones de la Dirección General de Enseñanzas Medias. Elías, Alfredo. 1941. “Traducir es interpretar.” Hispania 24: 397–405. Fernández Gil, María Jesús. 2013. Traducir el horror: La intersección de la ética, la ideología y el poder en la memoria del Holocausto. Bern: Peter Lang. ———. 2014. “Operaciones traductológicas de tesignificación del Holocausto. Ideología y ética en su representación.” Estudios de Traducción 4: 99–113. Fuertes, Alberto. 2015. “The Echoes of the Translator’s Voice: Plagiarism as a Translation Strategy in English-Spanish Narrative Translations.” In And Translation Changed the World (and the World Changed Translation), edited by Alberto Fuertes and Esther Torres-Simón, 123–39. Newcastle Upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. García Yebra, Valentín. 1982. Teoría y práctica de la traducción. Madrid: Gredos. Gómez Castro, Cristina, and María Pérez López de Heredia. 2015. “En terreno vedado: género, traducción y censura: El caso de Brokeback Mountain.” Quaderns de filologia. Estudis literaris 20: 35–52. González Ruiz, Nicolás. 1942. “Doctrina de la traducción.” Revista Nacional de Educación 18: 39–46.

426

Ethics and translation Gutiérrez Lanza, Camino. 2011. “Censors and Censorship Boards in Franco’s Spain (1950s–1960s): An Overview of the TRACE Cinema Catalogue.” In Translation and Opposition, edited by Dimitris Asimakoulas and Margaret Rogers, 305–20. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Hernández Alonso, Rebeca. 2012. “Hacia una (po)ética de traducción literaria: el escritor-traductor en las literaturas postcoloniales de lengua portuguesa.” In Olhares & Miradas. Reflexiones sobre la traducción portugués-español y su didáctica, edited by Óscar Díaz. Fouces. Granada: Atrio. Jiménez Liébanas, Manuel José. 2009. “Aproximación a la ética profesional en traducción.” Revista Digital Transversalidad Educativa 23: 32–38. Lobato Patricio, Julia. 2007a. “Aspectos deontológicos y profesionales de la traducción jurídica, jurada y judicial.” PhD diss., Universidad de Málaga. ———. 2007b. “Deontología de la traducción: análisis general de los elementos comunes a diversos códigos de ética que regulan el ejercicio profesional de la traducción y la interpretación en distintos países.” In Traducción y mediación cultural: reflexiones interdisciplinares, edited by María del Carmen Balbuena Torezano and Angeles García Calderón, 225–32. Granada: Atrio. López Ponz, María. 2014. Juego de capitales: La traducción en la sociedad del mestizaje. Frankfurt am Main: Peterlang. Marinas, José Miguel. 2007. “La corteza de la letra: sobre ética de la traducción.” In Dirección Terminología e Industrias de la Lengua – Unión Latina. Accessed July 1, 2016. http://dtil.unilat.org/ panhispanico/edicion2/jose_miguel_marinas.htm. Martin, Anne, and Mustapha Taibi. 2010. “Translating and Interpreting for the Police in Politicised Contexts: The Case of Tayseer Allouny.” In Translation/Interpreting and Social Activism, edited by Julie Boéri and Carol Maier, 214–26. Granada: ECOS. Martín Ruano, María Rosario. 2005. “La transmisión de la cultura en traducción jurídica: nuevas estrategias éticas alternativas.” In Traducción y cultura. El referente cultural en la comunicación especializada, edited by María Gracia Torres Díaz and Marie-Ange Bugnot, 165–204. Málaga: ENCASA. ———. 2012. “Traducción institucional e indentidad(es): asimetrías, conflictos, posibilidades.” In Ensayos sobre traducción jurídica e institucional, edited by Icíar Alonso, Jesús Baigorri, and Helen Campbell, 43–68. Granada: Comares. ———. 2015a. “(Trans)formative Theorising in Legal Translation and/or Interpreting: A  Critical Approach to Deontological Principles.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 9 (2): 141–55. ———. 2015b. “The Role of Legal and Institutional Translation in Processes of Identity (Re)construction in Multilingual and Multicultural Contexts.” Journal of the International Institute for Terminology Research (IITF) 25: 16–27. Martínez-Gómez, Aida. 2014. “Interpreting in Prison Settings.” Interpreting 16 (2): 233–59. Martínez Pleguezuelos, Antonio. 2016. “Representación de la homosexualidad, identidad saliente y traducción: estudio del doblaje de Will & Grace en español.” In Traducción, medios de comunicación y opinión pública, edited by Rosario Martín and África Vidal Claramonte, 209–26. Granada: Comares. Mayoral Asensio, Roberto. 1999. “Las fidelidades del traductor jurado: batalla indecisa.” In Traducir para la justicia, edited by Manuel C. Feria García, 15–57. Granada: Comares. Merino-Alvárez, Raquel. 2015. “Mapping Translated Theatre in Spain Through Censorship Archives.” In Global Insights on Theatre Censorship, edited by Catherine O’Leary, Diego Santos Sánchez, and Michael Thompson, 176–90. New York: Routledge. Minda, Gary. 1995. Postmodern Legal Movements: Law and Jurisprudence at Century’s End. New York: New York University Press. Mira, Alberto. 1999. “Pushing the Limits of Faithfulness: A Case for Gay Translation.” In The Practices of Literary Translation, edited by Michael Holman and Jean Boase-Beier, 109–24. Manchester: St Jerome. Moya Jiménez, Virgilio. 1998. “Ética y traductores.” [Ethics and the Translators.] Parallèles 20: 153–63. ———. 2002. “Con la sien herida: Reflexiones a propósito de tres artículos de García Yebra sobre los derechos y deberes de los traductoresIn La traducción: Estrategias profesionales, edited by Isabel Pascua Febles, 55–68. Las Palmas de Gran Canaria: Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. Ortega Arjonilla, Emilio, and Julia Lobato Patricio. 2008. “Comentario sobre los códigos deontológicos vigentes.” In La traducción e interpretación jurídicas en la Unión Europea. Retos para la Europa de los ciudadanos, edited by Emilio Ortega Arjonilla, 545–52. Granada: Comares.

427

Alberto Fuertes Peña Martín, Salvador. 1993. “La madre de las batallas: un planteamiento pragmático de la ética del traductor.” In Teoría y práctica de la traducción: reflexiones sobre la traducción, edited by Luis Charo Brea, 527–38. Cádiz: Universidad de Cádiz. ———. 1998. “El pacto tácito: hacia una deontología de la traducción (con atención especial a algunas versiones del Salmo 136).” TRANS: Revista de traductología 3: 77–88. Pérez-González, Luis. 2014. Audiovisual Translation: Theories, Methods and Issues. Abingdon: Routledge. Pym, Anthony. 2000. Negotiating the Frontier: Translation and Intercultures in Hispanic History. Manchester: St Jerome. Rabadán, Rosa, ed. 2000. Traducción y censura, inglés-español 1939–1985. Estudio preliminar. León: Universidad de León. Santaemilia, José, ed. 2005. Gender, Sex and Translation: The Manipulation of Identities. Manchester: St. Jerome. Santoyo, Julio-César. 1985. El delito de traducir. León: Universidad de León. ———. 1987. Teoría y crítica de la traducción: antología. Barcelona: Publicacions de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Tosi, Arturo, ed. 2003. Crossing Barriers and Bridging Cultures: The Challenges of Multilingual Translation for the European Union. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Tur, Jaume. 1974. “Sobre la teoría de la traducción.” Thesaurus: Boletín del Instituto Caro y Cuervo 29: 1–19. Valdeón, Roberto A. 2014. Translation and the Spanish Empire in the Americas. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Valero Garcés, Carmen. 2001. “El mediador interlingüístico en los servicios públicos: ¿nuevos principios éticos para nuevas realidades?” In Últimas corrientes teóricas en los estudios de traducción y sus aplicaciones, edited by Anne Barr, María Rosario Martín Ruano, and Jesús Torres del Rey, 819–28. Salamanca: Universidad de Salamanca. ———. 2016. “Aproximaciones desde la ética en la interpretación en casos de violencia de género.” Babel 62 (1): 67–85. Valero Garcés, Carmen, and Carmen Cedillo Corrochano. 2014. “Ética, TISP y redes sociales. Un estudio de caso.” In (Re)considerando ética e ideología en situaciones de conflicto, edited by Carmen Valero Garcés, 187–94. Alcalá de Henares: Universidad de Alcalá de Henares. Valero Garcés, Carmen, and Esperanza Mojica López. 2014. “La comunicación con mujeres extranjeras en la cárcel. Estudio de caso.” In (Re)considerando ética e ideología en situaciones de conflicto, edited by Carmen Valero Garcés, 187–94. Alcalá de Henares: Universidad de Alcalá de Henares. Valero Garcés, Carmen, and Bianca Vitalaru. 2014. “Ética e ideología en TISP en situaciones de conflicto en el siglo XXI. A  modo de introducción.” In (Re)considerando ética e ideología en situaciones de conflicto, edited by Carmen Valero Garcés, 7–12. Alcalá de Henares: Universidad de Alcalá de Henares. Various Authors. 2010. “Granada Declaration.” In Compromiso Social y Traducción/ Interpretación˗Translation/Interpreting and Social Activism, edited by Julie Boéri and Carol Maier. Granada: ECOS. Vidal Claramonte, María del Carmen África. 2007a. “Resisting Through Hyphenation: The Ethics of Translating (Im)pure Texts.” In Border Transits. Literature and Culture Across the Line, edited by Ana María Manzanas. Amsterdam: Ropopi. ———. 2007b. Traducir entre culturas: diferencias, poderes, identidades. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. ———. 2009. “Translation as an Ethical Action.” Forum 7 (1): 155–70. ———. 2010. Traducción y asimetría. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. ———. 2012. La traducción y los espacios: viajes, mapas, fronteras. Granada: Comares. ———. 2017. “Dile que le he escrito un blues”: del texto como partitura a la partitura como traducción en la literatura latinoamericana. Frankfurt am Main: Vervuert Iberoamericana. Vidal Claramonte, María del Carmen África, and María Rosario Martín Ruano. 2003. “Deconstructing the Discourse on Legal Translation, or Towards an Ethics of Responsibility.” In Speaking in Tongues: Language across Contexts and Users, edited by Luis Pérez González, 141–59. Valencia: Universitat de Valencia.

428

23 TRANSLATION POLICIES FROM/INTO THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGES IN SPAIN1 Montserrat Bacardí (Translated by Timothy Barton) Introduction In Spain, in addition to Spanish, three other languages are officially recognized in the areas where they developed, referred to in the Spanish Constitution as “historic nationalities”. Two of those languages – Catalan and Galician – belong to the same language group as Spanish. They are Romance languages that evolved from Latin. The other official language is Basque, a pre-Indo-European language whose origins remain controversial. Two other Romance ­languages  – Asturian and Aragonese  – are also spoken in parts of Spain, but do not have official status. The linguistic affiliation of Galician is the subject of a tug of war between the ‘isolationist’ regulations put forward by the Royal Galician Academy, which considers Galician to be an independent language, and the ‘reintegrationist’ regulations, which treat Galician as a variety of Galician-Portuguese. Galician is spoken by around three million speakers. On the other hand, the Catalan language is spoken by some eleven million people, including regions beyond the boundaries of modern-day Catalonia: in Spain, in addition to Catalonia, it is official in the autonomous regions of Valencia and the Balearic Islands and is also spoken in parts of Aragon; in France, it is spoken in the historical country of Roussillon, roughly identical to the present-day Pyrénées-Orientales département; in Italy, it is spoken in the Sardinian town of Alghero, and it is the official language of Andorra. The Basque language, which was standardized in 1968, also stretches across the French-Spanish border and is estimated to be spoken by fewer than one million people. Policies aimed at unification implemented from the fifteenth century onwards allowed the Spanish language to extend throughout Spain. Meanwhile, the other historical languages were marginalized, and underwent varying degrees of subordination at different times, depending on the laws in place. As occurred throughout Europe, the Romantic era breathed new life into these languages, fuelling a revival that reached its pinnacle in the early twentieth century. Franco’s rise to power, however, dealt yet another blow to them. His dictatorial regime tacitly introduced severe prohibitions on using languages other than Spanish, the effects of which can still be seen to this day. Nevertheless, over the last twenty-five years, Catalan, Galician and Basque translation (as well as translation itself ) have experienced unprecedented progress, albeit to varying degrees depending on the source and target languages and the translation fields. 429

Montserrat Bacardí

Supported by laws and by language-promotion policies, all three have language academies. There are also institutions to support translation in both directions, namely the Instituto Vasco Etxepare/Etxepare Euskal Institutua for the Basque language, the Institució de les Lletres Catalanes for translations from other languages into Catalan, and the Institut Ramon Llull for translations from Catalan to other languages. Professional authors’ and translators’ associations have played a key role in regulating and strengthening the profession in recent decades, especially the Asociación de Traductores, Correctores e Intérpretes de Lengua Vasca/Euskal Itzultzaile, Zuzentzaile eta Interpreteen Elkartea (EIZIE); Euskal PEN Kluba; Associació d’Escriptors en Llengua Catalana (AELC); Associació Professional de Traductors i Intèrprets de Catalunya (APTIC); Associació de Traductors i Intèrprets Jurats de Catalunya (ATIJC); PEN Català; Asociación de Escritores en Lingua Galega (AELG); Asociación de Traductores Galegos (ATG); Asociación Galega de Profesionais da Traducción e da Interpretació (AGPTI); and PEN Clube Galego. These associations and academic researchers have supported the development of very useful databases and virtual catalogues for imported translations: for Basque, Armiarma, Base de Datos de Traducción Vasca Nor da Nor and Catálogo de las Traducciones de la Literatura en Lengua Vasca/Euskal Literatura Itzuliaren (ELI); for Catalan, Visat; and for Galician, Biblioteca de Traducción Galega (BTG) and Biblioteca Virtual de Literatura Universal en Galego (Bivir). Other organizations have inventoried the exported translations: for Basque, Nor da Nor; for Catalan, Traduccions del Català (TRAC), Traductors del Català (TRALICAT) and Visat; and for Galician, Biblioteca de Traducción Galega (BTG). Furthermore, the Bibliography of Interpreting and Translation (BITRA), created by Javier Franco in 2001, has nearly 70,000 entries in various languages, making it a clear exponent of the development of translation studies since the turn of the century (which had been initiated by J. C. Santoyo’s Bibliografía de la traducción en español, catalán, gallego y vasco [Bibliography of translation in Spanish, Catalan, Galician and Basque] and Fernando Navarro Domínguez’s Manual de bibliografía española de traducción e interpretación [Manual of Spanish translation and interpreting bibliography], both published in 1996). University faculties providing training in translation and interpreting have played a decisive role in driving forward research. The first university in Spain to offer translation studies was the Autonomous University of Barcelona (UAB) in 1972. The Martutene School of Translation opened in San Sebastián in 1980 but closed in 1991, and a translation degree was not introduced by the University of the Basque Country until 2000; all the other universities that currently offer the translation degree introduced it in the early 1990s, when translation studies was upgraded from a foundation degree to a bachelor’s degree. Specific training for translation into Basque is provided by the University of the Basque Country; the University of Vigo provides the same for translation into Galician; and several universities provide training for translation into Catalan: the University of Alicante, the Autonomous University of Barcelona, Jaume I University (Castellón de la Plana), Pompeu Fabra University (Barcelona), the University of Valencia and the University of Vic. Since then, a wide range of master’s degrees and doctoral programmes have been introduced. This means the number of research papers and doctoral theses has grown year on year, as has the number of resulting publications. In addition, the eight aforementioned universities that train students in translation into Basque, Catalan or Galician have published journals (such as 1611: Revista d’Història de la Traducció, Anuari TRILCAT, Doletiana, Monti, Quaderns: Revista de Traducció, Senez, Tradumàtica and Viceverva: Revista Galega de Traducción) and collections (such as “Biblioteca de Traducció i Interpretació”) to disseminate the research they do, often written in Basque, Catalan or Galician. 430

Translation policies in Spain

Historical perspective Clearly translations into Basque, Catalan, Galician and any other minoritized language have played a decisive role in standardizing the respective languages and developing literature written in them. Such translations play a role that is almost as important as original productions in Basque, Catalan and Galician. As Lefevere wrote, “Rewritings tend to play at least as important a part in the establishment of the poetics of a literary system as original writings do” (Lefevere 1992, 28). In such cases, translations have contributed to national affirmation, acting as vital tools to create a ‘normal’, useful, necessary culture that has an effective, fertile vehicle with which to express itself. The importation of world literature created an autochthonous literature and steered such cultures away from becoming isolationist and inward-looking. As has often been the case with other languages, debates on translation in these three languages began with the initial thoughts expressed by the translators in prefaces, afterwords, letters, circulars, etc. For Catalan, the earliest examples are from the medieval period, a time when many works were translated into Catalan. The thoughts expressed by the translators Francesc Alegre, Arnau d’Alfarràs and Ferran Valentí are particularly significant. The late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries saw the reemergence of Basque, Catalan and Galician translations for cultural reasons, rather than merely out of necessity, leading to a resurgence of treatises on translation. Translators continued to conduct their research even in the most trying circumstances, often with great aplomb: at the height of Spanish civil war (C. A. Jordana in 1938 with the essay “L’art de traduir” [The art of translation]), in exile (Josep Carner in 1944 with his aphorisms in “De l’art de traduir” [On the art of translation] and the anonymous author of the “Liminar” [Introduction] to Poesía inglesa e francesa vertida ao galego [English and French poetry translated into Galician], published in Buenos Aires in 1949), or during the repression of Spain’s brutal post-Civil War era (Carles Riba in his prologue to the Odyssey and Aquilino Iglesia Alvariño in his article “Traduttore, traditore”, both from 1948). The influence of European critical comparatism occasionally emerged in revisionist studies that focused heavily on reception and translations of modern European classics, such as Goethe en la literatura catalana [Goethe in Catalan literature] by Manuel de Montoliu in 1935, Shakespeare en la literatura española [Shakespeare in Spanish literature] by Alfons Par in 1935, and Shakespeare a Catalunya [Shakespeare in Catalonia] by Ramon Esquerra in 1937. This emerging research tradition was also blighted by Franco’s dictatorship. In 1974, shortly before the end of the regime, two very different books were published that went largely unnoticed at the time, but since then have become pioneering works in research on translation into Catalan. The first was Xavier Benguerel’s Relacions [Relations], which contained a type of reasoned confessions by one of the most devoted and persevering vocational translators. The second was Jaume Tur’s Maragall i Goethe: Les traduccions del “Faust” [Maragall and Goethe: Translations of Faust], a study that introduced Catalan readers to the latest European theories of translation and applied them to analysis of translations by the poet Joan Maragall. A few years later, in 1991, shortly before most of the university translation qualifications were introduced, Joaquim Mallafrè published Llengua de tribu i llengua de polis: Bases d’una traducció literària [Language of the tribe and language of the polis: Foundations of a literary translation] based on his doctoral thesis and his experience as a translator of James Joyce’s Ulysses, which laid the groundwork for academic research in Catalan literary translation. This review of translation into the official languages of Spain other than Spanish adapts the linguistic/thematic criterion established by Josep Marco for defining Catalan translation studies. His framework included only works “written in this language [Catalan] and/or focused on 431

Montserrat Bacardí

some aspect of Catalan reality” (Marco 2008, 12), and we have broadened this approach so that it also includes Basque and Galician. Because of the sheer amount of reference material available, the body of this chapter also looks only at works published in the form of a book, while the bibliography includes many books and articles – some more generic, some less so – that provide useful information about the development of the discipline in these languages.

Research issues and methods Historiography: panoramic approaches Ricard Torrents traces “the birth of Catalan Translation Studies” back to “the last decade of the twentieth century” (Torrents 2010, 363), when university studies had become consolidated and some scientific platforms had been set up to disseminate research. We would probably have to date the birth of Basque and Galician translation studies, which have less production and academic representation, a few years later, perhaps not until the turn of the century. Translation studies in all three languages have been marked by their historicist nature, and therefore their literary nature, in the broadest sense of the term. This is linked to a desire to rekindle and draw attention to a forgotten, suppressed or simply unknown past. Behind many of these works there has been an eagerness to put these literary traditions on the evolutionary map of European languages of culture, situated alongside neighbouring or sister languages that were able to develop normally. The authors have raised the prestige of their language and culture, both in the minds of their own people, and in the minds of the international scientific community. They have employed a dual strategy, producing works with a broad scope to provide basic resources to construct a history of translation, as well as works with a more narrow, specialized scope, which are also essential to properly appreciate key moments in that history. Among the broader works, the 1998 anthology entitled Cent anys de traducció al català (1891–1990) [One hundred years of translation into Catalan (1891–1990)], compiled by Montserrat Bacardí, Joan Fontcuberta and Francesc Parcerisas, brought together the main reflections on translation during that period, much as other writers had done for other languages. These reflections were in the form of prefaces, articles and book chapters written by around fifty translators. By uncovering and arranging these texts, the authors highlighted how translation had been seen as a valuable tool for language management and literary nourishment. Two years later, in 2000, Enric Gallén, Manuel Llanas, Marcel Ortín, Ramon Pinyol and Pere Quer published another anthology, L’art de traduir: Reflexions sobre la traducció al llarg de la història [The art of translation: Reflections on translation throughout history], but this time offering the reverse of the previous one, i.e. Catalan translations of classic Western texts on translation theory, complete with authors’ comments. The purpose of the publication was very clearly educational. It was not long before Xosé Manuel Dasilva published Babel entre nós. Escolma de textos sobre a traducción en Galicia [Babel among us: A collection of texts on translation in Galicia] (2003). This broad collection of more than 400 texts written between 1868 and 1999 contained everything from forewords and articles to dedications and advertisements. It made translation into Galician visible. Though translation into the language had been held back by historical circumstances, it was not negligible, so it had been able to develop its own voice. After the publication of the anthologies, various authors sought to offer rather detailed overviews of the history of translation. In a special issue of Catalan Writing (2002) devoted to Catalan translation, Montserrat Bacardí published extensive “Notes on the History of Translation into Catalan”, covering the period from the Middle Ages to the twentieth century. Two 432

Translation policies in Spain

years later, in 2004, Francisco Lafarga and Luis Pegenaute published the extensive Historia de la traducción en España [History of translation in Spain]. In the second part of the book, entitled “La traducción en otros ámbitos lingüísticos y culturales” [“Translation in other linguistic and cultural domains”], Josep Pujol, Josep Solervicens, Enric Gallén and Marcel Ortín dealt with the history of Catalan translation, Camiño Noia with the history of Galician translation, and Xabier Mendiguren with the history of Basque translation. The publication went into great depth, was academically rigorous and used a wealth of bibliographical sources. In 2009, Lafarga and Pegenaute also published their Diccionario histórico de la traducción en España [Historical dictionary of translation in Spain], an encyclopaedic publication with 850 entries written by 400 writers on languages and authors translated, translators and nonliterary translation fields. Like their previous work, they included translations into Catalan, which had fifty-nine entries, and Galician and Basque, which had twenty-one entries each. The most significant translators are referenced, especially modern translators, and the selection is a representative sample. The dictionary provides an overview of translation in Catalan, Galician and Basque and translation into and out of Spanish. Both publications by Lafarga and Pegenaute have played a vital role in raising the prominence of translations into these stateless languages. The Diccionari de la traducció catalana [Dictionary of Catalan Translation] (2011, winner of the 2012 Crítica Serra d’Or award for Humanities), edited by Montserrat Bacardí and Pilar Godayol, is a compilation of articles about the most prominent translators of all time who have translated from any language into Catalan, as well as notable anonymous or collaborative translations. Around a thousand entries written by some eighty specialists provide biographical details, a presentation and review of the person’s translations and a bibliography of the works translated and the studies on those translations. Thanks to the various indexes at the end of the book, it can be used as a catalogue of translators, translations and critical bibliography. Xosé Manuel Dasilva’s compilation of articles entitled O alleo é noso: Contribucións para a historia de traducción en Galicia [That which is foreign is ours: Contributions to a history of translation in Galicia] (2008) seeks to strengthen the foundations for a history of Galician translation. From various perspectives, the forty or so texts analyse the contributions made over the course of more than a century by writer-translators from Rosalía de Castro to Manuel Rivas. The sharp rise in the number of translations into Basque, Catalan and Galician since the end of Franco’s dictatorship has driven research on production during the post-Franco era. This research has focused on a wide range of areas. Published in 2010 and edited by Montserrat Bacardí and Pilar Godayol, Una impossibilitat possible: Trenta anys de traducció als Països Catalans (1975–2005) [A possible impossibility: Translation in the Catalan Countries (1975– 2005)] reviews published works classified by genre (narrative, poetry, drama, essay, children’s and young adult literature, and audiovisual productions) and looks at various concepts such as ideology, the publishing market and the professionalization of translation. In 2015, BITRAGA group members Ana Luna Alonso, Áurea Fernández Rodríguez, Iolanda Galanes Santos and Silvia Montero Küpper published a similar volume for the Galician language, entitled Literaturas extranjeras y desarrollo cultural: Hacia un cambio de paradigma en la traducción literaria gallega [Foreign literatures and cultural development: Towards a paradigm shift in Galician literary translation]. The authors’ contributions examine literature imported into Galician since 1980, classifying works into categories similar to those used by Montserrat Bacardí and Pilar Godayol. Their publication therefore summarizes the direction that Galician translation took during this period. 433

Montserrat Bacardí

Carme Arenas and Simona Škrabec’s report La literatura catalana i la traducció en un món globalitzat/Catalan literature and translation in a globalized world (2006) provides an in-depth analysis of the most recent Catalan translations. Adopting a purely sociological perspective, the report analyzes aspects such as the impact of Catalan literature abroad, the reception of world literature translated into Catalan, the profile of literary translators, and financial support for translations. Needless to say, it would be useful if the report were updated regularly and were produced for the other languages of Spain. For Galician, each edition of the Anuario de Estudos Literarios Galegos [Yearbook of Galician Literary Studies] – published annually from 1994 to 2007 – included an “Overview of literary translation in Galician” by Gonzalo Constenla Bergueiro and Ana Luna Alonso, while many editions of Viceversa – first published in 1995 – have featured an inventory of works translated into Galician the previous year.

Historiography: time-based approaches The vast majority of studies on the history of translation focus on specific periods, translated authors, translators and translations. Unfortunately, there are still comparatively few studies that adopt a more global approach. For many years now, medieval translations into Catalan and Galician have been studied mainly by philologists and historians who specialize in that era (Basque translation, of course, did not begin until 1571, when Johannes Leizarraga published his New Testament). Unlike contemporary translations, older translations have always been included in histories of language and literature. Among the many works that have been published, several recent studies that have led to book publications stand out. The following books are global studies or collections of a broad range of articles: De la traducció literal a la creació literària [From literal translation to literary creation] (1995) by Curt Wittlin, La ciència en català a l’Edat Mitjana i el Renaixement [Science in Catalan in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance] (2002) by Lluís Cifuentes, and La traducción medieval en la Península Ibérica [Medieval translation in the Iberian Peninsula] (2009) by Julio-César Santoyo. The following books focus instead on an author’s reception, a translator or a translated work: La Bíblia valenciana [The Valencian Bible] (1993) by Jordi Ventura, Ferrando Valentí i la seva família [Ferrando Valentí and his family] (1996) by Maria Barceló Crespí and Gabriel Ensenyat Pujol, La Bíblia a Catalunya, València i les Illes fins al segle xv [The Bible in Catalonia, Valencia and the [Balearic] Islands up to the fifteenth century] (1997) by Armand Puig and Un clàssic entre clàssics: Sobre traduccions i recepcions de Sèneca a l’època medieval [A classic among classics: On translations and receptions of Seneca in medieval times] (1998) by Tomàs Martínez Romero. Obviously much research on Catalan and Galician medieval translations is included in published editions of the translated texts, whether they are the first translations into those languages or new editions of previously translated works. Between the sixteenth and nineteenth centuries, there were fewer translations into Basque and Catalan and none into Galician, and therefore few studies have analyzed translations into those languages during that period. Many of those that have are case studies. One exception is Frederic Mistral i la Renaixença catalana [Frédéric Mistral and the Catalan Renaixença] (1985) by Ramon Aramon i Serra. By contrast, much has been written about eighteenth- and nineteenth-century drama translations on the island of Minorca (at the time a possession of the British Crown) and in French Catalonia. Over the course of two centuries, many plays were published that had previously been performed but had remained unpublished. One of the most prolific translators, Antoni Febrer i Cardona, was the subject of Maria Paredes i Baulida’s 434

Translation policies in Spain

essay entitled Antoni Febrer i Cardona, un humanista il·lustrat a Menorca (1761–1841) [Antoni Febrer i Cardona, an enlightened humanist on Minorca (1761–1841)]. The twentieth century saw a surge in translations into the “peripheral” languages as a form of literature to “replace” or “supplement” original-language production, which had not yet fully developed, and as a linguistic tool to create a new standard and new linguistic models. Nevertheless, few books presented studies focusing on translations in general produced during a certain era. The Translation, Reception and Catalan Literature Research Group (TRILCAT) at Pompeu Fabra University has sought to arrange partial studies into various multi-author volumes, with each volume dealing with certain types of studies. Edited by Sílvia Coll-Vinent, Cornèlia Eisner, Enric Gallén, Miquel M. Gibert, Amparo Hurtado Díaz, Marcel Ortín, Dídac Pujol and José Francisco Ruiz Casanova, these volumes are entitled Gèneres i formes en la literatura catalana d’entreguerres (1918–1939) [Genres and forms in Catalan literature during the interwar period (1918–1939)] (2005); Literatura comparada catalana i espanyola al segle xx: gèneres, lectures i traduccions (1898–1951) [Comparative twentieth-century Catalan and Spanish literature: Genres, readings and translations (1898–1951)] (2007); Llengua literària i traducció (1890–1939) [Literary language and translation (1890–1939)] (2009); La traducció i el món editorial de postguerra [Post-war translation and publishing] (2011); and Lectures dels anys cinquanta [1950s readings] (2013). The post-war period is also the focus of La traducció catalana sota el franquisme [Catalan translation under the Franco regime] (2012) by Montserrat Bacardí. In the first part of the book, the author provides an overview of Catalan translation at a time when it was a semi-clandestine censored activity. The second part is an anthology of various texts that illustrate the vicissitudes suffered by Catalan translation. The effects of censorship are analysed in detail in a dossier published by Quaderns: Revista de Traducció (2013) in the multi-author volume Traducció i censura en el franquisme [Translation and censorship during the Franco regime] (2016), edited by Laura Vilardell, and in the monographic work Tres escriptores censurades: Simone de Beauvoir, Betty Friedan & Mary McCarthy [Three censored women writers: Simone de Beauvoir, Betty Friedan & Mary McCarthy] (2016) by Pilar Godayol, which examines the labyrinth of ideological and administrative channels that the translations of the works by those three authors had to go through, thus conditioning the reception of their texts.

Historiography: original languages and authors As we have seen, since before the Civil War, there has been a tradition of studies on the reception of major Western European literary authors and the Catalan translation of their works. Occasionally, there has even been a focus on the imports of major works written in a specific language. This practice began with Fèlix Cucurull’s pioneering study on Catalonia and Portugal entitled Dos pobles ibèrics [Two Iberian peoples] (1967), which was later amplified by Víctor Martínez-Gil’s El naixement de l’iberisme catalanista [The birth of Catalanist Iberism] (1997) and by the works compiled by Martínez-Gil in “Uns apartats germans”: Portugal i Catalunya/“Irmaos afastados”: Portugal e a Catalunha [“Distant brothers”: Portugal and Catalonia] (2010). Gabriella Gavagnin conducted research on the presence of Italian literature in early-twentieth-century Catalan culture in Classicisme i Renaixement: una idea d’Itàlia durant el Noucentisme [Classicism and Renaissance: An idea from Italy during Noucentisme] (2005), as did Assumpta Camps in El Decadentismo italiano en la literatura catalana [The Italian Decadent movement in Catalan literature] (2010). Two-way traffic between German and Catalan literature are the subject of Gerhard Ackermann’s era-specific study Von Carles Riba zu Bertolt Brecht: die Rezeption der deutschen Literatur in Katalonien während der 435

Montserrat Bacardí

Franco-Zeit [From Carles Riba to Bertolt Brecht: The reception of German literature in Catalonia in the Franco era] (1990); the miscellaneous Fronteres entre l’universal i el particular en la literatura catalana [Frontiers between the universal and the specific in Catalan literature] (2007), edited by Jordi Jané-Lligé and Johannes Kabatek; and especially the two extensive volumes entitled Carrers de frontera: Passatges de la cultura alemanya a la cultura catalana [Border roads: Passages from German culture to Catalan culture], edited by Arnau Pons and Simona Škrabec and published by the Institut Ramon Llull as a cover letter for Catalan literature when it was the guest of honour at the Frankfurt Book Fair in 2007. In A esperanza bretona: Á luz dos estudios de traducción [The Breton hope: In the light of translation studies] (2002), Anxo Fernández Ocampo adopted an interdisciplinary approach midway between anthropology and translation, exploring the extent to which Breton cultural heritage shaped Galician culture (2002). Assimilation of the Graeco-Roman legacy has generated huge interest in Catalan culture, as Catalan people – as is the wont of peoples who need to reaffirm their identity – have researched their roots and sought to mirror other peoples. There are countless reference works on this subject. Els clàssics en la literatura catalana moderna [The classics of modern Catalan literature] (1973) by the Latinist Eduard Valentí stands out as a precursory book. Also of note are Josep Maria Solà’s El somni de Grècia: La recepció catalana de la cultura clàssica [The dream of Greece: The Catalan reception of classical culture] (2006) and Montserrat Franquesa’s La Fundació Bernat Metge, una obra de país (1923–1938) [The Bernat Metge Foundation: A national work (1923–1938)] (2013), about a foundation founded in 1923 to create a collection of translations of Greek and Latin classics, which is still active today. Continuing chronologically, the Catalan versions of Dante’s Divine Comedy have been the subject of many studies, including Sobre el Dant [On Dante] (2001) by Rossend Arqués and Alfons Garrigós and Una literatura entre el dogma i l’heretgia: Les influències de Dante en l’obra de Joan Maragall [A literature between dogma and heresy: Dante’s influences on the work of Joan Maragall] (2006) by Francesco Ardolino. Shakespeare has been at the very heart of the Western canon for two centuries (Bloom 1994). The Bard has been one of the most admired, performed and translated authors in Catalan, leaving us with a huge corpus of studies. In addition to the works of Par (1935) and Esquerra (1937), already cited, there are two more recent publications: Shakespeare in Catalan: Translating Imperialism (2007) by Helena Buffery and Traduir Shakespeare: Les reflexions dels traductors [Translating Shakespeare: The thoughts of the translators] (2007) by Dídac Pujol. A contemporary of Shakespeare, Cervantes and his classic novel Don Quixote have regularly been the subjects of translation studies. In El “Quixot” en català [Don Quixote in Catalan] (2006), Montserrat Bacardí and Imma Estany present around forty Catalan translations and adaptations of the Cervantine classic, some partial, some complete, but all “unnecessary” in terms of intelligibility. Among modern classics, Molière is the second most performed and translated playwright on the Catalan stage. Judit Fontcuberta acknowledged the value of this heritage in Molière a Catalunya [Molière in Catalonia] (2005) and Molière en català: Les reflexions dels traductors [Molière in Catalan: The thoughts of the translators] (2007). Jaume Tur looks at Goethe’s influence on the major poet and translator Joan Maragall in Maragall i Goethe: Les traduccions del “Faust” [Maragall and Goethe: The translations of “Faust”] (1974). As mentioned previously, before the war, Goethe’s influence had already been the subject of a study by Montoliu (1935). 436

Translation policies in Spain

The Romantic revolution did not reach the Iberian Peninsula until the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, when the Catalan Modernisme movement was already at its height, but in Catalonia, its effects were particularly strong. The works of Wagner are testimony to the exceptional impact of Romanticism in Catalonia. His works inspired the creation of the Wagnerian Association, thanks to which the musician’s entire corpus was translated. Alfonsina Janes shed light on this in L’obra de Richard Wagner a Barcelona [The work of Richard Wagner in Barcelona] (1983). Meanwhile, in Els pre-rafaelites a Catalunya [The Pre-Raphaelites in Catalonia] (1981), Maria Àngela Cerdà Surroca examined the impact of this English movement on Catalan culture and literature at the turn of the century. Similarly, Marisa Siguán analyzed how Ibsen and Hauptmann shaped Modernisme in La recepción de Ibsen y Hauptmann en el modernismo catalán [The reception of Ibsen and Hauptmann in Catalan modernism] (1990). The influence and translation of nineteenth-century literary realism was explored only partially in Traduccions catalanes d’Alphonse Daudet [Catalan translations of Alphonse Daudet] (2010) by Àngels Ribes and in the multi-author book Dickens en la cultura catalana [Dickens in Catalan culture] (2013), edited by Sílvia Coll-Vinent and Marcel Ortin. The Modernisme movement gradually became aware of the impressive work of Nietzsche and D’Annunzio, both of whom would have a major impact on Catalan letters, as explained by Assumpta Camps in La recepció de Gabriele d’Annunzio a Catalunya [The reception of Gabriele D’Annunzio in Catalonia] (1996, 1999) and Joaquim Espinós in Història d’un entusiasme: Nietzsche i la literatura catalana [History of an enthusiasm: Nietzsche and Catalan literature] (2009). More recently, Jaume Medina has examined the mark that Rilke’s poetry left on Catalan literature in El crepuscle de la poesia: Rainer Maria Rilke: un capítol de la història literària catalana [The dawn of poetry: Rainer Maria Rilke: A chapter in the history of Catalan literature] (2009). Silvia Coll-Vinent looked at the presence of the novels and thought of Chesterton in G. K. Chesterton a Catalunya i altres estudis sobre una certa anglofília a Catalunya (1916–1938) [G.K. Chesterton in Catalonia and other studies on a certain Anglophilia in Catalonia (1916–1938)] (2010). The translation journal Quaderns: Revista de Traducció (2014) devoted an extensive dossier to the reception of Virginia Woolf in Catalonia; and Xavier Pla edited a volume offering a rather critical analysis of Maurras’s reception in Maurras a Catalunya: Elements per a un debat [Maurras in Catalonia: Elements for debate], as well as a volume on the reception of Proust in Proust a Catalunya [Proust in Catalonia] (2016). Pla also wrote the essay Simenon i la connexió catalana [Simenon and the Catalan connection] (2007), which examines the difficulties encountered when the famous Belgian author’s novels were brought to Catalonia at the height of the dictatorship. Over the last twenty years, Asian literature has also begun to make headway into Catalonia and is being assimilated. Enric Balaguer offered an overview in Ressonàncies orientals: Budisme, taoisme i literatura [Echoes from the East: Buddhism, Taoism and literature] (1999). Some years later, Jordi Mas edited two multi-author volumes on the appropriation of tanka and haiku, the two Japanese poetry genres that have contributed the most to Western poetry: La tanka catalana [The Catalan tanka] (2011) and L’haiku en llengua catalana [Haiku in Catalan] (2014). Mas had already published his doctoral thesis, entitled Josep Maria Junoy i Joan Salvat-Papasseit: dues aproximacions a l’haiku [Josep Maria Junoy and Joan SalvatPapasseit: Two approaches to haiku] (2004).

Historiography: translators and translations Unlike articles, few books in any of the three languages (or in Spanish for that matter) focus on a specific translator’s works or a specific translation. There are, of course, biographies or 437

Montserrat Bacardí

literary analyses of major authors/translators, discussing their translations tangentially but not as a main focus. The books that do focus on a specific translator or translation are therefore special cases. One example is Josep Vallverdú’s pioneering monographic work entitled Magí Morera i Galícia, traductor de Shakespeare [Magí Morera i Galícia, Shakespearian translator] (1982). Carles Riba is one of the Catalan translators who has generated the most critical bibliography. Examples include: Carles Riba als Ubersetzer aus dem Deutschen [Carles Riba as a translator from German] (1985) by Birgit Friese; Carles Riba, hel·lenista i humanista [Carles Riba, Hellenist and humanist] (1984) and Carles Riba: La vessant alemanya del seu pensament i de la seva obra [Carles Riba: The German angle of his thought and his works] (1987), both by Manuel Balasch; Carles Riba i Friedrich Hölderlin [Carles Riba and Friedrich Hölderlin] (1987) by Jaume Medina; Carles Riba i la traducció [Carles Riba and translation] (2006) by Jordi Malé; and L’hàbit de la dificultat: Wilhelm von Humboldt i Carles Riba davant l’Agamèmnon d’Èsquil [The habit of difficulty: Wilhelm von Humboldt and Carles Riba faced with Aeschylus’s Agamemnon] (2015) by Raül Garrigasait. The major poet and prolific translator Marià Manent has been the subject of two very different studies: El llegat anglès de Marià Manent [Marià Manent’s English legacy] (1998) by Montserrat Roser Puig and Marià Manent i la traducció [Marià Manent and translation] (2009) by Jordi Marrugat. Traducció, edició, ideologia [Translation, publishing, ideology] (2009) by Francesc Parcerisas is a very different work, offering a sociological analysis of the translations of two works of literature that shaped the birth of Western culture: the Bible and the Odyssey. As early as 1990, Xesús González Gómez dedicated Álvaro Cunqueiro, traductor [Álvaro Cunqueiro, translator] to the renowned Galician author. Almost twenty years later, Xosé Manuel Dasilva wrote Ramón Piñeiro, traductor [Ramón Piñeiro, translator] (2009), dedicated to a leading Galician post – Civil War intellectual who had already been the subject of biographies and partial studies of his oeuvre. In Itzulpenari buruzko gogoeta eta itzulpen-praktika Joseba Sarrionandiaren lanetan [Transation and reflections on translation in the work of Joseba Sarrionandia] (2012), Aiora Jaka examines the translations by Joseba Sarrionandia, a poet, fiction writer and essayist who translated Coleridge, Eliot and Pessoa into Basque. It is important to note, too, that in recent years, some translator-academics who have made successful, extensive contributions to translation and academia have written many articles and some books in which they reflect on their own experience and on translation in general. Such contributions include: De bona llengua, de bon humor (1994), which is a compilation of articles on language that Joaquim Mallafrè published in the newspaper Diari de Barcelona; Uns i altres: Literatura i traducció (2016), a series of articles, also by Mallafrè, about Catalan literature and literary translations from or into Catalan; Introducció a Shakespeare [Introduction to Shakespeare] (2000) by Salvador Oliva; Tots els colors del camaleó: Un assaig sobre la traducció [All the colours of the chameleon: An essay on translation] (2008) by Joan Fontcuberta; L’ofici de traduir: Shakespeare, un home de teatre [The translation profession: Shakespeare, a man of the theatre] (2010) by Joan Sellent; and Sense mans: Metàfores i papers sobre la traducció [No hands: Metaphors and papers on translation] (2013) by Francesc Parcerisas.

Exported literatures Translations from Basque, Catalan and Galician into other languages ​​have grown exponentially in recent decades as the literary systems of the three languages have become firmly established and occupied a clearly defined, widely recognized space within each linguistic area. There is a clear, simple pattern: the more successful – and therefore more prestigious – that a language 438

Translation policies in Spain

is in its home market, the more translations it generates into foreign languages. The opposite is also true: the more successful a literature becomes internationally, the more popular it becomes in its homeland, especially for languages that are less widely spoken (Sapiro 2012, 373). However, academic research on translation out of Basque, Catalan and Galician into foreign languages is less comprehensive and more fragmented than research on translation into those languages. There are compendiums and data analyses on translated Basque and Galician literature, but only a myriad of scattered studies for Catalan literature. Edited by Ana Luna Alonso, Áurea Fernández Rodríguez, Iolanda Galanes Santos and Silvia Montero Küpper, the book Traducción de una cultura emergente: La literatura gallega contemporánea en el exterior [Translation of an emerging culture: Contemporary Galician literature outside Galicia] (2012) uses a sociological approach to translation to explore the mechanisms through which a “literature of resistance” produced between 1980 and 2010 has reached a large number of languages. In addition to information and data, the authors provide analysis parameters applicable to other contexts. Similarly, having compiled the catalogue Euskal Literatura Itzuliaren (ELI), Elizabete Manterola Agirrezabalaga published La literatura vasca traducida/Euskal literatura itzulia. Bernardo Atxagaren lanak erdaretan [Basque literature translated: The works of Bernardo Atxaga in other languages] (2014). There are several notable parallels between the two literary systems: the translations of general fiction and of children’s and young adult literature, which outnumber those of poetry, drama and essays; the abundance of self-translations; the many translations into Spanish; and the use of Spanish as a relay or source language (a clear symptom of the weak position of the cultures of origin). Catalan is in a somewhat stronger situation, with production levels “very similar to that of other languages of culture” (Mallafrè 2009, 16). As a result, inventories and works focused on a specific target language have been published, including Bibliografia (1974–2000): Catalao-português, portuguès-català [Bibliography (1974–2000): Catalan-Portuguese, Portuguese-Catalan] (2001) by Ana Madureira and Assumpta Forteza; Bibliografia de la literatura catalana en versió alemanya [Bibliography of German versions of Catalan literature] (2005) by Ferran Robles i Sabater; and special dossiers by the journal Quaderns: Revista de Traducció in 2004, 2008 and 2011 on translations into Catalan and on translations from Catalan exported to Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia, Macedonia, Romania, Bulgaria, Ireland and Iceland. For many years, studies have analyzed the international reach of works by some of the most illustrious authors and the translations of those works. As one might expect, the main focus is on old rather than contemporary literature. One early groundbreaking study was Traducciones castellanas de Ausias March en la Edad de Oro [Spanish translations of Ausias March during the Golden Age] (1946), written during the post – Civil War era by the mediaevalist Martí de Riquer. The oldest translations of Joanot Martorell’s great Catalan chivalresque novel Tirant lo Blanch are analysed by Vicent Martines in El Tirant poliglota: Estudi sobre el Tirant lo Blanch a partir de les seues traduccions espanyola, italiana i francesa dels segles xvi-xviii [The polyglot Tirant: A study on Tirant lo Blanch based on the Spanish, Italian and French translations in the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries] (1997) and by Cesáreo Calvo Rigual in Estudi contrastiu del lèxic de la traducció italiana del Tirant lo Blanc (1538) [Contrastive study of vocabulary in the Italian translation of Tirant lo Blanch (1538)] (2012). Rosalía de Castro’s poetry during the Galician Rexurdimento was so popular that Carme Hermida Gulías researched its impact in Rosalía de Castro na prensa barcelonesa (1863– 1899) [Rosalía de Castro in the Barcelona press (1863–1899)] (1993). Similarly, Joan Martori studies the success that Catalan playwright Àngel Guimerà enjoyed during the Catalan Renaixença in La projecció d’Àngel Guimerà a Madrid [The impact of Àngel Guimera in 439

Montserrat Bacardí

Madrid] (1995). Juan M. Ribera Llopis adopts a similar focus in Projecció i recepció hispanes de Caterina Albert i Paradís, Víctor Català, i de la seva obra [Hispanic impact and reception of Caterina Albert i Paradís, Víctor Català and her works] (2007), which looks at Caterina Albert, the popular author of the novel Solitud, written under her pseudonym Victor Català. Lecturas alleas [Foreign readings] (1996) by Antón Figueroa looks at the work undertaken to create the journal Nós to bring a “weak”, unknown literature to the French market. Despite these endeavours, translations into Basque, Catalan and Galician are far more numerous than translations out of those languages, a situation typical of literary systems that have been marginalized. For example, in 2010 there were 3,907 translations into Basque but only 994 out of the language (Manterola 2014, 55), and the vast majority of translations out of Basque have been published since the 1980s, as is the case for Galician and to a lesser extent Catalan. This imbalance in the direction of translations and the fact that this is a new area of study explain the disproportionate amount of research on translations into, rather than out of, those languages.

Miscellaneous translation studies Outside the area of the historiography of translation, which is so dominant, Basque, Catalan and Galician translation studies have developed along different paths, all of them limited in scope. Very often, authors in those lands have decided to write in languages that give them access to a much wider audience (mainly Spanish and English), especially on subjects not directly involving the language. It is widely known that ‘small’ languages have problems related to diglossia, one of the most obvious examples being the difficulty of doing science in those languages. To provide learning resources to translation students, a series of manuals has been produced, each dealing with a specific aspect of language or a specific field, many of which have been published in the “Translation and Interpreting Library” series established in 1995 through an agreement among four Catalan universities. The manuals are by Muñoz Martín (1995); Agost and Monzó (2001); Ainaud, Espunya and Pujol (2003); Chaume (2003); Montalt (2005); Oliver, Moré and Climent (2007); van Lawick (2009); Chaume and García de Toro (2010); Ugarte (2010); Castellanos (2010); Verdegal (2011); Bacardí et  al. (2012); Bartoll (2012); Riera (2014); Martín-Mor, Piqué, and Sánchez-Gijón (2016). Of the various fields of translation studies that exist today, literary translation, in the broadest sense of the term, remains the field that has attracted most attention in Basque, Catalan and Galician, thanks to the corpus of translations that exist in those three languages. As already mentioned in this paper, special attention has been devoted to self-translation, which is nearly always from a ‘minority’ language to a ‘majority’ language, or from the author’s ‘own’ language to his or her ‘acquired’ language, the aim being to reach a broader audience and to take responsibility for a version that often becomes the source text for translations into other languages (especially for works originally written in Basque). The main contributions to the study of self-translation include Autoitzulpengintza euskal haur eta gazte literaturan [Self-translation of Basque children’s and young adult literature] (2005) by Manu López Gaseni; Estudios sobre la autotraducción en el espacio ibérico [Studies on self-translation in the Iberian zone] (2013), a collection of articles by Xosé Manuel Dasilva; and Autotraducció: De la teoria a la pràctica [Self-translation: From theory to practice] (2014) by Josep Miquel Ramis. Two other wide-ranging volumes contain numerous contributions to the study of self-translation between Iberian languages: Traducción y autotraducción en las literaturas ibéricas [Translation and self-translation in Iberian literatures] (2010) edited by Enric Gallén, Francisco Lafarga and 440

Translation policies in Spain

Luis Pegenaute; and Aproximaciones a la autotraducción [Approaches to self-translation] (2011) edited by Xosé Manuel Dasilva and Helena Tanqueiro. With the aim of developing a text-analysis model combining a linguistic focus with a focus on literary studies, Josep Marco published El fil d’Ariadna: Anàlisi estilística i traducció literària [Ariadne’s thread: Stylistic analysis and literary translation] (2002). Victòria Alsina also proposed a model for the linguistic and stylistic analysis of literary translations in Jane Austen: Les traduccions al català [Jane Austen: Translations into Catalan] (2008). Heike van Lawick analysed metaphors, phraseology and translation in Metàfora, fraseologia i traducció: Aplicació als somatismes en una obra de Bertolt Brecht [Metaphor, phraseology and translation: Application to body-part idioms in a work by Bertolt Brecht] (2006), while Ramon Lladó looked at puns in La paraula revessa: Estudi sobre la traducció dels jocs de mots [The unruly word: A study on the translation of puns] (2002). Dolors Cinca wrote her thesis – Oralitat, narrativa i traducció: Reflexions a l’entorn de “Les mil i una nits” [Orality, narrative and translation: Reflections around “One thousand and one nights”] (2005) – about her own translation of the classic collection of tales. Eva Espasa dealt with the specificities of drama translation in La traducció dalt de l’escenari [Translation on stage] (2001). Finally, Caterina Briguglia discussed the controversial issue of dialect in translation in Dialecte i traducció: El cas català [Dialect and translation: The Catalan case] (2013). Pilar Godayol’s Espais de frontera: Gènere i traducció [Intervening spaces: Gender and translation] (2000) is situated at the intersection between gender and translation, and provides the groundwork for this binomial. Over a decade later, Godayol and Bacardí focused on the Catalan tradition in Les traductores i la tradició: 20 pròlegs del segle xx [Women translators and tradition: 20 twentieth-century forewords] (2013). Meanwhile, Marta Marín-Dòmine’s Traduir el desig: Psicoanàlisi i llenguatge [Translating desire: Psychoanalysis and language] (2004) is a contribution to translation theory based on Lacan’s development of Freud’s psychoanalytic discourse. In the compilation Traducció i dinàmica sociolingüística [Translation and sociolinguistic dynamics] (2002), edited by Oscar Diaz Fouces, Marta García González and Joan Costa Carreras, a group of lecturers at Pompeu Fabra University and the University of Vigo explore the social function of translation. Edited by Joaquim Mallafrè, ii Jornades per a la Cooperació en l’Estandardització Lingüística (2002) contains the papers presented at the 2nd Conference for Cooperation on Language Standardization, which focused on the various fields of translation in which the standardization of Catalan was taking place. Xesús M. Mosquera Carregal compiled the papers from Lingua e tradución: ix Xornadas sobre Lingua e Usos [Language and translation: 9th Conference on Language and Uses] for the same purpose for the Galician language (2013). Publications such as L’ús de corpus en la traducció especialitzada [The use of corpora in specialized translation] (2004) by Pilar Sánchez-Gijón and Aspectes de terminologia, neologia i traducció [Aspects of terminology, neology and translation] (2010), edited by Eusebi Coromina and Josep M. Mestres, have explored the links between translation and terminology. There are, of course, many comparative studies looking at specific language pairs, mainly for the purpose of foreign-language learning. These studies use translation as a tool, but do not explore translation in any depth. Other publications are centred around translation studies: Os falsos amigos da traducción: criterios de estudio e clasificación [False friends in translation: study and classification criteria] (1997) and Estilística comparada da traducción: proposta metodolóxica e aplicación práctica ó estudio do corpus TECTRA de traduccións do inglés ó galego [Comparative stylistics in translation: a methodological proposal and practical application to the study of the TECTRA corpus of translations from English to Galician] (2001a), both by 441

Montserrat Bacardí

Alberto Álvarez Lugrís; and La traducción entre lenguas en contacto: catalán y español [Translation between languages in contact: Catalan and Spanish] (2009) by Cristina García de Toro. Other recent monographic works from different fields – some more applied than others – have often been pioneering. In the field of scientific and technical translation, examples include Correcció i traducció de textos informàtics [Editing and translating IT texts] (2002) by Anna I. Montesinos and Llum Bracho; and Environmental Translation in Catalan: Culture, Ideology and the Environment (2010) by Llum Bracho. For legal translation, Les plomes de la justícia: La traducció al català dels textos jurídics [The quills of justice: Translating legal texts into Catalan] (2006), edited by Esther Monzó, offers an overall perspective of the field, while two other publications analyse a specific language pair: Criteris de traducció de textos normatius del castellà al català [Criteria for translating regulatory texts from Spanish to Catalan] (1999 and 2010), published by the Generalitat de Catalunya (the Government of Catalonia); and Materials i diccionari per a la traducció juridicoadministrativa francès-català [Resources and dictionary for legal and administrative translation from French to Catalan] (2010) by Laia Baqué, Carles Castellanos and Ramon Lladó. In the field of audiovisual translation, which has received a lot of attention in recent times, notable publications include Natàlia Izard’s pioneering La traducció cinematogràfica [Film translation] (1992); the guide for translators and dubbers entitled Criteris lingüístics sobre traducció i doblatge [Linguistic criteria for translation and dubbing] (1997), published by Catalan public television’s language standardization commission; the papers compiled by Rosa Agost and Frederic Chaume in La traducción en los medios audiovisuales [Translation in the audiovisual media] (2001); L’audiodescripció en català [Audio description in Catalan] (2009) by Margarida Bassols and Laura Santamaria; and Lenguas minoritarias y traducción: La traducción audiovisual en euskera [Minority languages and translation: Audiovisual translation in Basque] (2012) by Josu Barambones Zubiria. The latter contains the first state of the art of social mediation and interpreting, in a paper by the MIRAS group at the Autonomous University of Barcelona (UAB) entitled Comunicar en la diversitat: Intèrprets, traductors i mediadors als serveis públics [Communication in diversity: Interpreters, translators and mediators in public services] (2011).

Research groups for translation studies In addition to this concise review of published books, we must also very briefly mention research conducted by university research teams from different fields that focuses, if only partially, on translation into Basque, Catalan and Galician. This area of research is a work in progress that will undoubtedly need to be monitored and considered. Headed for many years by Raquel Merino, the University of the Basque Country’s Translation, Literature and Audiovisual Media (TRALIMA) team has focused primarily on the effects that censorship had on the translations of literature, films and musicals from English and German to Spanish, and perhaps also into Basque (through the TRACE project, led by Ibon Uribarri). The University of Vigo’s Library of Galician Translation (BITRAGA), curated by Ana Luna, analyzes translations from and into Galician since the 1980s from various perspectives. The group has compiled an exhaustive inventory of translations in both directions, which is available on the library’s website. The group has produced several monographic publications to draw guidelines for the mapping of Galician translations. The University of Vigo’s Computational Linguistics Seminar (SLI) and the same university’s Galician Language Technologies and Applications Research Group (TALG) explore the 442

Translation policies in Spain

linguistic applications of information technology, machine translation, IT translation support tools, corpus linguistics, corpus-based translation studies, lexicography and computational terminology. The TALG research group has developed numerous language-technology resources that they make available to the public. Led by Oscar Díaz Fouces, the Free Translation Technologies Study Group (GETLT) at the University of Vigo conducts research and creates relevant tools to analyse and promote the use of free software professionally and in translation teaching. Also at the University of Vigo, the Translation & Paratranslation research group, led by José Yuste Frías, defines itself as a “transdisciplinary” group to explore new perspectives regarding theory, teaching and professional practice in translation studies. The group’s research lines look at the relations between translation and a range of other fields: anthropology, philosophy, images, literature, memory, cultural fusion and migration. The group promotes research and knowledge transfer through new technologies. At the University of Alicante, the International Virtual Institute of Translation (IVITRA), directed by Vicent Martines, is researching and publishing medieval Catalan literature translated into other languages as part of its creation of a cross-border corpus of classic European literature. Clàssics valencians multilingües [Multilingual Valencian classics] (2007), edited by Vicent Martines, Maria Àngels Fuster Ortuño and Elena Sánchez López, was the group’s first publication. The Valencian Corpus of Translated Literature (COVALT) is a group at Jaume I University in Castellón de la Plana, directed first by Josep Marco and then by Josep Roderic Guzmán Pitarch. Using an electronic corpus of translated fiction published between 1990 and 2005, it conducts research on areas such as corpus linguistics and translated literature, the nature of the language of translated texts compared with source texts (phraseology, interference, standardization, creativity, style, etc.), and contrasts between pairs of languages (from German, English, Spanish and French). In Barcelona, the Translation, Reception and Catalan Literature Research Group (TRILCAT) at Pompeu Fabra University, directed by Enric Gallén, looks at contact between literatures and analyzes the role of authors and translators as cultural mediators. The group has held many symposia and published around a dozen multi-author books. Since 2011, it has published the annual TRILCAT Yearbook. The group’s website has three databases: Reception and Translation Studies, Translation of Literary Works into Catalan (nineteenth century to 2000) and Translation of Catalan Literary Works into Spanish. The UAB’s TRANSLAT research group, directed by Lluís Cabré and Josep Pujol, examines translations into medieval Catalan (1300–1500), and is part of the broader NARPAN platform, which describes itself as a “Medieval Literature and Culture Space”. TRANSLAT surveys translations into medieval Catalan (accessible in a database) and studies aspects such as textual variation with respect to the source text, translation techniques, translation reception, and creative uses of translations. Coordinated by Montserrat Bacardí, the Contemporary Catalan Translation Study Group (GETCC) at the UAB researches and disseminates translations published in Francoist Spain and in exile, as well as those published since 1975. The research looks at theoretical, linguistic, sociolinguistic and sociocultural aspects. The group has published previously unpublished translations, collections of correspondence, anthologies and monographic studies through the “Versions” and “Visions” collections. In conjunction with the university’s Humanities Library, it manages various documentary sources on contemporary authors and translators. The University of Vic has a “Gender Studies Group: Translation, Literature, History and Communication” (GETLIHC), directed by Pilar Godayol. One of the areas it researches is 443

Montserrat Bacardí

the intersection between gender and translation, both by applying theoretical thought and by seeking to uncover a largely unknown past of women translators and translations that have remained anonymous or have been silenced or forgotten. The group has also published many individual and collective works. Also at the University of Vic, the “Contemporary Literary Texts: Study, Publication and Translation” group (TEXLICO), coordinated by Ramon Pinyol Torrents, has several lines of research, one of which looks at publishing houses, translation and reception in Catalonia. Thanks to the research, the group has produced many publications. In addition, Manuel Llanas used the research for L’edició a Catalunya [Publishing in Catalonia] (2002–2007), a comprehensive, six-volume history that Llanas wrote in a personal capacity.

Future directions As we have seen, research on Basque, Catalan and Galician translation is weighted disproportionately towards translations in specific directions and fields. This clearly reflects imbalances among the types of translation that occur to and from those languages, as is usually the case for stratified cultural systems (Even-Zohar 1990). Even today, literary translation – or, perhaps more accurately, translation for publication in general – is still much stronger than scientific translation and interpreting, which account for only a token proportion of all translation into those languages. Between the two are machine translation, administrative and legal translation, and the translation of journalism, advertising and audiovisual media. The prominence of these forms of translation depend on a range of factors, including legislation, political support and market demand. Of course, the more translations a community produces, the more research they generate on those translations, since one cannot research what does not exist. Consequently, for these languages to exist in an entirely ‘normal’ manner after centuries of subordination and especially the unfortunate period of Franco’s dictatorship, translations in all directions and in all fields must be promoted, including where translations are essentially ‘unnecessary’, since almost anyone who is able to read these three languages today is perfectly capable of understanding Spanish. The target audience understand Spanish, and sometimes English too, but it is still necessary to translate a Jane Austen or Ken Follet novel, the latest feature film, or a television advertisement into Basque, Catalan and Galician to ensure equal opportunities and to create cultural assets in those three languages that are comparable with the norm in other European languages. A knock-on effect of such translations is that they confer strength and prestige on languages that have only a few million speakers, are not spoken anywhere overseas and must compete with other languages with tens or hundreds of millions of speakers. In other words, these translations help to reduce the widespread “uneven distribution of literary resources among national literary spaces” (Casanova 1999, 120) in a world that, in other aspects, is more global than ever. These marginalized languages have sought to study history  – especially the history of ­translation – as a way of forging an identity. In particular, the glorious past of Catalan tradition has been the subject of countless books and articles on a range of topics. Nevertheless, all three traditions are lacking comprehensive studies (such as detailed, extensive and systematic translation histories) and detailed studies (there are none that look at many translators or many translations). Reissues of old translations of unquestionable value are rare. Unpublished translations (many of which survive from certain eras, such as Spain’s post-Civil War period) could also be unearthed and, if appropriate, published. So could other documents that would help people understand the past, such as memoirs, newspaper articles and translators’ letters.

444

Translation policies in Spain

Because translation is a social phenomenon, it has very fruitful relations with related disciplines, ranging from politics and sociology to publishing and stylistics. There are many different perspectives and focuses of study, giving rise to a variety of unexpected results. Translation theory is underdeveloped in Basque, Catalan and Galician, even though there are a few isolated texts that are excellent and highly relevant. Not even the major works of contemporary translation studies have been translated into those languages. However, to consolidate any scientific discipline, it seems essential for each language to create its “own” way of thinking. Furthermore, various authorities ought to promote policies and programmes to conduct research on the relations and parallels between production in the past and in the present in all the official languages of Spain (and perhaps also in Portuguese), and on translations that have taken place in all possible directions, an aspect that has been rather neglected so far. Indications suggest such research would be very fruitful. For instance, the second most common target language (after Spanish) of translations from Basque is Catalan, and the fourth most common is Galician. This means that the languages of Spain are the main target languages of translations from Basque, accounting for 68% of all translations from that language (Manterola 2014, 132–38). It is irrefutable that the past twenty to twenty-five years have seen the birth of Basque, Catalan and Galician translation studies, despite their limitations explained in this paper. It is also irrefutable that they have experienced remarkable growth compared with other languages in a similar situation. Translation studies in Basque, Catalan and Galician remain weak in some aspects, perhaps too many, but at least they now exist.

Recommended reading Bacardí, Montserrat, and Pilar Godayol, dir. 2011. Diccionari de la traducció catalana. Vic, Spain: Eumo. This compilation of articles looks at the most prominent translators of all time who have translated from any language into Catalan. Around a thousand entries written by some eighty specialists provide biographical details, a presentation and review of the person’s translations and a bibliography of the works translated and the studies on those translations. Dasilva, Xosé Manuel. 2008. O alleo é noso: Contribucións para a historia de traducción en Galicia. Noia: Toxosoutos. As suggested by the title (That which is foreign is ours: Contributions to a history of translation in Galicia), this compilation of articles seeks to strengthen the foundations for a history of Galician translation. From various perspectives, the forty or so texts analyze the contributions made over the course of more than a century by writer-translators from Rosalía de Castro to Manuel Rivas. Lafarga, Francisco, and Luis Pegenaute, eds. 2004. Historia de la traducción en España. Salamanca: Ambos Mundos. In the part of the book entitled “La traducción en otros ámbitos lingüísticos y culturales” [“Translation in other linguistic and cultural domains”], Josep Pujol, Josep Solervicens, Enric Gallén and Marcel Ortín dealt with the history of Catalan translation, Camiño Noia with the history of Galician translation, and Xabier Mendiguren with the history of Basque translation. Luna Alonso, Ana, Áurea Fernández Rodríguez, Iolanda Galanes Santos, and Silvia Montero Küpper, eds. 2012. Traducción de una cultura emergente: La literatura gallega contemporánea en el exterior. Bern: Peter Lang. Using a sociological approach to translation, this book explores the mechanisms through which a “literature of resistance” produced between 1980 and 2010 has reached a large number of languages. In addition to information and data, the authors provide analysis parameters applicable to other contexts.

445

Montserrat Bacardí ———. 2015. Literaturas extranjeras y desarrollo cultural: Hacia un cambio de paradigma en la traducción literaria gallega. Bern: Peter Lang. The various authors’ contributions examine literature imported into Galician since 1980, classifying works by genre (narrative, poetry, drama, essay, and children’s and young adult literature) and looking at concepts such as ideology, the publishing market and the professionalization of translation. Manterola Agirrezabalaga, Elizabete. 2014. La literatura vasca traducida/Euskal literatura itzulia. Bernardo Atxagaren lanak erdaretan. Bern: Peter Lang/Bilbao: Universidad del País Vasco. The author analyzes how Basque literature has been exported and translated. She notes that translations of general fiction and of children’s and young adult literature outnumber those of poetry, drama and essays. She also looks at the abundance of self-translations, the many translations into Spanish, and the use of Spanish as a relay language.

Note 1 This chapter is the result of work by the consolidated research group “Grup d’Estudi de la Traducció Catalana Contemporània” (GETCC) (2014 SGR 285), of the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, and the R&D project “La traducción catalana contemporánea: censura y políticas editoriales, género e ideología (1939–2000)” (FFI2014-52989-C2-1-P), financed by the Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad. Author’s ORCID number: 0000-0001-9593-7928. Email: [email protected]. Translation of the chapter by Timothy Barton.

Bibliography Ackermann, Gerhard. 1990. Von Carles Riba zu Bertolt Brecht: die Rezeption der deutschen Literatur in Katalonien während der Franco-Zeit. Bonn: Romanistischer Verlag. Agost, Rosa, and Frederic Chaume. 2001. La traducción en los medios audiovisuales. Castelló: Universitat Jaume I. Agost, Rosa, and Esther Monzó. 2001. Teoria i pràctica de la traducció general espanyol-català. Castelló: Universitat Jaume I. Ainaud, Jordi, Espunya, Anna, and Dídac Pujol. 2003. Manual de traducció anglès-català. Vic, Spain: Eumo. Alsina, Victòria. 2008. Jane Austen: Les traduccions al català. Vic, Spain: Eumo. Álvarez Lugrís, Alberto. 1997. Os falsos amigos da traducción: criterios de estudio e clasificación. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. ———. 2001a. Estilística comparada da traducción: proposta metodolóxica e aplicación práctica ó estudio do corpus TECTRA de traduccións do inglés ó galego. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. ———. 2001b. “Notas para una historia de la traducción literaria en Galicia.” In Trasvases culturales: literatura, cine, traducción, edited by Pajares, Eterio, Merino, Raquel, and J. M. Santamaría, 61–70. Vitoria-Gasteiz: Universidad del País Vasco. Aramon i Serra, Ramon. 1985. Frederic Mistral i la Renaixença catalana. Barcelona: Rafael Dalmau. Ardolino, Francesco. 2006. Una literatura entre el dogma i l’heretgia: Les influències de Dante en l’obra de Joan Maragall. Barcelona: Cruïlla/Fundació Joan Maragall. Arenas, Carme, and Simona Škrabec. 2006. La literatura catalana i la traducció en un món globalitzat/ Catalan literature and translation in a globalized world. Barcelona: Institució de les Lletres Catalanes/Institut Ramon Llull. Arqués, Rossend, and Alfons Garrigós. 2001. Sobre el Dant. Barcelona: Claret/Fundació Joan Maragall. Bacardí, Montserrat. 2002. “Notes on the History of Translation into Catalan.” Catalan Writing 17–18: 13–99. ———. 2012. La traducció catalana sota el franquisme. Lleida: Punctum. Bacardí, Montserrat, Ona Domènech, Cristina Gelpí, and Marisa Presas. 2012. Teoria i pràctica de la traducció. Barcelona: Universitat Oberta de Catalunya. Bacardí, Montserrat, and Imma Estany. 2006. El “Quixot” en català. Barcelona: Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. Bacardí, Montserrat, Joan Fontcuberta, and Francesc Parcerisas, eds. 1998. Cent anys de traducció al català (1891–1990). Antologia. Vic: Eumo.

446

Translation policies in Spain Bacardí, Montserrat, and Pilar Godayol, eds. 2010. Una impossibilitat possible. Trenta anys de traducció als Països Catalans (1975–2005). Vilanova i la Geltrú: El Cep i la Nansa. ———, dir. 2011. Diccionari de la traducció catalana. Vic, Spain: Eumo. ———. 2013. Les traductores i la tradició: 20 pròlegs del segle xx. Lleida: Punctum. ———. 2014. “Catalan Women Translators: An Introductory Overview.” The Translator 20 (2): 144–61. Badia, Lola. 1991. “Traduccions al català dels segles xiv-xv i innovació cultural i literària.” Estudi General 11: 31–50. Balaguer, Enric. 1999. Ressonàncies orientals: Budisme, taoisme i literatura. València: Edicions 3 i 4. Balasch, Manuel. 1984. Carles Riba, hel·lenista i humanista. Barcelona: Barcino. ———. 1987. Carles Riba: La vessant alemanya del seu pensament i de la seva obra. Barcelona: Edicions del Mall. Baltrusch, Burghard, Pérez Durán, Gabriel, and Kathrin Sartingen, eds. 2010. Soldando Sal. Galician Studies in Translation & Paratranslation. Munich: Martin Meidenbauer Verlag. Baqué, Laia, Castellanos, Carles, and Ramon Lladó. 2010. Materials i diccionari per a la traducció juridicoadministrativa francès-català. Bellaterra: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Barambones Zubiria, Josu. 2012. Lenguas minoritarias y traducción: La traducción audiovisual en euskera. Castelló: Universitat Jaume I. Barceló Crespí, Maria, and Gabriel Ensenyat Pujol. 1996. Ferrando Valentí i la seva família. Barcelona: Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. Bartoll, Eduard. 2012. La subtitulació: Aspectes teòrics i pràctics. Vic, Spain: Eumo. Bassols, Margarida, and Laura Santamaria. 2009. L’audiodescripció en català. Bellaterra: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Baxter, Robert Neal. 2002. “El paper de la traducció en la consolidació de la percepció social del gallec com a Abstandsprache.” Quaderns. Revista de Traducció 7: 167–81. ———. 2010. “Tradución e androcentrismo: quen traduce que(n) e como na Galiza.” In Lingua e usos: Lingua e Xénero, edited by Xesús Mosquera, 115–35. A Coruña: Universidade da Coruña. Benguerel, Xavier. 1974. Relacions. Barcelona: Selecta. Bloom, Harold. 1994. The Western Canon: The Books and School of the Ages. New York: Harcourt Brace. Bracho, Llum. 2010. Environmental Translation in Catalan: Culture, Ideology and the Environment. Saarbrucken: Lap Lambert Academic. Branchadell, Albert, and Lovell Margaret West, eds. 2004. Less Translated Languages. Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Briguglia, Caterina. 2013. Dialecte i traducció: El cas català. Vic, Spain: Eumo. Buffery, Helena. 2007. Shakespeare in Catalan: Translating Imperialism. Cardiff: University of Wales. Buján Otero, Patricia, and María Xesús Nogueira Pereira. 2011. “La (re)escritura de los márgenes: Traducción y género en la literatura gallega.” MonTI. Monografías de traducción e interpretación 3: 131–60. Calvo Rigual, Cesáreo. 2012. Estudi contrastiu del lèxic de la traducció italiana del Tirant lo Blanc (1538). Barcelona: Institut d’Estudis Catalans. Camps, Assumpta. 1996. La recepció de Gabriele d’Annunzio a Catalunya. Barcelona: Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. ———. 1999. La recepció de Gabriele d’Annunzio a Catalunya: traduccions i textos inèdits. Barcelona: Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. ———. 2010. El Decadentismo italiano en la literatura catalana. Bern: Peter Lang. Carner, Josep. 1944. “De l’art de traduir.” Lletres 3: 4–6. Casanova, Pascale. 1999. La République mondiale des lettres. Paris: Seuil. Casares, Carlos, dir. 2003. Catálogo de obras literarias en lingua galega traducidas a utros idiomas. Santiago de Compostela: Consello da Cultura Galega. Castellanos, Carles. 2010. Traducció i ideologia: Síntesi de continguts i temes de debat. Girona: Documenta Universitària. Castro, Olga. 2011. “Traductoras gallegas del siglo xx: Reescribiendo la historia de la traducción desde el género y la nación.” MonTI. Monografías de traducción e interpretación 3: 107–30. Castro, Plácido R., Tobío Fernández, Lois, and F. M. Delgado Gurríaran. 1949. Poesía inglesa e francesa vertida ao galego. Buenos Aires: Alborada. Cerdà Surroca, Maria Àngela. 1981. Els pre-rafaelites a Catalunya. Barcelona: Curial. Chaume, Frederic. 2003. Doblatge i subtitulació per a la TV. Vic, Spain: Eumo.

447

Montserrat Bacardí Chaume, Frederic, and Cristina García de Toro. 2010. Teories actuals de la traductologia. Alzira: Bromera. Cifuentes, Lluís. 2002. La ciència en català a l’Edat Mitjana i el Renaixement. Barcelona/Palma: Universitat de Barcelona/Universitat de les Illes Balears. Cinca, Dolors. 2005. Oralitat, narrativa i traducció: Reflexions a l’entorn de “Les mil i una nits”. Vic, Spain: Eumo. Coll-Vinent, Sílvia. 2010. G. K. Chesterton a Catalunya i altres estudis sobre una certa anglofília a Catalunya (1916–1938). Barcelona: Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. Coll-Vinent, Sílvia, Eisner, Cornèlia, and Enric Gallén, eds. 2011. La traducció i el món editorial de postguerra. Lleida: Punctum. Coll-Vinent, Sílvia, and Marcel Ortín, eds. 2013. Dickens en la cultura catalana. Lleida: Punctum. Constenla Bergueiro, Gonzalo. 2004. “La traducción literaria en gallego: 1975–2000.” In Ética y política de la traducción en la época contemporánea, editey by Assumpta Camps, 131–46. Barcelona: PPU. Coromina, Eusebi, and Josep M. Mestres, eds. 2010. Aspectes de terminologia, neologia i traducció. Barcelona: Institut d’Estudis Catalans/Vic, Spain: Universitat de Vic. Criteris de traducció de textos normatius del castellà al català. 1999 and 2010. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya. Cruces Collado, Susana. 1993. “A posición da literatura traducida no sistema literario galego.” Boletín Galego de Literatura 10: 59–65. Cruces Colado, Susana, and Ana Luna Alonso, eds. 2004. La traducción en el ámbito institucional: autonómico, estatal y europeo. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. Cucurull, Fèlix. 1967. Dos pobles ibèrics. Barcelona: Selecta. Dasilva, Xosé Manuel. 1999. “Cinco lustros de traducción literaria en Galicia.” Ínsula 629: 9–11. ———. 2003. Babel entre nós. Escolma de textos sobre a traducción en Galicia. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. ———. 2008. O alleo é noso. Contribucións para a historia de traducción en Galicia. Noia: Toxosoutos. ———. 2009. Ramón Piñeiro, tradutor. Noia: Toxosoutos. ———. 2013. Estudios sobre la autotraducción en el espacio ibérico. Bern: Peter Lang. Dasilva, Xosé Manuel, and Helena Tanqueiro, eds. 2011. Aproximaciones a la autotraducción. Pontevedra: Academia del Hispanismo. Diaz Fouces, Oscar, García González, Marta, and Joan Costa Carreras, eds. 2002. Traducció i dinàmica sociolingüística. Barcelona: Llibres de l’Índex. Domínguez Pérez, Mónica. 2008. “As primeiras traducións de literatura infantil e xuvenil ao galego: normas de tradución, difusión e recepción.” Boletín Galego de Literatura 39–40: 37–60. “Dossier.” 2004. Quaderns: Revista de Traducció 11: 9–125. “Dossier: La traducció literària entre el català i les tres noves llengües oficials de la Unió Europea.” 2008. Quaderns: Revista de Traducció 15: 93–133. “Dossier: La traducció literària entre el català i les llengües oficials dels països candidats a ingressar a la Unió Europea.” 2011. Quaderns: Revista de Traducció 18: 91–162. Espasa, Eva. 2001. La traducció dalt de l’escenari. Vic, Spain: Eumo. Espinós, Joaquim. 2009. Història d’un entusiasme: Nietzsche i la literatura catalana. Lleida: Pagès. Esquerra, Ramon. 1937. Shakespeare a Catalunya. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya. Even-Zohar, Itamar. 1990. “Polysystem Studies.” Poetics Today 11, 1. Fernández del Riego, Francisco. 1979. As letras de fora na literatura galega. Vigo: Caja de Ahorros Municipal. Fernández Ocampo, Anxo. 2002. A esperanza bretona: Á luz dos estudios de tradución. Santiago de Compostela: Sotelo Blanco. Fernández Rodríguez, Áurea. 1995. “O papel da tradución no sistema lingüístico e literario nacional: o ámbito galego.” Grial 128: 541–54. Figueroa, Antón. 1996. Lecturas alleas. Santiago de Compostela: Sotelo Blanco. ———. 2001. Nación, literatura, identidade. Comunicación literaria e campos sociais en Galicia. Vigo: Xerais. ———. 2010. Ideoloxía e autonomía no campo literario galego. Santiago de Compostela: Laiovento. Figueroa, Antón, and Xan González-Millán. 1997. Communication littéraire et culture en Galice. Paris: L’Harmattan. Filgueira Valverde, Xosé. 1981. “A  tradución dos clásicos no ‘Rexurdimiento’ galego.” In Primeira Reunión Galega de Estudios Clásicos, 289–396. Santiago: Universidade de Santiago.

448

Translation policies in Spain Fontcuberta, Joan. 2008. Tots els colors del camaleó: Un assaig sobre la traducció. Tarragona: Arola. Fontcuberta, Judit. 2005. Molière a Catalunya. Barcelona: Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. ———. 2007. Molière en català: Les reflexions dels traductors. Lleida: Punctum. Franquesa, Montserrat. 2013. La Fundació Bernat Metge, una obra de país (1923–1938). Barcelona: Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. Friese, Brigit. 1985. Carles Riba als Ubersetzer aus dem Deutschen. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Fuster, Joan. 1992. L’aventura del llibre català. Barcelona: Empúries. Galanes Santos, Iolanda, Luna Alonso, Ana, Montero Küpper, Silvia, and Áurea Fernández Rodríguez, eds. 2016. La traducción literaria. Nuevas investigaciones. Granada: Comares. Gallén, Enric. 2001. “Traduir i adaptar teatre a Catalunya (1898–1938)”. In La traducción en la Edad de Plata, edited by Luis Pegenaute, 49–74. Barcelona: PPU. Gallén, Enric, Francisco Lafarga, and Luis Pegenaute, eds. 2010. Traducción y autotraducción en las literaturas ibéricas. Bern: Peter Lang. Gallén, Enric, Llanas, Manuel, Ortín, Marcel, Pinyol, Ramon, and Pere Quer. 2000. L’art de traduir: Reflexions sobre la traducció al llarg de la història. Vic, Spain: Eumo. Gallén, Enric, and José Francisco Ruiz Casanova, eds. 2013. Lectures dels anys cinquanta. Lleida: Punctum. García-Izquierdo, Isabel, and Esther Monzó, eds. 2012. Iberian Studies on Translation and Interpreting. Oxford/New York: Peter Lang. García de Toro, Cristina. 2009. La traducción entre lenguas en contacto: catalán y español. Bern: Peter Lang. Garrigasait, Raül. 2015. L’hàbit de la dificultat: Wilhelm von Humboldt i Carles Riba davant l’Agamèmnon d’Èsquil. Barcelona: Institut d’Estudis Món Juïc. Gavagnin, Gabriella. 2005. Classicisme i Renaixement: una idea d’Itàlia durant el Noucentisme. Barcelona: Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. Gibert, Miquel M., Hurtado Díaz, Amparo, and José Francisco Ruiz Casanova, eds. 2007. Literatura comparada catalana i espanyola al segle xx: gèneres, lectures i traduccions (1898–1951). Lleida: Punctum. Gibert, Miquel M., and Marcel Ortín, eds. 2005. Gèneres i formes en la literatura catalana d’entreguerres (1918–1939). Lleida: Punctum. Godayol, Pilar. 2000. Espais de frontera: Gènere i traducció. Vic, Spain: Eumo. ———. 2006. “Traductores.” In Catalanes del xx, edited by Pilar Godayol, 347–65. Vic, Spain: Eumo. ———. 2008. “Triplement subalternes.” Quaderns: Revista de Traducció 15: 41–50. ———. 2011. “Gènere i traducció en català. Bases arqueològiques per a un estat de la qüestió.” MonTI. Monografías de traducción e interpretación 3: 53–73. ———. 2016. Tres escriptores censurades: Simone de Beauvoir, Betty Friedan & Mary McCarthy. Lleida: Punctum. González Gómez, Xesús. 1990. Álvaro Cunqueiro, traductor. Coruña: O Castro. González-Millán, Xoán. 1995. “Cara a unha teoría da tradución para sistemas literarios ‘marxinais’: A situación galega.” Viceversa 1: 63–72. ———. 2000. Resistencia cultural e diferencia històrica: A experiencia da subalternidade. Santiago de Compostela: Sotelo Blanco. Hermida Gulías, Carme. 1993. Rosalía de Castro na prensa barcelonesa (1863–1899). [Padrón]: Patronato Rosalía de Castro. Ibarluzea, Miren, and María José Olaziregi. 2016. “Autonomización y funciones del subcampo de la traducción literaria vasca contemporánea. Una aproximación sociológica.” Pasavento. Revista de Estudios Hispánicos 4, 2: 293–313. Iglesia Alvariño, Aquilino. 1948. “Traduttore, traditore.” La Noche, August 13. Izard, Natàlia. 1992. La traducció cinematogràfica. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya. Jaka, Aiora. 2012. Itzulpenari buruzko gogoeta eta itzulpen-praktika Joseba Sarrionandiaren lanetan. Bilbao: Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea/Euskalzaindia. Jané-Lligé, Jordi, and Johannes Kabatek, eds. 2007. Fronteres entre l’universal i el particular en la literatura catalana. Aachen: Shaker. Janés, Alfonsina. 1983. L’obra de Richard Wagner a Barcelona. Barcelona: Fundació Salvador Vives Casajuana/Ajuntament de Barcelona. Jordana, C. A. 1938. “L’art de traduir.” Revista de Catalunya 88: 357–70.

449

Montserrat Bacardí Lafarga, Francisco, and Luis Pegenaute, eds. 2004. Historia de la traducción en España. Salamanca: Ambos Mundos. ———, eds. 2009. Diccionario histórico de la traducción en España. Madrid: Gredos. Lafarga, Francisco, Luis Pegenaute, and Enric Gallén, eds. 2010. Interacciones entre las literaturas ibéricas. Bern: Peter Lang. “La recepció de Virginia Woolf a Catalunya.” 2014. Quaderns: Revista de Traducció 21: 9–137. Lawick, Heike van. 2006. Metàfora, fraseologia i traducció: Aplicació als somatismes en una obra de Bertolt Brecht. Aachen: Shaker. ———. 2009. Manual de traducció alemany-català. Vic, Spain: Eumo. Lefevere, André. 1992. Translation, Rewriting, and the Manipulation of Literary Fame. London/New York: Routledge. Lladó, Ramon. 2002. La paraula revessa: Estudi sobre la traducció dels jocs de mots. Bellaterra: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Llanas, Manuel. 2002–2007. L’edició a Catalunya. 6 vols. Barcelona: Gremi d’Editors de Catalunya. López Gaseni, Manu. 2000. Euskarara itzulitako haur eta gazte literatura: funtzioak, eraginak eta itzulpen-estrategiak. Bilbao: Universidad del País Vasco. ———. 2005. Autoitzulpengintza euskal haur eta gazte literaturan. San Sebastián: Utrisque Vasconiae. ———. 2010. “Las normas preliminares en la literatura juvenil traducida al euskera.” Anuario de Investigación en Literatura Infantil y Juvenil 8: 29–43. ———. 2013. “Análisis de la literatura traducida al euskara (1976–2011).” Ínsula 797: 18–20. Luna Alonso, Ana. 2004. “El comportamiento de la traducción en lengua gallega.” In Ética y política de la traducción en la época contemporánea, editey by Assumpta Camps, 113–30. Barcelona: PPU. ———. 2014. “Circuitos de edición en la producción literaria gallega traducida. Propuesta de un modelo de sistematización.” Quaderns. Revista de Traducció 21: 165–81. Luna Alonso, Ana, and Silvia Montero Küpper, eds. 2006. Tradución e política editorial de literatura infantil e xuvenil. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. Luna Alonso, Ana, Montero Küpper, Silvia, and Liliana Valado Fernández, eds. 2011. Translation Quality Assessment Policies from Galicia. Bern: Peter Lang. Luna Alonso, Ana, Áurea Fernández Rodríguez, Galanes Santos Iolanda, and Silvia Montero Küpper, eds. 2012. Traducción de una cultura emergente: La literatura gallega contemporánea en el exterior. Bern: Peter Lang. ———, eds. 2015. Literaturas extranjeras y desarrollo cultural. Hacia un cambio de paradigma en la traducción literaria gallega. Bern: Peter Lang. Madureira, Ana, and Assumpta Forteza. 2001. Bibliografia (1974–2000): Catalao-português, portuguèscatalà. Barcelona: Institució de les Lletres Catalanes. Malé, Jordi. 2006. Carles Riba i la traducció. Lleida: Punctum. Mallafrè, Joaquim. 1991. Llengua de tribu i llengua de polis: Bases d’una traducció literària. Barcelona; Quaderns Crema. ———. 1994. De bona llengua, de bon humor. Barcelona: Columna. ———. 2000. “Models de llengua i traducció catalana.” Quaderns. Revista de Traducció 5: 9–27. ———, ed. 2002. II Jornades per a la Cooperació en l’Estandardització Lingüística. Barcelona: Institut d’Estudis Catalans. ———. 2009. “Traduccions del català avui. Dades i reflexions.” In Actes del Catorzè Col·loqui Internacional de Llengua i Literatura Catalanes, vol. 1, edited by Kálmán Faluba and Ildikó Szijj, 15–36. Barcelona: Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. ———. 2016. Uns i altres: Literatura i traducció. Reus: Centre de Lectura. Manterola Agirrezabalaga, Elizabete. 2014. La literatura vasca traducida/Euskal literatura itzulia. Bernardo Atxagaren lanak erdaretan. Bern: Peter Lang/Bilbao: Universidad del País Vasco. Marco, Josep. 2000. “Funció de les traduccions i models estilístics: el cas de la traducció al català al segle xx.” Quaderns. Revista de Traducció 5: 29–44. –——. 2002. El fil d’Ariadna: Anàlisi estilística i traducció literària. Vic, Spain: Eumo. ———. 2008. “La traductologia catalana contemporània: bases per a una cartografia provisional.” Quaderns. Revista de Traducció 15: 11–30. Marrugat. Jordi. 2009. Marià Manent i la traducció. Lleida: Punctum. Marín-Dòmine, Marta. 2004. Traduir el desig: Psicoanàlisi i llenguatge. Vic, Spain: Eumo. Martín-Mor, Adrià, Piqué, Ramon, and Pilar Sánchez-Gijón. 2016. Tradumàtica: Tecnologies de la traducció. Vic, Spain: Eumo.

450

Translation policies in Spain Martines, Vicent. 1997. El Tirant poliglota: Estudi sobre el Tirant lo Blanch a partir de les seues traduccions espanyola, italiana i francesa dels segles xvi-xviii. Barcelona: Curial/Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. Martines, Vicent, Fuster Ortuño, Maria Àngels, and Elena Sánchez López. 2007. Clàssics valencians multilingües. Alcoi: Marfil. Martínez-Gil, Víctor. 1997. El naixement de l’iberisme catalanista. Barcelona: Curial. ———, ed. 2010. “Uns apartats germans”: Portugal i Catalunya/“Irmaos afastados”: Portugal e a Catalunha. Palma: Lleonard Muntaner. Martínez Romero, Tomàs. 1998. Un clàssic entre clàssics: Sobre traduccions i recepcions de Sèneca a l’època medieval. Barcelona: Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat/València: Institut Interuniversitari de Filologia Valenciana. Martínez Romero, Tomás, and Roxana Recio, eds. 2001. Essays on medieval translation in the Iberian Peninsula. Castelló de la Plana: Universitat Jaume I. Martori, Joan. 1995. La projecció d’Àngel Guimerà a Madrid. Barcelona: Curial/Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. Mas Jordi. 2004. Josep Maria Junoy i Joan Salvat-Papasseit: dues aproximacions a l’haiku. Barcelona: Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. ———, ed. 2011. La tanka catalana. Santa Coloma de Queralt: Obrador Edèndum. ———, ed. 2014. L’haiku en llengua catalana. Santa Coloma de Queralt: Obrador Edèndum. Medina, Jaume. 1987. Carles Riba i Friedrich Hölderlin. Barcelona: Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. –——. 2009. El crepuscle de la poesia: Rainer Maria Rilke: un capítol de la història literària catalana. Palma: Lleonard Muntaner. Mendiguren Bereziartu, Xabier. 1993. “Incidencia de la traducción en la normalización lingüística del euskera.” Livius. Revista de Estudios de Traducción 4: 107–16. ———. 1995. Euskal itzulpenaren historia laburra. San Sebastián: Elkar. MIRAS. 2011. Comunicar en la diversitat: Intèrprets, traductors i mediadors als serveis públics. Barcelona: Linguamón. Mociño González, Isabel, and Eulalia Agrelo Costas. 2008. “As traducións entre a literatura infantil e xuvenil galega e vasca.” In Un mundo, muchas miradas/Mundu bat, begirada anitz, 81–100. Bilbao: Universidad del País Vasco. Montalt, Vicent. 2005. Manual de traducció cientificotècnica. Vic, Spain: Eumo. Montesinos López, Anna I., and Llum Bracho Lapiedra. 2002. Correcció i traducció de textos informàtics. València: Universitat Politècnica de València. Montoliu, Manuel de. 1935. Goethe en la literatura catalana. Barcelona: La Revista. Monzó, Esther, ed. 2006. Les plomes de la justícia: La traducció al català dels textos jurídics. Barcelona: Pòrtic. Mosquera Carregal, Xesús M., ed. 2013. Lingua e tradución. ix Xornadas sobre Lingua e Usos. Coruña: Universidade da Coruña. Muñoz Martín, Ricardo. 1995. Lingüística per a la traducció. Vic, Spain: Eumo. Murgades, Josep. 1994. “Apunt sobre noucentisme i traducció.” Els Marges 50: 92–6. Navarro Domínguez, Fernando. 1996. Manual de bibliografía española de traducción e interpretación: diez años de historia 1985–1995. Alicante: Universidad de Alicante. Noia Campos, Camiño. 1995. “Historia da tradución en Galicia no marco da cultura europea.” Viceversa 1: 13–62. ———. 2002. “A función da tradución no sistema literario marxinal.” Anuario de Estudios Literarios Galegos 105–19. Oliva, Salvador. 2000. Introducció a Shakespeare. Barcelona: Empúries. Oliver, Antoni, Moré, Joaquim and Salvador Climent. 2007. Traducció i tecnologies. Barcelona: Universitat Oberta de Catalunya. Ortín, Marcel, and Dídac Pujol, eds. 2009. Llengua literària i traducció (1890–1939). Lleida: Punctum. Par, Alfons. 1935. Shakespeare en la literatura española. Madrid: Librería General de Victorianio Suárez/Barcelona: Biblioteca Balmes. Parcerisas, Francesc. 1995. “Traducció, edició, ideologia.” In La traducció literària, edited by Josep Marco, 93–105. Castelló de la Plans: Universitat Jaume I. ———. 2009. Traducció, edició, ideologia. Vic, Spain: Eumo.

451

Montserrat Bacardí ———. 2013. Sense mans: Metàfores i papers sobre la traducció. Barcelona: Galàxia Gutenberg/Cercle de Lectors. Paredes i Baulida, Maria. 1991. Antoni Febrer i Cardona, un humanista il·lustrat a Menorca (1761– 1841). Barcelona: Curial/Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. ———. 1999. “Traductors i traduccions a la Menorca il·lustrada.” In La traducción en España (1750– 1830). Lengua, literatura, cultura, edited by Francisco Lafarga, 79–89. Lleida: Universitat de Lleida. Pazó González, Noemí. 2002. A función da traducción no desenvolvemento do mapa teatral galego. Unha Achega, 1960–1978. Madrid: UNED. Pericay, Xavier, and Ferran Toutain. 1996. El malentès del noucentisme. Barcelona: Proa. Pinyol i Torrents, Ramon. 2006. “Les escriptores catalanes vuitcentistes i la traducció.” Quaderns: Revista de Traducció 13: 67–75. Pla, Xavier. 2007. Simenon i la connexió catalana. València. Edicions 3 i 4. ———. 2012. Maurras a Catalunya: Elements per a un debat. Barcelona: Quaderns Crema. ———. 2016. Proust a Catalunya. Barcelona: Arcàdia. Pons, Arnau, and Simona Škrabec. 2007–2008. Carrers de frontera: Passatges de la cultura alemanya a la cultura catalana. Barcelona: Institut Ramon Llull. Puig, Armand. 1997. La Bíblia a Catalunya, València i les Illes fins al segle xv. Tarragona: Arquebisbat de Tarragona. Pujol, Dídac. 2007. Traduir Shakespeare: Les reflexions dels traductors (2007). Lleida: Punctum. Pujol, Josep. 2002. “Expondre, traslladar i reescriure clàssics llatins en la literatura catalana del segle xv.” Quaderns. Revista de Traducció 7: 9–32. Ramis, Josep Miquel. 2014. Autotraducció: De la teoria a la pràctica (2014). Vic, Spain: Eumo. Real Pérez, Beatriz. 2000. “A tradución e os textos traducidos ó galego no período 1907–1936.” Viceversa 6: 9–36. Riba, Carles. 1948. “Uns mots del traductor.” In Homer. L’Odissea, 11–17. Barcelona: [n. e.]. Ribera Llopis, Juan M. 2007. Projecció i recepció hispanes de Caterina Albert i Paradís, Víctor Català, i de la seva obra. Girona: CCG. Ribes, Àngels. 2010. Traduccions catalanes d’Alphonse Daudet. Barcelona: PPU. Riera, Carles. 2014. Manual de traducció de textos científics de l’anglès al català. Barcelona: Claret. Riquer, Martí de. 1946. Traducciones castellanas de Ausias March en la Edad de Oro. Barcelona: Instituto Español de Estudios Mediterraneos. Robles i Sabater, Ferran. 2005. Bibliografia de la literatura catalana en versió alemanya. Aachen: Shaker. Roser Puig, Montserrat. 1998. El llegat anglès de Marià Manent. Barcelona: Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. Salord Ripoll, Josefina, and Maite Salord Ripoll. 2001. “Les traduccions teatrals dels il·lustrats menorquins: una recreació de modernitat.” In El teatre català dels orígens al segle xviii, 409–17. Kassel: Reichenberger. Sánchez-Gijón, Pilar. 2004. L’ús de corpus en la traducció especialitzada. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra/Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Santoyo, J. C. 1996. Bibliografía de la traducción en español, catalán, gallego y vasco. León: Universidad de León. ———. 2009. La traducción medieval en la Península Ibérica. León: Universidad de León. Sapiro, Gisèle, dir. 2012. Traduire la littérature et les sciences humaines: Conditions et obstacles. Paris: Ministère de la Culture et de la Communication. Sellent, Joan. 1998. “La traducció literària en català al segle xx: alguns títols representatius.” Quaderns: Revista de Traducció 2: 23–32. ———. 2010. L’ofici de traduir: Shakespeare, un home de teatre. Sabadell: Fundació Bosch i Cardellach. Siguán, Marisa. 1990. La recepción de Ibsen y Hauptmann en el modernismo catalán. Barcelona: PPU. Solà, Josep Maria. 2006. El somni de Grècia: La recepció catalana de la cultura clàssica. Berga: L’Albí. Televisió de Catalunya. 1997. Criteris lingüístics sobre traducció i doblatge. Barcelona: Edicions 62. Torrealdai, Joan Mari. 1997. Euskal kultura gaur. San Sebastián: Jakin. ———. 1999. La censura de Franco y el tema vasco. San Sebastián: Fundación Kutxa. Torrents, Ricard. 2010. “Vers una traductologia catalana.” In Actes del Catorzè Col·loqui Internacional de Llengua i Literatura Catalanes, vol. 3, edited by Kálmán Faluba and Ildikó Szijj, 361–79. Barcelona: Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. “Traducció i censura.” 2013. Quaderns: Revista de Traducció 20: 9–161. Tur, Jaume. 1974. Maragall i Goethe: Les traduccions del “Faust”. Barcelona: Universitat de Barcelona.

452

Translation policies in Spain Ugarte, Xus. 2010. La pràctica de la interpretació: anglès-català. Vic, Spain: Eumo. Uribarri, Ibon. 2013. “Censura(s) en la traducción al/del vasco.” Quaderns. Revista de Traducció 20: 31–45. Valentí, Eduard. 1973. Els clàssics en la literatura catalana moderna. Barcelona: Curial. Vallverdú, Josep. 1982. Magí Morera i Galícia, traductor de Shakespeare. Lleida: Institut d’Estudis Ilerdencs. Ventura, Jordi. 1993. La Bíblia valenciana. Barcelona: Curial. Verdaguer, M. Àngels, ed. 2013. Traduir els clàssics, antics i moderns. Barcelona: Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. Verdegal, Joan. 2011. La pràctica de la traducció: francès-català. Vic, Spain: Eumo. Vila, Pep. 1996. “Les traduccions d’obres franceses i italianes en el teatre català al Rosselló.” Revista de Catalunya 109: 103–29. Vilardell, Laura, ed. 2016. Traducció i censura en el franquisme. Barcelona: Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. Wittlin, Curt. 1995. De la traducció literal a la creació literària. València/Barcelona: Institut Interuniversitari de Filologia Valenciana/Publicacions de l’Abadia de Montserrat. Zabaleta, J. M. 1984. Euskal itzulpenaren antologia. Lazkao: Pax Argitaletxea.

453

24 A BIBLIOMETRIC OVERVIEW OF TRANSLATION STUDIES RESEARCH IN SPANISHSPEAKING COUNTRIES Javier Franco Aixelá and Sara Rovira-Esteva1 This chapter attempts to provide an overview of the history and state of the art of research in Translation Studies (TS) in Spanish-speaking countries through an examination of the pertinent bibliography in our discipline, which already comprises no less than 15,000 references in Spanish, Catalan, Galician and Basque. With this aim in mind, we will focus on central bibliometric issues, including the evolution of TS publications written in languages spoken in Spain, TS journals, publishers and authors in Hispanic America and Spain, the main research hubs in the area, and the thematic distribution of this research as compared with TS as a whole. Since it is more and more frequent to find TS scholars working in the Spanish-speaking area who publish in English, we will also devote a section to an analysis of their production. Thus, apart from the central aim of providing a general bibliometric presentation of TS in Spanishspeaking countries, the other objective of this chapter is to discover whether research in languages spoken in Spain and by authors working in Spain or Hispanic America presents some kind of systematic differences as compared with the rest of publications on the same subject.

Introduction In 1990 there were in Spain three diploma programmes in translation and interpreting. Ten years later there were about twenty full BA degrees. Currently, this country, which is still under fifty million inhabitants, features no less than twenty-nine BA degrees in Translation Studies (TS). After performing a manual search for Hispanic America on the Internet, we found at least eightyfive TS BA degrees more in this area, at least sixty universities involved in them, and forty-one undergraduate degrees only in Argentina and fourteen in Chile (cf. Appendices 1 and 2 for further details). These odd one hundred BA degrees and the corresponding MA’s and PhD programmes are implemented by dozens of specialized university departments and hundreds of lecturers who in their professional lives essentially deal with translation and interpreting. It is only logical that this shows in research. Indeed, the two existing holistic bibliographical databases in TS (TSB and BITRA) place Spanish as the second most used publication language in the discipline. Catalan features in seventh position, with over 1% of all collected research, whereas Galician and Basque tend to lag behind, but still occupied higher positions than would be expected given their number of speakers and BA degrees (two in Galicia, and one in the Basque Country). 454

Bibliometric overview of translation studies

TS is thus extensively and intensively furthered in Spanish-speaking countries, and seems worthy of a close examination in order to establish its main characteristics. Indeed, the approximately 15,000 TS publications in Spanish, Catalan, Galician and Basque, plus the twenty-two specialized TS journals published in Spain alone need to be described and explained in order to better know where we stand and what – if anything – distinguishes TS in Spanish-speaking countries, all this without leaving out the increasing number of publications in foreign languages by TS scholars working in Spain and Hispanic America. In order to do this, we will proceed to draw relevant data from all available bibliographic and bibliometric resources, paying special attention to BITRA (Bibliography of Interpreting and Translation). BITRA is an open-access annotated bibliography compiled in Spain which comprised 68,080 records as of November, 2016 (see Franco Aixelá 2001–2017). BITRA also mines citations within TS, with close to 100,000 collected by the end of 2016, which allow us to combine all types of bibliometric research, especially in the fields of productivity and impact. Whenever possible, data have been triangulated with other databases and indexes, especially John Benjamin’s TSB (see Gambier and van Doorslaer 2004–2017), the other holistic bibliography in TS, and RETI (see Biblioteca d’Humanitats. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona 2017), a website devoted to TS journals and their international indexing and visibility. It is also important to state here that although the samples we are working with are really large – almost 70,000 TS publications – they are still samples and do not include everything ever published in TS. Thus, when we affirm that there is a given number of publications meeting whichever conditions in such period or language, we are always saying that those are the ones we have knowledge of at the time of writing. In this sense, absolute numbers are always interim in living bibliographies, whereas ratios for past periods should be quite stable.

A historical perspective TS research in languages spoken in Spain before 1900 TS publications were very scarce before the second half of the 1980s, with the consolidation of TS as an autonomous research discipline and the creation of numerous new university degrees in Translation and Interpreting worldwide. BITRA contains 8,694 entries for publications prior to 1986, i.e. 12.9% of the total, as can be seen in Table 24.1.2 Until 1900, there are hardly 129 entries with Spanish as a language of publication in BITRA. About fifty (38.8%) of those are in fact modern translations of old foreign TS classics, reflecting, all in all, the very scarce autonomous interest translation aroused in Spain or Table 24.1  The evolution of TS publications according to the languages spoken in Spain (all years) 1–1900

1901–1970

1971–1985

1986–2000

2001–2015

Total BITRA

434 (100%)

2,992 (100%)

5,262 (100%)

22,870 (100%) 35,854 (100%)

Spanish

129 (29.7%)

266 (9.0%)

436 (8.3%)

4,080 (17.8%)

7,989 (22.3%)

Catalan

0

45 (1.5%)

38 (0.7%)

288 (1.3%)

666 (1.9%)

Galician

0

4 (0.1%)

3 (0.1%)

128 (0.6%)

247 (0.7%)

Basque

0

0

2 (0.1%)

68 (0.3%)

139 (0.4%)

(Source: BITRA, November 2016)

455

Javier Franco Aixelá and Sara Rovira-Esteva

Hispanic America at that time. This abundance of translations of TS essays also goes a long way towards explaining the surprisingly high 29.7% of Spanish in TS for this period. Indeed, the total (434) of detected works in any language dealing with TS in this period is scarce, and a good part of these classics are also available in Spanish, so that this language’s presence is quite higher than what its original output would justify. In fact, among the twenty-four most cited TS publications in Spanish included in BITRA for this period, only two (Menéndez Pelayo 1876; Pellicer y Saforcada 1778) were originally written in Spanish, whereas the remaining twenty-two are available in Spanish thanks to translation. Of the 129 entries in Spanish for this period, only one was originally published in Hispanic America, i.e. a preface on literary translation by Argentinian writer Bartolomé de Mitre (1889), one of the first (although brief ) Spanish essays on translation written in South America. In Spain and in Spanish, one of the first (and also brief ) reflections on translation is Alonso de Cartagena’s preface to his translation of Cicero’s Retórica, published in 1430 (Cartagena, 1430). From a thematic perspective, it is especially interesting to note that Spanish TS research into issues such as scientific and technical translation and interpreting are completely absent in this period, whereas in other sub-areas, such as translation didactics, publications are very scarce and never meta-theoretical, i.e. we find a few textbooks purporting to teach how to translate, but no reflection whatsoever on the teaching of translation. On the other hand, the majority of the publications delving into translation issues take a historical and/or literary approach. These provide a fair idea of the place of translation at the time, usually as a secondary tool in philological investigations.

TS research in languages spoken in Spain (1901–1970) In the period 1901–1970, production remains poor, both in TS in general and in Spanish TS in particular. Basque and Galician are virtually negligible as publication languages in this period, whereas Catalan reaches its current ratio (1.5%), of which almost fifty publications (c. 85%) are mainly case studies analyzing Catalan translations of literary classics. Spanish research in translation-related issues reaches 9% for this period, with 266 entries in BITRA. Once again, about fifty of these publications are translations into Spanish of essays written in other languages, but now they represent 18.7% of the total production in Spanish. Authors such as Borges (1932, 1936, 1939) and Ortega y Gasset (1937) publish very important reflections on translation in this period, being also the first Spanish-speaking authors to be broadly disseminated in multiple languages. Both authors are good representatives of how theoretical reflection on translation had a very marked literary and philosophical slant at the time. As regards Hispanic American scholarship, thirty-five publications came out in this region. Apart from Borges, a few Hispanic American authors seem to show more than a passing interest in translation, with three works by the Venezuelan Pedro Grases, and four by Argentinian Ernest Krebs. Argentina (18 publications) and Mexico (10) are the most active American countries producing TS research in the period 1901–1970. As for the other official languages of Spain, the forty-year dictatorship banned the public use of any language other than Spanish. As the current constitution, which incorporated the use of other languages, was not approved until 1978, it is then only normal that until the 1980s hardly any TS research was published in Catalan, Basque or Galician. As for the impact of these publications, it is noteworthy that works from this period tend to receive many more citations than the older ones (145 works from 1901–1970 are cited at least five times versus twenty-four of the publications before 1900). A likely explanation would be 456

Bibliometric overview of translation studies

the higher relevance of their work to modern TS scholars. The most cited Spanish publications from this period are the work of writers and philosophers (Borges and Ortega y Gasset). Thematically, 57.5% of the texts between 1901 and 1970 (154 publications, 69.8% of which were originally in Spanish) deals with Spain or Spanish, denoting a very marked interest in local issues. Although somewhat more diversified, as new topics such as interpreting and technical translation were explored by Spanish academics through translations of foreign essays, the emphasis was once again on historical and literary texts.

TS research in languages spoken in Spain (1971–1985) The third historical period we have established prior to the effective consolidation of modern TS is 1971–1985. Matters surrounding translation are now visibly beginning their exponential growth in academia, with over 5,000 publications detected in this interval, and the launching of seminal works that are usually considered to mark the birth of modern TS as an autonomous discipline (Holmes 1972; Toury 1980; Reiss and Vermeer 1984; Holz-Mänttäri 1984). This scholarly pursuit will skyrocket in the next thirty years, as we will presently see. For the moment, we can state that TS research in Spanish (436 entries in BITRA) once again almost doubled its figures in this period, whereas the other languages spoken in Spain did not grow, perhaps partly because of the repression exerted by the Spanish dictatorship and partly due to the lack of any consolidated university network in TS in the Basque Country, Catalonia and Galicia. We have detected a further percentage decrease of translation of foreign-language essays within Spanish TS (13.8%), involving a corresponding growth of research originally performed in Spain. Unlike TS in other languages, the most cited among the approximately 400 Spanish original publications issued in these fifteen years still follow traditional approaches. Thus, we find magnificent essays still in line with the past literary-oriented approach to translation (Paz 1971), attempts at renewing the linguistic approach (Vázquez Ayora 1977), or philological and historical overviews containing the first modern sparks of TS (García Yebra 1982, 1983; Santoyo Mediavilla 1983a, 1983b, 1984). Although we will devote a whole section to TS journals published in Spain and Hispanic America, it should be noted at this point that it is in the 1980s when the first TS specialized journals3 are born in the Spanish-speaking area, the origins of a currently very prolific set of journals with languages spoken in Spain as their main means of publication. The list of pioneers is comprised of three journals published in Spain, namely, Cuadernos de traducción e interpretación/Quaderns de traducció i interpretació (1982–1992), Babel: Revista de los estudiantes de la EUTI (1984–1986) and Senez (1984–). In Hispanic America we have found thirty-two different publications for this period. Argentina (with a special issue of the journal Sur in 1976) and Mexico continue to be central players in Hispanic American TS, joined now by a powerful contribution by Puerto Rico (mainly from a conference whose proceedings were published in 1982) and Cuba, with several books on the matter. No Hispanic American scholar seems to show a keen interest in our discipline during 1971–1985, and we find none with more than two essays dealing with translation. All in all, Hispanic American TS publications seem to dwindle in spite of staying relatively stable, keeping a rather low profile while the rest of the world embarks on an ever-growing interest in translation and interpreting. As regards the other languages, Catalan (38 publications, i.e. 0.7% of BITRA) is the only one with a visible presence, albeit smaller than in the past period. As in the previous interval, 457

Javier Franco Aixelá and Sara Rovira-Esteva

during 1971–1985 the thematic nature of these publications in Catalan is mainly local, with about 85% dealing with Catalonia or the Catalan language. Considering again the 436 publications in Spanish from this period, we see that 46.6% of them deal with local issues. Although with a very low presence at first, nonexistent topics in the literary- and historically-oriented past begin to find their way to the academic surface, with twelve publications in Spanish on interpreting (2.8%) or sixteen (3.7%) on technical and scientific translation. Rather more slowly than in the rest of the world, modern TS with its interest in translation such as it is and in all its modes was now beginning to wake up also in Spanish-speaking countries.

TS research in languages spoken in Spain (1986–2015) The turn of the twenty-first century brought about an unprecedented boom in TS in many parts of the world. The less than 500 publications on TS detected in the approximately twenty-five centuries of Western theoretical reflections before 1901, became some 8,000 in 1901–1985, and about 60,000 detected in 1986–2015, a thirty-year period (see Table 24.1). This exponential growth is almost a cliché in our discipline, but it is really hard to exaggerate the momentum TS acquired in the 1990s as compared with the previous lack of scholarly interest. The growth in TS academic texts using Spanish, Catalan, Galician or Basque for publication is equally (or even more) dramatic: from 129 recorded before 1900, to 700 in the 1901–1985 period, and to 12,000 publications in 1986–2015, as detected in BITRA for Spanish. In Catalan, we go from none before 1900, to eighty in 1901–1985, and end up with almost 1,000 in 1986–2015. Both Galician and Basque, move from virtually no TS publications found before 1985 to almost 400 (Galician) and 200 (Basque) in the last thirty years. In proportional terms, Spanish reaches 22% (BITRA) and 11% (TSB) of the total TS production, occupying second place after English in both databases, well ahead of languages with a much more consolidated academic tradition, such as French, German or Italian. If we consider that BITRA is compiled in Spain, whereas TSB is a Dutch-Belgian product, it would be reasonable to estimate the current overall presence of Spanish in TS to be somewhere in between. In their last report on bibliometric indicators of Spanish research (FECYT 2016, 18), the academic authorities estimated that Spanish scientific articles for 2014 amounted to 3.25% of the world’s total. The ratios drawn from the two existing holistic TS bibliographies only for Spanish, Catalan, Galician and Basque – i.e. discounting TS performed in foreign languages in Spain – place Spanish quota in our discipline well over 10%. Clearly, Spain and its languages are central stakeholders in modern TS, and much more so than in other fields of study. Given its number of speakers (approximately ten million), Catalan also reaches a surprising 1.9% (BITRA) and 1.4% (TSB) in current TS production, taking seventh place in both bibliographies. The fewer speakers of both Galician (three million) and Basque (one million) explain their lower presence in TS, with 0.7%–0.3% and 0.4%–0.1%, respectively, although they both have enjoyed in these last decades very active academic journals in TS, allowing them to keep a visible profile. However, taking a closer look, the evolution of the languages spoken in Spain within TS is not so promising. In Table 24.2 we provide a detailed examination of the evolution of all Iberian languages (except Portuguese) as means of publication in the twenty-first century. 458

Bibliometric overview of translation studies Table 24.2  Twenty-first-century evolution of TS works according to the languages spoken in Spain

Total in BITRA (all languages)

2001–2004

2005–2008

2009–2012

2013–2016

10,341

10,856

9,986

5,391

1,975 (19.8%)

1,028 (19.0%)

Spanish

2,624 (25.4%)

2,451 (22.6%)

Catalan

195 (1.9%)

214 (2.0%)

171 (1.7%)

92 (1.7%)

Galician

84 (0.8%)

91 (0.8%)

57 (0.6%)

15 (0.3%)

Basque

13 (0.1%)

25 (0.2%)

59 (0.6%)

42 (0.8%)

(Source: BITRA, November 2016)

Given the usual rate of compilation in databases of this nature, it is only normal that academic production in the last years seems to dwindle. This does not (necessarily) reflect any actual diminution in TS production, and it is most probably just a consequence of the need to wait some years before most existing contributions for those last years are detected and find their way into the bibliographical databases. However, although absolute figures for the last years will grow in the bibliographies, there is no reason why the ratios for recent periods should substantially change in the future, and they can be considered to be reliable. The important and apparently hard fact we can draw from the available data is that Spanish as a language of publication within TS seems to have reached its apex and to be clearly on the decline, with a series of 25.4%, 22.6%, 19.8% and 19.0% in BITRA for 2001–2016 in fouryear intervals, and 13.9%, 11.1%, 10.4% and 8.1% in TSB for the same period and intervals. Regarding the other languages, Catalan seems to be on a slower decrease: 1.9%, 2.0%, 1.7% and 1.7% in BITRA for 2001–2016, and 1.9%, 1.4%, 1.3% and 0.5% in TSB for the same period and intervals. Galician as a language of publication in TS seems to be suffering a severe decline (0.8%, 0.8%, 0.6% and 0.3%), probably derived from some listlessness in its most important means of dissemination. Finally, Basque seems to keep and even increase its modest but visible profile (0.1%, 0.2%, 0.6% and 0.8%)4 thanks to the good health of the journal Senez, almost its only container in TS. Incidentally, this shows the great importance the initiative of a small group of scholars and translators can have in establishing the scientific dimension of less-spoken languages. As regards impact, the most cited Spanish publications from this period are for the first time the work of TS scholars (not historians, literary authors or philosophers). This could be considered a sign of the consolidation of TS as a scholarly pursuit in Spain. Indeed, among the twenty most cited TS works originally written in Spanish, all but two (Ortega y Gasset 1937 and Paz 1971) were published after 1980 and written by university instructors. Thematically, the use of Spanish to address local issues is still quite intense but continues to diminish (39.6% in 1986–2015 vs. 46.6% in 1971–1985). It is only logical that the local language is predominantly used for this kind of issues, and it is probably a sign of good academic health that the same language is also frequently used to address many other and more universal issues. Although research into literary translation and historical matters is still very high (40.0% vs. 49.9% in the past period), all kinds of modes and concerns associated to translation now crop up with great force, e.g. scientific and technical translation (16.9%), didactics (14%), professional issues (8.6%) or audiovisual translation (6.3%), all of them nonexistent or with a very poor presence in the past. 459

Javier Franco Aixelá and Sara Rovira-Esteva

As regards the thematic distribution of Catalan, a great part (52.9%) of the almost 1,000 publications in the last thirty years revolve around local issues and do so in a lower proportion than before, very much in line with the academic consolidation shown by Spanish. In this same vein, the topical gamut is really broad and every issue seems to merit research in Catalan contemporary TS. Apart from the usual preeminence of literary and historical topics (56.3% for the combination of both), many other daily and technical matters are consistently cultivated: professional issues (16.5%), scientific and technical translation (11.3%), didactics (11.1%), or audiovisual translation (8.1%), to mention the same as in Spanish. The most cited Catalan works are quite recent (even more than in Spanish) and were systematically written by university teachers. Galician and Basque also present a marked local thematic approach, with 56.5% and 58.9%, respectively, very much in the line of Catalan. Once again, literary and historical issues (46.9% and 42.5% for Galician and Basque, respectively) are dominant, but these last thirty years have opened the doors to frequent research in many diverse topics also in these languages. To mention the same issues as in Catalan and Spanish, professional matters represent 8.0% in Galician and 21.3% in Basque,5 scientific and technical translation 12.8% in Galician and 10.6% in Basque, didactics represent 7.2% in Galician, and 4.8% in Basque, whereas audiovisual translation takes 4.5% in Galician, and 3.4% in Basque. Finally, it must be noted that all the most cited works originally written in Galician are quite recent, and systematically published by scholars specializing in TS. In Basque, our universe of potential citers is too small and the citations available too few to establish any reliable regularities in this regard.

A global overview of TS in languages spoken in Spain In the preceding section, we have provided a general overview of the historical development of languages spoken in Spain and Hispanic America in TS. Now we will attempt to give a general outlook of the ways these languages are currently part of TS as a whole. In order to attain this objective, we will pay special attention to four facets which are central in the bibliometric portrait of any area: thematic distribution, academic containers (journals and book publishers), productivity and visibility (in terms of impact). To start with, it will be useful to see the respective global position of each of our languages in the international scenario, as shown in Table 24.3. Table 24.3  Language distribution in terms of productivity within TS for all times6

English Spanish*

BITRA (Ranking – Qty.)

TSB (Ranking – Qty.)

1st – 34,489 (50.7%)

1st – 17,834 (64.9%)

2nd – 12,995 (19.1%)

2nd – 3,041 (11.1%)

French

3rd – 8,420 (12.4%)

3rd – 2,626 (9.5%)

German

4th – 6,004 (8.8%)

4th – 1,407 (5.1%)

Italian

5th – 2,046 (3.0%)

6th – 388 (1.4%)

Portuguese

6th – 1,993 (2.9%)

5th – 782 (2.8%)

460

Bibliometric overview of translation studies

BITRA (Ranking – Qty.)

TSB (Ranking – Qty.)

7th – 1,043 (1.5%)

7th – 323 (1.2%)

Chinese

8th – 959 (1.4%)

9th – 151 (0.5%)

Galician*

9th – 382 (0.6%)

10th – 80 (0.3%)

Russian

10th – 342 (0.5%)

12th – 37 (0.1%)

Dutch

11th – 319 (0.5%)

8th – 309 (1.1%)

Polish

12th – 279 (0.4%)

11th – 66 (0.2%)

Basque*

13th – 209 (0.3%)

? th – 14 (0.0%)

14th – 88 (0.1%)

13th – 32 (0.1%)

Catalan*

Arabic

(Sources: BITRA & TSB, November 2016)

The global figures confirm what has been mentioned above – English plays very clearly the role of lingua franca within TS, and Spanish occupies a solid second place in the ranking of productivity within TS, ahead of languages with a greater academic tradition such as French or German. The presence of Catalan and, especially, Galician and Basque logically presents a lower profile given their respective numbers of speakers, as compared with the approximately 550 million who speak Spanish. Thus, the seventh place Catalan takes in both TS bibliographies is remarkably high compared with its geo-linguistic spread. The ninth–tenth place of Galician is no less commendable, and speaks of a consolidated ‘critical mass’ in the institutionalization of TS in Galicia, at the same time that it is necessary to mention the great importance of the journal Viceversa in the making of TS in Galician. Finally, current Basque TS essentially depends on its almost sole means of academic communication, the journal Senez, which has a strong professional leaning.

The thematic distribution of research in languages spoken in Spain In the past sections, we used the name of the geographical area and its language in order to gauge the evolution of the degree of localness of concerns in research performed in each language. We will consider this same parameter from a global, time-independent perspective now, adding both Hispanic America as a whole and its individual countries to the count. Generally speaking, as we have already seen, all TS publications in languages spoken in Spain tend to primarily deal with local matters, although this leaning is lower as we move forwards in time, in what could be termed as a maturing process of these languages as academic vehicles valid for all types of objects of study. Logically, since Spanish is a language spoken in many different countries and shared by scholars who have other mother tongues, it is the one with a lower share (43.6%) of local matters (including Spain, Hispanic America and their countries and regions in this concept). Basque (58.4%), Catalan (58.0%) and Galician (56.8%) show very similar ratios, supporting the hypothesis that the more internationally spread a language is the less local its academic interests will be, and vice versa.

461

Javier Franco Aixelá and Sara Rovira-Esteva

In terms of the interest aroused by the different geopolitical areas in TS publications written in any language, this distribution closely corresponds to what we have been discussing until now. In Table 24.4 we show the distribution of the most studied Spanish-speaking regions and their languages as research topics. Perhaps the most noteworthy novelty of this ranking is the strength of Hispanic America, which emerges as a powerful object of interest to researchers, with almost 1,500 TS publications dealing with this geo-linguistic area as a whole or with any of its countries in particular. In the light of what we have seen until now, it could be said that Hispanic America is not a central producer of autonomous TS research yet, but it is a central topic in our discipline. The twenty-six most productive authors with TS publications (both on their own and as co-authors) dealing either with Hispanic America or any of its countries are shown on Table 24.5, together with the countries and the last universities they have been affiliated to. Since we are now interested in all the local production on these subjects, all languages are included in the results. The most interesting piece of news associated with this list is that TS now has definitely got specialists who are primarily interested in Hispanic American matters. The list of the working places of the most productive authors blends internal and external research, although it still places the bulk of research outside the region, more specifically in those countries having a long historical contact with the region: Spain (4), Canada (4), United States of America (4), Colombia (3), Argentina (2), Brazil (2), Chile (2), Cuba (1), Germany (1), Mexico (1), Peru (1) and United Kingdom (1). There does not seem to be any specific university gathering a large Table 24.4  Distribution of Spanish-speaking regions or their languages as objects of study Spain (including all regions and excluding Spanish)

6,466 (9.5%)

Spanish (the language, as an object of study)

2,039 (3.0%)

Hispanic America (including all countries)

1,424 (2.1%)

Catalonia

875 (1.3%)

Galicia

372 (0.5%)

Argentina

313 (0.5%)

Mexico

234 (0.3%)

Catalan (the language, as an object of study)

202 (0.3%)

Basque Country

200 (0.3%)

Chile

97 (0.1%)

Colombia

90 (0.1%)

Peru

81 (0.1%)

Galician (the language, as an object of study)

79 (0.1%)

Basque (the language, as an object of study)

35 (0.1%)

Venezuela

34 (0.1%)

(Source: BITRA, November 2016)

462

Table 24.5  Most productive TS researchers addressing Hispanic America as an object of study Name

Last known university

Country

  1. Arencibia, Lourdes B.

No regular teaching found

Cuba

26

  2. Bastín, Georges L.

U. Montréal

Canada

22

  3. Payás, Gertrudis

U. Católica de Temuco

Chile

20

  4. Willson, Patricia

U. Buenos Aires

Argentina

18

  5. Alonso, Iciar

U. Salamanca

Spain

14

  6. Pulido, Martha L.

U. Antioquia

Colombia

14

  7. Vega, Miguel Ángel

U. Alicante

Spain

13

  8. Gargatagli, Ana

U. Autònoma de Barcelona

Spain

11

  9. Pagni, Andrea

U. Erlangen Nürnberg

Germany

11

10. Munday, Jeremy

U. Leeds

U. Kingdom

9

11. Weller, Georganne

U. CIESAS

Mexico

9

12. Arrojo, Rosemary

U. Binghampton

US

8

13. Levine, Suzanne J.

U. California in Santa Barbara

US

8

14. Stratford, Madeleine

U. Québec

Canada

8

15. Valdivia, Rosario

U. Ricardo Palma

Peru

8

16. Clavijo, Bibiana

EAN

Colombia

7

17. Foz, Clara

U. Ottawa

Canada

7

18. Guzmán, María Constanza

U. York

Canada

7

19. Pagano, Adriana Silvina

U. Minas Gerais

Brazil

7

20. Diéguez, María Isabel

Pontificia U. Católica

Chile

6

21. Fossa, Lydia

U. Arizona

US

6

22. Milton, John

U. São Paulo

Brazil

6

23. Montoya, Paula Andrea

U. Antioquia

Colombia

6

24. Waisman, Sergio

U. George Washington

US

6

25. Bradford, Lisa Rose

U. Nacional de Mar del Plata

Argentina

5

26. Valdeón, Roberto A.

U. Oviedo

Spain

5

(Source: BITRA, November 2016)

# pubs.

Javier Franco Aixelá and Sara Rovira-Esteva

list of specialists, and there is only one centre which is included twice: the U. of Antioquia (Colombia). The regions or their languages are obviously not the sole object of study in TS. In Table 24.6 we can see the global thematic distribution in TS for 22 different keywords with at least 1% in the corresponding language and in BITRA as a whole. The aim now is to compare the other thematic interests shown by research in TS in all languages with those featured by TS in Spanish, Catalan, Galician and Basque. We have organized the data in four categories to enhance comparability: the thematic distribution of BITRA as a whole, of all TS publications in Spanish, of only those published in (any language in) Hispanic American journals, and of only those published in Spanish journals, also in any language. We have included all languages for Hispanic American and Spanish journals because the idea here is to provide a picture of research as published in both regions, regardless of the publication language. Thus, we have information about both research in Spanish (second column) and research in Spain or in Hispanic America (third and fourth columns). Given the shortage of TS specialized journals in Hispanic America, for this corpus we have used all TS articles from all journals, whether active or extinct, published in this area and having more than ten TS articles. We are then talking of seven journals: Mutatis Mutandis and Ikala (Colombia), Traduic (Mexico), Revista de la Facultad de Lenguas Modernas (Peru), Onomazein (Chile), Letras (Costa Rica) and Núcleo (Venezuela). For the Spanish corpus, we have used the sixteen TS specialized journals published in Spain, whether active or extinct, with more than fifty TS articles. This list is thus made up of: Cuadernos de traducción e Interpretación, Entreculturas, Estudios de traducción, Hermeneus, Hieronymus Complutensis, Hikma, Livius, MonTI, Panace@, Puentes, Quaderns, Revista Tradumàtica, Sendebar, Skopos, TRANS, and Vasos comunicantes. As before, it includes all publication languages, since this column attempts to represent all research published in Spain and not only in Spanish. This way, too, we can include the other languages spoken in Spain and foreign languages (notably English) in this thematic comparison, since their individual study would need more space than we can use in this contribution. Table 24.6 Global thematic distribution of TS research in Spain and Hispanic America vs. BITRA in general, ordered by their frequency All BITRA

All publications in Spanish

Only Hispanic American journals (any language)

Only Spanish journals (any language)

Total entries

68,050 (100%)

12,995 (100%)

446 (100%)

2,795 (100%)

Literature

17,229 (25.3%)

3,940 (30.3%)

136 (30.5%)

1,020 (36.4%)

History

9,489 (13.9%)

2,658 (20.4%)

62 (13.9%)

525 (18.8%)

Didactics

8,640 (12.7%)

1,805 (13.9%)

73 (16.4%)

288 (10.3%)

Specialized tr.

8,009 (11.8%)

2,085 (16.0%)

39 (8.7%)

519 (18.5%)

Interpreting

7,081 (10.4%)

913 (7.0%)

22 (4.9%)

195 (7.0%)

Profession

5,704 (8.4%)

1,086 (8.4%)

36 (8.1%)

369 (13.2%)

Machine tr.

4,344 (6.4%)

451 (3.5%)

7 (1.6%)

132 (4.7%)

464

Bibliometric overview of translation studies

All BITRA

All publications in Spanish

Only Hispanic American journals (any language)

Linguistics

3,728 (5.5%)

606 (4.7%)

21 (4.7%)

91 (3.3%)

Audiovisual

3,723 (5.5%)

781 (6.0%)

13 (2.9%)

166 (5.9%)

Religion

3,215 (4.7%)

332 (2.6%)

15 (3.4%)

61 (2.2%)

Legal

2,954 (4.3%)

701 (5.4%)

10 (2.2%)

129 (4.6%)

Quality/Assess.

2,464 (3.6%)

314 (2.4%)

13 (2.9%)

80 (2.9%)

Documentation

1,924 (2.8%)

541 (4.2%)

4 (0.9%)

114 (4.1%)

Ideology

1,907 (2.8%)

286 (2.2%)

10 (2.2%)

54 (1.9%)

Research meth.

1,757 (2.6%)

237 (1.8%)

6 (1.3%)

52 (1.9%)

Process

1,698 (2.5%)

156 (1.2%)

8 (1.8%)

51 (1.8%)

Medical

1,575 (2.3%)

456 (3.5%)

6 (1.3%)

197 (7.0%)

Terminology

1,275 (1.9%)

345 (2.7%)

6 (1.3%)

63 (2.3%)

Corpus

1,211 (1.8%)

144 (1.1%)

2 (0.4%)

22 (0.8%)

Interference

1,036 (1.5%)

299 (2.3%)

5 (1.1%)

48 (1.7%)

953 (1.4%)

144 (1.1%)

11 (2.5%)

60 (2.1%)

Gender

Only Spanish journals (any language)

(Source: BITRA, November 2016)

A perfunctory glance at Table 24.6 tells us that there is a basic similitude among all these research domains, and at the same time that there are a few notable and intriguing differences, each of which would deserve a detailed study of its own. To start with, the relative weight of literary and historical issues in Spanish journals is remarkable as compared to BITRA as a whole. Figures here are consistently much higher than the ones for BITRA as a whole. Professional issues are also much more pursued in Spain than in TS in general, thus suggesting a marked local tendency, since these three topics are the most liable to be focused on local culture. It is also very interesting to note that the increase in these same topics is much more modest for the Hispanic American domain, suggesting a more practical approach here, and this is in turn backed up by a sharp increase of interest in didactics only in Hispanic American production. Interpreting as a research topic seems also to be lagging behind in our three domains, but very especially in Hispanic America, where it does not even reach half the global ratio it has in BITRA. Machine translation is another topic with a very low presence in the three domains, and only the important contribution of an exception, Revista Tradumàtica, goes some way towards restoring ‘balance’ in Spanish journals. In this same line of exceptions led by the crucial contribution of a small group of researchers, the journal Panace@ stands out, with its almost 150 articles on medical translation, turning Spain into one of the most productive research hubs in this field. 465

Javier Franco Aixelá and Sara Rovira-Esteva

TS journals in Spain and Hispanic America The distribution of TS publications in Spanish-speaking countries in the last thirty years places Spain as the great scientific stakeholder for this language in TS. No less than twenty-two (17%) of the 130 TS living journals we know of are published in Spain, whereas there seems to be only one (the Colombian Mutatis Mutandis) in Hispanic America devoting at least 50% of its contents to TS. This situation merits a detailed examination in countries such as Argentina (some 30 TS books detected in the last 30 years), with a long history of translation programmes (no less than 41 BA degrees in translation as of 2016) but no stable academic journal in TS, although it must also be said that there have been several attempts (three short-lived journals that we know of ) at creating a TS journal in this country. Probably one of the main reasons for this lack of interest in TS as a field of academic research lies in the very practical nature of the approach to translation in Hispanic America, as the general lack of MA’s and PhD programmes in TS in this part of the world seems to suggest. In Spain there are at least sixty MA’s programmes in different TS areas and ten specific PhD programmes including the word “Translation” (or a synonym) in their titles. In this connection, it must also be said that a recent change in postgraduate legislation promoting interdisciplinary PhD programmes has reduced the number of specific PhD courses in all fields in Spain, so that TS is now often blended with other disciplines of Arts and Humanities. In the whole of Hispanic America we have found eighty-five BA’s in TS but only nineteen postgraduate courses and one specific TS PhD programme (in Argentina). Table 24.7 shows all active journals specialized in TS and published in Spanish-speaking regions. Table 24.7 List of the 23 TS living journals published in Spanish-speaking countries and main languages of publication ordered by age Name

Birth year

Publisher

Main language

2nd language

Senez

1984

EIZIE (Assoc. Basque translators)

Basque (93.5%)

Spanish (6.5%)

Sendebar

1990

U. Granada

Spanish (91.7%)

English (6.5%)

Vasos comunicantes

1993

AceTT (Assoc. Spanish book translators)

Spanish (100%)

-----

Viceversa: Revista galega de traducción

1995

U. Vigo & Assoc. Galician translators

Galician (100%)

-----

Trans: Revista de traductología

1996

U. Málaga

Spanish (82.5%)

English (15.6%)

Quaderns: Revista de traducció

1998

U. Autònoma de Barcelona

Catalan (56.7%)

Spanish (26.7%)

466

Name

Birth year

Publisher

Main language

2nd language

Hermeneus: Revista de traducción e interpretación

1999

U. Valladolid

Spanish (81.0%)

English (13.7%)

Panace@: Boletín de medicina y traducción

2000

MedTrad (Assoc. Spanish medical translators)

Spanish (88.9%)

English (7.9%)

Revista Tradumàtica

2001

U. Autònoma de Barcelona

English (42.9%)

Spanish (40.3%)

Hikma: Estudios de traducción

2002

U. Córdoba

Spanish (88.9%)

English (6.9%)

La linterna del traductor

2002

ASETRAD (Assoc. Spanish translators)

Spanish (100%)

------

Transfer: Revista electronica sobre traducción e interculturalidad

2006

U. Barcelona

Spanish (76.1%)

English (12.7%)

Visat

2006

Pen Català

Catalan (100%)

-----

1611

2007

U. Autònoma de Barcelona

Spanish (75.8%)

Catalan (12.1%)

Doletiana

2007

U. Autònoma de Barcelona

French (63.4%)

English (26.8%)

Mutatis Mutandis: Revista latinoamericana de traducción

2008

U. Antioquia

Spanish (64.1%)

English (20.4%)

Entreculturas

2009

U. Málaga

Spanish (88.3%)

English (8.3%)

MonTI: Monografías de traducción e interpretación

2009

U. Alicante, U. Jaume I & U. València

English (98.0%)7

Spanish (48.0%)

Estudios de traducción

2011

U. Complutense de Madrid

Spanish (85.7%)

English (5.7%)

Anuari TRILCAT

2011

U. Pompeu Fabra

Catalan (88.5%)

Spanish (11.5%)

Skopos

2012

U. Córdoba

Spanish (92.1%)

English (6.3%) (Continued)

Javier Franco Aixelá and Sara Rovira-Esteva Table 24.7  (Continued) Name

Birth year

Publisher

Main language

2nd language

FITISPos International Journal

2014

U. Alcalá de Henares

English (54.5%)

Spanish (45.5%)

CLINA

2015

U. Salamanca

English (66.7%)

Spanish (33.3%)

(Sources: RETI & BITRA, November 2016)

As seen in Table 24.7, journal publishing activity in Spain is almost frenetic for a country of its size and scientific tradition (see Franco Aixelá 2012). If we added the extinct eighteen Spanish and three Hispanic American TS journals to this list, we would have forty-four specialized periodicals from 1982 to the present. In other words, since 1990 there have been very few years in which some Spanish or Hispanic American TS journal was not created.8 One of the ways (especially the most recent) Spanish journals have developed to cope with this overpopulation is to tend to some kind of further specialization within TS, something which is not so frequent in the international scenario. Thus, we have journals specifically dealing with medical, machine, or literary translation, together with others showing strong historical or regional leanings. As we can also see in Table 24.7, the language distribution suggests a very marked trend towards the use of local languages for publication. Only five out of the twenty-three journals on our list publish more in a foreign language (almost always English) than in local ones, thus seeming to indicate an equally local readership. Nevertheless, it should also be said that four out of the five journals using foreign languages more than local ones were created in the last decade, possibly signalling a change of trend and an ambition of greater international visibility in this respect. It is also noteworthy that only journals from bilingual regions publish articles in Basque, Catalan or Galician. In this connection, the existence of local TS journals specializing in publishing articles in these three languages appears essential for their continuity in TS research. Practically all TS research in Basque and Galician depends on one specialized journal each, whereas in Catalan there are half a dozen journals regularly publishing TS articles, even if Quaderns: Revista de Traducció is the great and traditional TS provider in this language. The data also tell us that Spanish journals tend to be very young – almost two thirds were born in the twenty-first century. Indeed, the data speak both about their youth (which matches the youth of modern TS and tallies with the 1990s boom in the creation of translation degrees in this country) and about their frailty, with 5.6 years as the mean duration of the eighteen extinct TS journals. As regards geographical distribution, the great hub of Spanish TS living journals is Catalonia, with seven in the list, four of them published by the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Andalusia is the second great producer (five TS journals), with the universities of Málaga and Córdoba featuring two each. The existence of several TS journals within the same university is normally justified by the presence of active research groups which publish specialized academic periodicals. TS research groups working from Spain are indeed another very interesting object of bibliometric study given their importance. For instance, Li (2015, 192) states that: “Of the 39 TS groups listed on the website of the European Society for Translation Studies, 15 (38.5%) are Spain-based”. The keen interest in journal publishing shown by Spanish

468

Bibliometric overview of translation studies

professional associations of translators is also very noteworthy, with no less than five (21.7%) journals fostered by them. The journal publishers in Spain, now and in the past, are systematically non-commercial, with public universities and professional associations as their sole responsible agents. This is probably the main reason why currently all living TS journals in Spain are published on open access in a world in which still around 40% of TS journals require subscription. It is also necessary to state here that TS was, and remains, very attractive to other neighbouring disciplines. Thus, apart from the previously mentioned forty-four TS journals, there have been, and still are thousands of TS articles in Spanish being published in all kind of journals specializing in other disciplines, including linguistics, literary studies, computing, history and philosophy. To be more specific, we have located almost 550 non-TS journals that have published at least one article in Spanish dealing with TS. Individually, these non-specialized journals do not tend to be great TS publishers in quantitative terms, but all together they are central to TS, since they are collectively responsible for about 2,000 TS articles in Spanish, i.e. close to half of all detected TS articles in Spanish. In Hispanic America they play an even more crucial role, since no less than thirty journals published in that region have included some article on TS, thus providing an academic niche for reflection on our discipline and partially compensating for the shortage of specialized periodicals in this geographical area. As regards the visibility of living journals published in Spain and Hispanic America, their marked tendency to foster local languages does not favour their promotion in the Englishoriented international indexes. TSB, the other TS holistic bibliography, was trying as of 2016 to systematically cover fifty-six TS journals, eight of which (including Mutatis Mutandis) were from Spanish-speaking countries. Table 24.8, with data collected from RETI & SJR, shows the (non-)presence of our living twenty-three journals in the most important international indexes. There is no TS Spanish or Hispanic American journal in the two most prestigious international indexes, i.e. Thompson Reuters’ Arts and Humanities Citation Index (AHCI) and Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), nor in the International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBBS). As far as other important indexes are concerned, only five journals can be found in Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA), ERIH Plus and Google Scholar Metrics (GSM), while eight are indexed in Scopus. Although these values change over time and the situation seems to have improved in the last few years, in terms of overall visibility there is a huge amount of ground to make up still.

TS book publishers in Spain and Hispanic America Out of the 1,445 TS books published with at least part of their contents in Spanish, 74% were published in Spain, whereas 19% were launched in countries in which Spanish is not an official language, and 7% were published in Hispanic America. Thus, the picture drawn by journals is to a great extent mirrored in books. This unbalanced situation is, if anything, increasing. For the pre-1985 period, before modern TS, we have 207 TS books with at least some chapter in Spanish. In this period, 55% of these books were published in Spain, 29% in non-Spanish speaking countries and 16% in Hispanic America. Out of the 1,238 TS books published with at least part of their contents in

469

Table 24.8 Presence of TS Spanish and Hispanic American journals in international indexes for 2016 Journal

AHCI

SCCI

IBSS

LLBA

SCOPUS

SJR

ERIHPLUS

GSM h-index

1611

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

Anuari Trilcat

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

CLINA

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

Doletiana

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

Entreculturas

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

Estudios de traducción NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

YES

2

FITISPos ­International Journal

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

Hermeneus: Revista de traducción e interpretación

NO

NO

NO

YES

YES

0.144 (Q3)

YES

NO

Hikma: Estudios de traducción

NO

NO

NO

NO

YES

0.27 (Q2)

NO

NO

Linterna del Traductor NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

MonTI: Monografías de traducción e interpretación

NO

NO

NO

NO

YES

0.173 (Q2)

YES

NO

Mutatis Mutandis: Revista latinoamericana de traducción

NO

NO

NO

NO

YES

0.146 (Q3)

NO

3

Panace@: Boletín de medicina y traducción

NO

NO

NO

NO

YES

0.187 (Q2)

NO

4

Quaderns: Revista de traducció

NO

NO

NO

YES

YES

0.114 (Q3)

YES

5

Revista Tradumàtica

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

Sendebar

NO

NO

NO

YES

YES

0.156 (Q2)

YES

4

Senez

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

Skopos

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

Trans: Revista de traductología

NO

NO

NO

YES

YES

0.102 (Q4)

NO

NO

Transfer: Revista electrónica sobre traducción e interculturalidad

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

Vasos comunicantes

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

Viceversa: Revista galega de traducción

NO

NO

NO

YES

NO

NO

NO

NO

Visat

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

(Sources: RETI; SJR, August 2017)

Table 24.9  TS publishers with ≥10 books at least partially in languages spoken in Spain Rk.

Publisher

Spanish

Basque

Catalan

Galician

Total

 1

Comares

88

-----

-----

-----

88

 2

Peter Lang

68

1

 6

3

78

 3

Universitat Jaume I

40

-----

14

-----

54

 4

Universidad de Alicante

40

-----

 3

-----

43

 5

Universidade de Vigo

21

-----

-----

17

38

 6

Universitat de València

29

-----

 5

-----

34

 7

Universidad de Valladolid

29

-----

-----

-----

29

 8

Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria

28

-----

-----

-----

28

 9

Universidad de León

27

-----

-----

-----

27

10

PPU

18

-----

 6

-----

24

11

Atrio

23

-----

-----

-----

23

12

EUMO

2

-----

20

-----

22

13

Universidad de Castilla–La Mancha

20

-----

-----

-----

20

14

Universidad de Salamanca

20

-----

-----

-----

20

15

Universidad de Málaga

19

-----

-----

-----

19

16

Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona

14

-----

 5

-----

19

17

Universidad de Granada

17

-----

-----

-----

17

18

Cátedra

15

-----

-----

-----

15

19

Diputación provincial de Soria

15

-----

-----

-----

15

(Continued)

Javier Franco Aixelá and Sara Rovira-Esteva Table 24.9  (Continued) Rk.

Publisher

Spanish

Basque

Catalan

Galician

Total

20

Universidad de Murcia

13

-----

-----

-----

13

21

Ariel

12

-----

-----

-----

12

22

CSIC

12

-----

-----

-----

12

23

ENCASA

12

-----

-----

-----

12

24

Abadia de Montserrat

-----

11

-----

11

25

Bienza

11

-----

-----

-----

11

26

Gredos

11

-----

-----

-----

11

-----

(Source: BITRA, November 2016)

Spanish in 1986–2015, we have detected 6% published in Hispanic America, as against 16% published in countries where Spanish is not an official language, and 78% published in Spain during the last thirty years. All the most productive publishers with at least ten TS books in some language spoken in Spain but one (the Swiss Peter Lang) are Spanish. Also, it is especially noteworthy that of these twenty-six publishers, there are only seven commercial ones. As we saw previously, this is also much the case with TS journals, none of which is published for profit, thus indicating that our discipline in Spanish-speaking countries is not especially attractive to commercial publishers, although there are some exceptions. Regarding Catalan and Galician, once again the activity shown by very few publishers stands as basic for the academic survival of less-spoken languages. Thus, four public publishers represent about half of Catalan book production in TS, whereas the University of Vigo alone has published almost half of the books on TS with at least parts in Galician. In Basque we only know of fourteen TS books at least partly in that language, with no publisher responsible for more than two titles. It is also very interesting to note that twenty-one (80.8%) of these twenty-six publishers have launched TS books with at least part of them in English. The exceptions are mainly commercial Spain-based publishers. This presence of English is always quite small, reaching about 10% of the other local languages, very much in line with the visible but secondary presence of this language in Spain-based journals.

The most cited works in Spanish and their authors We will next examine the most visible TS works originally published in Spanish. Our aim is to show the main characteristics of the most cited works in this language, paying special attention to their topics, their international dissemination or the languages their authors use for academic communication. In Basque, Galician and Catalan, the number of publications mined for their citations in BITRA is still too small to allow for generalizations of the kind we can make here for Spanish. 472

Table 24.10 The most cited works originally published in Spanish listed according to their mean ­citations per year9 Rk.

Name

Year

Title

 1

Hurtado, Amparo

2001

Traducción y traductología

 2

Hurtado, Amparo (ed.)

1999

 3

Chaume, Frederic

 4

Cits.

Cits./year

186

12.4

Enseñar a traducir

86

5.1

2004

Cine y traducción

56

4.7

Díaz-Cintas, Jorge

2003

Teoría y práctica de la subtitulación inglésespañol

55

4.2

 5

Rabadán, Rosa

1991

Equivalencia y traducción

71

2.8

 6

Gamero, Silvia

2001

La traducción de textos técnicos

39

2.6

 7

Agost, Rosa

1999

Traducción y doblaje

45

2.6

 8

Kelly, Dorothy Anne

2002

“Un modelo de competencia traductora”

33

2.4

 9

García Yebra, Valentín

1982

Teoría y práctica de la traducción

50

2.1

10

Díaz-Cintas, Jorge

2001

La traducción audiovisual. El subtitulado

28

1.9

11

Collados, Angela

1998

La evaluación de la calidad en la interpretación simultánea

35

1.9

12

Vidal, María del Carmen Africa

1998

El futuro de la traducción

33

1.8

13

Gonzalo, Consuelo & Valentín García Yebra (eds.)

2004

Manual de documentación y terminología para la traducción especializada

20

1.7

14

Carbonell, Ovidi

1998

Traducción y cultura

30

1.7

15

Vega, Miguel Ángel (ed.)

1994

Textos clásicos de teoría de la traducción

38

1.7

16

Rabadán, Rosa (ed.)

2000

Traducción y censura inglés-español, 1939– 1985

25

1.6

17

Ruiz, José Francisco

2000

Aproximación a una historia de la traducción en España

26

1.6

18

Vázquez Ayora, Gerardo

1977

Introducción a la traductología

64

1.6 (Continued)

Table 24.10  (Continued) Rk.

Name

Year

Title

Cits.

Cits./year

19

Moya, Virgilio

2003

La selva de la traducción

20

1.5

20

Mayoral, Roberto

2001

Aspectos epistemológicos de la traducción

22

1.5

21

Waddington, Christopher

1999

Estudio comparativo de diferentes métodos de evaluación de traducción general (inglés-español)

26

1.5

22

García Yebra, Valentín

1994

Traducción: historia y teoría

33

1.5

23

Mayoral, Roberto; Dorothy Anne Kelly & Natividad Gallardo

1986

“Concepto de ‘traducción subordinada’ (cómic, cine, canción, publicidad). Perspectivas no lingüísticas de la traducción”

44

1.5

24

Borja, Anabel

2000

El texto jurídico inglés y su traducción al español

22

1.4

25

Baigorri, Jesús

2000

La interpretación de conferencias

22

1.4

26

González Davies, María (ed.)

2003

Secuencias: Tareas para el aprendizaje interactivo de la traducción especializada

17

1.3

27

Muñoz, Ricardo

1995

Lingüística para traducir

27

1.3

28

Torre, Esteban

1994

Teoría de la traducción literaria

29

1.3

29

García Yebra, Valentín

1983

En torno a la traducción

43

1.3

30

Mayoral, Roberto

1999

La traducción de la variación lingüística

21

1.2

31

Hurtado, Amparo (ed.)

1996

La enseñanza de la traducción

24

1.2

32

Gutiérrez, María del Camino

2001

Traducción y censura de textos cinematográficos en la España de Franco: doblaje y subtitulado inglés-español (1951– 1975)

17

1.1

33

Grupo PACTE

2001

“La competencia traductora y su adquisición”

17

1.1

Rk.

Name

Year

Title

34

Moya, Virgilio

2000

La traducción de los nombres propios

18

1.1

35

Catelli, Nora & Marietta Gargatagli (eds.)

1998

El tabaco que fumaba Plinio

19

1.1

36

Ávila, Alejandro

1997

El doblaje

20

1.1

37

Vidal, María del Carmen Africa

1995

Traducción, manipulación, desconstrucción

24

1.1

38

Tricás, Mercedes

1995

Manual de traducción: francés-castellano

20

1.0

39

Hurtado, Amparo

1996

“La enseñanza de la traducción directa general”

20

1.0

40

Paz, Octavio

1971

Traducción: literatura y literalidad

46

1.0

41

Lvovskaia, Zinaida D.

1997

Problemas actuales de la traducción

17

0.9

42

Hurtado, Amparo

1995

“La didáctica de la traducción: evolución y estado actual”

18

0.9

43

Carbonell, Ovidi

1997

Traducir al otro

18

0.9

44

Merino, Raquel

1994

Traducción, tradición y manipulación. Teatro inglés en España 1950– 1990

20

0.9

45

Santoyo, Julio César

1987

Teoría y crítica de la traducción

27

0.9

46

Ortega y Gasset, José

1937

“Miseria y esplendor de la traducción”

70

0.9

47

Gallego, Miguel

1994

Traducción y literatura

17

0.8

48

Santoyo, Julio César

1985

El delito de traducir

24

0.8

49

Paz, Octavio

1971

“Traducción: literatura y literalidad”

24

0.5

50

Borges, Jorge Luis

1939

“Pierre Menard, autor del Quijote”

24

0.3

51

Borges, Jorge Luis

“Los traductores de las 1001 noches”

17

0.2

(Source: BITRA, November 2016)

1936

Cits.

Cits./year

Javier Franco Aixelá and Sara Rovira-Esteva

The first thing to be observed in this list is that, when it comes to citations in the Humanities, there is an absolute preponderance of books (82.3%) and generalist approaches (98%). This picture is just the same as with TS in general (see Franco Aixelá 2013), and it would be good to preface this analysis with an important caveat: this is a list of the most visible, the most influential even, but not of the best (nor the worst) research. Indeed, research quality is not the issue here, as shown by the fact that the majority feature a generalist – often even handbook – approach, nothing to do with groundbreaking research (see Franco Aixelá and Rovira-Esteva 2015). The analysis of this list should then enable us to gain insights into what fields are of interest to Spanish-speaking researchers and into the persons and centres responsible for the most influential TS research in Spanish, but we are by no means implying that these are the best fifty-one TS essays ever written in Spanish. Regarding the relative impact of TS in different languages, it might be interesting to say that only the first of the works listed here would make it into the fifty most cited works in TS, regardless of language. The second one would take place eighty-seven in the world list, whereas number fifty-one in our ranking would have some 730 other works ahead. Nine (17.6%) of these fifty-one most cited works have been translated in some other language. If we consider that four of them are the work of very famous writers (Borges, Ortega y Gasset and Paz), and that one was translated only into Catalan, there would remain four (7.8%) TS academic works in Spanish that have merited international recognition via translation. Generally speaking, it seems fair to say that TS research performed in Spanish does not attract great attention abroad, and this matches quite well the tendency to associate local topics with local languages. Addressing the language distribution of TS works by researchers working in Spain and Hispanic America, it must be said that 75.6% of all the TS works by these most cited authors has been published in Spanish, 27.5% in English and 3.1% in Catalan, whereas French takes 1.8%, and three other languages are clear outliers, with 0.2% each.10 It is also interesting to note that only five of these authors have other works originally written in English accruing more citations than their most cited Spanish essays. There are of course exceptions, with some much-cited TS scholars who work in Spanish universities and publish mostly in other languages, including English and Catalan. Nevertheless and generally speaking, it seems fair to affirm that until 2015 at least, a majority of TS research performed in Spain and Hispanic America was being done in Spanish. An interesting hypothesis to be tested in the future would be whether the matters dealt with by Spanish-speaking authors in foreign languages differ from the ones they address in their local language(s). The opinions expressed by the editors of very prestigious international journals in applied linguistics (Byrnes 2010) seem to confirm that this is necessarily so. Indeed, the chief editors of journals such as The Canadian Modern Language Review, Language Learning, Language Learning & Technology or TESOL explicitly pose “concerns of local interest” as one of the main reasons for manuscript rejection in their journals. Incidentally, one of the consequences of this editorial policy is that systematic research on Spanish (including Basque, Catalan and Galician) and Hispanic American matters and languages is only possible in books and journals published locally. In the next section, we will analyse a sample of articles written mainly in English by authors who work in Spanish-speaking countries in order to begin to answer these questions. 476

Bibliometric overview of translation studies

Research in English and in foreign journals by authors working in Spain and Hispanic America Until now, we have focused our analysis on research in the languages spoken in Spain and Hispanic America, and in the publishers and journals published in the Spanish-speaking area, including in this latter case publications in all languages. As we have already seen, there is much research in the Spanish-speaking area being carried out in foreign languages, very especially in English. Thus, a portrait of research by authors working in Spain and Hispanic America must include an analysis of their contributions in English via journals located outside the Spanish-speaking area if it is not to be lacking. In order to do this, we have mined and manually assigned affiliations to all articles published in the 2011–2015 period in the nine TS journals included in Thomson Reuters’ JCR (Journal Citation Reports) as of April 2017, i.e. Across Languages and Cultures, Babel, Interpreter and Translator Trainer, Interpreting: International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting, Linguistica Antverpiensia, Target, Translation and Interpreting Studies, Translation Studies and The Translator. This should enable us to provide a preliminary portrait of the current presence and profile of TS scholars working in Spanish-speaking countries who write in the most prestigious internationally oriented journals. In the future, this sample should be broadened to include more journals and a longer period, but this preliminary analysis should provide a solid base and some working hypotheses to start with. Altogether, there are 744 articles in these journals and period, 705 (94.8%) of them written in English, twenty-one (2.8%) in French, fifteen (2.0%) in Spanish, and three (0.4%) in German. Out of these 744 articles, one hundred (13.4%) were written at least in part by scholars affiliated to Spanish universities and five (0.7%) by authors working in Hispanic America. As we can see, also when addressing a group of the most prestigious international TS journals written almost only in English, researchers working in Spanish-speaking countries represent a figure approximating 15% (14.1% in this case, to be precise), thus confirming the importance of the presence of Spanish and Hispanic American TS scholarship at all levels. In fact, as shown in Table 24.11, Spain represents the second most productive country in our sample, closely following the United Kingdom and preceding two academic superpowers such as the US and China. Table 24.11  Countries with ≥10 articles published in journals covered by JCR (2011–2015) Ranking

Country

Quantity

%

1

United Kingdom

110

14.8%

2

Spain

100

13.4%

3

United States of America

85

11.4%

4

China

76

10.2%

5

Belgium

41

5.5%

6

Canada

38

5.1%

7

Australia

31

4.2% (Continued)

477

Javier Franco Aixelá and Sara Rovira-Esteva Table 24.11  (Continued) Ranking

Country

Quantity

%

8

Italy

29

3.9%

9

Finland

20

2.7%

10

Germany

18

2.4%

10

France

18

2.4%

11

Austria

13

1.7%

11

Denmark

13

1.7%

11

Ireland

13

1.7%

11

South Africa

13

1.7%

12

Switzerland

12

1.6%

13

United Arab Emirates

11

1.5%

14

Turkey

10

1.3%

(Source: JCR, May 2017)

If we zoom into specific universities, we discover that, among the twenty-six most productive universities (≥7 articles) in our sample, the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven and the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, both with twenty-one articles each, are the ones with more contributions, whereas the Universitat Jaume I occupies third place, the Universitat Pompeu Fabra takes fifth, the Universidad de Granada is in sixth place and the Universidad de Oviedo and the Universitat Rovira i Virgili are in eighth place, with seven contributions each. Actually, there are no less than twenty-seven Spanish and Hispanic American universities with at least one article in our sample. Regarding authors, there is a total of 813 different scholars for the 744 articles under analysis, 113 (13.9%) of which are affiliated to Spanish universities. An author working in a Spanish university – Anthony Pym – occupies first place regarding productivity, together with a Chinese and a Canadian scholar, all of them with six contributions published in journals included in JCR during the 2011–2015 period. In second place, we have Roberto Valdeón among authors with five contributions, and in fourth place, with three contributions, we have Anabel Galán. A very interesting piece of data that can be extracted from this sample is the high degree of co-authorship in these journals, with 191 (25.7%) collective articles. This figure tallies with the global ratio of co-authorship in TS (24% for all publication types for the 2013–2015 period, according to Rovira-Esteva and Franco Aixelá 2020). Over half of the co-authored documents in our sample (96) are also the product of inter-institutional collaboration. Scholars working in Spanish universities are co-authors of thirty-six of these articles (18.8% of all the co-authorship in our sample), almost half of which (15 articles, 41.7%) were signed by transnational teams of researchers working in Spain and abroad. This indicates a notable international vocation on the part of authors working in Spanish universities, evidence of how local TS seems to be overcoming the traditional isolation of Spanish science, at least in the most prestigious internationally oriented journals. 478

Bibliometric overview of translation studies

With respect to impact, the presence of scholars working in Spanish-speaking countries is not so prominent, since only Anthony Pym exceeds one citation per year in BITRA for his articles in our sample, and five more authors (Montse Corrius, Patrick Zabalbeascoa, Sara RoviraEsteva, Pilar Orero and Mireia Vargas-Urpi) would come in tenth place, with 0.8 citations per year taking into account only their articles in our sample. An especially interesting question we can begin to answer in the analysis of our sample is whether scholars with Spanish affiliations who stand out in their international production tend to write more in English than their most productive and cited counterparts in Spanish (see Tables 24.5 and 24.10). Table 24.12 is an attempt to answer this. Table 24.12 Distribution by language of the works by the most cited and productive Spanish-affiliated authors included in JCR (2011–2015)11 Author

University

Total BITRA

English

Spanish

Others

TOTALS

------

777

482 (62%)

232 (29.9%)

73 (9.4%)

Abuín, Marta

U. Alfonso X el Sabio

7

2 (28.6%)

5 (71.4%)

0

Alcina, María Amparo

U. Jaume I

28

11 (39.3%)

19 (67.9%)

0

Boéri, Julie

U. Pompeu Fabra

9

7 (77.8%)

2 (22.2%)

0

Bolaños, Alicia

U. de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria

25

5 (20%)

21 (84%)

0

Cáceres, Ingrid

U. de Alcalá

13

2 (15.4%)

11 (84.6%)

0

Corrius, Montse

U. de Vic

5

4 (80%)

1 (20%)

0

Ezpeleta, Pilar

U. Jaume I

13

4 (30.8%)

8 (61.5%)

1 (7.7%)

Flórez, Sílvia

U. Jaume I

6

2 (33.3%)

4 (66.7%)

0

Galán, Anabel

U. Autònoma de Barcelona

12

7 (58.3%)

3 (25%)

2 (16.7%)

Marco, Josep

U. Jaume I

42

15 (35.7%)

10 (23.8%)

18 (42.9%)

Manuel, Jesús de

U. de Granada

19

6 (31.6%)

15 (78.9%)

0

Martín, Celia

U. de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria

21

7 (33.3%)

12 (57.1%)

2 (9.5%)

Matamala, Anna

U. Autònoma de Barcelona

49

36 (73.5%)

7 (14.3%)

6 (12.2%)

Ordóñez, Pilar

U. Jaume I

23

11 (47.8%)

11 (47.8%)

2 (8.7%) (Continued)

479

Javier Franco Aixelá and Sara Rovira-Esteva Table 24.12  (Continued) Author

University

Total BITRA

English

Spanish

Others

Orero, Pilar

U. Autònoma de Barcelona

96

72 (75%)

19 (19.8%)

7 (7.3%)

Orozco, Mariana

U. Autònoma de Barcelona

26

11 (42.3%)

15 (57.7%)

0

Poder, MarieEvelyne Le

U. de Granada

15

0

12 (80%)

3 (20%)

Presas, Marisa

U. Autònoma de Barcelona

33

11 (33.3%)

9 (27.3%)

14 (42.4%)

Pym, Anthony David

U. Rovira i Virgili

184

169 (91.8%)

11 (6.0%)

6 (3.3%)

Rovira-Esteva, Sara

U. Autònoma de Barcelona

29

13 (44.8%)

10 (34.5%)

6 (20.7%)

Sarmiento, Marcos

U. de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria

7

3 (42.9%)

5 (71.4%)

0

Soler, Betlem

U. de València

6

4 (66.7%)

1 (16.7%)

1 (16.7%)

Valdeón, Roberto A.

U. de Oviedo

40

40 (100%)

2 (5%)

2 (5%)

Vargas-Urpi, vMireia

U. Pompeu Fabra

13

5 (38.5%)

6 (46.2%)

2 (15.4%)

Zabalbeascoa, Patrick

U. Pompeu Fabra

54

33 (61.1%)

20 (37%)

1 (1.9%)

(Source: JCR, May 2017)

When we analyzed the language distribution of the most cited authors in Spanish (see Table 24.10), we saw that 75.6% of all the TS works by these most cited authors had been published in Spanish, and 27.5% in English (once again, the total exceeds 100% due to multilingual publications, especially edited volumes). Although a few of them coincide in both lists, the global language policy of authors with a Spanish affiliation publishing in JCR-indexed journals seems to be practically the opposite, with 62% of their production in English and 29.9% in Spanish. Even if the sample we are using is too small to be categorical, it seems that in Spain and among the most productive and cited TS scholars there are two different groups with some elements in common, one (probably smaller) specializing in international (mainly English) production and another made up by authors who feel more comfortable writing in Spanish, although almost none of the authors in both groups publish solely in one language. This hypothesis is intriguing, and should be further investigated using a larger sample and going into a degree of detail we cannot afford here for reasons of space. Finally, we must compare the thematic distribution of Spain-affiliated and the rest of authors publishing in JCR-indexed journals. 480

Table 24.13  Thematic distribution of all articles in JCR (2011–2015) All BITRA

All publications in All articles by Spanish in BITRA authors not working in Spain or Hispanic America (JCR journals 2011–2015)

All articles by authors working in Spain or Hispanic America (JCR journals 2011–2015)

Total entries

68,080 (100%)

12,995 (100%)

639 (100%)

105 (100%)

Literature

17,229 (25.3%)

3,940 (30.3%)

132 (20.6%)

12 (11.5%)

History

9,489 (13.9%)

2,658 (20.4%)

85 (13.3%)

10 (9.6%)

Didactics

8,640 (12.7%)

1,805 (13.9%)

104 (16.3%)

32 (30.1%)

Specialized tr.

8,009 (11.8%)

2,085 (16.0%)

87 (13.6%)

25 (24.0%)

Interpreting

7,081 (10.4%)

913 (7.0%)

123 (19.2%)

19 (18.3%)

Profession

5,704 (8.4%)

1,086 (8.4%)

68 (10.6%)

10 (9.6%)

Machine tr.

4,344 (6.4%)

451 (3.5%)

12 (1.9%)

1 (1.0%)

Linguistics

3,728 (5.5%)

606 (4.7%)

26 (4.1%)

6 (5.8%)

Audiovisual

3,723 (5.5%)

781 (6.0%)

32 (5.0%)

17 (16.3%)

Religion

3,215 (4.7%)

332 (2.6%)

12 (1.9%)

1 (1.0%)

Legal

2,954 (4.3%)

701 (5.4%)

46 (7.2%)

11 (10.6%)

Quality/Assess.

2,464 (3.6%)

314 (2.4%)

44 (6.9%)

8 (7.7%)

Documentation

1,924 (2.8%)

541 (4.2%)

7 (1.1%)

2 (1.9%)

Ideology

1,907 (2.8%)

286 (2.2%)

45 (7.0%)

7 (6.7%)

Research meth.

1,757 (2.6%)

237 (1.8%)

60 (9.4%)

12 (11.5%)

Process

1,698 (2.5%)

156 (1.2%)

51 (8.0%)

3 (2.9%)

Medical

1,575 (2.3%)

456 (3.5%)

20 (3.1%)

6 (5.8%)

Terminology

1,275 (1.9%)

345 (2.7%)

0 (0%)

3 (2.9%)

Corpus

1,211 (1.8%)

144 (1.1%)

21 (3.3%)

5 (4.8%)

Interference

1,036 (1.5%)

299 (2.3%)

13 (2.0%)

2 (1.9%)

953 (1.4%)

144 (1.1%)

12 (1.9%)

2 (1.9%)

Spain

6448 (9.5%)

4024 (31.0%)

12 (1.9%)

24 (23.1%)

Spanish

2039 (3.0%)

1282 (9.9%)

1 (0.2%)

10 (9.6%)

Gender

(Sources: BITRA & JCR, May 2017)

Javier Franco Aixelá and Sara Rovira-Esteva

As we have previously seen, Spain and Spanish as objects of study currently represent 40% of TS research in Spanish. In Table  24.13, this figure is lowered to 33% when considering only Spain-affiliated authors publishing in JCR-indexed journals, thus confirming that international publishing tends to discourage addressing local matters, even if scholars working in Spain will still frequently use Spanish examples to illustrate their points. In this same vein of avoiding local matters, there is a dramatic drop in literature and history as objects of study by Spain-affiliated authors when publishing in international journals. Generally speaking, an equally dramatic increase can be observed in the treatment of the most specialized and technical issues by authors affiliated to Spanish universities publishing in JCR-indexed journals (specialized translation, interpreting, audiovisual and legal translation, among others).

Conclusion We have tried to provide an overview of TS research performed in Spain and Hispanic America, and there are some challenging conclusions we would like to underline here. • •

• •

• •

•

•

The academic presence of Spain and Hispanic America in modern Translation Studies is central, both from the perspective of translation degrees and from the point of view of research. We have located over one hundred translation degrees offered in Spanish-speaking countries, with notable concentrations in countries such as Argentina, Mexico or Spain which, to our knowledge, find no parallel in any other part of the world, probably with the exception of China. However, the postgraduate offer in Hispanic America seems to be quite lower than in Spain, and this might be part of the explanation of the smaller weight of research in the former. Spanish is the second publication language in TS, just behind English, with a quota probably around 15% among Western languages. Currently, Spain has twenty-two journals specialized in TS, all of them published in open access and covering a broad variety of topics and languages, whereas in Hispanic America there is only one. These journals represent about 17% of those existing in TS, thus reinforcing the idea that the share of Spain and Hispanic America within TS is probably around 15%. Catalan also has a central presence in TS, with seventh place in its use as a publication language and a solid variety of publishers and journals ensuring a stable future. Galician and Basque TS both exceed the ratio they would normally have with respect to their numbers of speakers. However, both depend very heavily on one central journal each. The role played by these two journals talks highly of the importance a small group of people may have in a discipline, but at the same time this heavy dependence on small groups of scholars poses an important danger to the continuity of the discipline in those languages. The growth of languages spoken in Spain within TS has been dramatic, but with the exception of Basque, they all seem to currently dwindle in importance. The figures in the twenty-first century speak at least of a tendency to listlessness in the use of these languages, something that should be checked and explained in the future. Thematically, the use of languages other than English seems to bring about a high tendency to pursue local themes in an inverse proportion, i.e. this tendency is higher the fewer speakers a given language has.

482

Bibliometric overview of translation studies

• •

• •

• • • • •

•

Hispanic America rises as a central object in TS, although its most productive specialists tend to come from outside, especially from areas such as Spain, Canada or the US, with a long and intense tradition of scholarly contact with this part of the world. As regards the rest of usual topics in TS, research in languages spoken in Spain bears an important although not total resemblance with global research. The most notable differences are the greater importance of literary, historical and professional issues in Spanish research, the higher weight of didactics in Hispanic America, and the relative shortage of research in interpreting and in machine translation both in Spain and Hispanic America. The great importance in Spanish TS of articles published in journals from neighbouring fields of knowledge must also be stressed, with about half of all article production in these non-specialized containers. The presence of Spanish TS journals in international indexes is much lower than their relative weight would involve, very likely due to the scarce use of English and their focus on local concerns. At the same time that this may be considered a problem, it seems also clear that systematic coverage of local languages and subjects will only survive in TS if “peripheral” journals continue to foster them. About 75% of TS books in Spanish were published in Spain, and less than 10% were published in Hispanic America, thus confirming the unbalance already shown by TS journals. A great majority of the most productive TS book publishers in Spain are public universities, confirming the low commercial interest of TS published in languages spoken in Spain, as already shown by journals. Also, this analysis of the most cited in Spain shows that books (rather than journal articles) and generalist approaches (rather than case studies) are by definition the most attractive types of publications for scholars. An analysis of the most cited authors in Spanish shows a tendency to publish more in local languages and a poor impact abroad of the most popular research published in Spain and Hispanic America. The production of scholars working in Spanish universities who have published in TS journals covered by JCR during the 2011–2015 period shows some intriguing differences as compared with production in TS journals and books published in Spain and Hispanic America. Although the sample is too small for categorical statements, there are scholars affiliated to Spanish centres who prefer to publish mainly in English as opposed to another group who favour Spanish. The thematic preferences of the more internationally oriented group also seem to be different, at least when publishing in English, with a leaning towards more specialized and less local matters. All in all, TS in Spain and Hispanic America features great vigour, higher than what its demographic weight and academic tradition would imply for the four languages spoken in Spain. This quantitative importance is accompanied by a broad thematic variety which is compatible with a focus on local concerns. There are also some important problems to address, especially the imbalance between Spain and Hispanic America, and the poor international visibility of TS research performed in the languages spoken in Spain.

Future directions Bibliometric studies are hardly in their infancy as regards TS, and there is a great amount of work to be done yet in order to describe our discipline and understand its exponential growth

483

Javier Franco Aixelá and Sara Rovira-Esteva

since the 1990s. Regarding Spanish research, this study raises some particularly interesting questions we would like to set out here. First, the data seem to indicate that languages other than English, and quite notably Spanish, are dwindling in the bibliography of TS. This should be checked and, if proved right, explained. In principle, there are three main possible explanations for this decrease – a comparatively larger growth of TS research in other languages, a general decline in production by Spanish-speaking authors, and/or a significant growth of their production in other languages, especially English as the scientific lingua franca affording the highest visibility and impact. Second, although Spanish research and the one carried out in the rest of the world are globally similar, we have detected some very notable and intriguing differences in the thematic distribution of research depending on the language of publication. They probably depend on the academic framework of TS in each language community, and should be examined more closely and explained in the future. Third, there is a relative shortage of TS research in Hispanic America – even regarding the research dealing with Hispanic America itself as a topic – as compared with other countries such as Canada, Spain or the US, although the difference seems to be on a decline. Data seem to show that this might be due to the scarce number of TS postgraduate programmes in Hispanic America. We need to know if this is so, and if this is the normal state of affairs for all academic fields in the region or something peculiar to TS. Also, it is necessary to discover whether the difference is really decreasing and to unearth other possible reasons for it. Fourth, the role played by some research groups in the dissemination of specific subjects or minority languages seems to be crucial in the Spanish-speaking area. This is an important bibliometric hypothesis, since it would demand a more individualistic/qualitative approach to the understanding of the dissemination of science. Fifth, we have been able to provide an analysis of a small sample of the role played by publications in English written by authors working in Spanish-speaking areas, a rather arduous task given the difficulty of conducting automatic searches including affiliation. This topic should be further delved into, since its importance seems to be on a constant growth. As we have seen, until 2015 at least, a majority of TS research performed in Spain and Hispanic America was being done in Spanish. However, in the future it would be necessary to devise a diachronic analysis of the publication languages used by TS scholars who work in Spain and Hispanic America, in order to check whether this hegemony of Spanish might be losing ground in favour of English or other languages in the works of more junior researchers, or even in the most recent production of more senior ones. The search for optimal dissemination and visibility, the preference of Spanish assessment authorities for international research (i.e. published in English and in journals indexed in Thompson Reuter’s indexes) and the higher ratio of articles written in English in the most recent Spanish journals seem all to point in this direction. In this same line of research, we need to confirm whether the matters dealt with by Spanish-speaking authors in foreign languages differ from the ones the same authors write about in their local language(s), and whether there are systematic differences between the profiles of scholars who prefer to publish in English and those who favour local languages.

Recommended reading Bellis, Nicola de. 2009. Bibliometrics and Citation Analysis. Lanham: Scarecrow Press. A very systematic and accessible overview of bibliometrics and its history.

484

Bibliometric overview of translation studies Franco Aixelá, Javier. 2012. “A  Critical Overview of the Translation Studies Journals Published in Spain.” In Iberian Sudies on Translation and Interpreting, edited by Isabel García Izquierdo and Esther Monzó, 339–61. Bern: Peter Lang. This contribution provides a comprehensive history and analysis of all TS journals published in Spain. Grbić, Nadja, and Sonja Pöllabauer. 2008. “To Count or Not to Count: Scientometrics as a Methodological Tool for Investigating Research on Translation and Interpreting.” Translation and Interpreting Studies 3 (1–2): 87–146. This is a very interesting paper offering an overview of what had then been done in TS using bibliometric or quantitative approaches. Mellinger, Christopher D., and Thomas A. Hanson. 2016. Quantitative Research Methods in Translation and Interpreting Studies. New York: Routledge. This is a very complete handbook on methodological issues associated with TS-oriented bibliometrics. Rovira-Esteva, Sara, Pilar Orero, and Javier Franco Aixelá, eds. 2015. “Bibliometric and Bibliographical Research in Translation Studies.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 23 (2). This special issue of Perspectives presents an updated panorama of current bibliometric studies applied to different branches of Translation Studies.

Notes 1 Both authors are equally responsible for the contents of this essay. Javier Franco directed the writing and the coordination of information, whereas Sara Rovira-Esteva was especially responsible for obtaining and analyzing data. We revised and complemented each other’s work in a dialectic process. The order in which our names are presented responds to an agreement to alternate them in our academic collaborations to avoid any kind of precedence. 2 TSB focuses on recent research, starting its most systematic coverage in the 1990s. Thus, this database collects 515 records (1.9%) prior to 1986. 3 By “specialized journal” we mean any journal regularly devoting ≥50% of its contents to TS. 4 Data for both Basque and Galician in TSB for the last few years are virtually nonexistent, probably waiting to be included. 5 The two journals specializing in Galician and Basque TS are fostered by academic and professional institutions respectively, thus explaining this notable difference for professional matters in both languages. 6 In the case of BITRA, ratios exceed 100% due to multilingual publications, especially edited volumes. TSB includes only one language per entry – even if it is a multilingual edited volume –, and its website did not include its exact number of entries as of November 2016 (“ca. 28,000 records”), so after several searches we established 27,500 as a reliable approximation. 7 Practically all articles in journal MonTI are translated into English in its electronic version. 8 See RETI for an updated list of TS journals from all over the world, including extinct ones. 9 For complete reference and further information about all these publications, please consult BITRA. 10 The total exceeds 100% due to translations and editions of collective multilingual volumes. 11 Totals often exceed 100% due to multilingual publications, especially edited volumes.

References Biblioteca d’Humanitats. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. 2017. “RETI (Revistes dels estudis de traducció i interpretació: Indicadors de qualitat) [Translation and Interpreting Journals: Quality Indicators].” Departament de Traducció, Interpretació i Estudis de l’Àsia Oriental. Accessed August 2017. www.uab.cat/libraries/reti. Borges, Jorge Luis. [1932] 1983. “Las versiones homéricas.” In Discusión, 89–95. Madrid: Alianza. ———. [1936] 1987. “Los traductores de las 1001 noches.” In Historia de la eternidad, 107–38. Madrid: Alianza Emecé. ———. [1939] 1989. “Pierre Menard, autor del Quijote.” In Ficciones, 47–59. Madrid: Alianza Emecé. Accessed August 2017. www.literatura.us/borges/pierre.html.

485

Javier Franco Aixelá and Sara Rovira-Esteva Byrnes, Heidi. 2010. “The Changing Scene for Publishing in Applied Linguistics Journals: Views from Editors.” The Modern Language Journal 94 (4): 636–7. Cartagena, Alfonso de. [1430] 1994 “Introducción a la traducción de la Retórica de Cicerón.” In Textos clásicos de teoría de la traducción, edited by Miguel Ángel Vega Cernuda, 97–8. Madrid: Cátedra. FECYT. 2016. Indicadores bibliométricos de la actividad científica española 2005–2014. Edición 2016. Madrid: FECYT. Franco Aixelá, Javier. 2012. “A  Critical Overview of the Translation Studies Journals Published in Spain.” In Iberian Sudies on Translation and Interpreting, edited by Isabel García Izquierdo and Esther Monzó Nebot, 339–61. Bern: Peter Lang. ———. 2013. “Who’s Who and What’s What in Translation Studies: A Preliminary Approach.” In Tracks and Treks in Translation Studies, edited by Catherine Way, Sonia Vandepitte, Reine Meylaerts, and Magdalena Bartlomiejczyk, 7–28. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ———. 2001–2017. “BITRA (Bibliography of Interpreting and Translation).” Open-access bibliographical database. doi:10.14198/bitra. Accessed August 2017. http://dti.ua.es/en/bitra/introduction.html. Franco Aixelá, Javier, and Sara Rovira-Esteva. 2015. “Publishing and Impact Criteria, and Their Bearing on Translation Studies: In Search of Comparability.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 23 (2): 265–83. Gambier, Yves, and Luc van Doorslaer. 2004–2017. TSB (Translation Studies Bibliography). Bibliographical database. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Accessed August  2017. https://benjamins.com/ online/tsb/. García Yebra, Valentín. 1982. Teoría y práctica de la traducción. Madrid: Gredos. ———. 1983. En torno a la traducción: Teoría. Crítica. Historia. Madrid: Gredos. Holmes, James Stratton. [1972] 1988. “The Name and Nature of Translation Studies.” In Translated!: Papers on Literary Translation & Translation Studies, 67–80. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Holz-Mänttäri, Justa. 1984. Translatorisches Handeln: Theorie und Methode. Mänta, Helsinki: Mäntan Kirjapaino, Suomalainen Tiedekatemia. Li, Xiangdong. 2015. “International Visibility of Mainland China Translation Studies Community: A Scientometric Study.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 23 (2): 183–204. doi:10.1080/09076 76X.2015.1006645. Menéndez Pelayo, Marcelino. 1876. Biblioteca de traductores españoles IV. Santander: Aldus, CSIC. Mitre, Bartolomé de. [1889] 1946. “Teoría del traductor.” Preface to La Divina Comedia. Buenos Aires: Tor. Accessed August 2017. www.biblioteca.org.ar/libros/158321.pdf. Ortega y Gasset, José. 1937. “Miseria y esplendor de la traducción.” La Nación de Buenos Aires. Paz, Octavio. 1971. Traducción: literatura y literalidad. Barcelona: Tusquets. Pellicer y Saforcada, Juan Antonio. 1778. Ensayo de una Bibliotheca de Traductores Españoles. Madrid: Antonio de Sancha. Reiss, Katharina, and Hans Josef Vermeer. 1984. Grundlegung Einer Allgemeinen Translationstheorie. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. Rovira Esteva, Sara, Javier Franco Aixelá, and Christian Olalla-Soler. 2020. “A Bibliometric Study of Co-authorship in Translation Studies.” Onomázein 47. doi:10.7764/onomazein.47.09 Santoyo, Julio César. 1983a. “A propósito del término ‘translema’.” In Actas del I Congreso Nacional de Lingüística Aplicada, 255–65. Madrid: SGEL. ———. 1983b. La cultura traducida: Lección inaugural del curso académico 1983–84. León: Universidad de León. ———. 1984. “La traducción como técnica narrativa.” In Actas del IV Congreso de la AEDEAN (Asociación Española de Estudios Anglo-Norteamericanos), 37–53. Salamanca: Universidad de Salamanca. SCImago Journal & Country Rank (SJR). 2017. Accessed August 2017. www.scimagojr.com/. Toury, Gideon. 1980. In Search of a Theory of Translation. Tel Aviv: The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics. Vázquez Ayora, Gerardo. 1977. Introducción a la traductología [An introduction to translatology]. Washington, DC: Georgetown University.

486

Appendix 1 SPAIN University courses in Translation and Interpreting (2017)

37  universities with some TS degree 29  BA degrees 46  full MA degrees 12  minor postgraduate courses 10  TS-specific doctoral programmes University

Degree

Public/Private

1. Centro de Estudios Superiores Universitarios de Galicia (CESUGA) (A Coruña) (with U. San Jorge)

Grado en Traducción y Comunicación Intercultural

Private

2. Instituto Superior de EstudiosLingüísticos y Traducción (Istrad) (Sevilla)

Máster universitario en nuevas tecnologías aplicadas a la traducción

Private

2. Instituto Superior de Estudios Lingüísticos y Traducción (Istrad) (Sevilla)

Experto en traducción y localización de videojuegos

Private

3. Universidad Alfonso X el Sabio (Madrid)

Grado en traducción e interpretación

Private

3. Universidad Alfonso X el Sabio (Madrid)

Máster en interpretación de conferencias

Private

3. Universidad Alfonso X el Sabio (Madrid)

Doctorado en traducción y comunicación multicultural: didáctica, ciencia, cultura, sociedad

Private

(Continued)

487

University

Degree

Public/Private

3. Universidad Alfonso X el Sabio (Madrid)

Experto en traducción jurídica y jurada

Private

3. Universidad Alfonso X el Sabio (Madrid)

Experto en tradumática, localización y traducción audiovisual

Private

4. Universidad Antonio de Nebrija (Madrid)

Máster en traducción especializada

Private

5. Universidad Autónoma de Madrid

Grado en traducción e interpretación

Public

5. Universidad Autónoma de Madrid

Curso de especialización en interpretación simultánea y consecutiva

Public

6. Universidad Complutense de Madrid

Grado en traducción e interpretación

Public

6. Universidad Complutense de Madrid

Máster universitario en traducción literaria

Public

7. Universidad de Alcalá de Henares

Grado en lenguas modernas y traducción

Public

7. Universidad de Alcalá de Henares

Máster en comunicación intercultural, interpretación y traducción en los servicios públicos

Public

7. Universidad de Alcalá de Henares

Curso de perfeccionamiento de las habilidades de traductores e Intérpretes para los órganos de interior y justicia

Public

8. Universitat d’Alcant/ Universidad de Alicante

Grado en traducción e interpretación

Public

8. Universitat d’Alcant/ Universidad de Alicante

Máster en traducción institucional

Public

8. Universitat d’Alcant/ Universidad de Alicante (with U. Valladolid)

Doctorado en traductología, traducción profesional y audiovisual

Public

9. Universidad de Cádiz

Máster en comunicación internacional

Public

9. Universidad de Cádiz (with Isetrad)

Máster en traducción audiovisual: localización, subtitulación y doblaje

Public

University

Degree

Public/Private

10. Universidad de Córdoba

Grado en traducción e interpretación

Public

10. Universidad de Córdoba

Máster en traducción especializada

Public

10. Universidad de Córdoba

Máster en traducción en contextos especializados

Public

10. Universidad de Córdoba

Máster en traducción y mediación ling. de las lenguas española y alemana

Public

11. Universidad de Granada

Grado en traducción e interpretación

Public

11. Universidad de Granada

Máster en interpretación de conferencias

Public

11. Universidad de Granada

Máster de traducción profesional

Public

12. Universidad de La Laguna

Máster en interpretación de conferencias

Public

12. Universidad de La Laguna

Diploma de especialización en traducción e interpretación para los servicios comunitarios

Public

13. Universidad de las Palmas de Gran Canaria

Grado en traducción e interpretación

Public

13. Universidad de las Palmas de Gran Canaria

Máster oficial en traducción profesional y mediación intercultural

Public

14. Universidad de León

Doctorado en Estudios contrastivos y comparados

Public

15. Universidad de Málaga

Grado en traducción e interpretación

Public

15. Universidad de Málaga

Máster en traducción para el mundo editorial

Public

15. Universidad de Málaga

Doctorado en lingüística, literatura y traducción

Public

16. Universidad de Murcia

Grado en traducción e interpretación

Public

16. Universidad de Murcia

Máster en traducción editorial

Public (Continued)

University

Degree

Public/Private

16. Universidad de Murcia

Doctorado en artes y humanidades: bellas artes, literatura, teología, traducción e Interpretación y lingüística

Public

17. Universidad de Salamanca

Grado en traducción e interpretación

Public

17. Universidad de Salamanca

Máster en traducción y mediación intercultural

Public

17. Universidad de Salamanca

Máster en audiodescripción para la cultura y el ocio

Public

18. Universidad de Valladolid

Grado en traducción e interpretación

Public

18. Universidad de Valladolid

Máster en traducción profesional e institucional

Public

18. Universidad de Valladolid (with U. Alicante)

Doctorado en traductología, traducción profesional y audiovisual

Public

19. Universidad del País Vasco/ EuskalHerrikoUnibertsitatea

Grado en Traducción e interpretación

Public

20. Universidad Europea de Madrid

Grado en traducción e interpretación

Private

20. Universidad Europea de Madrid

Máster en doblaje, traducción y subtitulación

Private

21. Universidad Europea de Valencia

Grado en traducción y comunicación intercultural

Private

21. Universidad Europea de Valencia

Máster en interpretación de conferencias

Private

22. Universidad Europea del Atlántico (Santander)

Grado en traducción e interpretación

Private

23. Universidad Internacional de Valencia

Grado en traducción e interpretación 

Private

24. Universidad Internacional Menéndez Pelayo & Instituto Superior de Estudios Lingüísticos y Traducción (Madrid – Santander)

Máster en traducción especializada: español-alemán/ francés/inglés

Private

University

Degree

Public/Private

24. Universidad Internacional Menéndez Pelayo & Instituto Superior de Estudios Lingüísticos y Traducción (Madrid – Santander)

Máster en traducción y nuevas tecnologías: traducción de software y productos multimedia

Private

25. Universidad Pablo de Olavide de Sevilla

Grado en traducción e interpretación

Public

25. Universidad Pablo de Olavide de Sevilla

Máster en comunicación internacional, traducción e interpretación

Public

26. Universidad Pontificia Comillas de Madrid

Grado en traducción e Interpretación

Private

26. Universidad Pontificia Comillas de Madrid

Máster universitario en interpretación de conferencias

Private

27. Universidad Rey Juan Carlos (Madrid)

Grado en traducción e interpretación

Public

28. Universidad San Jorge de Zaragoza

Grado en traducción y comunicación intercultural

Private

28. Universidad San Jorge de Zaragoza

Máster en traducción especializada

Private

29. Universidade de Vigo

Grado en traducción e interpretación

Public

29. Universidade de Vigo

Máster en traducción multimedia

Public

29. Universidade de Vigo

Máster en traducción y paratradución

Public

29. Universidade de Vigo

Máster en traducción para la comunicación internacional

Public

29. Universidade de Vigo

Especialista en doblaje

Public

30. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona

Grado en traducción e interpretación

Public

30. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona

Máster oficial en traducción, interpretación y estudios interculturales

Public

30. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona

Máster Oficial en tradumática: tecnologías de la traducción

Public

30. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona

Máster en traducción audiovisual

Public (Continued)

University

Degree

Public/Private

30. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona

Máster europeo en traducción audiovisual

Public

30. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona

Máster en traducción jurídica e interpretación judicial

Public

30. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona

Posgrado entraducciónjurídica

Public

30.Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona

Doctorado en traducción y estudiosinterculturales

Public

31. Universitat de València

Grado en traducción y mediación interlingüística

Public

31. Universitat de València

Máster univ. en traducción creativa y humanística

Public

32. Universitat de Vic (online or blended, with U. Oberta de Catalunya)

Grado en lenguas aplicadas y traducción

Private

32. Universitat de Vic

Máster universitario en traducción especializada

Private

32. Universitat de Vic

Doctorado en traducción, género y estudios culturales

Private

33. Universitat Jaume I

Grado en traducción e interpretación

Public

33. Universitat Jaume I

Máster universitario en investigación en traducción e interpretación

Public

33. Universitat Jaume I

Máster en traducción medicosanitaria

Public

33. Universitat Jaume I

Doctorado en lenguas aplicadas, literatura y traducción

Public

34. Universitat Pompeu Fabra

Grado en traducción e interpretación

Public

34. Universitat Pompeu Fabra

Máster en estudios de traducción

Public

34. Universitat Pompeu Fabra

Máster en traducción literaria y audiovisual

Public

34. Universitat Pompeu Fabra

Máster en traducción audiovisual

Public

34. Universitat Pompeu Fabra

Máster en traducción literaria

Public

University

Degree

Public/Private

34. Universitat Pompeu Fabra

Máster en traducción literaria (online)

Public

34. Universitat Pompeu Fabra

Doctorado en traducción y ciencias del lenguaje 

Public

35. Universitat Rovira i Virgili

Máster en traducción profesional inglés-español

Public

36. Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (online)

Máster en traducciónespecializada

Public

36. Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (online)

Diploma de posgrado en traducción y tecnologías

Public

36. Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (online)

Especialización en lingüística y traducción

Public

36. Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (online)

Especialización en localización y traducción audiovisual

Public

36. Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (online)

Especialización en traducción asistida y gestión de proyectos

Public

37. Universitat de Lleida (public) (forthcoming in 2017)

Grado en traducción, comunicación y lenguas aplicadas

Public

*****

Appendix 2 HISPANIC AMERICA University Courses in Translation and Interpreting (2017)

61  universities with some TS degree 85  BA degrees 14  full MA degrees 1  TS-specific doctoral programmes

Argentina 1. Instituto Nacional de Enseñanza Superior “Olga Cossettini” • Interpretariado en inglés (BA course) • Traductorado Literario y Técnico Científico en Inglés (BA course) 2. Instituto Superior del profesorado San Agustín • Traductorado Literario y Técnico Científico en Inglés (BA course) 3. Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentina • Traductorado Público en Inglés (BA course) 4. Universidad Adventista del Plata • Traductorado Público en Inglés (BA course) 5. Universidad Argentina de la Empresa • Traductorado Público en Idioma Inglés e Interpretariado Simultáneo de Idioma Inglés (BA course) • Traductor Público en Idioma Inglés (BA course) 6. Universidad Autónoma de Entre ríos • Traductorado en Francés (BA course) • Traductorado Público en Italiano (BA course) 7. Universidad CAECE • Traductorado Público en Inglés (BA course) 8. Universidad Católica de Salta • Traductor Público en Inglés (BA course) 9. Universidad Católica de las Misiones (UCAMI) • Tecnicatura Universitaria de Traducción e Interpretación en Inglés (BA course)

494

Bibliometric overview of translation studies

10. Universidad de Belgrano • Traductorado Público, Literario y Científico-Técnico de Inglés (BA course) • Maestría en Traducción (Master’s degree) 11. Universidad de Buenos Aires • Maestría en Traducción e Interpretación (Master’s degree) 12. Universidad del Aconcagua • Traductor Público de Inglés (BA course) 13. Universidad del Centro Educativo Latinoamericano • Traductorado público nacional (BA course) 14. Universidad de Morón • Traductor literario y científico técnico de inglés (BA course) • Traductorado público de inglés (BA course) 15. Universidad del Museo Social Argentino • Traductorado Público en Idioma Inglés (BA course) • Interpretariado en Idioma Inglés (BA course) 16. Universidad del Salvador • Licenciado en Interpretación de Conferencias en Ingles (BA course) • Traductor Público en Inglés (BA course) • Traductor Científico-Literario en Inglés (BA course) • Traductor Público en Portugués (BA course) • Traductorado Público en Italiano (BA course) • Traductor Científico-Literario en Portugués (BA course) 17. Universidad Nacional de Catamarca • Traductorado público nacional de francés (BA course) • Traductorado público nacional de inglés (BA course) 18. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba • Traductorado Público Nacional de Alemán (BA course) • Traductorado Público Nacional de Francés (BA course) • Traductorado Público Nacional de Inglés (BA course) • Traductorado Público Nacional de Italiano (BA course) • Maestría en Traductología (Master’s degree) • Master Doctorado en Ciencias del Lenguaje - Mención Traductología (PhD) • Especialización en Traducción Científica y Técnica (Other university-level courses) • Especialización en Traducción Jurídica y Económica (Other university-level courses) • Especialización en Interpretación (Other university-level courses) 19. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo • Traductorado Bilingüe Inglés-Español (BA course) 20. Universidad Nacional de Lanús • Traductorado Público en idioma inglés (BA course) • Interpretación y Traducción en Formas de Comunicación No Verbal (BA course) 21. Universidad Nacional de La Plata • Traductorado en Inglés (BA course) • Traductorado en Francés (BA course) 22. Universidad Nacional de La Rioja • Traductorado público nacional en lengua francesa (BA course) • Traductorado público nacional en lengua portuguesa (BA course) • Traductorado público nacional en lengua inglesa (BA course)

495

Javier Franco Aixelá and Sara Rovira-Esteva

23. Universidad Nacional del Comahue • Traductor público nacional de idioma inglés (BA course) 24. Universidad Nacional de Rosario • Traductor Público Nacional de Portugués (BA course) Bolivia (no data found)

Chile 1. Escuela Americana de Traductores e Intérpretes/ Instituto profesional EATRI, Santiago • Interpretación de Enlace con mención Inglés-Castellano (BA course) • Traductor e Intérprete de Enlace con Mención en Inglés (BA course) • Traductor e Intérprete de Enlace con Mención en Francés (BA course) • Traductor e Intérprete de Enlace con Mención en Alemán (BA course) • Traductor e Intérprete de Enlace con Mención en Inglés-Francés (BA course) • Traductor e Intérprete de Enlace con Mención en Inglés-Alemán (BA course) • Traductor e Intérprete Simultáneo y Consecutivo Inglés-Castellano (BA course) 2. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile • Magíster en Traducción del Inglés al Español (Master’s degree) • Programa de Traducción (BA course) 3. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso • Interpretación Inglés Español (BA course) • Traducción Inglés Español (BA course) 4. Universidad de Concepción • Traduccón/Interpretación en idiomas extranjeros (BA course) 5. Universidad de las Ciencias de la Informática (Ucinf ), Santiago • Traducción Inglés-Español, con Mención en Interpretación Simultánea InglésEspañol (BA course) 6. Universidad de La Serena • Traducción Inglés - Español (BA course) 7. Universidad de Playa Ancha, Valparaíso • Traducción e Interpretación Inglés – Español (BA course)

Colombia 1. Colegio Mayor de Nuestra Señora del Rosario • Especialización en Traducción (BA course) 2. Universidad Autónoma de Manizales • Maestría en Traducción e Interpretación (Master’s degree) 3. Universidad de Antioquia (UdeA), Medellín • Traducción Inglés - Francés - Español (BA course) • Maestría en Traducción (Master’s degree)

Costa Rica 1. Universidad Internacional de las Américas • Inglés con énfasis en traducción (BA course) 2. UnivesidadLationoamericana de Ciencia y Tecnología • Bachillerato en Enseñanza y Traducción del Inglés (BA course) 496

Bibliometric overview of translation studies

3. Universidad Nacional de Costa Rica (UNA), Heredia • Maestría en Traducción(Master’s degree) Cuba (no data found)

Ecuador 1. Pontificia Universidad católica del Ecuador •

Lingüística Aplicada con mención en Traducción (BA course)

El Salvador 1. Universidad Evangélica de El Salvador •

Traducción e Interpretación del idioma Inglés (BA course)

Guatemala 1. Escuela Profesional de epti Traducción e Interpretación • Interpretación (BA course) • Traducción (BA course) 2. Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala (USAC), Ciudad de Guatemala • Licenciatura en ciencias lingüísticas con especialidad en traducción e interpretación (BA course) • Licenciatura en traducción e interpretación maya – español (BA course) 3. Universidad Galileo • Técnico Universitario en Traducción Jurada (BA course) 4. Universidad Mariano Gálvez de Guatemala • Traducción Inglés-Español, Español-Inglés (BA course) Honduras (no data found)

México 1. Centro Universitario Angloamericano Campus Cuernavaca • Licenciatura en Interpretación y Traducción del Inglés (BA course) • Especialidad en Traducción Técnica Inglés-Español (BA course) 2. Colegio de México • Maestría en Traducción (Master’s degree) 3. Instituto Superior de Intérpretes y Traductores (ISIT) • Interpretación (BA course) • Traducción (BA course) 4. INTER Centro de Estudios Superiores, Plantel Izcalli • Interpretación (BA course) 5. Universidad Autónoma de Baja California (UABC) • Especialidad en Traducción e Interpretación (Master’s degree) • Licenciatura en traducción (BA course) 497

Javier Franco Aixelá and Sara Rovira-Esteva

6. Universidad Autónoma de Guadalajara • Maestría en Traducción e Interpretación Inglés-Español (Master’s degree) 7. Universidad Intercontinental • Traducción (BA course) 8. Universidad Madero Puebla (UMAD) • Interpretación y Traducción (Master’s degree)

Nicaragua 1. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Nicaragua (UNAN) • Licenciatura en Traducción e Interpretación (BA course)

Panamá 1. Universidad de Panamá • Traducción del inglés al español y del español al inglés (Master’s degree) • Maestría en traducción del inglés al español y del español al inglés (Master’s degree)

Paraguay 1. Universidad Politécnica y Artística de Paraguay • Traducción Pública Castellano – Portugués (BA course) • Traducción Pública Castellano – Inglés (BA course)

Perú 1. Universidad César Vallejo, Lima • Traducción e Interpretación (BA course) 2. Universidad Femenina del Sagrado Corazón (UNIFE), Lima • Traducción e Interpretación (BA course) 3. Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC), Lima • Traducción e Interpretación (BA course) 4. Universidad Ricardo Palma, Lima • Traducción e Interpretación (BA course) • Traducción (Master’s degree)

Puerto Rico 1. Universidad de Puerto Rico • Maestría en Traducción (Master’s degree) • Certificado de Traductor Especializado (BA course) • Graduado en Traducción (BA course) República Dominicana (no data found)

498

Bibliometric overview of translation studies

Uruguay 1. Universidad de la República, Uruguay • Traductorado Público de Inglés (BA course)

Venezuela 1. Universidad Central de Venezuela, Caracas • Licenciado en traducción (BA course) • Licenciado en Interpretación y Traducción (BA course)

499

INDEX

academic institutions for translator training and certification 87 – 88 access 97 – 98 Across Languages and Cultures 2, 391 ACTRES research group 234, 236 adaptations and remakes in audiovisual translation (AVT) 327 Adichie, C. N. 111 Adiciones a la Biblotheca Hispana Nova 22 advertising translation 412 – 413 Aeneid 45 A esperanza bretona: Á luz dos estudios de traducción 436 affective cognition 179, 181, 182 Al-Andalus 25 Alice in Wonderland 140 Allen, W. 148 Almela, S. 410 – 411 Alocución a la poesía 75 Alvar, C. 26 Álvaro Cunqueiro, traductor 438 America, discovery of 21 American Independence 74, 76 – 77 American Literary Translators Association 89 Aminta 45 Annie Hall 146 anthologies 23 – 24 Antoni Febrer i Cardona, un humanista il·lustrat a Menorca (1761–1841) 435 Anuario de Estudos Literarios Galegos 434 Apak, F. 14 appropriation 125 Aprender a traducir 166 Apropos of Ideology 121 Aproximaciones a la autotraducción 441 Arabism 127 – 129 Árbol de Cos 297

Argensola, B. 22 – 23 Argensola, L. 22 – 23 Argentinian Association of Translators and Interpreters (AATI) 199 Arias, S. 20 Arias Torres, J. P. 118 Arrugas 365, 367, 372 – 381 Arte de la lengua Pangasinan 125 – 126 Arte de la lengua tagala sacado de diversos artes 63 Arte della guerra 16 Arte y reglas de la lengua tagala 62 Asociación Argentina de Traductores e Intérpretes (AATI) 217 Aspectes de terminologia, neologia i traducció 441 Aspectos de la traducción en Hispanoamerica: autores, traducciones y traductores 78 Aspects of specialised translation 295 Association of Basque-Language Translators, Correctors and Interpreters (EIZIE) 199 Association of Conference Interpreters of Argentina and (ADICA) 199 Association of Sworn Translators and Interpreters of Catalonia (ATIJC) 199 Association of Translators and Interpreters of Catalonia (ATIC) 199 Association of Translators and Interpreters of Ecuador (ATIEC) 199 Astérix 143, 149 – 150 As You Like It 151 audiovisual texts, humour in 148 – 149 audiovisual translation (AVT): accessibility in 321 – 323; adaptations and remakes in 327; audio description in 325 – 326; didactics of 328; dubbing in 314 – 318; future directions in 329; game localization in 327; historical perspective

500

Index 458 – 460; research in languages spoken in Spain before 1900 455 – 456; translation studies book publishers and 469 – 472; translation studies journals and 466 – 469 Biblioteca chilena de traductores (1820–1924) 79 Biblioteca de traductores 48 Biblioteca de traductores españoles 22, 23 Bibliotheca Hispana Nova 22 BITRA (Bibliografía de Traducción e Interpretación) 13, 288, 455 BITRAGA (Biblioteca da tradución galega) 15, 442 BITREST (Biblioteca de traducciones españolas) 15, 48 Bolivian Association of Conference (ABI) 199 Borges, J. L. 73, 75 Borodo, M. 371 Braga, J. 150 Breve teoría de la traducción 24 Brevísima relación de la destrucción de las Indias 63 – 64, 65, 67, 68 BT: bibliografías de traducción 15 Bucolics 17 Bush, G. W. 87 Byrne, J. 289

on 312 – 313; history of 313 – 314; ideological lenses in 330; introduction to 311 – 312; language acquisition by means of 328; process research in 329 – 330; product research in 329; of publicity 327; research issues and methods in 313 – 328; respeaking in 324 – 325; subtitling for the deaf and hard of hearing in 323 – 324; subtitling in 318 – 320; surtitiling in 326 – 327; voice-over in 320 – 321 Autoitzulpengintza euskal haur eta gazte literaturan 440 Autores traductores en la España del siglo XIX 52 Autotraducció: De la teoria a la pràctica 440 Ayala, F. 24 Babel 1 Babel entre nós. Escolma de textos sobre a traducción en Galicia 432 Babel: Revista de los estudiantes de la EUTI 457 Basque translation 106; see also bibliometric overview of translation studies; translation policies from/into official languages in Spain baybayin 60 Beacons 89 – 90 Belles infidèles 77 Bengoechea, M. 109 – 110 Benjamin, W. 17 Benjamins, J. 13 Berman, A. 13 Biblia medieval romanceada judeo-cristiana. Versión del Antiguo Testamento en el siglo XIV, sobre los textos hebreo y latino 25 Biblical translations: evangelization of indigenous peoples and 61 – 63; Medieval 25; during the Renaissance 27 – 28 Bibliografia (1974–2000): Catalao-português, portuguès-català 439 Bibliografía de autores españoles del siglo XVIII 15 Bibliografia de la literatura catalana en versió alemanya 439 Bibliografía de la traducción en español, catalán, gallego y vasco 430 Bibliografía hispano-clásica 23 bibliometric overview of translation studies: conclusions on 482 – 483; future directions in 483 – 484; global overview of, in languages spoken in Spain 460 – 476; historical perspective on 455 – 460; introduction to 454 – 455; research in English and in foreign journals by authors working in Spain and Hispanic America and 477 – 482; research in languages spoken in Spain (1901–1970) 456 – 457; research in languages spoken in Spain (1971–1985) 457 – 458; research in languages spoken in Spain (1986–2015)

Cabo, F. 20 Cabré, M. T. 249 – 250 Calvo, C. 15 Camino de Santiago 408 Campos Pardillos 388 Camtasia 182 Canadian Fiction 91 Canadian Modern Language Review, Language Learning, Language Learning & Technology, The 476 Carles Riba, hel·lenista i humanista 438 Carles Riba als Ubersetzer aus dem Deutschen 438 Carles Riba i Friedrich Hölderlin 438 Carles Riba i la traducció 438 Carles Riba: La vessant alemanya del seu pensament i de la seva obra 438 Carrers de frontera: Passatges de la cultura alemanya a la cultura catalana 436 Carroll, L. 140 cartography 19 – 21 Casanova, R. 24, 45 Castilian Spanish 95 Castro, O. 106 Catalan translation 105 – 106, 122; humour and 150 – 151; see also bibliometric overview of translation studies; translation policies from/ into official languages in Spain Catalan Writing 432 – 433 Catálogo general de la Librería española, 1931 – 1950 15

501

Index Catálogo general de la Librería española e hispanoamericana, 1901 – 1930 15 Catelli, N. 23, 75 Catholicism: evangelization of indigenous peoples and 61 – 63; missionary linguistics and translation and 125 – 127; National 31 CEFR (Common European Framework of Reference for Languages) 178 censorship in Spain: feminist translations and 107 – 108; history and memory of 121 – 122 Cent anys de traducció al català (1891–1990) 432 Cervantes, M. 22 – 23, 436 Chamberlain, L. 106 Chesterman, A. 17 childrens’ literature, translation of 50 – 51; editorial 91 Christian evangelization of indigenous peoples 61 – 63; missionary linguistics and translation and 125 – 127 Ciencias y traducción en el mundo hispánico 296 Civil Rights movements 98 Claramonte, V. 118 Clarissa Harlowe 46 Classicisme i Renaixement: una idea d’Itàlia durant el Noucentisme 435 Clàssics valencians multilingües 443 cognitive approaches: cognitive research in interpreting 184 – 187; future directions in research on 187; introduction to 175; PACTE research group 178 – 179; research in the Hispanic domain 175 – 187; research into translation process in translation students by 182; research issues and methods on 187 – 188; on translation and neurocognition 183 – 184; translation process research and post-editing 184 Colegio de Traductores Públicos 217 College of Translators and Interpreters of Chile (COTICH) 199 Colloquios 125 Colombian Association of Translators and Interpreters (ACTI) 199 colonialism: missionary linguistics and 125 – 127; in North Africa 127 – 129; orientalism, translation, and 127 – 129; see also Hispanic America, translation in; Spanish empire, the Columbus, C. 59 comics and graphic novels, translation of: case study of 372 – 381; conclusions and future directions in 381; cultural references in 376 – 378; from the Iberian Peninsula 366 – 367; introduction to 365; in Latin America 368 – 370; overview of 365 – 370; research issues and methods in 370 – 372; visual adaptation of originals in 378 – 381

communicative theory of terminology (CTT) 249, 255, 257 – 258; resources on 250; translation and 249 – 250 Cómo traducir y redactar textos científicos en español 295 comparative literature 53 – 54 Comunicar en la diversitat: Intèrprets, traductors i mediadors als serveis públics 442 concept modelling and organization in Translation-Oriented Terminology (TOT) 253 – 254 Conde Lucanor 75 Conférence Internationale Permanente d’Instituts Universitaires de Traducteurs et d’Interprètes (CIUTI) 163 Conference Interpreters Association of Spain (AICE) 198 Conference of Translation and Interpreting Departments and Faculties (CCDUTI) 162 Confessio amantis 45 conflict paradigm and translation 129 – 130 copyright laws 47; translation rights and 90 corpus-based translation studies (CBTS) 233 – 234 CorpusNet 236 Correcció i traducció de textos informàtics 442 Cours de linguistique générale 228 COVALT (Valencian Corpus of Translated Literature) research group 235, 443 Creación y traducción en la España del siglo XIX 52 creative subtitling 320 Criteris de traducció de textos normatius del castellà al català 442 Criteris lingüístics sobre traducció i doblatge 442 critical drive 123 – 124 critical linguistics 120 – 121 Critical Readings in Translation Studies 121 criticism, translation 418 – 419 critics, literary translation by 52 Crónica del Perú 61, 63 – 64, 66 Crónica troyana 45 Cuadernos de traducción e interpretación/ Quaderns de traducció i interpretació 457 Cuban Association of Translators and Interpreters (ACTI) 199 culture and humour translation 146 – 147; reception in 147 Curious incident of the dog in the night-time, The 110 Dante 436 deaf and hard of hearing persons, subtitling for 323 – 324 De bona llengua, de bon humor 438 De casibus virorum illustrium (Caída de príncipes) 45

502

Index de Castiglione, B. 27 de las Nieves Muñiz, M. 15 De la traducció literal a la creació literària 434 Delisle, J. 165 de Nebrija, A. 21 deontology 420 – 422 Descriptive Translation Studies (DTS) 313, 417 Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond (Los estudios descriptivos de traducción y más allá: metodología de la investigación en estudios de traducción) 54 DeSignis 103 D’Hulst, L. 14 Dialecte i traducció: El cas català 441 Dialnet 204 Diari de Barcelona; Uns i altres: Literatura i traducció 438 Diccionari de la traducció catalana 49, 105, 106, 433 Diccionario Crítico de Dudas inglés-español de Medicina 297 Diccionario de Arquitectura, Construcción y Obras Públicas 298 Diccionario de la traducción en Hispanoamérica 49 Diccionario de términos médicos 298 Diccionario general de bibliografía española 15 Diccionario histórico de la traducción en España 433 Diccionario histórico de la traducción en Hispanoamérica 74, 78 Diccionario inglés-español de alergología e inmunología clínica 297 Diccionario Médico Español-Inglés, InglésEspañol 298 Diccionario politécnico de las lenguas española e inglesa 297 Diccionario Técnico español-inglés 297 Dickens en la cultura catalana 437 didactics of audiovisual translation (AVT) 328 digital culture and audiovisual translation (AVT) 320 digitlization and audiovisual translation (AVT) 319 – 320 Discourse and the Translator 120 Discursos (Dis)Con/Cordantes: Modos y formas de comunicación y convivencia 213 distributed cognition 180 Divine Comedy 436 Doce, J. 30 Doctrina Cristiana 62 Don Quijote 49 Don Quixote 45 – 46, 436 Don Raimundo y los traductores de Toledo 25 Dos pobles ibèrics 435 Drown 50 dubbing 314 – 318 Duch, L. 108

due process 97 – 98 Durán Muñoz, I. 409 – 410 EcoLexicon 251 editorial translation 88 – 92 education, translator see pedagogy of translation eighteenth century, histories of Spanish translation from the 28 – 29 El caballero determinado (Le Chevalier Délibéré) 45 El Corán y sus traducciones 129 El crepuscle de la poesia: Rainer Maria Rilke: un capítol de la història literària catalana 437 El Decadentismo italiano en la literatura catalana 435 El delito de traducir 419 El Diario/La Prensa 92 El español jurídico 271 El Especialito 92 El Eternauta 368 El europeo 21 El fantasma en el libro 52 El fil d’Ariadna: Anàlisi estilística i traducció literària 441 El futuro de la traducción 102 El inglés jurídico 271 El inglés jurídico norteamericano 271 El lazarillo de Tormes 50 El Libro de los plagios 418 El llegat anglès de Marià Manent 438 El Mundo 390, 391, 393 El naixement de l’iberisme catalanista 435 El Nuevo Herald 92 El País 390, 394 El País English Edition 393 El “Quixot” en català 436 El revés del tapiz: Traducción y discurso de identidad en la Nueva España (1521–1821) 126 El revés del tapiz. Traducción y discurso de identidad en la Nueva España (1521–1821) 79 El Rómulo 45 Els clàssics en la literatura catalana moderna 436 El segundo sexo 108 El somni de Grècia: La recepció catalana de la cultura clàssica 436 Els pre-rafaelites a Catalunya 437 El texto de opinión de la prensa escrita. Su tratamiento en la traducción 390 El Tirant poliglota: Estudi sobre el Tirant lo Blanch a partir de les seues traduccions espanyola, italiana i francesa dels segles xvixviii 439 embedded cognition 179, 182 embodied cognition 179, 182 enacted cognition 179, 182

503

Index Encuentro internacional de traductores literarios 81 English Grammar Begun, The 66 English Only movement 86 Ensayo de una biblioteca de traductores españoles 22, 48 En torno a la traducción. Teoría. Crítica. Historia 25 Entre lo uno y lo diverso: introducción a la literatura comparada 53 Environmental Translation in Catalan: Culture, Ideology and the Environment 442 equity 97 – 98 ESIT (Paris School of Intepreters and Translators) 175 – 176 Espais de frontera: Gènere i traducció 102, 441 España, eslabón entre la cristianidad y el Islam 25 Essays on Medieval Translation in the Iberian Peninsula 27 Estilística comparada da traducción: proposta metodolóxica e aplicación práctica ó estudio do corpus TECTRA de traduccións do inglés ó galego 441 Estudi contrastiu del lèxic de la traducció italiana del Tirant lo Blanc 439 Estudio de encuesta sobre la Traducción e Interpretación en México 212 Estudios Bíblicos 25 Estudios sobre la autotraducción en el espacio ibérico 440 ethics: future directions in translation and 424 – 425; introduction to 417 – 418; literary 422 – 423; social 423 – 424; translation criticism and 418 – 419; translation studies and 420 – 425 Ética y política de la traducción en la época contemporánea 422 Ética y política de la traducción literaria 422 EULITA (European Legal Interpreters and Translators Association) 199 European Higher Education Area (EHEA) 162 European Society for Translation Studies 1 evangelization of indigenous peoples by the Spanish 61 – 63 Even-Zohar, I. 44 Exequias de la lengua castellana 23 exports of Spanish books 47 extended cognition 179, 180, 182 extranslation of literary works 49 – 50

Film Dubbing: Phonetic, Semiotic, Esthetic and Psychological Aspects 314 Finnegans Wake 49 First International Seminar on Gender and Language (The Gender of Translation–The Translation of Gender) 103 Food and Drug Administration, U.S. 93 Formas de mediación intercultural. Traducción e interpretación en los servicios públicos: Conceptos, datos, situaciones y práctica 213 Forner, J. P. 23 Foucault, M. 19 Foz, C. 21, 26 Fraga Law 107 Frame-based terminology (FBT) 250 – 251, 252, 253, 255 – 256, 258 – 259 Francoist period of Spanish literature 30 – 31, 47 – 48, 106; censorship in 107 – 108, 122; feminist translation in 107 – 108 Frederic Mistral i la Renaixença catalana 434 Fronteres entre l’universal i el particular en la literatura catalana 436 functionalism 166, 179 Functional Linguistics 228 – 229 Function Theory of Lexicography (FTL) 251 Gaceta de Buenos Aires 76 Galatée: roman pastoral 16 Galician Association of Professional Translators and Interpreters (AGPTI) 199 Galician translation 106, 123; see also bibliometric overview of translation studies; translation policies from/into official languages in Spain Galician Translators (ATG) 199 Gallito Comics 369 game localization 327 Garcés, V. 87 García, A. M. 183 – 184 Garcia Beyaert, S. 214 Gargatagli, M. 23, 75 Gazeta de Roma 387 Gazeta romana, y relacion general, de auisos de todos los Reynos y Prouincias del mundo 387 Gender, Sex and Translation 424 gender and translation: feminist translating theories and practice in 108 – 111; future directions in 111 – 112; introduction to historical and theoretical origins of 102 – 104; main lines of research in 104 – 108 Generall Historie of Virginia 66 Generation of 1898 22, 30 Generation of 1914 30 Generation of 1927 30 Gèneres i formes en la literatura catalana d’entreguerres (1918–1939) 435 GENTT research group 235, 297

Faber, J. N. B. de 21 – 22 feminist theories of translation see gender and translation Feria, M. 127 – 128 Feria Garcia, M. C. 118 Ferrando Valentí i la seva família 434 Fifties, The 50

504

Index History of How the Spaniards Arrived in Peru 68 Horacio en España 23 House on Mango Street, The 50 Huffington Post, The 393 Humanism, Renaissance 21, 27 – 28 humour translation studies (HTS): of audiovisual texts 148 – 149; case for 139 – 141; factors determining creation of humour and its translation and 144; future directions in 152 – 153; historical review of 141 – 144; ideological issues in 148; issue of culture in 146 – 147; methods in 151; reception in 147; research issues in 144 – 151; of specific humorous genres/texts/authors 149 – 150; translating into languages other than Castilian Spanish 150 – 151; translating the classics in 150; translation of irony in 145 – 146; verbal humour 144 – 145 Huntington, S. 86 Hurtado Albir, A. 165

Gentzler, E. 72 – 73 GETCC (Research Group on Contemporary Catalan Translation) 105, 443 GETLIHC (Gender Studies Research Group: Translation, Literature, History and Communication) 105, 443 – 444 GETLT (Free Translation Technologies Study Group) 443 GITRAD research group 274 G. K. Chesterton a Catalunya i altres estudis sobre una certa anglofília a Catalunya (1916– 1938) 437 global translation strategies 53 Goethe en la literatura catalana 431 Gramática de la lengua castellana 21 Gramática o arte de la legua general de los indios de los Reynos del Perú 62 graphic novels see comics and graphic novels, translation of Guatemalan Association of Interpreters and Translators (AGIT) 199 Guerra, P. 369 Gutiérrez, J. M. 74 – 75

Iberian Peninsula, the 20 – 21, 119, 290; comics and graphic novels from 366 – 367 Iberoamericana 78 ideology and translation: colonialism, postcolonialism and political ideologies in 124 – 125; critical drive in 123 – 124; critical linguistics in 120 – 121; future directions in 130 – 131; history and memory of censorship in Spain and 121 – 122; in humour translation studies (HTS) 148; introduction to 118 – 120; missionary linguistics and 125 – 127; orientalism, colonialism and 127 – 129; political engagement and activism 130; research on 120; sociolinguistic perspectives on power and 122 – 123; terrorism, media and 129 – 130 ii Jornades per a la Cooperació en l’Estandardització Lingüística 441 Il Cortegiano 25, 27, 45 Iliad 77 Il Rapimento d’ Europa (Fábula de Europa) 45 Inca Account of the Conquest of Peru, An 68 Index Translationum 14 Indigo: The Spanish/Canadian Presence in the Arts, Trilce, Ruptures: The Review of the 3 Americas 91 Institute of Modern Languages and Translation 230 institutional translation see legal and institutional translation intercultural communication see Public Service Interpreting and Translation (PSIT) International Association of Conference Interpreters (AIIC) 199 International Federation of Translators (FIT) 199

Hale, S. 217 – 218 Halliday, M. A. K. 228 – 229 Hamlet (Hamleto) 46 Handbook for Translator Trainers 166 Hatim, B. 120 – 121 Helios 91 Hermeneus 164 Hidalgo, D. 15 “hidden translation history” 86 Hispanic America, translation in: concepts and theoretical approaches to 74 – 77; conclusions on 81 – 82; historical perspective on 73 – 74; introduction to 72 – 73; publications, research projects, and methods in 77 – 81; research in English and in foreign journals by authors working in 477 – 482; translation studies book publishers and 469 – 472; translation studies journals and 466 – 469; university courses in interpreting and 494 – 499; see also Spanish empire, the; US and Canada, Spanish translation in the Hispanic American writers 50 Hispanic marketing 93 HISTAL (history of translation in Latin America) 77 – 78, 79, 387 Historia de la traducción en España 433 Història d’un entusiasme: Nietzsche i la literatura catalana 437 Historia general de las cosas de Nueva España 74 Historia general de las Indias 63 histories of Spanish translation 24 – 31 History of Bruce and Emily, or, The Amicable Quixote 16

505

Index Interpretación en contextos de violencia de género 202 Interpreter and Translator Trainer 157, 164 Intérpretes y Traductores en Servicios Públicos y Comunitarios, A.C. 212 interpreting, Spanish: cognitive research in 184 – 187; future directions in 205; Hispanic America courses in 494 – 499; historical background on 199 – 200; in Latin America 198; main research topics in 200 – 205; overview of 196 – 205; public service (see Public Service Interpreting and Translation (PSIT)); in South and Central America 197; Spanish courses in 487 – 493; see also translation, Spanish Interpretive Theory of Translation (ITT) 175 – 176 Introducció a Shakespeare 438 Introducción a la vida devota 45 Introducción a una historia de la novela en el siglo XIX. Seguida del esbozo de una bibliografía española de traducciones de novelas 48 Introduction to Functional Grammar 228 irony 145 – 146 Islam 128 – 130 Itzulpenari buruzko gogoeta eta itzulpen-praktika Joseba Sarrionandiaren lanetan 438 IVITRA (International Virtual Institute of Translation) 443

La cité des dames 107 La ciudad de Dios 25 La constelación del Sur: Traductores y traducciones en la literatura argentina del siglo XX 79 – 80 Lafarga, F. 13, 15, 24, 28 – 29 La Fundació Bernat Metge, una obra de país (1923–1938) 436 La interpretación en el ámbito de la medicina 203 La Linterna del Traductor 199 La literatura catalana i la traducció en un món globalitzat/Catalan literature and translation in a globalized world 434 La literatura traducida y censurada para niños y jóvenes en la época franquista: Guillermo Brown 51 La literatura vasca traducida/Euskal literatura itzulia. Bernardo Atxagaren lanak erdaretan 439 Lambert, J. 14, 19 La mediación lingüístico-cultural en tiempos de guerra: cruce de miradas desde España y América 79 Landa, G. 175 – 176 language acquisition by means of audiovisual translation (AVT) 328 language ideologies 122 – 123 Language Minority Provisions Amendment, Voting Rights Act 98 languages for special purposes (LSP) 288; see also technical and medical translation La paraula revessa: Estudi sobre la traducció dels jocs de mots 441 La perdida 369 La projecció d’Àngel Guimerà a Madrid 439 – 440 La recepció de Gabriele d’Annunzio a Catalunya 437 La Relación 90 L’art de traduir: Reflexions sobre la traducció al llarg de la història 432 La tanka catalana 437 Latin America: comics and graphic novels from 368 – 370; growth of publishing in 108 La traducció catalana sota el franquisme 435 La traducció cinematogràfica 442 La traducció dalt de l’escenari 441 La traducció i el món editorial de postguerra 435 La traducción científico-técnica y la terminología en la sociedad de la información 295 La traducción como actividad editorial en la Andalucía del siglo XIX 49 La traducción del texto periodístico 388 – 389 La traducción de textos médicos especializados para el ámbito editorial (inglés-español) 294 La traducción de textos técnicos 294

Jameson, F. 20 Jane Austen: Les traduccions al català 441 Jiménez-Crespo, M. A. 352 – 353 jokes 141; see also humour translation studies (HTS) Josep Maria Junoy i Joan Salvat-Papasseit: dues aproximacions a l’haiku 437 Jourdain, A. 25 journalistic translation: articles and other contributions in 392 – 395; future directions in 395 – 396; historical perspective on 386 – 389; introduction to 386; research issues in 389 – 395; research monographs, edited collections and special issues of specialized journals 390 – 392 journals, translations studies 466 – 469 Kelly, D. 166 khipus 61 La adaptación en la traducción de literatura infantil 51 La Bíblia a Catalunya, València i les Illes fins al segle xv 434 La Bíblia valenciana 434 La ciència en català a l’Edat Mitjana i el Renaixement 434

506

Index La traducción en España, siglos XIV–XVI 26 La traducción en la prensa: “El País 1995” 388 La traducción en los medios audiovisuales 442 La traducción entre lenguas en contacto: catalán y español 442 La traducción medieval en la Península Ibérica 434 La traducción periodística 390 La traducción y los espacios 118, 125 L’audiodescripció en català 442 La Vanguardia 390 Law of Intellectual Property, 1996 48 Laws of Burgos 60 Le contrat social 76 Lecturas alleas 440 Lectures dels anys cinquanta 435 L’edició catalana i la censura franquista 122 Lefebvre, M. 19 legal and institutional translation: future directions in 277; historical perspective on 269 – 273; introduction to and definitions in 267 – 269; research issues and methods in 273 – 277 Legal Translation Studies (LTS) 270 – 271; see also legal and institutional translation legitimacy 96 – 97 Le Monde Diplo 390 Le Monde Diplomatique 390, 394 Le Monde diplomatique en español 394 Lengua, cultura y política en la historia de la traducción en Hispanoamérica 78 Lengua de Señas Mexicana (LSM) 212 lenguas generales 60, 61, 64 Lenguas minoritarias y traducción: La traducción audiovisual en euskera 442 lenguas particulares 64 Les adieux au comptoir 17 Les illes d’or 105 Les plomes de la justícia: La traducció al català dels textos jurídics 442 Les Possédés 47 Les traductores i la tradició: 20 pròlegs del segle xx 441 LEXICON research group 236 LEXYTRAD research group 234, 236 L’hàbit de la dificultat: Wilhelm von Humboldt i Carles Riba davant l’Agamèmnon d’Èsquil 438 L’haiku en llengua catalana 437 Libro blanco de la traducción e interpretación institucional en España 269, 272 Libro Blanco del Título de Grado en Traducción e Interpretación 162 Lingua e tradución: ix Xornadas sobre Lingua e Usos 441 linguistic approaches to translation: brief historical overview of 228 – 230; concluding remarks and future directions for 237 – 238;

findings from projects and studies by research groups on 233 – 236; findings from publications in specialized journals on 231 – 233; introduction to 227 – 228; linguistically oriented Translation Studies in the Spanish context and 230 – 237 List and Glossary of Medical Terms 297 listening comprehension 186 literary ethics 422 – 423 literary translation: by critics 52; editorial 89 – 92; extranslation 49 – 50; feminist translation in 106 – 108; future directions in 54; global translation strategies and 53; historical perspective on 45 – 48; history of 48 – 49; introduction to 44 – 45; question of Spanishes in 92 – 93; relationship between comparative literature and 53 – 54; research issues in 48 – 54; retranslation 49; of specific genres and literary tendencies 50 – 51; Translation and Receptions Studies and 51 – 52; translator studies and 52 Literatura chilena en Canadá/Chilean Literature in Canada 91 Literatura comparada catalana i espanyola al segle xx: gèneres, lectures i traduccions (1898–1951) 435 Literatura hispano-canadiense/HispanoCanadian Literature/Littérature hispanocanadienne 91 Literaturas extranjeras y desarrollo cultural: Hacia un cambio de paradigma en la traducción literaria gallega 433 Lives (Plutarch) 45 Llamas, J. 25 Llengua de tribu i llengua de polis: Bases d’una traducció literària 431 Llengua literària i traducció (1890–1939) 435 L’obra de Richard Wagner a Barcelona 437 localization and localization research in Spanish-speaking contexts: future directions in 360; historical perspective on 356 – 357; introduction to 352 – 355; research issues and methods in 357 – 360 Localization Industry Standard Association (LISA) 353 L’ofici de traduir: Shakespeare, un home de teatre 438 Lolita 47 Lonely Planet Guides 403 López Parada 126 – 127 Lorga, J. de 22 Los límites de Babel 126 Los traductores en la historia 80 L’ús de corpus en la traducció especialitzada 441 Mafalda & Friends 150, 368 Magí Morera i Galícia, traductor de Shakespeare 438

507

Index Molière a Catalunya 436 Molière en català: Les reflexions dels traductors 436 MonTI 103 Môrè nebûchîm (Mostrador e enseñador de los turbados) 45 Morreale, M. 25 Mortadelo y Filemón 150 multimodality and translation of comics and graphic novels 370 – 372 Multiple Voices in the Translation Classroom 167 Muñoz-Basols, J. 366, 372, 373 Muñoz-Calvo, M. 366, 372, 373 Mutatis Mutandis 80, 123

Maier, C. 102, 109, 112 Mamusse Wunneetupanatamwe Up-Biblum God 66 Manhattan Murder Mystery 148 Manual de bibliografía española de traducción e interpretación 430 Manual de documentación y terminología para la traducción especializada 295 Manual del librero hispanoamericano 15 Manual de traducció cientificotècnica 294 Manual de traducción médica. Diccionario básico de Medicina (inglés-francés-español) 297 Manual de traducción periodística (del español al árabe): textos e introducción teórica 389 Maragall i Goethe: Les traduccions del “Faust” 431, 436 Marià Manent i la traducció 438 marketing, Hispanic 93 Martin Sánchez, T. 409 Mason, I. 120 – 121 Mateo, M. 142 Mateos, J. 25 Materials i diccionari per a la traducció juridicoadministrativa francès-català 442 Mathematics dictionary and handbook: English-Spanish = Diccionario y manual de matemáticas: inglés-español 298 Maurras a Catalunya: Elements per a un debat 437 medical translation see technical and medical translation Medieval and 16th century translation in the Iberian Peninsula 26 Medizin. Gran diccionario médico alemánespañol 298 MedTrad 293 Memories (de Lorga) 22 Mercurio gaditano 21 Merry Wives of Windsor, The 151 META 2 Metàfora, fraseologia i traducció: Aplicació als somatismes en una obra de Bertolt Brecht 441 metahistoriography 22 – 23 Mexican Civil and Commercial Codes 86 Mexican College of Conference Interpreters (CMIC) 199 Microsoft 94 – 95 Middle Ages, histories of Spanish translation from the 24 – 27; legal and institutional translation and 269 – 270 Miller, J. L. 87 Miseria y esplendor de la traducción 24, 47 Mis pasatiempos 16 missionary linguistics 125 – 127 Modernisme in La recepción de Ibsen y Hauptmann en el modernismo catalán 437 Molière 436

Narratives on Translation 130 National Catholicism 31 nativism 86, 94 Naturalism 29 – 30, 46 natural translation 180 Naufragios 66 needs assessment and resource allocation in Translation-Oriented Terminology (TOT) 251 – 252 Neoclassical movement 21 – 22, 46 neologism 256 – 257 Network of Doctoral Theses 204 neurocognition and translation 183 – 184 neutral Spanish 93 – 97 New Essential Guide to Spanish Reading: Librarians’ Selections, The 90 newspapers, Spanish-language 92 New York Times, The 92, 394 nineteenth century, histories of Spanish translation from the 29 – 30 Nobs Federer, M.-L. 410 No más mostrador 16 non-fiction translation, editorial 91 – 92 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) 86 Nueva Biblia Española 25 O alleo é noso: Contribucións para a historia de traducción en Galicia 433 O’Hagan, M. 353 Olohan, M. 290 On Translation History in Hispanic America 78 Operación Bolivar 369 Oralitat, narrativa i traducció: Reflexions a l’entorn de “Les mil i una nits” 441 Ordenada por J.T. Medina 79 Order of Certified Translators, Terminologists and Interpreters of Quebec (OTTIAQ) 88 Ordóñez, P. 23 Orientalism 129 Ortega y Gasset, J. 24 Os falsos amigos da traducción: criterios de estudio e clasificación 441

508

Index Os Lusíadas 45 Our Bodies, Ourselves 91

Professional Association of Legal and Sworn Translators and Interpreters (APTIJ) 199 Professional Association of Translators and Interpreters of Catalonia (APTIC) 199 Projecció i recepció hispanes de Caterina Albert i Paradís, Víctor Català, i de la seva obra 440 Proust a Catalunya 437 Proyecto Boscán. Catálogo histórico crítico de las traducciones de la literatura italiana al castellano y al catalán desde 1300 a 1939 15 pseudotranslation 122 Public Service Interpreting and Translation (PSIT): future directions in 220 – 222; historical perspective and review on 213 – 217; introduction and definitions in 211 – 213; research issues and methods in 217 – 220 Puentes 164 Pym, A. 17, 24

PACTE (Proceso de Adquisición de la Competencia Traductora y Evaluación) research group 165 – 166; assessing competences 178 – 179; conceptual and methodological framework of 176; establishing levels of comptences 178; goals of 176; research on translation competence 176 – 178 Pageaux, D.-H. 28 Pagni, A. 78 Palau, A. 15 Palencia, A. G. 25 Pamela or virtue rewarded 46 Panace@ 293 Payás, G. 79 Paz, O. 17, 72 – 73, 75 pedagogy of translation: approaches and research in 164 – 168; brief terminological consideration in 157 – 158; in context of Spanish university system 159 – 164; directionality in 162; general and specialized translation in 161 – 162; instrumental competences in 162; introduction to 157; publications on and for training and 164; theoretical content in 161; translating and/or interpreting training in 161; translator education programmes in Spanish-speaking universities and 158 – 164; two working language proficiency in 160 – 161 Pegenaute, L. 24, 29 Pelayo, M. M. 23 Peña, S. 32 Pérez, M. C. 121 periodization 21 – 22, 73 – 74 Perspectives Studies on Translatology 2 Petrarca, F. 21 PETRA (Pericia y Entorno de la TRAducción) research group: conceptual and methodological framework of 179; evolution of works by 179 – 182; goals of 179 Piazza universale 16 Pidal, R. M. 25 Piñal, A. 15 Platero y Yo (Platero and I) 91 Plática para todos los indios 62 Poesía en traducción 51 Poesía inglesa e francesa vertida ao galego 431 political engagement and activism 130 Portraits des traductrices 106 – 107 postcolonial literature, translation of 50, 124 – 125 Postigo Pinzao, E. 411 – 412 Premio Nacional del Cómic 366 – 367 Problemas de la traducción técnica 294 Problemáticas narrativas. Los Inkas bajo la pluma española 81

Quaderns 164 Quaderns de Filologia. Estudis Literaris 103 – 104, 107, 122 Quaderns de traducció 25 Quaderns: Revista de Traducció 103, 122, 435, 437, 439 Quixote: the Novel and the World 49 Ramón Piñeiro, traductor 438 Read, J. 76 Realism 29 – 30, 46 Recio, R. 26 – 27 recording artists, Spanish translations of works by 92 Red Communica network 214, 218 – 219, 220 – 221 Red Vértice 199 relaciones reports 61 Relacions 431 Renaissance, histories of Spanish translation from the 27 – 28 Renaissance Humanism 21, 27 – 28 Renaixença 439 Repertorio de siglas, acrónimos, abreviaturas y símbolos utilizados en los textos médicos en español 297 Represura. Revista de Historia Contemporánea española en torno a la represión y la censura aplicadas al libro 122 Requerimiento 59 Resina, J. R. 20 resources, translation 14 – 17 respeaking 324 – 325 Ressonàncies orientals: Budisme, taoisme i literatura 437 Retórica 456

509

Index Retos del siglo XXI en comunicación intercultural: Mapa lingüístico y cultural de España en los comienzos del siglo XXI 213 Retraducir: una nueva mirada 49 retranslation of canonical literary works 49 Retratos de traductoras en la Edad de Plata 106 Review: Latin American Literature and Arts 90 Revista de Medicina, Lenguaje y Traducción 293 Rides 373 Robinson der Jungere 16 Roca, P. 365, 367, 372 – 381 Rodríguez Inés, P. 165 Roman de Troie 45 Romanticism 21 – 22, 29, 46 Romero López, D. 106 Room of One’s Own, A 104 Rosalía de Castro na prensa barcelonesa (1863– 1899) 439 Routledge Encyclopaedia of Translation Studies 269 Russell, P. 27

Smartling 413 Sobre el Dant 436 social ethics 423 – 424 sociolinguistic perspectives on translation and power 122 – 123 Soja, E. J. 19 – 20 Solnit, R. 104 – 105 Solo vos sos vos. Los Sonetos de Shakespeare en traducción rioplatense 53 Sonnets (Shakespeare) 49, 53 source texts (ST) 403 space, segmentation of 19 – 21 “Spain is Different” slogan 404 – 406 Spanglish 93 – 97 Spanish-American war 22, 65 Spanish Association of Translators, Correctors and Interpreters (ASETRAD) 199 Spanish Civil War 47, 106 Spanish Colonie, The 63 Spanish Computing Dictionary/Diccionario Bilingüe de Informática 298 Spanish empire, the: Black Legend and translation of Spanish chronicles in 63 – 64; evangelization of the indigenous peoples in 61 – 63; future directions in studies of translation in 66 – 68; historical perspective on translation in 59 – 64; introduction to translation and 59 – 60; research issues on translation in 64 – 65; translation and administration of colonies in 60 – 61; see also Hispanic America, translation in Spanish Fever. Stories by the New Spanish Cartoonists 367 Spanish Professional Association of Translators and Interpreters (APETI) 198 spatial turn 20 Speak Out for Support project 202 Status of the Translation Profession in the European Union, The 272 Stavans, I. 90 Stedman, Diccionario bilingüe de Ciencias Médicas (inglés-español, español-inglés) 298 Steiner, G. 17 Step-by-Step Guide to Medical Translation 167 Suau Jiménez, F. 411 subtitling 318 – 320; for the deaf and hard of hearing 323 – 324 Suma y Narración de los Incas 66 Sur 457 Sur in English 390 surtitiling 326 – 327

Sabio, J. A. 23 Salama-Carr, M. 290 Salmos y cánticos del Breviario 25 Santoyo, J.-C. 15, 23, 24 – 25, 26, 31 Schelegel, A. W. 21 – 22 Schöckel, L. A. 25 School of Translation and Interpreting (L’Escola Universitària de Traductors i Intèrprets, EUTI) 230 Sefarad 25 self-translation 18 semantic analysis in Translation-Oriented Terminology (TOT) 254 Sendebar 164 Senez 199, 457 Sense mans: Metàfores i papers sobre la traducció 438 Serrano Lucas, L.-C. 411 Shakespeare, W. 49, 53, 436 Shakespeare a Catalunya 431 Shakespeare en la literatura española 431 Shakespeare in Catalan: Translating Imperialism 436 sight translation 185 Siglos de Oro (Golden Age) 27 – 28 Silver Age of Spanish literature 30 Simenon i la connexió catalana 437 Simon, S. 112 Simpsons, The 147, 148, 149 simultaneous interpreting 186 Singh, N. 97 situated cognition 180 1611. Revista de historia de la traducción 49 16th Century Account of the Conquest 68 Sixties, The 50

TALG (Galician Language Technologies and Applications Research Group) 442 – 443 Taller del Perro 369 Tapia Sasot de Coffey, M. J. 387 Target 2

510

Index Traducciones castellanas de Ausias March en la Edad de Oro 439 Traducciones poéticas 73 Traducciones y traductores en la historia cultural de America Latina 81 Traducciones y traductores en la Península Ibérica (1400–1550) 27 Traducción: historia y teoría 25 Traducción: literatura y literalidad 51, 73 Traducción periodística y literaria 390 Traduccions catalanes d’Alphonse Daudet 437 Traducción y autotraducción en las literaturas ibéricas 440 Traducción y censura, inglés-español 1939 – 1985 423 Traducción y enriquecimiento de la lengua del traductor 25 Traducción y género: propuestas para nuevas éticas de la traducción en la era del feminismo transnacional 103 Traducción y Lenguaje en Medicina 294 Traducción y Lenguajes Especializados 15 Traducción y periodismo 390, 391 Traducción y representaciones del conflicto en España y América 126 Traducir poesía. Mapa rítmico, partitura y plataforma flotante 51 Traduction. Terminologie, Rédaction 2 Traductología y Neurocognición 183 Traductores de las Églogas y Bucólicas de Virgilio 23 Traductores españoles de La Eneida 23 Traductores y traductores en la historia cultural de América Latina 123 – 124 Traductor Público degree 164 Traduir el desig: Psicoanàlisi i llenguatge 441 Traduir Shakespeare: Les reflexions dels traductors 436 Tradumática 357 Trainspotting 146 TRALIMA (Translation, Literature and Audiovisual Media) research group 235, 236, 442 Trans 164 Translating Information 391 Translation, Rewriting and the Manipulation of Literary Fame (Traducción, reescritura y la manipulación del canon literario) 54 translation, Spanish 1 – 2; advertising 412 – 413; anthologies of 23 – 24; audiovisual (see audiovisual translation (AVT)); cognitive approaches to (see cognitive approaches); of comics and graphic novels (see comics and graphic novels, translation of); different Spanishes in 92 – 97; ethics and (see ethics); future directions in 31 – 32; gender and (see gender and translation); in Hispanic America

target texts (TT) 403 Tears of the Indians 63 Teatro clásico en traducción: texto, representación, recepción 51 technical and medical translation: book chapters and articles in specialized journals on 296 – 297; doctoral theses on 298; edited collections in 295 – 296; future directions in 298 – 299; historical perspective on 290 – 293; introduction to 288 – 290; research issues in 293 – 298; research monographs on 293 – 295; terminological and lexicographical works on 297 – 298 television programming, Spanish-language 92 Teoría de los polisistemas 54 terminology see Translation-Oriented Terminology (TOT) terrorism 129 – 130 TEXLICO (Contemporary Literary Texts: Study, Publication and Translation) group 444 Theory of Sense 175 Think-aloud Protocols (TAPs) 175 time, segmentation of 21 – 22 Tin-Tin 150 Tirant lo Blanch 439 Toledo School of Translation 25 – 26 Tots els colors del camaleó: Un assaig sobre la traducció 438 tourism and translation: future directions in 413 – 414; historical perspective on 404 – 406; introduction to 402 – 404; research issues in 406 – 411 Toury, G. 17 TRACE research group 235 – 236 Traducció, edició, ideologia 438 Traducció i censura en el franquisme 435 Traducció i dinàmica sociolingüística 441 Traducción, identidad y nacionalismo en Latinoamérica 81 Traducción, Ideología, Cultura 424 Traducción, medios de comunicación, opinión pública 391 Traducción, tradición y manipulación: teatro inglés en España (1950–1990) 51 Traducción, xénero, nación: cara a una teoría e práctica da traducción feminista 103 Traducción científica y técnica (francésespañol): Aspectos teóricos, metodológicos y profesionales 295 Traducción de una cultura emergente: La literatura gallega contemporánea en el exterior 439 Traducción e Interpretación en el ámbito biosanitario 295 Traducción e Interpretación en los Servicios Públicos. Contextualización, actualidad y futuro 213

511

Index (see Hispanic America, translation in); histories of 24 – 31; history and historiography of 13 – 22; humour and (see humour translation studies (HTS)); ideology and (see ideology and translation); journalistic (see journalistic translation); legal and institutional (see legal and institutional translation); literary (see literary translation); metahistoriography of 22 – 23; pedagogy of (see pedagogy of translation); professionalization of the Spanish publishing industry and 47 – 48; public service (see Public Service Interpreting and Translation (PSIT)); resources for 14 – 17; technical and medical (see technical and medical translation); tourism (see tourism and translation); translation policies from/into the official languages in Spain and 429 – 445; university courses in interpreting and 487 – 493; in the US and Canada (see US and Canada, Spanish translation in the); see also interpreting, Spanish; Translation Studies Translation and Reception Studies 51 – 52 Translation and the Spanish Empire in the Americas 126 translation competence (TC) 176 – 179 translation competence acquisition (TCA) 176 – 179 Translation in Global News 390 Translation-Oriented Terminology (TOT): communicative theory of terminology in 249 – 250, 255, 257 – 258; concept and term description in 253 – 257; elaboration and design of terminological entries in 257 – 259; framebased terminology (FBT) in 250 – 251, 252, 253, 255 – 256, 258 – 259; future directions in 259 – 260; historical perspective on 249 – 251; introduction to 247 – 249; needs assessment and resource collection in 251 – 252; neologism in 256 – 257; research topics and methodology in 251 – 260; semantic analysis in 254; standardization and harmonization in 259; term identification and extraction in 252; terminological variation in 254 – 256 translation policies from/into official languages in Spain: exported literatures in 438 – 440; future directions in 444 – 445; historical perspectives on 431 – 432; introduction to 429 – 430; miscellaneous translation studies and 440 – 442; original languages and authors in historiography of 435 – 437; research groups for 442 – 444; research issues and methods in 432 – 444; time-based approaches in historiography of 434 – 435; translators and translations in historiography of 437 – 438 Translation Studies: anthologies in 23 – 24; bibliometric overview of (see bibliometric

overview of translation studies); book publishers in Spain and Hispanic America 469 – 472; cartography and 19 – 21; critical drive in 123 – 124; emergence of discipline of 1 – 2; ethics and 420 – 425; global overview of, in languages spoken in Spain 460 – 476; humour (see humour translation studies (HTS)); introduction to 1 – 10; journals on, in Spain and Hispanic America 466 – 469; linguistically oriented, in Spanish context 230 – 237; most cited works in Spanish and their authors and 472 – 476; periodization and 21 – 22; research groups for 442 – 444; research in English and in foreign journals by authors working in Spain and Hispanic America 477 – 482; research in languages spoken in Spain (1901–1970) 456 – 457; research in languages spoken in Spain (1971–1985) 457 – 458; research in languages spoken in Spain (1986–2015) 458 – 460; research in languages spoken in Spain before 1900 455 – 456; resources for 14 – 17; thematic distribution of research in languages spoken in Spain in 461 – 465; translators in 17 – 19; see also translation, Spanish Translation Studies Bibliography 13 Translation Theories and Practices 125 translation zone 32 Translator, The 2 translators 17 – 19; education programs at Spanish-speaking universities for 158 – 164; feminist theory and 109 – 110; studies of 52; training and certification of, in the US and Canada 87 – 88; translation policies from/into official languages in Spain and 437 – 438; university courses in translation and interpreting in Hispanic America 494 – 499; university courses in translation and interpreting in Spain 487 – 493; womanidentified 109; see also pedagogy of translation Translators and Interpreters Associated for College (TRIAC) 199 Translators through History/Les traducteurs dans l’histoire 80 TRANSLAT research group 443 TREC (Translation, Research, Empiricism, Cognition) 175 Tree of Hate 65 Tres escriptores censurades: Simone de Beauvoir, Betty Friedan & Mary McCarthy 107, 435 Trewe Relacyon 66 TRILCAT (Traducció, recepció i literatura catalana) 15, 435, 443 twentieth century, histories of Spanish translation from the 30 – 31 “tyranny of the alphabet” 60

512

Index Ulysses 47 Una impossibilitat possible: Trenta anys de traducció als Països Catalans (1975–2005) 433 Una literatura entre el dogma i l’heretgia: Les influències de Dante en l’obra de Joan Maragall 436 Un clàssic entre clàssics: Sobre traduccions i recepcions de Sèneca a l’època medieval 434 UNESCO Courier 121 universal Spanish 93 – 97 Universidad de Granada group 184 – 185 Un retrat 105 “Uns apartats germans”: Portugal i Catalunya/”Irmaos afastados”: Portugal e a Catalunha 435 US and Canada, Spanish translation in the: academic institutions, translator training, and certification for 87 – 88; editorial translation 88 – 92; equity, access, and due process role of 97 – 98; future directions in 98 – 99; Hispanic marketing and 93; historical perspective/ overview of 86 – 88; introduction to 85 – 86; research issues and methods for 88 – 98; translation and ideology at the ballot box and 98; US Latino/a, Chicano/a authors in 92 – 93; ‘US Spanish,’ ‘neutral Spanish,’ ‘universal Spanish,’ and Spanglish in 93 – 97 US Spanish 93 – 97 Valdés, M. J. 19, 20 Valencian translation 123 Vallicrosa, J. M. M. 25 Vandaele, J. 141 – 142 Van Hoof, H. 24 Vega, M. A. 30 Venezuelan Association of Conference Interpreters (AVINC) 199 Venezuelan chapter of the International Association of Conference Interpreters (AIIC) 199 Venuti, L. 17 verbal humour 144 – 145 videogame localization (VGLOC) 327 Viruta y Chicharrón and Caras y Caretas 368

Visión de los vencidos. Relaciones indígenas de la conquista 125 voice-over in audiovisual translation (AVT) 320 – 321 Voice-Overs 50 voice-text integrated systems 234 Von Carles Riba zu Bertolt Brecht: die Rezeption der deutschen Literatur in Katalonien während der Franco-Zeit 435 – 436 Vorlesungen über dramatische Kunst und Literatur 21 Voting Rights Act 98 Waisman, S. 75 – 76 Warf, B. 20 Washington Post, The 92 Waves, The 47 ways-of-seeing (WOS) proposal 255 Weinberg, F. 74 – 75 We should all be feminists 111 White Book on Institutional Translation and Interpreting in Spain 199 Who Are We? 86 Willson, P. 79 – 80 Woodsworth, J. 13 Woolf, V. 104, 105 World Interpreter and Translator Training Association (WITTA) 158 Wörterbuch der Sportwissenschaft. Deutsch, Englisch, Spanisch. Dictionary of sport science. German, English, Spanish. Diccionario de las ciencias del deporte. Alemán, Inglés, Español 298 Wrinkles 374 Xarxa 199 Yebra, V. G. 25 Zabalbeascoa, P. 142 – 143 Zanettin, F. 370 Zanoletty, L. 411 Zaro, J. J. 32 zone of engagement 130 Zurro, E. 25

513