View More View Less
  • 1 Department of Contrastive Linguistics, Translation and Interpreting,f Latvia Visvalza 4a, Riga LV-1050, Latvia
Restricted access

Purchase article

USD  $25.00

1 year subscription

USD  $360.00

This article addresses the question of the extent to which today translations from minor cultures can affect the recognisability of this culture in the eyes of the rest of the world and whether translations can serve as a tool of cultural self-assertion. The auricle is based on the assumption that translations of literature from minor cultures have a much smaller impact on the image of a culture than we would like to admit. The paper discusses some of the reasons, such as a general decline in reading habits, the self-interest of the initiator and the mode of translation. Translations of Latvian literature (and most probably other minor cultures) mostly start not with a need on the target pole but with a wish to become known generated on the source pole. Translations enhance source culture without much of a concern for acceptability. As the source pole initiates and pays for translation, that is, it controls the process, there is no danger of assimilation but, on the down side, the distribution and resonance are limited.

  • Aixela, J. F. 1996. Culture-specific Items in Translation. In: Alvarez, R. & Vidal, C. A. (eds.) Translation, Power, Subversion. Clevedon and Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters. 52-79.

    Culture-specific Items in Translation. , () 52 -79.

  • Alvarez, R. & Vidal, C. A. (eds) 1996. Translation, Power, Subversion. Clevedon and Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.

    Translation, Power, Subversion. , ().

  • Bassnett, S. 1991. Translation and Ideology. In: Kione. Annali della Scuola Superiore per Interpreti e Traduttori 'San Pellegrino' Vol. 1. No. 2. 7-33.

    'Translation and Ideology ' () Vol. 1. Kione. Annali della Scuola Superiore per Interpreti e Traduttori 'San Pellegrino' : 7 -33.

    • Search Google Scholar
  • Dollerup, C. 1995. Translation as Imposition vs. Translation as Requisition. In: Snell-Hornby, M., Jettmarova, Z. & Kaindl, K. (eds.) Translation as Cross-Cultural Communication. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 45-57.

    Translation as Imposition vs. Translation as Requisition. , () 45 -57.

  • Essmann, H. & Frank, A. P. 1991. Translation Anthologies: an Invitation to the Curious and a Case Study. Target Vol. 3. No. 1. 65-91.

    'Translation Anthologies: an Invitation to the Curious and a Case Study ' () Vol. 3 Target : 65 -91.

    • Search Google Scholar
  • Vanderauwera, R. 1985. The Response to Translated Literature. In: Hermans, T. (ed.) The Manipulations of Literature. Studies in Literary Translation. London and New York: Routledge. 198-213.

    The Response to Translated Literature. , () 198 -213.

  • Venuti, L. 1992. Introduction. In: Venuti, L. (ed.) Rethinking Translation. London and New York: Routledge.

    Introduction. , ().

  • Venuti, L. 1995. The Translator's Invisibility. London and New York: Routledge.

    The Translator's Invisibility. , ().

  • Zauberga, I. 2000. Rethinking Power Relations in Translation. Across Languages and Cultures Vol. 1. No. 1. 49-57.

    'Rethinking Power Relations in Translation ' () Vol. 1 Across Languages and Cultures : 49 -57.

    • Search Google Scholar
  • Lefevere, A. 1996. Translation and Cannon Formation: Nine Decades of Drama in the United States. In: Alvarez, R. & Vidal, C. A. (eds.) Translation, Power, Subversion. Clevedon and Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters. 138-156.

    Translation and Cannon Formation: Nine Decades of Drama in the United States. , () 138 -156.

    • Search Google Scholar
  • Nord, Ch. 1997. Translating as a Purposeful Activity: Functionalist Approaches Explained. Manchester: St. Jerome.

    Translating as a Purposeful Activity: Functionalist Approaches Explained. , ().

  • Szegedy-Maszák, M. 2003. Canon, Translation and Literary History. Across Languages and Cultures Vol. 4. No. 1. 5-19.

    'Canon, Translation and Literary History ' () Vol. 4 Across Languages and Cultures : 5 -19.

    • Search Google Scholar
  • Kuhiwczak, P. 1990. Translation as Appropriation: the Case of Milan Kundera's "The Joke". In: Lefevere, A. & Bassnett, S. (eds.) Translation, History and Culture. London: Pinter Publishers. 118-130.

    Translation as Appropriation: the Case of Milan Kundera's "The Joke". , () 118 -130.

  • Jones, W. 1993. Hvad har de dog gjort ved Andersen? In: Danske Afhandlinger Om Oversaettelse. No. 4. Centre for Oversaettelse, Kobenhavns Universitet. 67-80.

    Hvad har de dog gjort ved Andersen? , () 67 -80.

  • Lefevere, A. 1992. Translation, Rewriting and the Manipulation of Literary Fame. London and New York: Routledge.

    Translation, Rewriting and the Manipulation of Literary Fame. , ().

Monthly Content Usage

Abstract Views Full Text Views PDF Downloads
Jun 2020 0 3 6
Jul 2020 22 1 2
Aug 2020 3 0 0
Sep 2020 0 0 0
Oct 2020 1 0 0
Nov 2020 1 36 15
Dec 2020 0 0 0