Abstract
The volume you are about to read focuses on retranslation in a specific culture; the authors explore different aspects of retranslation as they have surfaced in the Ottoman Empire and modern Turkish society. However, their descriptions of their contexts and their analysis of the position and implications of retranslation offer a set of conclusions that can be associated with practices in a wider set of cultures. In that sense, the articles should not be seen as confined to the Ottoman-Turkish context, since the issues that they bring to the spotlight are varied and have implications for the theories and methodologies of (re)translation. In this introduction we will offer an account of some common patterns that emerge from the studies that make up the present volume. While the findings of these studies reveal a set of characteristics that mark the history of (re)translation in Turkey, their findings are significant contributions to recent fields of inquiry in translation studies. In a recent article, Koskinen and Paloposki (2019) draw attention to the importance of the larger cultural context for a fuller understanding of individual case studies. The need to complement quantitative and qualitative approaches in research in (re)translation history and the advantages of such a combined effort is already evident (Berk Albachten and Tahir Gürçağlar 2019a). Once such studies reach a critical threshold, whereby a macro view complete with sufficient detail and analysis has emerged in a specific culture, the door opens for larger comparative studies. Koskinen and Paloposki suggest, “the next step for retranslation research will, we believe, consist of studies asking new questions on the basis of such macro level empirical evidence (tested on new, targeted data sets or case studies) and comparisons between these studies completed in different cultural, historical and literary contexts” (2019, 23). Having spent nearly 20 years researching the Finnish retranslation landscape, these two researchers have already started engaging in a cultural comparative method and compared their results with those from a study on retranslation in the field of children’s literature in Slovene by Pokorn published in 2012 (Koskinen and Paloposki 2019, 36–38). With this volume, and the more quantitative and macro methodology we have implemented elsewhere (Berk Albachten and Tahir Gürçağlar 2019b), we hope to make headway to create a better understanding of Ottoman-Turkish retranslation history and its current state. We believe that this will make a contribution to identifying larger diachronic and synchronic patterns of retranslation, and the findings from this volume will help increase the capacity for cultural comparative studies in the field.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Alvstad, C., & Rosa, A. A. (2015). Voice in retranslation: An overview and some trends. Targets, 27(1), 3–24.
Batchelor, K. (2018). Translation and paratexts. London/New York: Routledge.
Berk Albachten, Ö., & Tahir Gürçağlar, Ş. (2019a). The making and reading of a bibliography of retranslations. In Ö. B. Albachten & Ş. Tahir Gürçağlar (Eds.), Perspectives on retranslation: Ideology, paratexts, methods (pp. 212–230). London/New York: Routledge.
Berk Albachten, Ö., & Tahir Gürçağlar, Ş. (Eds.). (2019b). Perspectives on retranslation: Ideology, paratexts, methods. London/New York: Routledge.
Berman, A. (1990). La Retraduction comme espace de la traduction. Palimpsestes, 4, 1–7.
Cadera, S. M., & Walsh, A. S. (Eds.). (2017). Literary retranslation in context. Oxford: Peter Lang.
Deane-Cox, S. (2014). Retranslation, translation, literature and reinterpretation. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
Demircioğlu, C. (2005). From discourse to practice: Rethinking ‘translation’ (Terceme) and related practices of text production in the late ottoman literary tradition. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Boğaziçi University.
Demircioğlu, C. (2009). Translating Europe: The case of Ahmed Midhat as an ottoman agent of translation. In J. Milton & P. Bandia (Eds.), Agents of translation (pp. 131–159). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Dore, M. (Ed.). (2018). Exploring audiovisual retranslation, special issue of Status Quaestionis 15. Available at https://statusquaestionis.uniroma1.it/index.php/statusquaestionis/issue/view/1239/showToc.
Franzon, J. (2008). Choices in song translation: Singability in print, subtitles and sung performance. The Translator, 14(2), 373–399.
Koselleck, R. (2002). Hinweise auf die temporalen Strukturen begriffsgeschichtlichen Wandels. Begriffsgeschichte, Diskursgeschichte, Metapherngeschichte, ed. Hans Erich Bödeker, 29–47. Göttingen: Wallstein.
Koskinen, K., & Paloposki, O. (2003). Retranslations in the age of digital reproduction. Cadernos de Traduçao, 1(11), 19–38.
Koskinen, K., & Paloposki, O. (2010a). Retranslation. In Y. Gambier & L. van Dorslaer (Eds.), Handbook of translation studies (Vol. 1, pp. 294–298). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Koskinen, K., & Paloposki, O. (2010b). Reprocessing texts. The fine line between retranslating and revising. Across Languages and Cultures, 11(1), 29–49.
Koskinen, K., & Paloposki, O. (2019). New directions for retranslation research: Lessons learned from the archaeology of retranslations in the finnish literary system. Cadernos de Traduçao, 39(1), 23–44.
Milton, J., & Torres, M-H. C. (Eds.). (2003). Tradução, retradução e adaptação, special issue of Cadernos de Tradução 11.
O’Driscoll, K. (2011). Retranslation through the centuries. Oxford: Peter Lang.
Paker, S. (2002). Translation as Terceme and Nazire. Culture-bound concepts and their implications for a conceptual framework for research on ottoman translation history. In T. Hermans (Ed.), Crosscultural transgressions: Research models in translation studies II: Historical and ideological issue (pp. 120–143). Manchester: St. Jerome.
Paker, S. (2011). Translation, the pursuit of inventiveness and ottoman poetics: A systemic approach. In R. Sela-Sheffy & G. Toury (Eds.), Culture contacts and the making of cultures. Papers in homage to Itamar even-Zohar (pp. 459–474). Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University Unit of Culture Research.
Paker, S. (2015). On the poetic practices of ‘a singularly uninventive people’ and the anxiety of imitation. In Ş. Tahir Gürçağlar, J. Milton, & S. Paker (Eds.), Tension and tradition: The dynamics of translation in Turkey (pp. 27–52). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Pym, A. (1998). Method in translation history. Manchester: St Jerome.
Sanz Gallego, G., & Van Poucke, P. (2019). Retranslation in context. Cadernos de Traduçao (special issue), 39(1).
Tahir Gürçağlar, Ş. (2009). Retranslation. In M. Baker & G. Saldanha (Eds.), Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies (2nd ed., pp. 233–236). London/New York: Routledge.
Tymoczko, M. (2007). Enlarging translation, empowering translators. London/New York: Routledge.
Van Poucke, P. (2017). Aging as a motive for literary retranslation: A survey of case studies on retranslation. Translation and Interpreting Studies, 12(1), 91–115.
Van Poucke, P., & Sanz Gallego, G. (2019). Retranslation in context. Cadernos de Traduçao, 39(1), 10–22.
Yücel, H.-Â. (1961). Tercüme Cenneti. Tercüme, 15(75–76), 17–19.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Berk Albachten, Ö., Tahir Gürçağlar, Ş. (2019). Introduction: Mutability in Retranslation. In: Berk Albachten, Ö., Tahir Gürçağlar, Ş. (eds) Studies from a Retranslation Culture. New Frontiers in Translation Studies. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7314-5_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7314-5_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-13-7313-8
Online ISBN: 978-981-13-7314-5
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)