Identifying political and ideological bias in translated newspaper articles

References

1. Artstein, Ron and Masimo Poesio
   2008 “Inter-coder agreement for computational linguistics”. Computational Linguistics34 (4): 555–596. doi: 10.1162/coli.07‑034‑R2
   https://doi.org/10.1162/coli.07-034-R2 [Google Scholar]
2. Baker, Mona
   2006 Translation and Conflict. A Narrative Account. London and New York: Routledge.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Baker, Mona
   2007 Activist Communities of Translators and Interpreters. Paper presented at Translation, Interpreting and Social Activism 1st International Forum . Granada: University of Granada.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Baker, Mona
   2010 “Narratives of terrorism and security: ‘accurate’ translations, suspicious frames”. Critical Studies on Terrorism3 (3): 347–364. doi: 10.1080/17539153.2010.521639
   https://doi.org/10.1080/17539153.2010.521639 [Google Scholar]
5. Bánhegyi, Mátyás
   2006 “A kanadai politikai diskurzus vizsgálata fordítástudományi szempontból [An Analysis of Canadian Political Discourse from the Perspective of Translation Studies]”. Fordítástudomány8 (2): 21–38.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Bánhegyi, Mátyás
   2008 “A Translation Studies Oriented Integrative Approach to Canadian Political Discourse”. Across Languages and Cultures9 (1): 77–107. doi: 10.1556/Acr.9.2008.1.5
   https://doi.org/10.1556/Acr.9.2008.1.5 [Google Scholar]
7. Bánhegyi, Mátyás
   2010 “Politikai szövegek és fordítástudomány 1. rész: A kritikai diskurzuselemzés gyökerei és legfontosabb iskolái [Political Texts and Translation Studies, Part 1: The Roots of Critical Discourse Analysis and its most Important Schools]”. Fordítástudomány12 (1): 16–30.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Bánhegyi, Mátyás
   2011a “Politikai szövegek and fordítástudomány 2. rész: Szövegnyelvészeti trendek a politikai diskurzuselemzés fordítástudományi megközelítése terén [Political Texts and Translation Studies, Part 2: Text Linguistic Trends in Political Discourse Analysis from the Perspective of Translation Studies]”. Fordítástudomány12 (2): 24–41.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Bánhegyi, Mátyás
   2011b “Politikai szövegek és fordítástudomány 3. rész: Van Dijk kritikai diskurzuselemzés modellje és a fordításközpontú diskurzus-társadalom hatásmodell [Political Texts and Translation Studies, Part 3: Van Dijk’s Critical Discourse Analysis Model and the Translation-centred Discourse-Society Interface Model]”. Fordítástudomány13 (1): 22–39.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Bánhegyi, Mátyás
    2012a “A fordításközpontú diskurzus-társadalom hatásmodell gyakorlati alkalmazása 1. rész [The Application of the Translation-centred Discourse-Society Interface Model: Part 1]”. Fordítástudomány13 (2): 37–55.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Bánhegyi, Mátyás
    2012b “A fordításközpontú diskurzus-társadalom hatásmodell gyakorlati alkalmazása 2. rész [The Application of the Translation-centred Discourse-Society Interface Model: Part 2]”. Fordítástudomány14 (1): 69–81.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Bánhegyi, Mátyás
    2012c “A politikai manipuláció fordítástudományi kutatása európai kontextusban: a fordításközpontú politikai tömegkommunikációs modell [The Translation Studies Oriented Research of Political Manipulation in a European Context]”. InStudia Caroliensia 2011, ed. by Sepsi Enikő , 177–192. Budapest: Károli Gáspár University of the Reformed Church in Hungary.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Bánhegyi, Mátyás
    2013a “Exposing Political Manipulation and Bias in Mediatised Translations. The Translation-centred Political Mass Communication Model”. Intralinea15. www.intralinea.org/archive/article/exposing_political_manipulation_and_bias_in_mediatised_translations.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Bánhegyi, Mátyás
    2013b “Politikai manipuláció és/vagy fordítástudomány. A fordításközpontú politikai tömegkommunikációs modell elméleti alapjai [Political manipulation and/or Translation Studies. The Translation-centred Political Mass Communication Model]”. InFordítás és tolmácsolás a harmadik évezred elején, ed. by Kinga Klaudy , 77–93. Budapest: ELTE BTK Fordító- és Tolmácsképző Központ.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Bánhegyi, Mátyás
    2014 “Translation and Political Discourse”. Philologica6 (2): 139–158.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Baumann, Gerd , Marie Gillespie and Annabelle Sreberny
    eds. 2011 “Transcultural journalism and the politics of translation: Interrogating the BBC World Service”. Journalism12 (2): 135–142. doi: 10.1177/1464884910388580
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884910388580 [Google Scholar]
17. Calzada-Pérez, Maria
    ed. 2003 Apropos of Ideology: Translation Studies on Ideology. Ideologies in Translation Studies. Manchester: St Jerome.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Chilton, Paul . and Christina Schäffner
    eds. 2002 Politics as Text and Talk. Analytic Approaches to Political Discourse. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/dapsac.4
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.4 [Google Scholar]
19. Conway, Kyle
    2010 “Paradoxes of translation in television news”. Media, Culture and Society32 (6): 979–996. doi: 10.1177/0163443710379668
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443710379668 [Google Scholar]
20. van Dijk, Teun A.
    1980 Macrostructure. An Interdisciplinary Study of Global Structure in Discourse, Interaction and Cognition. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
21. van Dijk, Teun A.
    1993 “Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis”. Discourse and Society4 (1): 249–283. doi: 10.1177/0957926593004002006
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926593004002006 [Google Scholar]
22. van Dijk, Teun A.
    1997 “Discourse as interaction in society”. InDiscourse as Social Interaction, ed. by Teun A. van Dijk , 1–37. Thousand Oaks, USA: Sage Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
23. van Dijk, Teun A.
    2001 “Critical Discourse Analysis”. InHandbook of Discourse Analysis, ed. by Deborah Tannen , Deborah Schiffrin and Heidi E. Hamilton , 352–371. London: Oxford Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
24. van Dijk, Teun A.
    2003 AccessedNovember 16, 2016. Ideology and Discourse – A Multidisciplinary Introduction. www.discourses.org/download/articles/.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Fairclough, Norman and Ruth Wodak
    1997 “Critical Discourse Analysis”. InDiscourse as Social Interaction, ed. by Teun A. van Dijk , 258–283. Thousand Oaks, USA: Sage Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Gagnon, Chantal
    2006 “Language Plurality as Power Struggle, or: Translating Politics in Canada”. Target18 (1): 69–90. doi: 10.1075/target.18.1.05gag
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.18.1.05gag [Google Scholar]
27. Guillaume, Astrid
    2016a Traduction et implicites idéologiques. Paris: Editions La Völva.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Guillaume, Astrid
    2016b Idéologie et Traductologie. Paris: L’Harmattan.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Hoey, Michael
    2001 Textual Interaction. An Introduction to Written Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Inghilleri, Moira and Sue-Anne Harding
    2010 “Translating Violent Conflict”. The Translator16 (2): 165–173. doi: 10.1080/13556509.2010.10799467
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2010.10799467 [Google Scholar]
31. Károly, Krisztina
    2007 Szövegtan és fordítás [Text Studies and Translation]. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Kintsch, Walter and Teun A. van Dijk
    1978 “Toward a model of text comprehension and production”. Psychological Review85 (5): 363–394. doi: 10.1037/0033‑295X.85.5.363
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.85.5.363 [Google Scholar]
33. Larson, Charles U.
    2001 Persuasion, Reception and Responsibility. Stamford: Wadsworth.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Mazzoleni, Gianpietro
    2002 [1998] Politikai kommunikáció [Political Communication]. Budapest: Osiris Kiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Munday, Jeremy
    2007 “Translation and Ideology. A Textual Approach”. The Translator13 (2): 195–217. doi: 10.1080/13556509.2007.10799238
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2007.10799238 [Google Scholar]
36. Salama-Carr, Myriam
    ed. 2007 Translating and Interpreting Conflict. Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Schäffner, Christina
    1997 “Strategies of Translating Political Texts”. InText Typology and Translation, ed. by Anna Trosborg , 119–143. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/btl.26.11sch
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.26.11sch [Google Scholar]
38. Schäffner, Christina
    2004 Political Discourse Analysis from the Point of View of Translation Studies. Journal of Language and Politics3 (1): 117–150. doi: 10.1075/jlp.3.1.09sch
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.3.1.09sch [Google Scholar]
39. Spooren, Wilbert and Liesbeth Degand
    2010 “Coding coherence relations: Reliability and validity”. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory6 (2): 241–266. doi: 10.1515/cllt.2010.009
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt.2010.009 [Google Scholar]
40. Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja
    1985 Argumentative Text Structure and Translation. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Valdeón, Roberto. A.
    ed. 2012 “Journalisme et traduction/Journalism and Translation”. Special issue ofMETA57 (4).
    [Google Scholar]
42. Zanettin, Federico
    2016 “ ‘The deadliest error’: translation, international relations and the news media”. The Translator22 (3): 303–318. doi: 10.1080/13556509.2016.1149754
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2016.1149754 [Google Scholar]