Volume 15, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1598-7647
  • E-ISSN: 2451-909X
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


Translation can serve the purposes of gaining, maintaining and even abusing political power in the interests of certain political groups. In order to identify political manipulation in translated texts, a text linguistics based tool called Political Bias Screener has been developed, which includes superstructure and macrostructure analysis, critical discourse analysis and political mass communication related theories. This article describes the most relevant theoretical foundations and the component models of the Screener, investigates its validity and reliability and introduces the most important research findings obtained with its help. The findings show possible tendencies of translator behaviour and are transferable to other research fields in Translation Studies.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  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
    2006Translation and Conflict. A Narrative Account. London and New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 2003Apropos of Ideology: Translation Studies on Ideology. Ideologies in Translation Studies. Manchester: St Jerome.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Chilton, Paul . and Christina Schäffner
    eds. 2002Politics 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.
    1980Macrostructure. An Interdisciplinary Study of Global Structure in Discourse, Interaction and Cognition. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. 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. 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. 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. 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
    2016aTraduction et implicites idéologiques. Paris: Editions La Völva.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. 2016bIdéologie et Traductologie. Paris: L’Harmattan.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Hoey, Michael
    2001Textual 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
    2007Szövegtan 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.
    2001Persuasion, 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. 2007Translating 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. 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
    1985Argumentative 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]

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error