1887
image of Translatophilia
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This article advances the notion of translatophilia, defined as the fetishisation of translation in hypercorrection of its perceived marginalisation. Using how Translation Studies scholars have engaged with the copyright regime in postpositivist fashion as a case in point, it argues that in the course of resisting structuralist notions of originality and authorship, Translation Studies has ironically come to fetishise its object of study as the privileged site of a new individuality and personality – romantic myths it initially set out to dispel. In light of the recent ‘outward turn’ in Translation Studies, the article identifies sources of anxiety in the field that have pushed it toward extreme theorisation. It proposes that before Translation Studies makes its outward turn, it is pertinent for it to first turn inward to combat its translatophiliac tendencies.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/target.20198.lee
2022-01-27
2022-05-27
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Designer Guilds Ltd. v. Russell Williams (Textiles) Ltd
    Designer Guilds Ltd. v. Russell Williams (Textiles) Ltd [2000] 1 WLR 2416
  2. Infopaq International A/S v. Danske Dagblades Forening (C-5/08
    Infopaq International A/S v. Danske Dagblades Forening (C-5/08 [2009] ECDR 16 [CJEU Fourth Chamber]
  3. Ladbroke (Football) Ltd v William Hill (Football) Ltd
    Ladbroke (Football) Ltd v William Hill (Football) Ltd [1964] 1 WLR 273
  4. University of London Press v. University Tutorial Press
    University of London Press v. University Tutorial Press [1916] 2 Ch 601
  5. Aplin, Tanya, and Jennifer Davis
    2017Intellectual Property Law: Text, Cases, and Materials. 3rd ed.Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/he/9780198743545.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780198743545.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  6. Barthes, Roland
    (1957) 2012Mythologies [orig. Mythologies]. Translated byRichard Howard and Annette Lavers. New York: Hill and Wang.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Bassnett, Susan
    2014aTranslation. Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 2014b “Translation Studies at a Cross-Roads.” InThe Known Unknowns of Translation Studies, edited byElke Brems, Reine Meylaerts, and Luc van Doorslaer, 17–27. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/bct.69.02bas
    https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.69.02bas [Google Scholar]
  9. 2017 “Foreword.” InTranslation and Rewriting in the Age of Post-Translation Studies, edited byEdwin Gentzler, viii–x. Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. 2018 “Questioning Authority and Authenticity: The Creative Translations of Josephine Balmer.” InThe Palgrave Handbook of Literary Translation, edited byJean Boase-Beier, Lina Fisher, and Hiroko Furukawa, 333–350. London: Palgrave. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑75753‑7_17
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75753-7_17 [Google Scholar]
  11. Bassnett, Susan, and Peter Bush
    eds. 2007The Translator as Writer. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Bennett, Jane
    2010Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things. Durham: Duke University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Bently, Lionel, and Brad Sherman
    2014Intellectual Property Law. 4th ed.Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/he/9780199645558.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780199645558.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  14. Brown, Bill
    2001 “Thing Theory.” Critical Inquiry28 (1): 1–22. 10.1086/449030
    https://doi.org/10.1086/449030 [Google Scholar]
  15. Cabanellas, Guillermo
    2014The Legal Environment of Translation. Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Chesterman, Andrew
    2016Memes of Translation: The Spread of Ideas in Translation Theory. Revised ed.Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.123
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.123 [Google Scholar]
  17. Cintron, Ralph
    2020Democracy as Fetish. University Park: Penn State University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Coates, Jenefer
    2006 “Vladimir Nabokov.” InTranslation – Theory and Practice: A Historical Reader, edited byDaniel Weissbort and Astradur Eysteinsson, 376–392. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Lee, Tong King
    2020a “Translation and Copyright: Toward a Distributed View on Originality and Authorship.” The Translator26 (3): 241–256. 10.1080/13556509.2020.1836770
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2020.1836770 [Google Scholar]
  20. 2020b “Ideology.” InThe Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, 3rd ed., edited byMona Baker and Gabriela Saldanha, 252–256. Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Lefevere, André
    2017Translation, Rewriting, and the Manipulation of Literary Fame. Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Litwin, Maciej
    2020 Review of Contra Instrumentalism: A Translation Polemic, byLawrence Venuti. The Translator26 (2): 209–216. 10.1080/13556509.2020.1681740
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2020.1681740 [Google Scholar]
  23. Perteghella, Manuela, and Eugenia Loffredo
    eds. 2006Translation and Creativity: Perspectives on Creative Writing and Translation Studies. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Pym, Anthony
    2009 “The Translator as Non-Author, and I Am Sorry about That.” InThe Translator as Author: Perspectives on Literary Translation, edited byClaudia Buffagni, Beatrice Garzelli, and Serenella Zanotti, 31–44. Berlin: Lit Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Reynolds, Matthew
    2019 “Introduction.” InPrismatic Translation, edited byMatthew Reynolds, 1–18. Cambridge: Legenda.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Ricketson, Sam
    1987The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works: 1886–1986. London: Centre for Commercial Law Studies, Queen Mary College/Kluwer.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Tymoczko, Maria
    2014Enlarging Translation, Empowering Translators. Abingdon: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315759494
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315759494 [Google Scholar]
  28. Vaver, David
    1994 “Translation and Copyright: A Canadian Focus.” European Intellectual Property Review16 (4): 159–166.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Venuti, Lawrence
    1995 “Translation, Authorship, Copyright.” The Translator1 (1): 1–24. 10.1080/13556509.1995.10798947
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.1995.10798947 [Google Scholar]
  30. 1998The Scandals of Translation: Towards an Ethics of Difference. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203269701
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203269701 [Google Scholar]
  31. 2008The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation. 2nd ed.Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. 2013Translation Changes Everything: Theory and Practice. Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. 2019Contra Instrumentalism: A Translation Polemic. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. 10.2307/j.ctvgc62bf
    https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvgc62bf [Google Scholar]
  34. Woods, Michelle
    2006Translating Milan Kundera. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781853598845
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853598845 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/target.20198.lee
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: translatophilia ; fetish ; postpositivism ; outward turn ; copyright law
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