Advertisement

The Translator’s Gaze: Intersemiotic Translation as Transactional Process

  • Madeleine Campbell
  • Ricarda Vidal
Chapter

Abstract

This first chapter sets the stage and provides a theoretical and analytical framework for the rest of the volume in the context of semiotics, cognitive poetics, psychoanalysis and transformative learning theory. Challenging boundaries between source and target and recognizing the topographical limitations that tend to be placed on conceptions of modalities and media, we offer a perspective of intersemiotic translation as a subjective, synaesthetic and relational experience to be rendered, rather than a message or content-and-form package to be carried across modal or medial boundaries. Hence, we posit that what makes intersemiotic translation translation is not so much the end result but the praxis of translation, illustrating our argument with examples from our own practice: Translation Games, Wozu Image? and Jetties.

References

  1. Barraclough, Simon. 2013. “Two Sun Spots” p.o.w. (poetry/oppose/war) 17, edited by Antonio Claudio Carvalho. Edinburgh and Rio de Janeiro: unit4art. Google Scholar
  2. Barthes, Roland. 1967. “Death of the Author.” Aspen 5–6.Google Scholar
  3. Benjamin, Walter. [1916] 1992. “Über die Sprache des Menschen.” In Sprache und Geschichte: Philosophische Essays, edited by Rolf Tiedemann, 30–49. Stuttgart: Reclam.Google Scholar
  4. Benjamin, Walter. [1923] 2002. “The Task of the Translator.” In Walter Benjamin: Selected Writings, 1913–1926, edited by Marcus Bullock and Michael W. Jennings, 253–63. Cambridge, MA and London, UK: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Berman, Antoine. 1995. Pour une critique des traductions: John Donne. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  6. Boal, Augusto. [2002] 2006. Games for Actors and Non-actors, 2nd ed., translated by A. Jackson. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Bollas, Christopher. 2009. The Evocative Object World. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Campbell, Madeleine. 2017a. “Entre l’audible et l’inaudible: Intersemiotic Translation of Mohammed Dib’s Poetry.” In Language—LiteratureThe Arts: A Cognitive-Semiotic Interface, edited by Olga Voroboya and Elzbieta Chrzanowska-Kluczewska, 167–82. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  9. Campbell, Madeleine. 2017b. “Towards a Rhetoric of Translation for the Postdramatic Text.” Poroi 13: 1. http://ir.uiowa.edu/poroi/vol13/iss1/2/,  https://doi.org/10.13008/2151-2957.1234. Accessed 15 September 2017.
  10. Campbell, Madeleine, and Laura González. 2018, forthcoming. “‘Wozu Image?’/What’s the Point of Images? Exploring the Relation between Image and Text through Intersemiotic Translation and Its Embodied Experience.” In Special Issue: (e)motion, edited by Naomi Segal and Maciej Maryl (Cultural Literacy in Europe), Open Cultural Studies. Google Scholar
  11. Campbell, Madeleine, Birthe Jørgensen, and Bethan Parkes. 2013. “Haجar and the Anجel: Mohammed Dib’s 1996 Poem ‘Hagar aux Cris’ and John Runciman’s c. 1766 painting ‘Hagar and the Angel’”. http://www.gla.ac.uk/hunterian/learning/hunterianassociates/hagarinstallation/. Posted 2013. Accessed May 15, 2018.
  12. Coffey, Simon. 2015. “Reframing Teachers’ Language Knowledge Through Metaphor Analysis of Language Portraits.” The Modern Language Journal 99, 3: 500–14.  https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Derrida, Jacques. 2001. “What Is a ‘Relevant’ Translation?” Translated by Lawrence Venuti. Critical Inquiry 27 (2): 174–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dib, Mohammed. [1996] 2007. “L’Aube Ismaël (Louange).” In Œuvres Complètes: I Poésies, edited by Habib Tengour, 283–97. Paris: Éditions de la Différence.Google Scholar
  15. Elleström, Lars. 2010a. “Iconicity as Meaning Miming Meaning and Meaning Miming Form.” In Iconicity in Language and Literature, Vol. 9, 73–100. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  16. Elleström, Lars. 2010b. “The Modalities of Media: A Model for Understanding Intermedial Relations.” In Media Borders. Multimodality and Intermediality, edited by Lars Elleström, 11–48. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  17. Elleström, Lars. 2016. “Visual Iconicity in Poetry: Replacing the Notion of ‘Visual Poetry’.” Orbis Litterarum 71 (6): 437–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Englund, Axel. 2010. “Intermedial Topography and Metaphorical Interaction.” In Media Borders, Intermediality and Multimodality, edited by Lars Elleström, 69–80. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Forceville, Charles J., and Eduardo Urios-Aparisi, eds. 2009. Multimodal Metaphor. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  20. France, Peter. 2010. “Translation: The Serva Padrona.” Art in Translation 2 (2): 119–130.Google Scholar
  21. García Ochoa, Gabriel, Sarah McDonald, and Nicholas Monk. 2016. “Embedding Cultural Literacy in Higher Education: A New Approach.” Intercultural Education 27 (6): 546–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2016.1241551. Accessed May 20, 2018.
  22. García, Ofelia. 2014. “Multilingualism and Language Education.” In The Routledge Companion to English Studies, edited by Constant Leung and Brian V. Street, 84–99. London: Taylor & Francis,Google Scholar
  23. Gibbs, Raymond W. 1994. The Poetics of Mind: Figurative Thought, Language, and Understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Gibbs, Raymond W. 1999. “Taking Metaphor Out of Our Heads and Putting it into the Cultural World”. In Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics, edited by Raymond W. Gibbs and Gerard J. Steen, 145–66. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gibbs, Raymond W. 2006a. Embodiment and Cognitive Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Gibbs, Raymond. 2006b. “Metaphor Interpretation as Embodied Simulation.” Mind & Language 21: 434–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gibbs, Raymond W. 2011. “Evaluating Conceptual Metaphor Theory.” Discourse Processes 48 (8): 529–62.  https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853x.2011.606103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gottlieb, Henrik. 2005. “Multidimensional Translation: Semantics Turned Semiotics.” In MuTra 2005—Challenges of Multidimensional Translation: Conference Proceedings, edited by Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast and Sandra Nauert. http://www.euroconferences.info/proceedings/2005_Proceedings/2005_Gottlieb_Henrik.pdf. Accessed May 16, 2018.
  29. Grady, J. 1997. “Theories Are Buildings Revisited.” Cognitive Linguistics 8: 267–90.Google Scholar
  30. Grady, J. 1999. “A Typology of Motivation for Metaphor: Correlations vs. Resemblances.” In Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics, edited by Raymond Gibbs and Gerard Steen, 79–100. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  31. Guattari, Félix. 1984. Molecular Revolution Psychiatry and Politics. Translated by Rosemary Sheed. USA: Penguin.Google Scholar
  32. Jakobson, Roman. [1959] 2000. “On Linguistic Aspects of Translation.” In The Translation Studies Reader, edited by Lawrence Venuti, translated by Lawrence Venuti, 113–18. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  33. Lacan, Jacques. 1973. “Du regard comme objet petit a.” Le Séminaire livre XI: Les quatre concepts fondamentaux de la psychanalyse, edited by Jacques-Alain Miller. Paris: Éditions du Seuil.Google Scholar
  34. Lacan, Jacques. 1981. The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis: The Seminar of Book XI, edited by Jacques-Alain Miller, translated by Alan Sheridan. London: Norton. Google Scholar
  35. Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  36. Lakoff, George, and Mark Turner. 1989. More Than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lotman, Juri. 2005. “On the Semiosphere.” Sign Systems Studies 33 (1): 205–29.Google Scholar
  38. Mezirow, Jack. 1991a. Fostering Critical Reflection in Adulthood: A Guide to Transformative and Emancipatory Learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  39. Mezirow, Jack. 1991b. Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  40. Mezirow, Jack. 1992. “Fostering Critical Reflection in Adulthood: A Guide to Transformative and Emancipatory Learning.” The Canadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education 6 (1): 86–89.Google Scholar
  41. Mezirow, Jack, and Edward W. Taylor, eds. 2009. Transformative Learning in Practice: Insights from Community, Workplace, and Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  42. Mitchell, W.J.T. 1994. Picture Theory. London: The University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
  43. Moure, Erín. 2016. “But Do We Need a Second Language to Translate?” In Currently & Emotion: Translations, edited by Sophie Collins, n.p. London: Test Centre.Google Scholar
  44. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1945. Phénoménologie de la perception. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  45. Polezzi, L. 2014. “Migration and Translation: Introduction.” In From Literature to Cultural Literacy, edited by Naomi Segal and Daniela Koleva, 79–85. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  46. Reddy, Michael J. 1979. “The Conduit Metaphor—A Case of Frame Conflict in Our Language about Language.” In Metaphor and Thought, edited by Andrew Ortony, 284–324. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Scott, Clive. 2010. “Intermediality and Synesthesia: Literary Translation as Centrifugal Practice.” Art in Translation 2 (2): 153–70.  https://doi.org/10.2752/175613110x12706508989415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Segal, Naomi. 2014. “Introduction.” In From Literature to Cultural Literacy, edited by Naomi Segal and Daniela Koleva, 1–12. Basingstoke, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  49. Shabohin, Sergey. 2013. WOZU POESIE? Eine Europäische Polyphonie. Ausgestellt. Berlin: Literaturwerkstatt Berlin.Google Scholar
  50. Silverstein, Michael. 2015. “How language communities intersect: Is ‘superdiversity’ an incremental or transformative condition?” Language & Communication 44: 7–18.Google Scholar
  51. Toury, Gideon. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies—And Beyond. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Treadaway, Sam, and Ricarda Vidal. 2013. Revolve:R, 1st ed. Bristol: Arrow Bookworks.Google Scholar
  53. Treadaway, Sam, and Ricarda Vidal. 2015. Revolve:R, 2nd ed. Bristol: Arrow Bookworks.Google Scholar
  54. Treadaway, Sam, and Ricarda Vidal. 2018, forthcoming. Revolve:R, 3rd ed. Bristol, Chicago: Arrow Bookworks & Intellect Books.Google Scholar
  55. Vermeer, Hans J. [1989] 2000. “Skopos and Commission in Translational Action.” In The Translation Studies Reader, edited by Lawrence Venuti, translated by Andrew Chesterman, 221–32. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  56. Vidal, Ricarda, and Manuela Perteghella. 2018, forthcoming. “Translation as Movement: Migration and Notions of ‘Home’.” In Special Issue: (e)motion, edited by Naomi Segal and Maciej Maryl (Cultural Literacy in Europe), Open Cultural Studies.Google Scholar
  57. Vinay, Jean-Paul, and Jean Darbelnet. [1958/1995] 2000. “A Methodology for Translation.” In The Translation Studies Reader, edited by Lawrence Venuti, translated by Juan C. Sager and M.-J. Hamel, 84–93. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  58. Vygostky, Lev S. [1934] 1986. Thought and Language, translated by Alex Kosulin. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of EdinburghEdinburghUK
  2. 2.King’s College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations