Translation as a Social Activity - Literature review Example

Translation is a Social Activity April 10, Introduction Translation studies involves changing an original text usually referred to as source text in the original verbal language referred to as source language into a written text (source text) in a different verbal language, the target language. Translation is embedded in the social context in the sense that translation is shown by an incisive description of the relationship between the author of a particular text, the persons transferring the text, the text itself and the members of the society in the societal environment (Wolf and Alexandra 2007, p.1). Distinguished scholars in translation studies describe this discipline as an ‘exciting, new study, perhaps the subject of 1990s’, assembling together scholars from an extensive assortment of traditional areas. The same translation studies scholars show how the discipline of translation studies has changed over time and how it has affected social activities. It shows the concerns in the discipline, how multidiscipline it has become and its desire to break away from Eurocentric origins and retaining the gains in translation studies in the past (Baker and Saldanha 2008, p.13). Holmes’s work ‘The name and nature of translation studies’ identifies three areas of pure research which include the description of translation studies, establishment of general principles to help in explanation of translation studies and the theoretical branch divided into general theories which seek to describe all types of translations as a whole and partial theories. In descriptive translation theories, the translation studies scholar examine the product, the function and the process involved as way of determination of translation as a social activity. Descriptive translation studies examined in terms of product looks into existing translations. According to Venuti (2012 p.85), one final aim of product oriented descriptive translation studies is the general history of translations. Descriptive translation studies along function examine the context of the translation rather than the text itself. It may research on what issues were translated and in which place and the influence it had or its effects. This is what is known as socio-translation studies in descriptive translation studies. However, process-oriented descriptive translation studies concerns itself with the psychology of translation that is what goes in the mind of the translator at the time of translation. This is the cognitive-perspective that makes people examine think-aloud techniques where we can record the verbalization of a translator as he does the translation. Holmes mentions the translation policies, which gives the place of a translator in his role as a translator in the society, and this is an inquiry of its place in the teaching and learning of language in the curriculum. Holmes says that translation studies are related through different branches that include descriptive, theoretical and applied translation techniques. He claims that with time, by mere fact of the multiplicity of disciplines involved, there has been increased specialization and incorporation of theories in the art of translation studies. Accordingly, translation studies can be subdivided into approaches either culturally or linguistically and theories that include the translation theory and the polysystem theory. Furthermore, it is divided into research methods, which may be descriptive or empirical in nature while applied translation studies also involve criticisms, didactics and institutional environments. Bourdieu has a theory of interpreting and translation based on the public service known as Public Service Interpreting and Translation where he argues about translation studies and the effect of migration on it as a social activity. The migration has had the effect of changing societies in the West and being buttressed in the social, cultural, linguistic and political way of life. This is because persons migrating may bring languages hitherto unknown by the majority of persons in the place they have immigrated to. They will also be in a position of disadvantage, as they may not know the language of the majority in that particular area. When the aforementioned phenomenon happens, there are required translators and interpreters who will help in making communication useful or helpful and easier. However, the role of these interpreters and translators come into question when they are involved in public interpretation, for example in places like public schools, hospitals and even government offices. Public Service Interpreting and Translating (PSIT) comes about due to the need by the society to communicate within it through different but distinct languages, which come into play together. It is at this point that translation comes into play due to the complex nature of a society’s composition. PSIT therefore comes about due to the emergence from the confluence of different cultures and man’s need to communicate when such a scenario presents itself. This phenomenon is known as multiculturalism, which refers to the presence of large number of persons in a particular society who, because of ethnic or linguistic affiliations, religious inclinations and national differences have differing cultural codes. PIST is therefore, the art of communicating with a particular group of people who are part of a cultural and linguistic marginal group and whose lack of knowledge in the trends of that particular society is applied not just towards the language but also the values, practices and representations held high by the society. Therefore, PSIT plays an important role in communication between different cultural groups that exist within the same area or place. It provides a viable response when a situation, which comes into play of intercultural microcosm, mutual understanding and relations among, collections of persons with dissimilar cultures. When the above situation comes into play, the main aim of PSIT would be to balance out the relationship in power between the main objectives of the provider and the recipients by putting the need for communication at the forefront. According to Bourdeau social organization is easily comprehended through two important concepts that is the habitus and field concept. Habitus concept allows us to understand the fact that societal or social organization is a system of relationships made up of structures that cannot be seen or are incomprehensible. The members of the society therefore relate in a manner that is conditioned or determined by previous historical notions integrated as habitus combined with the coming up of new values between the members of the society that crop up due to their differences. Therefore, Habitus is a mode through which the society is distinguished, determines the act of members within the society, and is constituted on the initial experiences of a person known as the primary habitus and the later experiences in adult life known as the secondary habitus (Inghilleri 2005, p.125-145). Field is where the system of relations is practiced either through struggles or forces through the employment of different means and ends depending on their position within the structure of field of forces. Bourdieu says that fields operate independently each with its own rules in the handling of the conflicts that come up each day, and are composed of three agents acting together. These agents include the existence of common capital such as ability or talent and the struggle to utilize the capital. Moreover, it includes a hierarchy made up due to the existence of those who have the capital and those who aspire to do so. When habitus and fields come into play, there is reproduction and transformation of the entire structure in the society in that when the agents that are in play in the field is incorporated with habitus, they acquire dispositions, which in turn bring about practices and representations, which allow them, play in different social fields. Therefore, Bourdieu posits that practices are the building blocks of any social space made up upon a system of values. This means that what is involved in PIST is to understand the message without changing or interfering with its meaning with an aim of producing an interpretation that suits the particular environment, the person receiving the information and the prevailing culture. Niklas Luhmann’s social system theory is applied in the systematic study of translation studies through the systemic point of view is done in three ways. These include the study of translation as a system comprising of a process distinct from other types of social processes. Alternatively, translation was studied as a subsystem within a larger field of related systems known as the polysystem theory. The third part is placing translation in the larger societal context and relating it to the social discourse (Vermeer 2006, p.122). Luhmann says that human beings are part of the larger society or environment of social systems that make their participation in translation important. Human beings act as the point that the three types of life that is biological, psychic and social life intertwine, and this places an emphasis of the social systems, which come into play in three levels. These levels are the small level of physical communications grouped as micro –level, the meso-level and the macro-level organizations of social systems (Fuchs 1999, pp.117-118) Luhmann theory is more important because it provides the necessary concepts that help us understand the social system theory. Through this theory, there is an agreement that the society is the unit for communication in a particular environment. Therefore, translation is the boundary of social systems and serves two core functions, which are to free or open systems for the environment and close them from the environment. This is so because it is used to control information getting into the society thus influencing the particular society. According to Luhmann’s social systems theory, a differentiation is made between meaning and complexity at the time of study whereby, meaning is given as a form for adapting to the prevailing complexities. Moreover, it is an additional reference to social-systematic actions and experiences, while complexity on the other hand is lack of relevant information and prevents the system from observing itself. The aforementioned theory provides that in social systems, the boundary between the environment and the systems go further into the minds of the members of the society who volunteer the information got from the environment to the system for complete evaluation. This simply means that a member of a particular social system is the bearer of the society’s communication and their operation is determined by the structural operation of their minds together with their social systems. In ancient times Peter the Great set up a printing press in Amsterdam for public translations as this formed an integral part of the state policy. Important foreign writings were thus introduced to reform Russia; thus, translation became the mechanism through which there can be an equal comparison between the social system and the environment, in this case Russia and Western parts of Europe. Sergey Tyulenev (2011, P.140) states that translation provides the referential background that determines self-reference, which simply means what one owns can only be seen at the back mind of a stranger. This, therefore, means that the system looks at the outside views by contacting what is held in the outside. Luhmann’s theory provides that translation played an integral part in the removing the veil that existed between presence and absence. The conception of the future was, therefore associated with life in Western Europe, which became an example in the factual dimension meaning being transferred into the temporal meaning dimension. This is because translation came forth from different social systems through foreign languages and cultural conventions. Translation also split the present from the past or the future so that both the past and future would become visible in the present translation activity. Translation thus reconstituted the audience that is the subject of target and nurtured the Russians with an eye on the visible future. In conclusion, translation in the Luhmann social system theory makes the societal system evolve with sensitivity to the environment in the renegotiation of the society’s system of internal communication. Therefore, translation is important in social, factual and temporal dimensions; in the social dimension it important in the interaction between the social system and the environment in everyday life. Furthermore, in factual dimension as a mode of translation defines the social discourse or communication in the society through the introduction of new themes in the society’s internal communication. In addition, temporal dimensions introduced the eagerly awaited modernity with a focus on the future in application of present translation system, and this led to the society’s system that is past or the future become the present through translation. References Baker, M. and Saldanha, G. Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London: Routledge. Fuchs, S. 1999. Niklas Luhmann. Sociological Theory, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 117-119. Inghilleri, M. 2005. Bourdieu and the sociology of translation and interpreting: special issue. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing. Tyulenev, S.2011. Applying Luhmann to Translation Studies: Translation in Society (Routledge Advances in Translation Studies. London: Routledge Venuti, L. 2012. Translation Studies Reader. London: Routledge. Vermeer, H.J. 2006. Luhmanns "social Systems" Theory: Preliminary Fragments for a Theory of Translation. Berlin: Frank & Timme. Wolf, M, and Alexandra Fi. 2007. Constructing a Sociology of Translation. Amsterdam: J. Benjamins Pub. Co. Read More