Translated fiction in Iran: Readers’ reception and expectations

Document Type : Research article

Authors

1 Department of English Translation, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran.

2 Department of English Translation, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Do translators know what kinds of translation their readers like and what kinds they dislike? The translator, like every author, has some readers in mind. Hence, in order for a translation to be acceptable, it needs to fulfill its readers’ expectations. The present study surveys readers’ expectations regarding literary translation (novels and stories), literary translators, as well as the peritext, the text and the format of such translated books. To this end, readers’ reviews in three sites, namely Fidibo, Taghcheh, and Goodreads, were collected and then coded and classified following the thematic analysis approach. Chesterman’s (2007) tripartite model of reception which studies readers’ reactions, responses, and repercussions was adopted as the theoretical framework. Readers’ expectations were classified into five main categories, namely translational expectations, textual/linguistic expectations, peritextual expectations, formatting expectations, and good literary translators' features. The results indicate that readers like translations that are both fluent and readable and are free from linguistic and textual abnormalities which are often the result of literal translation. Furthermore, the results of translational expectations specifically show that readers prefer translation methods and approaches that truly transfer the meaning, style, tone, register as well as culture-specific concepts. As to the peritext, readers preferred that an introduction and a literary criticism of the foreign work be included in the translation. Also, they defined a good literary translator as someone who is fully competent in the foreign language, able to comprehend the original text accurately and well-endowed with writing ability.

Keywords


  1. Abrams, M. H., & Harpham, G. G. (2012). A glossary of literary terms. Wadsworth. https://books.google.com/books/about/A_Glossary_of_Literary_Terms.html?id=2_Z-cgAACAAJ
  2. Bijani, S., Khoshsaligheh, M., & Hashemi, M. R. (2014). Categorization of the fiction translation expectancy norms to Iranian undergraduate readership. Asia Pacific Translation and Intercultural Studies, 1(3), 210-221. https://doi.org/10.1080/23307706.2014.956982
  3. Campbell, C. (2015). Translation and the reader: a survey of British book group members’ attitudes towards translation. University of Edinburgh. http://hdl.handle.net/1842/20948
  4. Chan, L. T. H. (2010). Readers, reading and reception of translated fiction in Chinese. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315760124
  5. Chesterman, A. (1998). Causes, translations, effects. Target, 10(2), 201-230. https://doi.org/10.1075/target.10.2.02che
  6. Chesterman, A. (2007). Bridge concepts in translation sociology. In M. Wolf, & A. Fukari (Eds.), Constructing a sociology of translation (pp. 171-183). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.74
  7. Chesterman, A. (2017). Reflections on translation theory. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.132
  8. Elimam, A. S. (2017). Translating the Qur’an into English: Target readers’ expectations. SKASE Journal of Translation and Interpretation, 11(1) 58-76. http://www.skase.sk/Volumes/JTI12/pdf_doc/03.pdf
  9. Fish, S. (1980). Is there a text in this class? The authority of interpretive communities. Harvard University Press. https://www.hup.harvard.edu/books/9780674467262
  10. Gambier, Y. (2018). Translation studies, audiovisual translation and reception. In E. D. Giovanni, & Y. Gambier (Eds.), Reception studies and audiovisual translation (pp. 43-66). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.141.04gam
  11. Gottlieb, H. (2004). Language-political implications of subtitling. In P. Orero (Ed.), Topics in audiovisual translation (pp. 83-100). John Benjamins . https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.56.11got
  12. Gutt, E. A. (1996). Implicit information in literary translation: A relevance-theoretic perspective. Target, 8(2), 239-256. https://doi.org/10.1075/target.8.2.03gut
  13. Huang, K. (2014). Translating for children: Cultural translation strategies and reader responses. University of Arizona. https://repository.arizona.edu/bitstream/handle/10150/332832/azu_etd_13477_sip1_m.pdf?sequence=1
  14. Khoshsaligheh, M., Kafi, M., & Ameri, S. (2020). Fiction translation expectancy norms in Iran: A quantitative study of reception. Translation and Interpreting, 12(1) 1-26. https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.112201.2020.a05
  15. Lv, L., & Ning, P. (2013). EST translation guided by reception theory. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 3(2), 114-118. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojml.2013.32015
  16. Matthews, B., & Ross, L. (2010). Research methods. A practical guide for the social sciences. Pearson Education Limited. https://books.google.com/books/about/Research_Methods.html?id=7s4ERAAACAAJ
  17. McAuley, T. E. (2015). Audience attitude and translation reception: the case of Genji. Babel, 61(2), 219 - 241. https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.61.2.04mac
  18. Meyer, J. (1997). What is literature? A definition based on prototypes. Work Papers of the Summer Institute of Linguistics, University of North Dakota Session, 41, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.31356/silwp.vol41.03
  19. Munday, J. (2016). Introducing translation studies. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315691862
  20. Nord, C. (1991). Text analysis in translation: Theory, methodology, and didactic application of a model for translation-oriented text analysis. Amsterdam University. https://books.google.com/books/about/Text_Analysis_in_Translation.html?id=ArJbAAAAMAAJ
  21. Nord, C. (2000). What do we know about the target-text receiver? In A. Beeby, D. Ensinger & P. Marisa (Eds.), Investigating translation (pp. 195-212). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.32.24nor
  22. Risku, H., Pichler, T., & Wieser, V. (2017). Transcreation as a translation service: Process requirement and client expectations. Across Languages and Cultures, 18(1) 53-77. https://doi.org/10.1556/084.2017.18.1.3
  23. Schäffner, C. (1998). Translation and quality: Current issues in language and society. Multilingual Matters. https://z-lib.io/book/15727921
  24. Suojanen, T., Koskinen, K., & Tuominen, T. (2015). User-centered translation. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315753508
  25. Venuti, L. (1998). The scandals of translation: Towards an ethics of difference. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203047873