.png)
https://doi.org/10.20339/PhS.3-19.053
Pugachev Ivan A.,
Doctor of Pedagogy, Associate Professor,
Professor, Head of the Russian Language Department
Engineering Academy of the Peoples Friendship University of Russia
e-mail: pugachev-ivan@mail.ru
Yarkina Ludmila P.,
Candidate of Philology, Associate Professor,
Methodist Professor of the Russian Language Department
Engineering Academy of the Peoples Friendship University of Russia
e-mail: yarkinaLP@mail.ru
Ideology affects the work of the translator in different ways, namely, through its presence in the source text, which may be subtle and difficult to reproduce, through the bias of the translator due to his or her personal ideological stance, or through the discrepancy in the reception of the source and target texts when the corresponding audiences belong to opposite ideological camps. The paper examines ideology-related problems in translation. The framework includes the working definition of ideology, indications on how to identify problematic ideology-related elements in the text and how to distinguish ideological issues from cultural ones. It allows for a better understanding of ideology issues, identifies essential factors influencing translator's choices and could be used as a guidance in translation practice.
Keywords: ideology, ideological stance, ideological camp, recontextualisation, translation practice, critical discourse analysis.
References
1. Munday J. (2007). Translation and ideology: a textual approach. The translator, 13(2), November. P. 195–218.
2. Munday J. (2012) Evaluation in Translation: Critical points of translator decision-making. Oxon: Routledge.
3. Mason I. (2009) Discourse, Ideology and Translation. In M. Baker (ed.) Critical readings in translation studies. London: Routledge. P. 83–95.
4. Baker M. (2006) Translation and Conflict: A Narrative Account. Oxon: Routledge.
5. Van Dijk T.A. (2006) Ideology and discourse analysis. Journal of Political Ideologies, 11(2), June. P. 115–140.
6. Valdeón R.A. (2015) Fifteen years of journalistic translation research
and more, Perspectives, 23:4, 634-662, DOI: 10.1080/0907676X.2015.1057187
7. Lefevere A. (1998) Translation Practice(s) and the Circulation of Cultural Capital: Some Aeneids in English. In S. Bassnett and A. Lefevere (eds). Constructing Cultures: Essays on Literary Translation. Clevedon: Cromwell Press.
8. Fawcett P., Munday J. (2009) Ideology. In M. Baker and G. Saldanha (eds) Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies (2nd ed.). Taylor and Francis e-Library (first published Routledge, 1998). P. 137–141.
9. Hatim B., Mason I. (2005) The Translator as Communicator. Taylor & Francis e-Library (first published London: Routledge, 1997).
10. Simpson P. (1993) Language, ideology, and point of view. Oxon: Routledge.
11. Martin J., Nakayama T. (2010) Intercultural communication in contexts (5th edn). New York: McGraw-Hill.
12. Spencer-Oatey H., Franklin P. (2009) Intercultural Interaction: A Multidisciplinary Approach to Intercultural Communication. Palgrave Macmillan.
13. Chesterman A. (2001) Proposal for a Hieronymic Oath. The Translator, 7(2). P. 139–154.
14. Rojo López A.M., Ramos Caro M. (2014) The impact of translators’ ideology on the translation process: A reaction time experiment. In R. Muñoz Martín (ed.) Minding translation. Special Issue of MonTI, 1. P. 247–272.
15. Kang J.-H. (2007) Recontextualization of news discourse: A case study of translation of news discourse on North Korea. The Translator, 13(2). P. 219–242.
16. Inggs J. (2015) Translation and Transformation: English-Language Children’s Literature in (Soviet) Russian Guise. International Research in Children’s Literature, 8(1). Edinburgh University Press. P. 1–16.