Journals / RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2020 / Sayı: 0

Culture specific items in literary texts and their translation based on “foreignization” and “domestication” strategies

Yazınsal metinlerde kültüre özgü öğeler ve “yabancılaştırma” ve “yerlileştirme” stratejileri ile çevirileri

Pages
617–653
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Therefore, literary translators could benefit from both foreignization and domestication translation strategies rather than adopting only one of them in translation of culture specific items.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of this study is to determine culture specific items in the novel titled Baba Evi by Orhan Kemal and find out the translation strategies used in translation of these culture specific items in English translation of the novel titled My Father’s House with a view to exemplifying and presenting potential translation strategies for professional and prospective literary translators.
📊
Key Findings & Data:To this end, Newmark’s (2010) categorization of culture specific items was adopted in order to classify the culture specific items besides proper nouns suggested by Aixelá (1996) as culture specific items.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Therefore, literary translators could benefit from both foreignization and domestication translation strategies rather than adopting only one of them in translation of culture specific items.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2010 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Kültüre özgü öğeler · çeviri stratejileri · yabancılaştırma

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to determine culture specific items in the novel titled Baba Evi by Orhan Kemal and find out the translation strategies used in translation of these culture specific items in English translation of the novel titled My Father’s House with a view to exemplifying and presenting potential translation strategies for professional and prospective literary translators. To this end, Newmark’s (2010) categorization of culture specific items was adopted in order to classify the culture specific items besides proper nouns suggested by Aixelá (1996) as culture specific items. The translation of those culture specific items was analyzed based on a synthesis of Aixelá’s (1996) conservation and substitution strategies with Venuti’s (2001[1995; 1998]) foreignization and domestication strategies. The analysis of the culture specific items in the source text yielded 194 items specific to the source culture. 31 items were found from proper nouns category while 163 items were found based on Newmark’s (2010) categorization. The translation analysis showed that foreignization strategies were dominantly used in translation of the culture specific items in the novel, while domestication strategies were used infrequently. Besides foreignization and domestication strategies, the translator also preferred to translate 59 source culture specific items through universal and neutral signs, favoring neither foreignization nor domestication strategies. Therefore, literary translators could benefit from both foreignization and domestication translation strategies rather than adopting only one of them in translation of culture specific items.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Orhan Kemal’in Baba Evi başlıklı romanındaki kültüre özge öğeleri saptamak ve bu terimlerin My Father’s House başlıklı İngilizce çeviri metindeki çeviri stratejilerini çözümleyerek yazın çevirmenlerine potansiyel çeviri stratejilerini örneklerle sunmaktır. Bu amaca yönelik olarak, kültüre özgü öğelerin saptanmasında Newmark’ın (2010) sınıflandırması temel alınmış, bunun yanı sıra Aixelá’nın (1996) kültüre özgü öğeler olarak öne sürdüğü özel isimler de kaynak metinde saptanmıştır. Kültüre özgü öğelerin çeviri çözümlemesi, Aixelá’nın (1996) öne sürdüğü çeviri stratejileri ile Venuti’nin (2001[1995; 1998]) yabancılaştırma ve yerlileştirme stratejilerinin sentezlenmesiyle gerçekleştirilmiştir. Kaynak metnin çözümlenmesi sonucunda 194 kültüre özgü öğe saptanmıştır. 31 öğe özel isimlerden oluşurken 163 öğe Newmark’ın (2010) sınıflandırmasındaki öğelerden oluşmuştur. Çeviri değerlendirmesi sonuçlarına göre, romandaki kültüre özgü öğelerin çevirisinde yabancılaştırma stratejileri yaygın şekilde kullanılmışken yerlileştirme stratejileri az kullanılmıştır. Yabancılaştırma ve yerlileştirme stratejilerinin yanı sıra, çevirmenin 59 kültüre özgü öğeyi nötr ve evrensel göstergelerle çevirdiği, böylelikle 59 öğenin çevirisinde yabancılaştırma veya yerlileştirme stratejilerini kullanmadığı bulunmuştur. Böylelikle, yazın çevirmenlerinin kültüre özgü öğelerin çevirisinde sadece bir çeviri stratejisi kullanmaktan ziyade hem yabancılaştırma hem yerlileştirme stratejileri kullanabilecekleri sonucuna varılmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

KULELİ, M. (2020). Culture specific items in literary texts and their translation based on “foreignization” and “domestication” strategies. RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi, Sayı: 0, 617–653. https://ajindex.com/articles/340274

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Aixelá, J. F. (1996). Culture-specific items in translation. In R. Alvarez and M. Carmen-Africa Vidal (Eds.), Translation, power, subversion (pp. 52-78).
  2. Clevedon, Philadelphia and Adelaide: Multilingual Matters. Antonini, R. (2007).
  3. SAT, BLT, spirit biscuits, and the Third Amendment. In Y. Gambier, M. Shlesinger and R. Stolze (Eds.), Doubts and directions in translation studies (pp. 153-167). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. Baker, M. (1992). In other words: A course book on translation. London: Routledge..... Baker, M. (2010). Reframing conflict in translation. In M. Baker (Ed.), Critical readings in translation studies (pp. 113-129). London and New York: Routledge. Bassnett, S. (2014). Translation studies. London and New York: Routledge...... Can Rençberler, A. (2020). Uncovering the farthest reaches of the meaning universe of a short story and its translations through semiotics of translation. RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi, (18), 539-556. DOI: 10.29000/rumelide.706324 Chesterman, A. (1997). Memes of translation. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. Derrida, J. (1976). Of grammatology. (G. C. Spivak, Trans.). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
  4. Ergil, B. (2020). Batı kanonu hayal perdesinde: Tiyatrotem yeniden yazım ve yeniden çevirilerinde “absürd”, “tragedya” ve “komedya” kavramlarının dönüşümü. Dünya Dilleri, Edebiyatları ve Çeviri Çalışmaları Dergisi, 1(1), 26-58.
  5. Gambier, Y. (2010). Translation strategies and tactics. In Y. Gambier and L. V. Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook of translation studies (pp. 412-418). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. Gentzler, E. (1998). Foreword. In S. Bassnett and A. Lefevere (Eds.), Constructing cultures: Essays on literary translation (pp. ix-xxi). Clevedon, Philadelphia and Adelaide: Multilingual Matters. Kemal, O. (2016). The story of the little man 1-2. My father’s house-The idle years. (C. Lugal, Trans.). İstanbul:
  6. Everest Yayınları.
  7. Kemal, O. (2020). Baba evi – Avare yıllar. Küçük adamın romanı 1-2 (17th ed.). İstanbul:
  8. Everest Yayınları.
  9. Lefevere, A. (1998). Translation practices and the circulation of cultural capital: Some Aeneids in English. In S. Bassnett and A. Lefevere (Eds.), Constructing cultures: Essays on literary translation (pp. 41-56).
  10. Clevedon, Philadelphia and Adelaide: Multilingual Matters. Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/culture. Retrieved: