Circulation of academic thought (2015)

This international research symposium aims to connect different strands of research dealing with translation in the sciences, social sciences and humanities. The focus will be on different methodological approaches chosen by individual researchers and implications of these approaches for understandings of translating science, the circulation of academic thought and social knowledge-making.

The symposium sets out to promote a cross-disciplinary debate and addresses translation of academic thought from a translation studies, historical, sociological or cultural studies perspective. It is at the same time a follow-up event to two international conferences at the Department of Translation Studies, University of Graz on the sociology of translation (2005 and 2012). The papers and discussions will be published by a renowned academic publisher or will appear as a special issue of an international translation studies journal.

If you want to attend the conference, please inform us via email (hanna.blum(at)uni-graz.at).

Merangasse 70, 8010 Graz, SR 2.106

 Download Poster

The study of translation in the context of the circulation of academic thought is dispersed between disciplines. Recently efforts to coordinate and institutionalize research dealing with “translating science” were made inside the field of translation studies (e.g. Brest conference 2014; special issue of The Translator 2011; recent addition of the term “Scientific and Technical Translation” to the Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies 2008).
Early contributions to the study of scientific translation (often) put an emphasis on aspects related to “language for specific purpose”, the technicality of texts and practical problems in translating these. Only with the turn towards sociologically inspired research did translation studies’ engagement with scientific translation take into account both social and historical contexts (see Olohan/Salama-Carr 2011:181) thus turning towards an understanding of translation as a form of knowledge-making in itself. Nevertheless, the direct exchange of ideas between historians or sociologists of science and translation studies scholars concerning the study of translation in the academic field, understandings of translation, translation as a (transformative) element of the dissemination and circulation of knowledge, but also of social knowledge-making (see Camic/Gross/Lamont 2011) and the specificities of the academic field remains sparse.

The symposium therefore aims to initiate such an exchange of ideas thereby putting the focus on methodological approaches. The space offered for reflection and debate will help to further our conception of translation of academic thought. Moreover the symposium aims to continue the quest to institutionalize the study of scientific translation in all its diversity within the field of translation studies.

Papers can address these and further points:

• Which empirical material has been and is currently being used by researchers with regard to the translation of academic thought? What methods are being used to gather, analyze and interpret this material? How are these approaches connected to understandings of knowledge-making used to explain agency of translators in the academic field?

• What theoretical strands of translation studies (e.g. DTS; cultural studies; feminist translation studies; sociology of translation; technical translation) offer added value to the study of translation in the context of translation of academic thought? How do these theoretical strands affect methodological decisions in empirical studies?

• What specific characteristics differentiates translation in the academic field from translation in other domains (such as literature) and/or in different disciplines (such as more technical disciplines compared to humanities)? How is this phenomenon reflected in the methodological approach chosen?

Also, papers can shed light on the following questions:

 
• What methodological approaches are chosen when studying translation from a historical, sociological and cultural studies’ perspective? What kind of data is being gathered? What kinds of tools are used to analyze the data?

• How is the understanding of translation affected by methodological decisions?

• What consequences result from using translation as a sensitizing concept in studying knowledge-making (and/or the history thereof)? What is the added value of focusing on translation when studying knowledge-making in its diverse forms?

The symposium will take place on Friday/Saturday December 11-12 2015. Deadline for full papers is December 4 2015. Papers will be circulated prior to the beginning of the symposium amongst participants. The number of speakers invited will be restricted to 10 to 12 persons. Each paper will be assigned a discussant that will comment the paper at the symposium.
The symposium sets at reviving an academic discourse on translation and knowledge-making as ignited (with specific focus on science) in a special issue of The Translator in 2011. It is at the same time a follow-up event to two international conferences at the department of Translation Studies of the University of Graz on the sociology of translation (2005 and 2012). The papers and discussions will be published by a renowned academic publisher or will appear as a special issue of an international translation studies journal.

Olohan, Maeve/Salama-Carr, Myriam (2011) „Translating Science”, in: The Translator 17:2, 179–188.
Camic, Charles/Gross, Neil/Lamont, Michèle (2011) Social knowledge in the making. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press.

Day 1 - 11 December 2015

Day 2 - 12 December 2015

Between paradigms: a critical approach to the study of academic translation

Karen Bennett, New University of Lisbon, Portugal

In the current context of globalization, the most pressing problem facing the academic translator (and, by extension, the translation studies scholar) is how to deal with texts produced in one paradigm of knowledge that have to be translated into another for the purpose of international dissemination. This is particularly pertinent in the case of humanities and social science scholarship, which is by definition linguistically and culturally embedded (De Swaan 2001) and often construed in a discourse that has little in common with the academic discourse that prevails in the lingua franca. According to Halliday and Martin (1993:220), there is in English ‘an essential continuity between humanities and science as far as interpreting the world is concerned’, reflecting the dominance of empiricism in the Anglo-Saxon world. Hence, we might expect the process of translating into it from the non-empiricist philosophical discourses that predominate in many European languages to be a highly fraught process, both technically and ideologically, leading in the worst instances to fully-fledged cases of ‘epistemicide’ (Bennett 2007).

This paper urges the need for a critical approach to the study of academic translation in order to problematize the very vehicle through which knowledge is construed and transmitted. Most of the methods currently favoured in Translation Studies (e.g. descriptive studies, corpus methods) are themselves grounded in the empiricist paradigm and thus shed little light upon the issue, possibly even contributing to the process of epistemological colonization. The paper therefore surveys some of the approaches used in neighbouring disciplines (such as Critical Discourse Analysis, Critical Theory, Cognitive Linguistics, the New Rhetoric, New Historicism, Cultural Criticism etc), with a view to assessing their potential for application to the study of academic discourse in translation. It also discusses possible reasons for their neglect in TS until now, and suggests ways in which their methods might be refined to make them more suited to our requirements.

Bennett, K. (2007) “Epistemicide! The tale of a predatory discourse”, in: The Translator 13:2, 151-169.

De Swaan, A. (2001) “English in the social sciences”. In: Ammon, Ulrich (ed.) The Dominance of English as a Language of Science: Effects on Other Languages and Language Communities. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 71-83.

Halliday, M.A.K/Martin, J.R. (eds) (1993) Writing Science: Literacy and Discursive Power. Pittsburgh/London: University of Pittsburgh Press.

Arendt in translation: a comparative study

Barbara Grüning, University of Bologna, Italy

Since the 1990s Arendt is a key-thinker of international fame, thanks also to some crucial intellectual biographies that were published after her death in the USA and elsewhere. Most biographies reflect the image of a controversial 'class-less' woman-intellectual (e.g. Kurzmann/Owens 2002) that stands in contrast to dominant philosophical thought, especially Marxist traditions as well as with public opinion on historical, social, political and gender issues. However, this crystallization of Arendt's intellectual life can only partially explain her institutionalization and iconization; especially within specific national reception fields. For this reason I will focus on the translation (i.e. Sapiro/Bustamante 2009) of Arendt’s works in two European countries – namely Italy and Germany – in order to try to answer to the following questions: How much is Arendt’s reputation related to dissemination patterns of her works and how much to her 'charismatic qualities' and 'public performances' when she was still alive (i.e. Baert 2011)? Which are the works that mostly circulate(d) in Italy and Germany? How did the structure and history of the two national reception fields (i.e. Bourdieu 2002) influence the translations of Arendt's works?

The analysis and comparison of the translated works in the two countries is based on a set of indicators: the temporal distance between the year of publication and that of translation; the number of republications; the social reputation, position and 'identity' of the publisher; the presence of a preface/introduction/conclusion; the identity of editors and of translators (profession; discipline(s); nationality; political culture orientation); the 'dissemination' of her essays/texts in collettaneous books. Nevertheless it is also to consider that Arendt was a German native speaker: not only did she publish her first works in German, but she monitored a number of German translations of her essays and books. Furthermore she maintained a social network in Germany that helped her to publish there. The second method used to get more in-depths insights are interviews with Arendt-experts in the two countries. These are used to better understand the impact of Arendt’s works on her iconization.

Baert, P. (2011) “The sudden rise of French-existentialism in the sociology of intellectual life”, in: Theory and society 40:6, 619-644.

Bourdieu, P. (2002) “Les conditions sociales de la circulation internationale des idées”, in: Actes de la recherche sociales 145, 3-8.

Kurzmann, C./Owens, Lynn (2002) “The sociology of Intellectuals”, in: Annual Review of Sociology 28, 63-90.

Sapiro, G./Bustamante, M. (2009) “Translation as a measure of International consecration”, in: Sociologica, 3, 1-44.

Studying scientific translation as collaborative practice

Maeve Olohan, University of Manchester, United Kingdom

This paper explores, both theoretically and methodologically, the nature of interactions between translators and scientists in knowledge-making and the publishing of scientific ideas. It begins by examining the extent to which models of collaboration that are readily applied in other professional contexts can help us to conceptualise scientific translation as collaborative practice. Notions for consideration include shared goals, shared intentionality, heeding strategies, articulation work and semiotic resources for coordination and alignment of actions.

Two different methodological approaches are then assessed in terms of their usefulness in shaping an understanding of collaboration between translators and scientists in the domain of scientific publishing. These are, firstly, archival research in the study of historical cases and, secondly, workplace research focusing on present-day scientific translation practices. I draw on my recent and ongoing research to illustrate the data types and methods of analysis involved. The paper aims to prompt discussion and reflection on both the conceptualization of scientific translation as collaborative practice and on the strengths and weaknesses of these methodological approaches for investigating those practices.

What’s translated in translation? Rethinking the problem of the “translation unit”

Lavinia Heller, University of Mainz, Germany

The value of interdisciplinary exchange is not limited to the transfer of research results and concepts or methods across disciplinary boundaries in order to explore new topic areas and new ways of solving problems. The long-term profit of interdisciplinary cooperation can also be regarded as its potential to question what is (or has become) unquestionable in a given discipline. It is in this sense that the usage of “translation” which is made, for example, within the history of science and concepts for the purpose of describing different forms of knowledge transfer and transformations of thought traditions presses Translation Studies to (re)consider an old but latent problem: the problem of the translation unit. This problem was first dealt with systematically by linguistically oriented approaches in Translation Studies. However, in the course of the cultural and social turn it has been marginalized by the attention towards other problems. The increasing interest of different disciplines in translation processes occurring in the context of academics and philosophy places the following questions on the agenda of reflection in Translation Studies: What are the crucial translation units which trigger the transformation of a thought collective or the transfer of a thought style (Fleck)? What is the relationship between translation processes on the micro-level of the scientific text and the more encompassing transformations within academic and knowledge cultures? Which entities of an academic culture are regarded as translatable in the first place and what kind of awareness of these translation units do the agents involved in such translation processes have?

Collecting data for new perspectives in translation history: A corpus of translations in the Humanities

Julia Richter, University of Vienna, Austria

Are particular authors particularly frequently translated at particular times? What happens to translating in times of social upheaval? Where and when can we speak of translation flows that indicate a massive transfer of knowledge or discourses? Can peaks and troughs in translating activity lead to periodization of translation history?

Processes of knowledge transfer are currently attracting more and more attention in several different scholarly disciplines. It is taken for granted that these processes are bound up with translation. However, the actual, specific interconnections of transfer, translation and multilingualism have rarely been investigated, or only through isolated aspects of the phenomenon.

We know that “knowledge” changes, that paradigm and discursive shifts occur within every discipline; and we – that is, translation studies, transfer studies and research in the history of science – assume that those shifts are brought about by means of transfer and of translation. We know that such transfer has its agents and fields of power, that there are differing views of who should translate and how, and that translations exert effects of different intensity, are received in very different ways. However, we do not have a genuine foundation for knowing these things – a foundation that would go beyond binational relationships and very short time periods and thus help to banish the danger of inadmissible generalisations. So far there is no database enabling researchers to investigate translation-related questions on the basis of an extensive, detailed, elaborated and transcultural corpus. Creating the frames for this database means defining the fundaments and perspectives of the history of translation in the way we would like it to be written.

Paratexts and the circulation of academic thought

Rafael Schögler, University of Graz, Austria

Transnational ties are a constant element of academic life and translations are a paramount means enabling the circulation of academic thought. Before a translation is read, interpreted and received in a target academic field, however, the process of translation by itself is one of manipulation, interpretation and reframing. Embedding or reframing a text or even offering a specific reading takes place more of less actively and visibly. In some instances this reframing mainly takes place within the translations themselves, i.e. in the form of a specific use of terminology or even style. In others the translators and/or editors take a more visible or active position. This paper will concentrate on this second type of reframing. The main techniques adopted in book translations are the use of paratextual elements in the form of introductions, comments, footnotes or appendices; but also by adding/changing indices, bibliographies or even by adapting examples to an expected target audience. One could go even further and take into account accompanying publications by translators or editors, such as introductions to a certain strand of theory, interpretations of the oeuvre of a particular author or simply contributions to a similar topic in the target academic field.

This paper will focus on the study of paratexts in translations of SSH texts. On the one hand it will deal with paratexts as elements of translations and on the other it will explore the knowledge-producing and -transforming character of translations in the SSH. The paper will suggest a methodological triangulation to better understand the phenomenon and the manifold characteristics of paratextual elements in the circulation of academic thought. First, the usefulness of available data, datasets and bibliographic resources to map the occurrence of certain types of paratexts will be discussed. Second, a sample of paratexts of Luchterhand’s translations in “Soziologische Texte” will serve to show different research perspectives when studying these in the context of academic translation and the social production of knowledge. The third methodological step moves away from the texts themselves and deals with negotiations leading to the implementation of paratextual elements by taking advantage of archival data. This will show that editors, publishers, reviewers and translators interpret the embedding of academic thought in different ways.

Diversity of translational data in contemporary social knowledge making

Şebnem Susam-Saraeva, University of Edinburgh, Scotland

The paper will delineate the outlines of a prospective study on the role of translation in social knowledge making by focusing on a particular social movement which challenges, as well as builds upon, mainstream medical discourse. The objective of the paper is to demonstrate the wide variety of data that should be gathered in order to present a brief history of the spread of the natural birth movement in Turkey, as a case study for the travels of ideas through translation and the contribution of translations to paradigmatic shifts within a society.

Such a study would compare and contrast the work of professional translators who undertake the translation of relevant key texts in obstetrics and midwifery (as well as publishers who act as patrons for these works) vis-à-vis the ‘non-professionals’ who have been translating excerpts from the same works and utilizing them in their activist endeavours online, through dedicated websites, blogs and online groups. It would emphasize the role of individual agents, whose international mobility and exposure ultimately open up further avenues for translation. Audio-visual material, such as Youtube clips and documentaries, which are crucial within this movement, and their subsequent subtitling, would also have to be addressed. Additionally, such a study would draw attention to the importance of printed and digital ‘storytelling’ in the creation and dissemination of social knowledge in contemporary societies, and thus question the boundaries between scientific and non-scientific texts, as well as the dichotomies of literary vs. non-literary. Finally, the participant observer role of the researcher would be elaborated on, as a significant means of facilitating data collection and understanding the networks and the needs and expectations of the agents, together with the drawbacks of limiting this research on a global social movement to its reflection in one particular language and society.

“Contributions in English, please”: Translation and knowledge-making in the social sciences

Kate Sturge, Aston University, UK/Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, Berlin, Germany

If we think of a scholarly article not as a gossamer of thoughts, hovering in the ether, but as an instrument, a particular set of questions arises. Who built this instrument, using what other instruments? How does it work, under what conditions, and in interaction with what human agents? What knowledges does it apply, modify, overthrow? Should we study it in its specific instantiations or in its productive longevity? And what is the relevance of its languages and linguistic transformations to its past, present and future? All these questions offer routes into the history and sociology of translations. Starting from the perspective of a practitioner, my paper will examine a translation in the field of the history of science through the prism of translation sociology. I trace the forms of capital that converge in this translated text, with special attention to the issue of linguistic capital, and try to follow its progress as a material object. As well as the implications of focusing on translation for our understanding of knowledge circulation, I would like to explore how a contextualising and reflexive approach to translation can enrich the work of scholars and scholarly translators alike.

Philology, Linguistics, Translation

Keith Tribe, private scholar and professional translator, United Kingdom

The translation of scholarly material raises particular problems of consistency not usually encountered in literary translation, for such translation goes beyond issues of literary expression to questions of meaning and interpretation. While it is becoming increasingly common for past translation practice in the humanities and social sciences to be recognised as having played a major part in the reception of particular writers (in my own field with respect to Adam Smith and Max Weber), a kind of casual empiricism tends to prevail in which the focus is upon particularly influential mistranslations within a given text. However, in my work as a translator I am increasingly aware of structural, rather than lexical, qualities of meaning, and wish to find a way to reflect this that goes beyond casual empiricism.

The approach that I have been developing over the last couple of years involves a turn back to philology, more precisely, the language and literary analysis of the later nineteenth century out of which Saussurean linguistics was born. The merits of work on language analysis in the later nineteenth century were naturally eclipsed by twentieth century developments today largely associated with Saussure; but it is also worth noting that the parallel emergence of an academic literary criticism involved a displacement of the technical appraisal of language forms by one in which broader conceptions of culture and philosophy dominated. It is this latter development, I believe, that has left us bereft of the conceptual instruments required for systematic understanding of the problems arising in modern translation studies.

Karen Bennett teaches Translation at the Universidade Nova de Lisboa (UNL) and researches in the area of Translation Studies with the University of Lisbon Centre for English Studies (ULICES), focusing in recent years upon the problems of transferring knowledge across linguistic and cultural boundaries. She has published over 35 articles, 2 monographs and an edited volume.

Barbara Grüning is post-doctoral research fellow in sociology at the Department of Philosophy and Communication, University of Bologna. Since March 2013 she is research assistant at the European Project “Interco-SSH. INTERnationalCOoperation in the SSH: Comparative Historical Perspectives and Future Possibilities”. Her research interests regards: the history of social sciences in Italy and in Germany, the sociology of intellectuals, memory and space studies.

Lavinia Heller (PhD) holds an MA degree in Translation for Italian and Chinese. She studied at the Johannes Gutenberg University in Mainz where she is currently employed as a research assistant at the Faculty of Translation Studies, Linguistics and Cultural Studies. Her research interests include concept and theory formation in Translation Studies, intercultural communication, and the translation of literary, philosophical and scientific texts.

Maeve Olohan is senior lecturer at the Centre for Translation and Intercultural Studies, University of Manchester. She is author of Scientific and Technical Translation (2015) and Introducing Corpora in Translation Studies (2004) and co-editor of a special issue of The Translator (2011) on the translation of science.  She delivers postgraduate courses in commercial, scientific and technical translation, translation technologies, translation project management and professional ethics, and research methods. Her current research on translation practices is situated at the interface between translation studies and science and technology studies (STS).

Julia Richter is research assistant at the Centre for Translation Studies (ZTW), University of Vienna and holds an MA in Translation Studies from the IALT, University of Leipzig. Her PhD thesis deals with dynamic methods for a transcultural history of translation. The focus is lying on texts of the Humanities in the 20th century. She is also the translator of several monographs and articles from Romanian and French.

Gisèle Sapiro (tbc) is Research Director at the Centre National de Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) and Professor of Sociology and Vice-President for international relations at the École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales (EHESS). She is currently lead coordinator of the EU-project INTERCO-SSH (International Cooperation in the Social Sciences and Humanities) dealing with the institutionalization and internationalization of the social sciences and humanities in Europe. Her research interests cover areas such as the sociology of knowledge, intellectuals, culture and literature as well as the sociology of translation.

Rafael Schögler is assistant professor at the Department of Translation Studies at the University of Graz, Austria. His research interests comprise sociology of translation, translation in the social sciences and humanities, history of translation studies and empirical social research. He has worked on manifold projects amongst others dealing with the translation of Max Weber into English, an anthology on community interpreting and sociological work on European research policy. Currently, his work focuses on translation in the social sciences and humanities. He is also associated to the EU funded INTERCO-SSH project dealing with the institutionalization and internationalization of the social sciences and humanities.

Kate Sturge is a translator and editor at the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, Berlin, and visiting senior lecturer in Translation Studies and German at Aston University, Birmingham. Her PhD at University College London investigated the politics of translating fiction in Nazi Germany, and she has also worked on translation as a mode of cultural representation in ethnographic texts. Her publications include ‘The Alien Within’: Translation into German during the Nazi Regime (2004), Representing Others: Translation, Ethnography and the Museum (2007), and Translation Under Fascism (2010, edited with Christopher Rundle).

Şebnem Susam-Saraeva is a Senior Lecturer in Translation Studies at the University of Edinburgh, U.K. Her research interests have included gender and translation, retranslations, translation of literary and cultural theories, research methodology in translation studies and internationalization of the discipline. She is the author of Translation and Popular Music. Transcultural Intimacy in Turkish-Greek Relations (2015) and Theories on the Move. Translation’s Role in the Travels of Literary Theories (2006), and guest-editor of Translation and Music (2008) and Non-Professionals Translating and Interpreting. Participatory and Engaged Perspectives (2012, with Luis Pérez-González). She is the co-vice president of the International Association for Translation and Intercultural Studies (IATIS) and a Steering Committee Member of ARTIS (Advancing Research in Translation and Interpreting Studies).

Keith Tribe is a private scholar and professional translator specialising in economic history and the history of economic thought. After his graduate work in Cambridge during the 1970s he worked until 2002 at the University of Keele, from the mid-1980s in the Department of Economics. His post-doctoral work in Heidelberg and Göttingen as an Alexander von Humboldt Stipendiat (1979-1985) led to the publication of his monograph on Cameralism (Governing Economy CUP 1988) and his essay collection Strategies of Economic Order (CUP 1995/2007). During the same period he translated the writings of Reinhart Koselleck and Wilhelm Hennis. His most recent publication is The Economy of the Word (OUP New York 2015). Further details of his work can be found on his website keithtribe.co.uk.

Department of Translation Studies

University of Graz
Merangasse 70, 8010 Graz, Austria
Tel.: +43 (0) 316 380-2666
Fax: +43 (0) 316 380-9785

By air:
Thalerhof Airport is only 30 minutes from the city centre, which can be reached either by taxi or public transport.

Public transport:
Buses linking the airport with the city centre (Jakominiplatz) leave in front of the arrival hall. From Jakominiplatz, take tram line 3 (direction Krenngasse) and get off at "Herz-Jesu Kirche". Follow the rails (Schillerstraße) up to Nibelungengasse, turn left and find the university building a couple of steps ahead.

By train:
For train information see ÖBB.
From the main train station take bus line 63 (direction Petersbergenstraße), get off at "Nibelungengasse", right in front of the university building.
Taxis are also available outside the main Station.