Manipulation of Ideology in Translation of Political Texts: A Criti-cal Discourse Analysis Perspective

Subject Areas : All areas of language and translation

Mohammad Hossein  Keshavarz ¹ (Islamic Azad University of Qazvin)
Leila  Alimadadi Zonoozi ² (Tarbiat Mo’alem University,Tehran)

Received: 2017-03-14 Accepted : 2017-03-14 Published : 2011-03-01

Keywords: Critical Discourse Analysis, Ideology, negative other-presentation and positive self-presentation,

Abstract :

As a culture-based phenomenon which involves both linguistic and social aspects, translation has been investigated from various perspectives. The present Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA)-based study is an attempt to probe into the manipulation of ideologies in translations of political texts. A CDA approach, based on Fairclough (1989), Van Dijk (2004) and Farahzad (2007), was adopted to conduct this research. Three English political books alongside their corresponding translations in Persian were critically analyzed both at micro and macro levels. At micro-level, lexical features based on Van Dijk's model (2004) and grammatical features based on Fairclough's (1989) framework were analyzed. This was followed by the analysis of macro-features (based on Farahzad, 2007) such as notes, prefaces, and footnotes in the translated books for the purpose of revealing the translation network's diverse world-views and ideologies. The results show that translators make use of certain grammatical and lexical strategies for the sake of ideological ploy, i.e. the basic strategy of positive self-presentation and negative other-presentation. That is, all the lexical and grammatical deviations used by the Persian translators were in the employment of self (i.e., Iranian) interests. Also the analysis of macro-features revealed the translators’ ideological trends and judgments toward the source texts. More specifically, in the footnotes, the translators manifested negative attitudes towards the authors of the original texts by pinpointing their mistakes and false information about Iranian affairs as well as their hostility towards Iran. The findings are interpreted to have implications for syllabus designers as well as translation students and teachers.

References:

Blum, W. (2005). Rogue State: A guide to the world's only superpower. London: Common Courage Press.

Chilton, P., & Schäffner, C. (1997). Discourse and politics. In T. Van Dijk (Ed.). Discourse studies: A multidisciplinary introduction, Vol 2: Discourse as social interaction (pp. 206- 30). London: Sage Publications.

Damaskinidis, G. (2006). MA studies on translation. Retrieved from: http://europa.eu.int/ comm/ employment- social/ elm/ summit/ en/ papers/ guide.htm.

Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. New York: Longman. 

Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Cambridge: Poloty Press.

Fairclough, N. (1995a). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. London: Longman.

Fairclough, N. (1995b). Media discourse. London: Edward Arnold.

Fairclough, N. (2000). Language and power (2nd Ed.). New York: Longman.

Fairclough, N. & Wodak, R. (1997). Critical discourse analysis. In  Van Dijk, T. A., Political Discourse and Political cognition. Congress paper on political discourse, Astone University July 1997. Retrieved from Van Dijk' homepage: http://www.let.uva.nl~teun.

Farahzad, F. (2007). Translation criticism. Journal of Translation Studies, 6 (24), 39-47.

Gazanfar, M. (2008). A Critical discourse analysis approach to the representation of cultures and ideologies through translated texts: A case study. Unpublished M.A thesis. Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran.

Grffiths, E. (2006). Turbulent Iran, recollections, revelations and a proposal for peace. London: Seven locks Press.

Hatim, B., & Mason, I. (1997). The translator as communicator. London: Routledge.

Hodge, B., & Kress, G. (2003). Language as ideology (2^nd ed.). London: Routledge.

Holland, B. (2000). Applications of Text Analysis. In Coulthard, M., Moon, R., Johnson, A., & Holland, B. (eds), Written Discourse. University of Birmingham.

Keddie, N. (2003). (2nd.Ed.) Modern Iran: Roots and results ofrevolution. New Heaven and London: Yale University Press.

King, R., & Karesh, E. (2006). The Iran-Iraq war and the first gulf war. London and New York: Routledge.

Kress, G. (1990). Critical Discourse Analysis. In Robert Kaplan (Ed.), Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, II. Retrieved from: http:// users.utu.fi/ bredelli/cda.htm.

Kuo, S., & Nakamura, M. (2005). Translation or transformation? A case study of language and ideology in the Taiwanese press. Retrieved from: hptt://das,sagepub.com.

Sardar, Z., & Davies, M. W. (2003). Why do people hate America? London: Disinformation Books.

Schäffner , C. (2003). Third ways and new centers: Ideological unity or difference? In M. Calzada- Perez (Ed.), Apropos of ideology (pp. 23-42). Manchester: St. Irome.

Schäffner, C. (2004). Political discourse analysis from the point of view of translation studies. Journal of Language and Politics 3,1.

Shamlou, H. (2007). The impact of ideology on translator's lexical choices in translation of political-journalistic texts. Unpublished M. A. thesis. Teacher Training University, Tehran.

Shamsali, M. (2007). The Effect of political ideology on the translation of journalistic texts. Unpublished M.A. thesis. Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran.

Van Dijk, T. A. (1997). Political discourse and political cognition. Congress Paper on Political Discourse, Aston University, July 1997. Retrieved from van Dijk's homepage: http:// www.let.uva. nl~teun

Van Dijk, T. A. (1998). Critical discourse analysis. Retrieved from: http://www.hum.uva.nl/ teun/ cda.htm

Van Dijk, T. A. (2000a). Ideology and Discourse. Retrieved from http://www.discourse-in-society. org/teun.html

Van Dijk, T. A. (2000b). Critical discourse analysis. Retrieved from: http://www.discourse in society.org/2003.

Van Dijk, T. A. (2000c). Multidisciplinary CDA: A Plea for Diversity. Retrieved from: http://wwww. hum.uva.nl/teun.

Van Dijk, T. A. (2002). The discourse knowledge interface. In Weiss, G. & Wodak, R. (eds.) Theory and interdisciplinarity in CDA (pp. 85-109). London: Palgrave.

Van Dijk, T. A. (2004). Politics Ideology and Discourse. Retrieved from: http://www.discourse-in-society.org/teun.html 

Widdowson, H. (2000). Critical Practices: On Representation and the interpretation of text. In S. Sarangi & M. Coulthard (Eds.), Discourse and social life (pp. 59-77). Harlow: Pearson Education.