Postcolonial Polysystems (2011)

8/11/2019 Postcolonial Polysystems (2011)

1/34

This article was downloaded by: [88.15.196.196]On: 09 October 2014, At: 02:46Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

The TranslatorPublication details, including instructions for authors

and subscription information:

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rtrn20

Postcolonial PolysystemsHaidee Kruger

a

aSchool of Languages, North-West University (VaalTriangle Campus), South Africa

Published online: 21 Feb 2014.

To cite this article:Haidee Kruger (2011) Postcolonial Polysystems, The Translator, 17:1,105-136, DOI: 10.1080/13556509.2011.10799481

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2011.10799481

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the

information (the Content) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, orsuitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressedin this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not theviews of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content shouldnot be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions,claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities

whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connectionwith, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/13556509.2011.10799481http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rtrn20http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2011.10799481http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/13556509.2011.10799481http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rtrn20


2/34

forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19

6]at02:4609October2014
http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditionshttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions


3/34

ISSN 1355-6509 St Jerome Publishing Manchester

The Translator. Volume 17, Number 1 (2011), 105-36

Postcolonial PolysystemsPerceptions of Norms in the Translation of Childrens

Literature in South Africa1

HAIDEE KRUGER

School of Languages, North-West University (Vaal

Triangle Campus), South Africa

Abstract.Polysystem theory provides a useful, though necessarily

limited, entry point for an investigation of the complex relationships

that underlie the production of childrens books in various languages

in South Africa, and the role that translation plays in this process.

In particular, it provides a theoretical means of hypothesizing rea-

sons for the tensions between original production and translation

in relation to different language groups, and an explanation of the

ways in which tensions between domesticating and foreignizing

approaches to translation are perceived by various role players.

This paper rst argues that there is a systemic relationship between

different types of literary texts for children in the various languagesin South Africa, and that this provides a possible key for explaining

the tensions outlined above. Against this background, the paper

presents some ndings of a survey conducted among South African

translators of childrens literature, focusing specically on transla-

tors perceptions of preliminary norms and the basic initial norm.

Based on these ndings, it is then argued that the dynamics and

power differentials among the different languages in South Africa

may challenge conventional interpretations of systemic relation-

ships and their effects on norms and (possible) laws or universalsof translation, particularly relating to binary conceptions of and

conventionally held assumptions about the relationship between

source-text and target-culture orientation (or domestication and

foreignization) as linked to polysystemic position.

Keywords: African languages, Afrikaans, Childrens literature, Polysystem

theory, Postcolonial theory, South Africa, Translation norms.

1 This article is based on a section of work from a thesis entitled The Translation of

Childrens Literature in the South African Educational Context, accepted in fullment of

the requirements for the degree PhD in Translation Studies at the University of the Wit-

watersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



4/34

Postcolonial Polysystems106

This paper sets out from the assumption that translation theories, like all

theories, are interwoven with their contextual origins in complex ways. Theo-

ries therefore cannot be transferred to different contexts as if they were neutral

instruments that can simply be applied to a given object of study, regardlessof whether this object of study is part of the same temporal, spatial and cultural

conguration as the theory, or whether it is far removed in time or space from

the original context of that theory. Instead, this article argues that it is essential

constantly to interrogate the relevance and usefulness of theoretical concepts,

as well as their metatheoretical underpinnings, wherever these concepts travel.

In this sense, the paper aligns itself with Saids (1983:242) comment that

it is the critics job to provide resistances to theory, to open it up toward

historical reality, toward society, toward human needs and interests,

to point up those concrete instances drawn from everyday reality that

lie outside or just beyond the interpretive area necessarily designated

in advance and thereafter circumscribed by every theory.

Based on some concrete instances, drawn from the everyday reality of the

use of translation in the production of childrens literature2in South Africa,

I argue that an analysis of the South African situation may challenge some

conventional concepts and conceptual relationships in descriptive translation

studies, particularly associated with the theoretical constructs of norms, laws

and systems. In this, I share Tymoczkos (1999b:33) belief that translationtheory is often based on a limited set of (Western) texts and contexts, which

require testing and elaboration in other contexts. A focus on local (and speci-

cally non-Western) situations is crucial as a means of assessing, revising and

supplementing theoretical constructs.

Polysystem theory provides a useful, though necessarily limited, entry point

for an investigation of the interlaced array of factors that underlie the produc-

tion of childrens literature in the 11 ofcial languages3in South Africa, and the

2In this paper, childrens literature is circumscribed in a particular way, linked to the focus

and aim of the research. Childrens literature is dened as ction, poetry and drama texts

for children aged 0 to 12 years. It includes picture books, as well as readers and other liter-

ary material used in the educational environment. Textbooks and other non-ction works

are excluded from the denition. While literary material used in the educational context

is often excluded from denitions of childrens literature, it is included here since one of

the studys concerns is the relationship between the educational discourse in South Africa

and the production of childrens books (see Section 1).3The 11 ofcial languages of South Africa are Afrikaans, English, isiNdebele, isiXhosa,

isiZulu, Sepedi, Sesotho, Setswana, Siswati, Tshivenda and Xitsonga. Numerous other lan-guages are also spoken in the country. According to the 2001 Census, isiZulu has the highest

number of rst-language speakers (23.8% of the population), and isiNdebele the lowest (1.6%

of the population). Afrikaans is the third most widely spoken rst language in the country

(13.3% of the population) and English the fth, jointly with Setswana (8.2% of the popula-

tion); see Statistics South Africa (2001). Webb (2002) makes a number of points about the

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



5/34

Haidee Kruger 107

role that translation plays in this process. In particular, it provides a theoretical

means of hypothesizing reasons for the tensions between original production and

translation in the context of different language groups, and the ways in which

tensions between domesticating and foreignizing approaches to translationare perceived by various role players. As background to the argument, I begin

with a brief and very general overview of childrens literature and translation

in the African and South African context, focusing on the role of educational

discourse. I then argue that there is a systemic relationship between different

types of literary texts for children in the various languages in South Africa, and

that this provides a possible key for explaining the tensions mentioned above.

The links between the polysystemic concept of position and Tourys (1995)

concept of translation norms are then elaborated, and some ndings presented

of a survey among South African translators of childrens literature, particularlyrelating to translators perceptions of preliminary norms and the basic initial

norm. Using these ndings as a point of departure, I argue that the dynamics

and power differentials among the different languages in South Africa may

challenge conventional interpretations of systemic relationships and their ef-

fects on norms and (possible) laws or universals of translation, as outlined, for

example, by Toury (1995) and Even-Zohar (1978, 1990, 2005). These factors

may inuence the role and function of translation in different language groups,

and, consequently and simultaneously, the norms that play a role in translators

perceptions of translation and their actual decision-making processes.

1. Childrens literature, education and translation in Africa and

South Africa

In the African context, the educational function of childrens literature has

received a great deal of emphasis and is strongly associated with the ideologi-

cal machinery of colonialism and (post-) independence. OSullivan (2005:55)

language situation in the country which provide necessary background to the argument in this

article. English is functionally the major language in South Africa, acting as lingua franca

and language of formal public contexts, while Afrikaans remains inuential as a language of

business and education despite its associations with apartheid. The nine African languages

full mostly lower-order functions, such as personal interaction. The African languages also

tend to be more clearly circumscribed geographically, while the geographical distribution

of Afrikaans and English is more diffuse. English tends to be associated with the urban

context. A last important point made by Webb (2002) is that individual and societal bi- and

multilingualism is particularly prevalent in South Africa. As far as the publishing industry is

concerned, the dominance of English is evident, with Afrikaans well represented but the use

of the African languages very limited (especially considered against the background of the

large percentage of South Africans who are rst-language speakers of these languages). Forexample, in 2007, English books represented 75.25% of all book sales, Afrikaans 15.25%

and the nine African languages together only 9.5% (Galloway et al2009:43). In the print

mass media, too, Afrikaans and English predominate, with very few major publications in

an African language (see, for example, SouthAfrica.info 2006 for some data on language

distribution in newspaper publishing).

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



6/34


points out that under colonial rule in Africa, childrens literature (often written

in colonial languages) formed part of the colonial project of establishing and

enforcing a Western educational system based on Western values. Independ-

ence from European colonial rule was accompanied by a focus on expandingeducational systems, so that the development and publication of school books,

readers and similar material received much attention (Dankert 1991, quoted in

Hunt 1992:111-12). According to Dankert (ibid.), the development of literacy

has led to a growth in book markets in Africa, which has attracted the interest

of large multinational publishing companies. These companies have typically

either exported European, Anglo-American and supercially Africanized

childrens books to African countries, or have had books produced by their

African subsidiaries. In the words of Dankert (ibid.), this leads to a kind of

uncontrolled, which is to say strictly market economy governed, prolifera-tion of originally English-language childrens books.4However, OSullivan

(2005:55) points out that in the postcolonial period, there has also been a move-

ment towards developing a local, indigenous printed childrens literature.

These very general comments raise some important issues about childrens

literature in Africa (and South Africa). First, they point to some of the com-

mercial, practical and ideological problems and challenges that accompany

the writing and translation of childrens books in Africa. OSullivan (2005:57)

summarizes some of these challenges and problems as the consequences of

colonialism; concepts of the family and childhood; the inuence of developedliteratures; the inuence of the mass media; literacy and illiteracy; linguistic

diversity; and economic questions pertaining to the market and distribution.

In addition, Ray (1996:653-54) points out that developing countries have

faced the challenge of having to produce an established body of childrens

literature in a relatively short space of time, compared to European countries

where the same process has taken hundreds of years. Second, in this acceler-

ated process, translation can, and often does, play a key role, despite the fact

that what Ray calls the common problems of post-colonialism (ibid.:658)

complicate the situation particularly, power differentials between powerful

colonial languages (like English) and the indigenous languages, as well as

cultural differences and conicts (Pellowski 1996:665). However, while the

merits of translating childrens literature, as opposed to writing original works

in the indigenous language, may be contested (see Ghesquiere 2006:29-32),

the fact remains that in many developing countries, including South Africa, the

translation of childrens literature plays a signicant role, in the educational

context and elsewhere. This point is also made by the Childrens Literature

Research Unit at UNISA (2006):

4See Segun (1992) for a more specic discussion of some of these issues as they relate to

publishing in particular African countries, with a special focus on Nigeria.

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



7/34

Haidee Kruger 109

As a result of the small local market, few original books with full colour

illustrations are published. Collaboration with overseas publishers and

the simultaneous publication of a book in various indigenous languages

is often the only way to make a publication viable. Also publishers of

childrens books concentrate on the publishing series, beginner and

second language readers.

In South Africa, currently, the educational discourse continues to play a

signicant role in the production of childrens literature. On a very practical

level, an emphasis on democracy and equality is reected in the principles

governing the treatment of the various South African languages in the school

environment. TheRevised National Curriculum Statement(Department of

Education, South Africa 2002:20) makes it clear that childrens home lan-guages should be used for learning and teaching as far as possible, especially

in the Foundation Phase (Grade R-3). The Languages Learning Area Statement

includes all ofcial languages as home languages, rst additional languages,

and second additional languages, so as to facilitate the additive or incremental

approach to multilingualism espoused by the Department of Education.5This

obviously has implications for the use of childrens literature in the formal

educational context: childrens literature, like other learning material (at least

in the lower grades), has to be available in all eleven ofcial languages. In

the more informal reading environment, too, there is an increasing emphasison the importance of providing children with leisure reading in their mother

tongue. One of the means that publishers have used to overcome the logisti-

cal difculties inherent in this situation is translation, in the context of both

literary and other texts.

In Kruger (2009a, 2010), I investigated the relationship between original

production and translation of childrens books in the context of the different

languages in South Africa, with particular attention to the role of educational

discourse.6An analysis of publishing statistics and publisher surveys, focus-

ing on production language and the (inferred) use of translation, suggests thattranslation plays very different roles in the production of childrens books

in Afrikaans, English and the African languages.7In the case of Afrikaans,

5However, in reality, and for various reasons, this multilingual policy is not reected in

the actual teaching situation in schools, where English is most frequently used as medium

of instruction, especially after Grade 3. See Kruger (2009a, 2010) for a more detailed

discussion of this situation, and its results and implications.6The brief summary of ndings presented in the remainder of this section should be read

against the sociolinguistic background in Footnote 3.7Grouping the nine indigenous languages together under African languages is not

intended to homogenize these languages under one superordinate term. The grouping is

done to highlight the differences between the various book markets in the country as they

currently exist (see also Galloway et al2007, 2009 for more details on the book-publishing

industry in South Africa).

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



8/34


the translation of childrens literature is used as a way of supplementing

signicant and well-established original production of childrens literature

in Afrikaans, independent of the requirements for books in childrens mother

tongue generated by the educational discourse in South Africa. In the caseof African languages, by contrast, translation plays a constitutive role, in the

sense that the vast majority of books in the African languages in the age group

0 to 12 years are translations, mostly from English originals. Furthermore,

the educational discourse that species that reading material for children in

the Foundation Phase (Grade R-3) should be available in their mother tongue

drives translation in the African languages, with the overwhelming majority

of translations being done for school reading material, rather than leisure read-

ing material. This suggests that the translation, as much as the publication, of

African-language childrens books in South Africa is driven by educationaland related economic incentives. Outside of the educational context, the

market for childrens books in the African languages is small. However, the

publication of leisure books for children in the African languages appears to

be on the increase, considering the number of recent childrens leisure books

(particularly picture books) published in all, or many, of the South African

languages.8At the moment, this growth appears to be facilitated largely by

translation into the African languages, rather than original production. Trans-

lation therefore plays a double-edged role as far as the African languages are

concerned. While it is used to make sorely needed childrens literature in theAfrican languages available, it simultaneously makes unnecessary (or even

suppresses) original production in the African languages.

The high status of English in South Africa is reected in the strong English

market for childrens books, which is dominated by original works in Eng-

lish. This market is also not as strongly driven by educational concerns as the

African-language childrens book market: there are many English childrens

books available other than those intended for the educational market.

All of the above suggest the continued privileged positions of the Afri-

kaans and English markets for childrens books. These markets are not only

markedly bigger, they are also more diversied in terms of the types of books

available, not as overwhelmingly driven by educational incentives, and much

8See, for example, the translated versions ofMadiba Magic(Mandela 2002), Ouma Rubys

Secret(Van Wyk 2006),Alba(De Boel 2006), The Day Gogo Went to Vote(Sisulu 1997),

Little Lucky Lolo and the Cola Cup Competition(Varkel 2006), The Singing Chameleon

(Mhlope 2008), The Best Meal Ever (Magona 2006), Lulamas Long Way Home (Van

Heerden 2007),Lila and the Secret of Rain(Conway 2008), The Cool Nguni(Bester 2007),

and Niki DalysJamelabooks (e.g. Daly 2001, 2005, 2007), among others. These booksare available in Afrikaans and all or some of the African languages. There are also some

multilingual books available, such as uTshepo Mde: Tall Enough(Jadezweni 2006) and

uTristan no Thobe Baya Esikolweni / Tristan and Thobe Go to School(Jones 1995), both

of which are presented in a bilingual isiXhosa and English format and are also available

in other language combinations.

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



9/34

Haidee Kruger 111

better balanced in terms of the relationship between translation and original

production. Where translation is undertaken, the predominant source language

is English.9

2. Polysystem theory, norms and the translation of childrens

literature in South Africa

Polysystem theory is part of the descriptive strain in translation studies, and

wishes to delve into translation as a cultural and historical phenomenon, to

explore its context and its conditioning factors, to search for grounds that can

explain why there is what there is (Hermans 1999:5). The key concept in

polysystem theory is that of the polysystem, which is dened by Even-Zohar

(2005:40) as a heterogeneous, open structure ... a multiple system, a systemof various systems which intersect with each other and partly overlap, using

concurrently different options, yet functioning as one structured whole, whose

members are interdependent. The concept of the polysystem therefore com-

bines a structuralist and functionalist approach with an emphasis on culture,

which is seen as a dynamic, compound, diversied entity characterized by

change both synchronically and diachronically (Codde 2003:93). It should be

emphasized, however, that the concept of the polysystem (or the system) is

just that: a concept. In other words, polysystem theory does not view systems

as realities or facts, but rather constructs them as heuristic tools that may beuseful in understanding a particular aspect of the world (Hermans 1999:103).

As a heuristic, the concept of the polysystem offers a useful starting point for

understanding the role of translation in the production of childrens literature

in South Africa an understanding that involves the broader cultural and

historical context.

In the conceptualization of the literary polysystem, which consists of vari-

ous literary systems, there is a continuous dynamic of change and struggle for

the central position in the literary canon (Munday 2008:108). As Even-Zohar

(2005:42) explains it,

These systems are not equal, but hierarchized within the polysystem. It

is the permanent tension between the various strata which constitutes

the (dynamic)synchronic state of the system. It is the prevalence of

one set of systemic options over another which constitutes the change

on the diachronic axis. In this centrifugal vs. centripetal motion,

systemic options may be driven from a central position to a marginal

one while others may be pushed into the center and prevail. However,

with a polysystem one must not think in terms of one center and one

periphery, since several such positions are hypothesized.

9For more detailed discussions of these ndings and the data analysis used to arrive at

them, see Kruger (2009a, 2010).

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



10/34


The system of childrens literature is generally regarded as occupying a

peripheral or marginal position in the polysystem (Shavit 1986, Ben-Ari 1992,

Pascua-Febles 2006), with the possible exception of some of the classics

of childrens literature (Shavit 1981). The position of translated literature,however, is more ambiguous. In his discussion of translated literature, Even-

Zohar (1978:22) explains that whether translated literature becomes central

or peripheral in a given polysystem is a result of the particular circumstances

operating in the polysystem. He delineates three instances in which translated

literature may occupy the central position: when a literature is young and

still in the process of being established (ibid.:23, Munday 2008:109), when

a literature is peripheral or weak, as may happen when a smaller nation (or

cultural group) is dominated by the culture of a larger one (Munday 2008:109),

and when there are turning points, crises, or literary vacuums in a literature(Even-Zohar 1978:23). In other words, as Codde (2003:106) puts it, systems

in crisis, characterized by some kind of social or cultural anemia, are especially

susceptible to change: to a reordering of the systems internal structure.

In situations where translated literature occupies a dominant position, it

plays an active role in modelling the centre of the polysystem. This means

that translation is an innovatory force, taking part in major events in literary

history. However, in situations where translated literature occupies a second-

ary or peripheral position, it has no inuence on literary processes at the

centre, and is based on conventional norms in the target culture. In this case,translated literature becomes essentially conservative (Even-Zohar 1978:24).

These possible positions obviously have far-reaching and complex potential

effects on translation practice.

Even-Zohar (1978:25) regards the default or normal position of trans-

lated literature as peripheral or secondary. Given the generally accepted

peripheral position of childrens literature, it could therefore be argued, as

Ben-Ari (1992:222) suggests, that translated childrens literature is a kind

of doubly marginalized or peripheralized literary system. However, Even-

Zohar (1978:24) himself suggests that matters may not always be this simpleor straightforward: The hypothesis that translated literature may be either a

primary or secondary system does not imply that it is always wholly the one

or the other. As a system, translated literature is itself stratied.

This idea of stratication within systems provides a useful point of depar-

ture for considering the South African situation regarding translated childrens

literature. The various language groups in South Africa, and the fact that trans-

lation is done from locally produced as well as imported source texts (Kruger

2009b), immediately complicate any simple or straightforward positioning of

translated childrens literature in the South African literary polysystem. Giventhis complexity, there may be a number of ways of conceiving of the South

African literary polysystem. Whichever conception is selected, it needs to

reect the importance of the multilingual situation in South Africa. In terms

of the system of translated literature, such a conception also needs to take

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



11/34

Haidee Kruger 113

account of the clear differences that exist between translation into Afrikaans

and translation into the African languages.

One way of conceptualizing the South African literary polysystem would

be to dene the literatures of the 11 ofcial languages as systems that coexistin a hierarchical formation, vying for dominance. It seems self-evident that

the English literary system occupies the dominant position, followed by Af-

rikaans, with the literatures of the other languages arranged in a hierarchical

relationship. Within each of these linguistically dened systems, there would

be subsystems dened on the basis of genre and audience (for example, popular

ction, serious ction, poetry, biography, childrens literature). Within each

of these, translated literature may form a sub-subsystem, occupying a more or

less dominant position in the subsystem and system depending on the dynam-

ics of the particular language. In addition, it is also necessary to distinguisha kind of macro-polysystem, which would include the globalized system of

literature, of which the South African polysystem is just one component, and

from whence source texts for translation are often drawn.10

The ndings reported in Kruger (2009a, 2010) and summarized in the

previous section suggest that translated childrens literature assumes a radi-

cally different position in the Afrikaans and African-languages literary systems

(since translation does not play a signicant role in the production of English

childrens literature in South Africa, it is not discussed here). In the case of

Afrikaans, translated childrens literature occupies a peripheral position in the

subsystem of childrens literature and is supplementary to original Afrikaans

literature for children. In the case of the African languages, however, trans-

lated childrens literature occupies a central and constitutive position in the

subsystem of childrens literature. The literary system of the African languages

as a whole, and the subsystem of childrens literature specically, do conform

to the three conditions under which translation may occupy a central position

in a literary polysystem, as outlined by Even-Zohar (1978:23-24). First, the

system of written African-language literature is comparatively young, and writ-

ten childrens literature especially is still in the process of being established.

Translation is used as a way of making texts available to a growing readership

a readership that is, in this instance, largely created by the requirements of

the guiding educational discourse that species that educational books for

young learners should be available in their mother tongue. Second, African-

language literature in South Africa still occupies a peripheral or weak position

in the South African literary polysystem, as evident from the analysis of the

publishing situation in South Africa presented in Kruger (2009a). Within this

system, childrens literature occupies an even more peripheral position hence,

in the logic of the polysystem, the dominance of translation. Finally, it may

well be that the subsystem of childrens literature in the African languages

10Codde (2003:112) calls the same concept a mega-polysystem. He also outlines the

innite regression implied by this kind of structure (ibid.). For the purposes of the argument

here, however, the levels are limited and circumscribed as discussed.

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



12/34


does nd itself at the kind of turning point, crisis or vacuum that Even-Zohar

(1978:23) describes as the third condition for the dominance of translation

in a literary polysystem. The requirements of the educational discourse have

precipitated a kind of crisis in terms of the availability of reading materialsin the African languages, and publishers have seized on translation as a way

of dealing with this crisis in an economically viable way.11At this point, a

signicant relationship may be postulated between polysystemic position

and the various norms that play a role in all aspects of translation, from text

selection to operational norms (ibid.:22).

2.1 Tourys translation norms

In developing descriptive translation studies as a systematic approach to the

study of translation, one of Tourys key interests is to investigate the process of

translation by means of a combination of contextual and textual analysis. Mun-

day (2008:111) explains that the ultimate aim of Tourys (1995) approach is

to distinguish trends of translation behaviour, to make generalizations

regarding the decision-making processes of the translator and then to

reconstruct the norms that have been in operation in the translation

and make hypotheses that can be tested by future descriptive studies.

Here, a kind of reverse engineering process is followed (Hermans 1999:23),whereby the artefact (usually translations themselves, but also statements about

translation by, for example, translators, as is the case in this study) is analyzed

on the assumption that evidence of the ways in which problems have been

solved during translation reects the decision-making process involved in

translation and the norms operative in translation. Toury (1995:65) is doubtful

of the validity of explicit statements about norms made by translators, publish-

ers, reviewers and others involved in the translation process, since they may

be incomplete or biased. However, this paper assumes that such bias in itself

provides telling insights into the perceived roles and functions of translationin a particular socio-cultural environment.

Before discussing Tourys (1995) application of the concept of norms

to translation specically, some clarication is necessary of the concept as it

is used here and its relation to the broad systemic approach followed in this

paper. First, Tourys use of the term is not prescriptive; descriptive theorists,

including Toury, are not interested in validating or expounding particular

prescriptions and proscriptions for translation, but in describingthese norms

as they emerge from analysis. Toury (ibid.:54-55) thus denes norms as the

translation of general values or ideas shared by a community as to what

11In this regard it is telling that Even-Zohar (1990:27) identies these kinds of turning

points and crises (if they can be managed by the system) as evidence of a vital rather than

deteriorating system.

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



13/34

Haidee Kruger 115

is right or wrong, adequate or inadequate into performance instructions

appropriate for and applicable to particular situations. Second, Tourys use

of terms like determines and governs (see, for example, Toury 1995:13)

sometimes suggests a rather deterministic, and even behaviourist view ofhow position in the polysystem relates to the translation process, translators

decision-making, and the norms involved in translation. Hermans (1999:75)

points out this difculty inTourys earlier work:

His initial approach was behaviourist: when we observe regularities in a

translators conduct, we may go on to inquire how to account for them.

If we disregard regularities attributable to structural differences between

the languages involved and focus on non-obligatory choices, we can look

for external, socio-cultural constraints to explain the recurrent prefer-

ences which translators show. These constraints Toury calls norms.

As Hermans (ibid.:79-80) further points out, one problem for norm theory is

how to set the regulatory aspect of norms against the translators intentional-

ity, and thus to balance constraint with agency. After all, translators do not just

mechanically respond to nods and winks, they also act with intent. Against

this background, it should therefore be noted that while the largely prescrip-

tive and conventionalized nature of norms is acknowledged in this paper, the

relationship between systemic position, norms and translators decision-

making is not understood in a deterministic and behaviourist way (even whenthe terminology imported from Toury suggests so). Rather, a more integrative

and probabilistic understanding of the relationship between various context-

ual aspects, norms and the translators decision-making process informs the

discussion, as will become evident in the sections that follow. Norms, in this

understanding, are more like conditioning factors, one type among a number

of probabilities, and less like irrevocable determinants.

Toury (1995:56-61) distinguishes three broad categories of norms (see also

Hermans 1999:75-76): the basic initial norm, preliminary norms and opera-

tional norms. This paper focuses on translators opinions regarding the basicinitial norm, and to some extent preliminary norms. For the purposes of this

study, these two types of norms may be briey dened as follows.

The basic initial normrefers to the translators basic choice between

an orientation towards the norms of the source text, impacting the trans-

lations adequacy, or the norms of the target culture, determining the

translations acceptability (Toury 1995:56). Toury (ibid.:56-57) seems to

suggest that the two orientations are not mutually exclusive, but rather

coexist in particular formations. His concepts of adequacy and accept-ability are closely aligned to the tensions between foreignization (as

an essentially source-text oriented approach) and domestication (as an

essentially target-text oriented approach). Parallels with Even-Zohars

(1978:22) innovation and conservatism may also be drawn. This

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



14/34


binary alignment of basic orientations to translation is addressed in

more detail and questioned later in this paper.12

Preliminary norms cover two areas. The rst is translation policy,

which Toury (1995:58) takes to refer to the factors that inuence how

and which texts are selected for translation. The second raises a number

of questions surrounding the directness of the translation, and also (by

extension) the visibility of translation.

A survey conducted among translators of childrens literature in South

Africa and reported below yields potentially signicant ndings in terms of

the norms governing translation, particularly regarding differences between

translation into Afrikaans and translation into the African languages. These dif-

ferences may be ascribed to the varying polysystemic positions that translation

assumes with respect to the different language groups, as outlined above.

3. A survey of translators of childrens literature

This study is informed by a survey of South African translators of childrens

literature conducted during the period December 2007 to January 2008. Part

of a larger study involving textual analyses as well as surveys among groups

of stakeholders, this particular survey was undertaken to gauge translators

perceptions of various aspects relating to the translation of childrens literature

in South Africa.

The selection of translators participating in the study was determined by

methods based on nonprobability sampling, and particularly a combination of

purposive and availability sampling (Schutt 2006:152-53, 155-56). In order

to target the population for the study, namely, translators who have translated

childrens literature, the secretary of the South African Translators Institute

(SATI) was contacted by e-mail. The aims of the research were explained,

using a subject information sheet, and the secretary was asked whether SATI

would be willing to distribute the questionnaire together with a covering let-

ter explaining the research to their e-mail list. Translators who had translated

childrens literature were invited to respond.

In addition, a number of prominent South African translators of childrens

literature were contacted individually by e-mail, and the aims of the study

explained before inviting them to participate in the research. Furthermore,

two established translation agencies dealing with all the South African lan-

guages were contacted by e-mail. The aims of the research were explained,

and the manager of the agency asked whether she or he would be willing

to send the questionnaire (together with a covering letter explaining the re-

search) to translators who have worked with childrens literature and invite

them to participate in the study. The questionnaire and covering letter were

12 See also Hermans (1999:76-77) for criticism of the adequacy vs acceptability

concepts.

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



15/34

Haidee Kruger 117

subsequently distributed by e-mail on the SATI mailing list, to translators of

childrens literature included in the databases of the two translation agencies,

and to individual translators of childrens literature. Consent to participate in

the study was implied by a respondents reply to the e-mail soliciting partici-pation. The cover letter accompanying the questionnaire assured respondents

of condentiality.

A total of 28 completed questionnaires were returned over the period 10

December 2007 to 28 January 2008. An analysis of answers to the demographic

part of the questionnaire demonstrated adequate variety in terms of language,13

experience and qualication, and the sample was therefore deemed sufciently

representative for the purposes of this study.

The questionnaire was designed to be open-ended and exible, using a

semi-structured design to facilitate the processing of data. It dealt primarilywith the following three categories of information:

demographic information about the translators experience, qualica-

tions, languages and the extent to which she or he is involved in the

translation of childrens literature;

specic information regarding the number of translations undertaken,

the language(s) in which they were undertaken, and respondents percep-

tions of changes in translation trends over time (e.g. typical language

combinations, typical kinds of childrens books translated, and numbers

of books translated);

matters relating to the translation process and perceptions regarding

translation: guidelines for translation, the issue of translation as opposed

13Respondents indicated the languages in which they usually undertake translation. The

largest percentage of respondents (60.7%) indicated English into Afrikaans translation,

followed by 50% of respondents indicating Afrikaans into English translation. A total of

32.1% of respondents indicated that they translate from English into an African language,

followed by 28.6% of respondents who indicated that they translate from a European lan-

guage into English. Since the emphasis of the study is mostly on the translation dynamicbetween English, Afrikaans and the African languages, these languages were regarded as

adequately represented in the sample. The ratio of Afrikaans/English and African-language

translators was 19 to 9. While there were notably fewer translators in the African languages

who participated in the survey, this was regarded as acceptable against the background

of the signicantly smaller share of the publishing industry devoted to publishing in the

African languages (Kruger 2009a). Also, sufcient diversity was evident in the particular

African languages represented, with seven of the nine African languages recognized as

ofcial languages in South Africa listed by the respondents: isiNdebele, isiXhosa, isiZulu,

Sesotho, Siswati, Tshivenda and Xitsonga. There was a sufcient geographical range in the

African languages represented, and the representation of widely spoken languages such asisiZulu and isiXhosa was balanced by the representation of less widely spoken languages

such as Tshivenda and Siswati. Furthermore, languages from the Nguni language group

were represented (isiNdebele, isiXhosa, isiZulu and Siswati), as well as a language from the

Sotho language group (Sesotho). The remaining two languages (Tshivenda and Xitsonga)

do not fall into either of the two main language groups.

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



16/34


to original writing in the production of childrens books, and the question

of source-text orientation as opposed to target-text orientation.

Responses to each question were coded and input on an Excel spreadsheet.

In instances where categories were not included in the questionnaire itself,

respondents answers were compared and analyzed, and categories of similar

data created and coded accordingly. The data were processed by means of

simple descriptive statistics, using frequency tables and graphs.

For the purposes of the argument here, the results of only three questions

will be reported: the question dealing with translation languages, the ques-

tion about the role of translation versus original production, and the question

dealing with source-text orientation as opposed to target-text orientation in

the translation of childrens literature.

3.1 Translation languages

Translators were asked to indicate the language combinations in which they

have translated childrens literature. The responses to this question are sum-

marized in Figure 1. This graph suggests a few trends that echo the ndings

presented in Kruger (2009a). Translators responses indicated that the most

common language combinations for the translation of childrens literature

are those with English as a source language: English into Afrikaans (50% of

respondents) and English into an African language (32.1% of respondents).14This reiterates the predominance of English as the main language from which

translation is undertaken, and indirectly suggests the dominance of English

as the language of original production of childrens literature in South Africa.

However, a considerable percentage of respondents (25%) also indicated

translation from Afrikaans into English as a combination in which they have

translated childrens literature, reecting the strong market for original Afri-

kaans books as well.

Signicantly, only 10.7% of respondents indicated that they have trans-

lated childrens literature from an African language into English, conrmingthe sustained hegemony of English as a language of original production, and

the African languages as languages that are translated into, but not from. As

far as translation exchange in South Africa is concerned, therefore, it appears

that the movement is predominantly from English into the other languages, a

14The ndings of a similar questionnaire directed at publishers (reported in Kruger 2009a)

suggests a higher incidence of translation from English into African languages (cited by 75%

of publisher respondents), with English-to-Afrikaans translation cited by 50% of publisher

respondents. The differences between the ndings of the questionnaire for publishers andthat for translators are accounted for by the particular demographic coverage of the sample

group of translators, which included signicantly more Afrikaans/English than African-

language translators. Also, as pointed out by some publishers (see Kruger 2009a), there

are relatively few African-language translators undertaking comparatively large volumes

of translation work from and into the African languages.

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



17/34

Haidee Kruger 119

dynamic which, if not managed carefully, may prove particularly disadvanta-

geous for the African languages in the long term by making original production

of childrens literature in these languages unnecessary.

3.2 Translation vs original production

Respondents were asked whether they thought that, given the unique linguistic

and cultural diversity (and difculties) of South Africa, translation was a good

way of making books available to South African children, or whether it would

be better to produce original books in the various languages. Responses to this

question, for the whole sample group, are summarized in Figure 2.

Figure 1. Language combinations in which respondents have translated

childrens literature

Figure 2. The role of translation versus original production in catering for

a diverse market

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



18/34


Overall, 53% of respondents expressed the opinion that translation was a

good way of catering for a diverse South African child readership. Only 14%

suggested that it would be better to write original texts in the various languages,

and 29% suggested that there needed to be a balance between translation andoriginal production. One translator, translating predominantly childrens and

youth books from English into Afrikaans, made the following comment:

There should be a healthy mix of translations and original books, with a

greater emphasis on original works, if at all possible. Translated works

serve as a window of other cultures and worlds and allow access to the

works of some of the best authors in the world. At least some of these

works should be available to readers as well as (budding) authors who

cannot read the original texts. However, local writers should still be

encouraged and developed by publishers.

Another English/Afrikaans translator pointed out that if there is a dearth

of original works in a language, a translation can ll the void at such a junc-

ture. However, it cannot and should not replace original work. Another

respondent made a similar comment: I do, however, think there should be a

healthy balance between local production and translation. A translated book

can never, in my opinion, convey exactly that same sense of familiarity that

an original text has.

A few respondents explicitly described the use of translation as a strategyto produce childrens books in societies where, for whatever reason, there are

not sufciently qualied or experienced authors to write these books in original

languages. The following comment exemplies such responses:

Translations are good, especially for those countries that are not in a

position to create their own books. Original books are good, but the

language could then be an issue, unless the right person to write the

book is found. So, until such a time as those countries are set up to

write their own, translating is denitely a good idea.

In order to gain a more nuanced understanding of responses to this question,

the sample was divided according to language, with translators working in the

African languages in one group, and translators working in English/Afrikaans

in the other. Figure 3 suggests signicant differences between the opinions

of the two groups.A higher percentage of Afrikaans/English respondents (57.9% of the

group) than African-language respondents (44.4% of the group) were in

favour of translation rather than original production. However, the mostmarked differences in opinion are evident in the next two categories. None

of the English/Afrikaans respondents suggested that original production is a

better way (than translation) of making childrens literature available to the

diverse South African reading constituency, whereas 44.4% of the African-

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



19/34

Haidee Kruger 121

Figure 3. Translation or original production: African-language vs Af-

rikaans/English respondents, expressed as a percentage of the total

respondents in each group15

15The different sizes of the two groups do, however, need to be taken into consideration

here, with 19 Afrikaans/English respondents and 9 African-language respondents. However,

the data here are expressed as a percentage of each group.

language respondents indicated that original production was a better option.

This suggests an awareness among African-language respondents of the po-tentially disempowering effects of translation, particularly given the fact that

very little original childrens literature is published in the African languages.

One respondent in favour of original production explained the perspective of

African-language translators as follows:

I believe it would be much better to write original books in the dif-

ferent languages, as it will elevate the status of the most marginalized

languages to be on par with those that are already developed. At the

same time, it will provide children with knowledge of key concepts

in their mother tongue that will be more useful in their school years

as they grow up.

Furthermore, while 36.8% of English/Afrikaans respondents indicated

that there should be a balance between translation and original production,

this option was selected by only 11.1% of African-languages respondents.

Overall, it appears that while translators working in the African languages

are positive about the role that translation may play in providing books for

children, there is also a strong feeling that original production possibly needs

to takepriority to ll the lack of original-language materials in the African

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



20/34


languages and to avoid a situation where the only African-language books for

children are translations from English. Afrikaans/English respondents appear

to conceive of translation as a process that supplements an already strong in-

dustry of original production of childrens literature in Afrikaans and English.Translation does not pose a threat to original production in these languages,

and from this (privileged) position, translation can be encouraged as a way

of enriching South African literatures, as many of the English and Afrikaans

respondents pointed out.

3.3 Domesticating vs foreignizing translation approaches

Respondents were asked to indicate which of two options they thought was

a better approach to the translation of childrens literature: a source-text ori-

entation (a broadly foreignizing approach) or a target-culture orientation (abroadly domesticating, localizing and adapting approach). The responses of

the entire sample arerepresented in Figure 4.

Figure 4. Preferences for source-text or target-text oriented approaches to

the translation of childrens literature

The tension between source-text orientation and target-text orientation is

particularly strongly felt in the translation of childrens literature (Klingberg

1986, Nikolajeva 1996, Oittinen 2000, OSullivan 2005). To a large extent, this

has to do with the asymmetrical power relationships involved in the production

of childrens literature the fact that adults (including translators) assess what

children are able to comprehend, including the degree of foreignness thatchildren may be able to cope with, and what is valuable in a childrens book

(e.g. identication of the child reader with the text, fostered by the familiar-

ity of its content, or the introduction of the child to places and cultures other

than her or his own). In this survey, 32% (the majority) of respondents were

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



21/34

Haidee Kruger 123

in favour of a source-text oriented approach, typically explaining that traces

of the source culture should denitely be retained to allow the child reader a

glimpse into a world (cultural milieu) differing from his own or pointing out

that the translator has an ethical obligation to keep as closely as possible tothe original text. One respondent explained his view as follows:

Adaptation is only necessary when something essential to under-

standing the book/plot needs to be claried. Children enjoy entering

a different world with a different culture and names, etc. Especially

when translating books that have been lmed, such as JK Rowling and

Roald Dahls work, I nd it confusing and quite ludicrous to change

proper names and try to localize the whole setting.

One respondent also cited the practical consideration of keeping costs downas a motivation for a source-text orientated approach, explaining that in this

case original artwork can mostly be used unaltered, whereas cultural adaptation

often necessitates changes to artwork, or new artwork altogether.

A total of 25% of respondents suggested that a target-culture oriented approach

was better, since children have difculty engaging with books that are too far

removed from their own experiences. One respondent cited research showing

that Afrikaans children prefer reading stories that take place in a familiar setting.

Another 25% of translators indicated that this decision depended on the individual

text, explaining that immersion in local culture or not is reliant on the natureof the book. A further 18% expressed the opinion that every text constitutes a

mixture of domesticating and foreignizing elements.Once again, when responses

to this question were split by group (an African-language group and an Afrikaans/

English group), notable differences emerged, as evident in Figure5.

Figure 5. Source-text or target-text orientation: African-language versus

Afrikaans/English respondents, expressed as a percentage of the total re-

spondents in each group

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



22/34


Preferences for source-text or target-culture oriented approaches are almost

inverse in the African-language and Afrikaans/English groups. Whereas 42.1%

of the English/Afrikaans respondents suggested that a source-text orientation

was more appropriate, only 11.1% of African-language respondents believedthis to be the case. A much higher percentage of African-language respondents

(55.6% of this group) suggested that a target-culture orientation was more

appropriate, with only 10.5% of English/Afrikaans respondents selecting this

option. This difference in preference is most likely related to the particular

functions that translation plays in the different languages. In the case of the

Afrikaans and English childrens book markets, translation plays a culturally

supplementary role of giving children access to other, diverse realms of ex-

perience, of facilitating, in the words of one respondent, confrontation with

cultures or people other than [them]selves. In the case of African-languagechildrens literature, translation is currently playing a culturally constitutive

role of providing, by and large, all the books there are. It is therefore to be

expected that cultural adaptation would be the norm for translations of chil-

drens literature into the African languages, as children rst and foremost need

books that relate to their own social and cultural experience before being

introduced to other social and cultural experiences. The educational factor also

enters into the equation. As one Sesotho translator pointed out, culture is also

a contributing factor to childrens learning and as a result it is important that in

translating childrens books, they be adapted to the target readers culture.Only a slightly larger percentage of African-language respondents (22.2%)

compared to Afrikaans/English respondents (15.8%) suggested that the opposi-

tion between target- and source-text oriented approaches was not necessary,

since each text constitutes a mixture of foreignizing and domesticating ele-

ments. However, a considerably greater percentage of the Afrikaans/English

respondents (31.6%), compared to African-language respondents (11.1%),

specied that decisions about source- or target-text orientation were dependent

on the text itself. It appears that for Afrikaans/English childrens book transla-

tors, who most likely proceed from the premise that translation is mostly away of supplementing the market of original books, decisions about source- or

target-text orientation are not constrained by the need to have books reect-

ing a familiar cultural environment, since these already exist. They therefore

seem to be aware of having the luxury of choice in this regard, whereas

African-language translators appear to experience the imperative of cultural

adaptation because of the absence of books in African languages that reect

the everyday environment of young African readers.

It is therefore possible to argue that the peripheral position of Afrikaans

(and English) translated childrens literature in the polysystem may have animpact on the basic initial norm in the sense that translators and publishers

are more likely to either advocate a source-text oriented approach to enrich

and diversify the corpus of Afrikaans (and English) childrens literature and

childrens reading experiences or advocate a highly individualized text-

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



23/34

Haidee Kruger 125

dependent decision about whether to align the translation with source-text

or target-culture norms. This contrasts sharply with the case of childrens

literature translated into the African languages, with African-language transla-

tors apparently more inclined to endorse a target-culture oriented approach ofadaptation and domestication. The fact that translated texts occupy a central

position in the subsystem of African-language childrens literature (with little

original production in the African languages) thus seems to inuence transla-

tors expression of the basic initial norm they subscribe to, compelling them

to favour a target-culture oriented approach to ensure that young readers have

access to reading material that reects their lived experience.

Despite the limitations of this survey,16 the ndings that have emerged

from it may be used to suggest a problematization of the model elaborated

by Even-Zohar (1978), who aligns the peripheral position of translation withconservatism and the central position with innovation. The problematic

aspects of this alignment become more apparent when Even-Zohars ideas

are correlated with Tourys proposed laws of translation.

4. Laws of translation

For Toury, what logically follows from the delineation of the norms that govern

translation (based on individual contextual and textual comparative analyses)

is the formulation of generalized laws of translation.17

Toury (1995:267-79)proposes two tentative laws:

The law of growing standardization:This law states that in translation,

textual relations obtaining in the original are often modied, sometimes

to the point of being totally ignored, in favour of [more] habitual op-

tions offered by a target repertoire (ibid.:268). Essentially, then, there

is a move towards target-culture options, a loss of source-text patterns,

and a selection of linguistic options that are more common in the target

language (Munday 2008:114), so that translations often manifest greater

levels of standardization and generalization than their source texts (Toury

1995:268).

The law of interference:According to this law, in translation, phenom-

ena pertaining to the make-up of the source text tend to be transferred to

the target text (ibid.:275). This law includes two dimensions: negative

16Of course, it has to be kept in mind that this assessment and interpretation of the situation

is based on a relatively small sample of respondents opinions. Also, translators opinions

may be rather different from their actual translation practice, and indeed, textual analyses

of a sample of translated Afrikaans and English childrens books published in South Africareveals a much more hybridized mix of domesticating and foreignizing strategies than

suggested by translators opinions (Kruger 2010).17Hermans (1999:92) is sceptical of the quest for laws along these lines. His criticism

is valid, but for the purpose of the argument here, Tourys (1995) line of argumentation

is worth pursuing.

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



24/34


transfer and positive transfer. The rst refers to deviations from habitual,

codied practices in the target system, while the second involves the

greater likelihood of selecting features which do exist and are used in

any case (ibid.).

Both these laws are conditional or probabilistic (Hermans 1999:92). Apart

from the individual or cognitive variables that inuence a translation (Toury

1995:270), the position of translation in the polysystem has a determining

effect on the strength of the law. In the case of the rst law, Toury (ibid.:271)

argues that the more peripheral the status of translation in the polysystem,

the more translation will accommodate itself to established models and

repertoires. The case of the second law is slightly more complex. Toury

(ibid.:275-76) stresses that the law of interference is the external result of a

general cognitive law. However, he also points out the conditioning role of

socio-cultural factors, particularly the relative prestige of cultures and lan-

guages as perceived by the target system, and the power relations that have a

bearing on the interaction between cultures and languages. Specically, Toury

(ibid.:278) argues that tolerance of interference and hence the endurance

of its manifestations tend to increase when translation is carried out from

a major or highly prestigious language/culture, especially if the target lan-

guage/culture is minor, or weak in any other sense.

In summary, then, Tourys laws appear to echo and elaborate the ideas ofEven-Zohar. Even though their terminology is different, both suggest that

socio-literary and socio-cultural factors inuence translators decision-making.

Even-Zohar (1978:25-26) argues that if translation occupies a central position

in the literary polysystem, translators do not feel the imperative to adhere to

target-culture models, and that this results in a translation that is adequate

(in Tourys sense). However, if translation occupies a peripheral position in

the literary polysystem, translators feel compelled to nd the best existing

domestic models for the translated text, thus creating a translation that ap-

proaches non-adequacy (Even-Zohar 1978:26), i.e., that is more acceptablethan adequate.

From the work of Toury and Even-Zohar, a kind of binary and conditional

matrix therefore emerges, even though both are careful to point out that the

two dimensions or positions are not mutually exclusive. A very simplied

model summarizing these tensions is presented in Figure 6.

However, as discussed above, responses to the survey among translators

of childrens literature in South Africa suggest an almost inverse model. In

the Afrikaans literary system, translation occupies a peripheral position in the

subsystem of childrens literature, yet the translators participating in the surveymostly advocated a source-text orientation (or a exible and individualized

text-dependent decision about source-text or target-culture orientation), with

a concomitant emphasis on adequacy and hence greater likelihood of the law

of interference operating in the resulting translations. In the African-languages

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



25/34

Haidee Kruger 127

literary system, translation occupies a central position in the subsystem of

childrens literature. Yet, contrary to Even-Zohar and Tourys probabilistic laws

or conditional predictions, the translators participating in the survey seemed

to advocate a target-culture orientation, with an emphasis on acceptability

and hence a stronger likelihood of the law of standardization exercising some

inuence. Even though the situation for translation into African languages

does conform to Tourys condition that translation is carried out from a more

prestigious to a less prestigious language, and into a literary system that is

weak, the translators participating in the survey did not seem to demonstrate

the greater tolerance for interference suggested by Tourys law.

Why might this be the case? Toury (2004:29) explains that the notion of a

law has the possibility of exceptionbuilt into it ... it should always be possible

to explain away (seeming) exceptions to a law with the help of anotherlaw,operating on anotherlevel. He also, crucially, explains that

There is no doubt a vast array of factors which have the capacity to

inuence the selection of a particular translational behavior or its

avoidance. Although we have no real list, it is clear that this array is

heterogeneousin its very nature: some of the variables are cognitive,

others cross-linguistic or socio-cultural, and there are no doubt more.

Due to this vastness and heterogeneity, there can be no deterministic

explanation in Translation Studies. First of all, there seems to be no

single factor which cannot be enhanced, mitigated, maybe even offsetby the presence of another. Secondly, the different variables are present

(and active) all at once rather than one by one, so that there are always

several factors interacting, and hence inuencing each other as well

as the selected behaviour. (ibid.:15).

Figure 6. Visual summary of Even-Zohar and Tourys ideas regarding

polysystemic position and translation orientation

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



26/34


The situation characterizing the translation of childrens literature in South

Africa is obviously more complicated than a simple, one-dimensionalif x then

yproposition could account for. There are many more variables than the ones

that have been considered so far, which mostly relate to position in the poly-system. It is beyond the scope of this article to consider all possible variables

that may affect the norms inuencing the decision-making process of South

African translators of childrens literature. For instance, cognitive and cross-

linguistic variables fall outside the scope of this paper, with its socio-cultural

emphasis. But even within the socio-cultural domain, there are likely to be

a vast number of variables. The following section explores one other socio-

cultural-linguistic variable that may be used to account for the exceptions to

Tourys laws of translation suggested by South African translators opinions

about the translation of childrens literature. I will also argue that this vari-able possibly has the potential of destabilizing the binary conceptualization

of translation that results from the essentially polysystemic approach outlined

above. This variable has to do with ideology, power differentials and socio-

political relationships among languages in the specically postcolonial context

of South Africa.18

5. Sociolinguistic imbalances, domestication and foreignization in

the postcolonial context of South Africa

Bassnett and Trivedi (1999:2) argue that translation is not an innocent,

transparent activity but is highly charged with signicance at every stage; it

rarely, if ever, involves a relationship of equality between texts, authors or

systems. The hierarchical organization of the literary systems associated with

the various languages in South Africa has already been discussed. This section

aims to cast the situation in specically postcolonial terms, by foreground-

ing more explicitly the postcolonial and neocolonial linguistic situation in

South Africa, and its consequences for the norms involved in the translation

of childrens literature.Tymoczko (1999b:293) points out that there is an evident relationship be-

tween polysystem theory and postcolonial approaches to translation, since the

latter extends the former by offering particular examples that highlight differ-

ences in the status and systemic positions of cultures and languages, differences

which have profound implications for translation on both the macro- and the

18 In the discussion that follows, particular aspects of the South African situation are

described in postcolonial terms. In this discussion, South Africa is thus regarded as a

particular instance of a postcolonial country, among other such countries with which it

may share certain commonalities but from which it may also differ in signicant ways.

The argument therefore is not based on the assumption that South Africa is prototypical of

postcolonial societies, but rather that South Africa represents one kind of postcolonialism

among many.

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



27/34

Haidee Kruger 129

micro-level. Niranjana (1992:2) has made the point that [t]ranslation as a prac-

tice shapes, and takes shape within, the asymmetrical relations of power that

operate under colonialism. In the postcolonial (and neocolonial) world, much

of these power relations continue to replicate themselves, so that translationoften remains a kind of cultural colonization (Bassnett and Trivedi 1999:5).

The case of international childrens literature illustrates this point. Garrett

(1996, quoted in Stan 1999:168) points out that in the USA, the concept of

international childrens literature is used ethnocentrically to refer to all

the childrens books in the world that are not ours. In this view, childrens

literature from other/Other places in the world is selected and translated on the

basis of providing American children with particular, ideologically acceptable

versions of or perspectives on cultural difference, perspectives that function

to keep the ideological status quo intact (Stan 1999:174-75).Of course matters are not as clear-cut as the above statements suggest.

Convenient dichotomies between self and other, colonizer and colon-

ized, centre and margin and, indeed, domestication and foreignization

are inevitably a simplication of actual situations. Viswanatha and Simon

(1999:162) comment that translations

enter into relations of transfer whose results are not entirely predict-

able. It is because they are products of the interaction between cultures

of unequal power, bearing the weight of shifting terms of exchange,that translations provide an especially revealing entry point into the

dynamics of cultural identity-formation in the colonial and post-

colonial context.

These cultures of unequal power cannot be conceptualized in terms of simple

dichotomies. Inequalities of power are not solely located on the national level,

but exist within countries, nations and communities. Increasingly, postcolo-

nial studies is taking cognizance of the fact that the other or the colonized

cannot be regarded as a homogenized and singular group of people (Tymocz-

ko 1999b:15). Rather, there needs to be an awareness of the multiplicity of

power differentials, on a local as well as a global scale. In this, the issue of

relationships of power between different languages (and, of course, cultures)

is crucial. As Bassnett and Trivedi (1999:13) explain,

the old business of translation as trafc between languages still goes

on in the once-and-still-colonized world, reecting more acutely than

ever before the asymmetrical power relationship between the various

local vernaculars (i.e. the languages of the slaves, etymologically

speaking) and the one master-language of our post-colonial world,English.

Various other translation scholars have also commented on these ten-

sions. Niranjana (1992:48) argues that translation studies has been by and

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



28/34


large unaware that the power differentials between languages involved in

translation need to be taken into consideration. These power imbalances most

obviously involve tensions between national and local languages and English,

but in multilingual countries like South Africa, there are additional complexand crucial interlinguistic dynamics (see also Viswanatha and Simon 1999,

Weissbrod 2008). Tymoczko (1999a:32) remarks on the tension between

the internationalization of literature and American cultural and economic

hegemony, and points out that conventional oppositional conceptions of

source and target languages and cultures, and the domestic and foreign, do

not always hold (ibid.:31):

Issues about intended audience are often deceptive; for example,

paradoxically translations are at times produced for the source cultureitself when, say, a colonial language has become the lingua franca of

a multicultural emergent nation or of a culture that has experienced a

linguistic transition of some sort. The most efcient way of addressing

such a nation after a colonial period may be through translation into the

colonizers language. A translation of this type, however, is produced

within an ideological climate that is quite different from a translation

oriented primarily at an international audience, and the translation

strategies are, accordingly, divergent.

This clearly problematizes a view of translation as negotiating tensions

between a simplied and homogenized foreign and an equally simplied

and homogenized domestic. It has signicant implications for the translation

strategies chosen, particularly when these are viewed within the paradigm of

domestication versus foreignization (or, indeed, other binary paradigms that

hinge on the familiar/strange opposition). Ultimately, as I will argue shortly,

the complexities of power relationships between languages and cultures in and

around the multilingual South African environment complicate the relationship

between the domestic and the foreign, and may inuence translators percep-tions of the domestication versus foreignization binary while simultaneously

problematizing the distinction between the two. The norms that operate in

translation, and the possible formulation of laws of translation that may result

from them, are thus inuenced by the uniquely postcolonial and neocolonial

power relationships between languages and cultures in South Africa.

In the rst instance, it seems likely that the opinions of the translator re-

spondents in the current survey about whether domestication or foreignization

is the best approach in translating childrens literature in South Africa (in other

words, their formulation of the initial norm at work) may be linked to theirideological beliefs, which (at least in part) spring from their subject positions

as participants in the postcolonial and neo-colonial South African culture.

Viewed from a postcolonial perspective, the African-language respondents

preference for cultural adaptation and domestication may be (broadly) read

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



29/34

Haidee Kruger 131

as informed by a spirit of abrogation (Ashcroft et al1989:38-77), or resist-

ance against the hegemony of powerful colonial and neocolonial languages

and cultures by means of a refusal of the categories of the imperial culture,

its aesthetic, its illusory standard (ibid.:38). Because of the lack of statusand power associated with the African languages, translators who translate

childrens literature into these languages may feel the need to assert the value

and importance of their culture and language by means of cultural adaptation

and domestication. Domestication, here, may become a strategy of resistance

against the dominance of colonial and neo-colonial language and culture.

The Afrikaans/English translators in the sample surveyed were much more

open to source-text oriented, foreignizing approaches, and also advocated

more exible, individual decisions about whether a translation should adhere

to source-text or to target-culture norms. At least in part this may be ascribedto the relatively strong and secure position of Afrikaans (and English) in the

South African publishing industry, and the fact that both Afrikaans and English

continue to full high-level, high-status functions in South African society. As

such, the Afrikaans/English translators seem to consider translation, broadly,

in the spirit of appropriation (Ashcroft et al1989:38-77), so that translation

is viewed as a way of broadening and enriching the reading experience of

children by introducing them to what is new and different while remaining

anchored in what is familiar.

Returning to Tourys ideas of conditional laws for translation, it wouldtherefore be possible, based on the above, to venture some generalizations. It

appears that South African (and especially African-language) translators views

on whether domestication or foreignization is the more appropriate approach to

the translation of childrens literature are signicantly inuenced by an awareness

of postcolonial and neocolonial tensions and difculties. These ideological fac-

tors may therefore have an impact on the system of probabilities that condition

Tourys laws, and the related ideas of Even-Zohar, effectively switching the

probability of adherence to source-text or target-culture norms around.

6. Conclusion

The argument set out in this paper is based on one, limited set of data: the

opinions of a sample of South African translators of childrens literature. While

such opinions are, of course, by their very nature incomplete and biased, they

provide insight into the ways in which ideology inuences perceptions of

translation in particular contexts. In the broader view, such practical test cases

also provide a means of assessing theoretical constructs in diverse contexts.

As I have argued, polysystem theory and concepts from descriptive transla-tion studies focused on norms and laws of translation offer useful points of

entry in accounting for the translation of childrens literature in South Africa.

However, the situation in South Africa may challenge some conventionally

held assumptions and theoretical ideas, highlighting the ways in which theories

Do

wnloadedby[88.1

5.1

96.19



30/34


developedin the Anglo-European context may benet from

Documents

Postcolonial Polysystems (2011)