Some features and content are currently unavailable today due to maintenance at our service provider. Status updates

Comptes rendusBook Reviews

B.J. Woodstein. Translation Theory for Literary Translators. London and New York, Anthem Press, 2024, 75 p.[Record]

  • Madeleine Stratford

…more information

  • Madeleine Stratford
    Université du Québec en Outaouais

Published in June 2024 by Anthem Press, Translation Theory for Literary Translators was written by B.J. Woodstein, “an honorary professor in literature and translation […] and a Swedish-to-English translator, writer, editor, EDI consultant, lactation consultant, and doula.” According to her profile page on the University of East Anglia website, Woodstein holds a B.A. and an M.F.A. in Creative Writing, a Ph.D. in Translation Studies, and an M.A. in Higher Education Practice. In this book, the author claims to “summarize a wide range of translation theories from across different time periods and parts of the world” and propose “ideas that a) stem from these theoretical concepts and that b) can be of practical use to translators”. According to the promotional flyer, it is aimed at “academics and students in translation studies, linguistics and related fields, practising translators and interested members of the general public.” After summarizing the book’s contents, we shall see whether it lives up to expectations with regard to its ambitious goals and intended readership. Acknowledgements and Bibliography aside, the book is divided into seven chapters of varied lengths, making up a total of 66 pages: 1. Introduction (8 pages); 2. Definitions (9 pages); 3. Betwixt (15 pages); 4. Identity (6 pages); 5. Power (9 pages); 6. Ethics (17 pages); 7. Conclusion (2 pages). Chapters 2 to 6 are all built on a similar pattern: presentation of a series of concepts or theories, discussion, and a closing section titled “From Theory to Practice” where the author prompts her readers to ask themselves a series of questions, encouraging them to become more self-aware of their own practice, ethics, and agency. Distancing herself from scholars such as Jean Boase-Beier (2010), Woodstein starts off by arguing that theory and practice are linked: “[T]ranslation theory impact[s] how people think about and carry out translation” and “the practice of translation should impact how people understand, write about and develop translation theory” (p. 4). Drawing from her teaching experience, she suggests theory should be integrated in practice-oriented translation courses (p. 5). She stresses that her book is not meant to be “a history of translation, a summary of translation theories and their development, or an anthology of translation theory” (p. 6). Instead, it presents her own “biased selection of theories” she thinks may be useful for practicing translators (p. 7). She hopes to “give something to think about” to “new or experienced translator[s] and/or translation studies scholars” (p. 8). The first part of the chapter focuses on translation as a concept. After discussing various definitions (pp. 9-10), the author presents contemporary views of translation from different parts of the world, including in India, the Arab world, Angola, Israel, and modern Greece (pp.10-13), to show that “scholars and translators cannot agree on what translation is” (p. 14). The following section summarizes the qualities translators are expected to possess: an expertise with regard to source author, languages and cultures, as well as a writing talent (p. 15). Woodstein believes that “theorists have begun to place potentially unreachable demands on translators” (p. 15). At the end of the chapter, she stresses the importance of self-awareness: “Although we cannot escape the influence” of context, “we have the right and even the responsibility to think of ourselves and to use our understanding of translation as a field to determine how we work” (p. 17). This chapter zeroes in on four fundamental concepts: fidelity, equivalence, distance, and visibility. First, Woodstein writes that complete fidelity is “generally impossible” (p. 20). She believes the expression “in allegiance” might better define the translator’s relationship to the text, “as wanting the best for” it and …

Padlock

Access to this article is restricted to subscribing institutions and individuals; only the abstract or an excerpt is displayed.

Please view our access options for more information.

Access options

Appendices

Appendices