Russian Journal of LinguisticsRussian Journal of LinguisticsRussian Journal of Linguistics2687-00882686-8024Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba (RUDN University)2325010.22363/2687-0088-2020-24-1-80-95ArticlesСтатьиArticlesResearch ArticleTranslation and Paratexts: A Study of Animal Farm in PersianПеревод и паратексты: на материале перевода повести-притчи Animal Farm на персидский языкAmirdabbaghianAminАмирдаббагхьянАмин

PhD, Researcher cum Translator (Persian/Turkic - English), Curatorial Affairs Department, Islamic Arts Museum Malaysia

научный сотрудник и переводчик (персидский / турецкий - английский) кураторского отдела Музея исламского искусства

amirdabbaghian@iamm.org.myShangeethaR. K.ШангитаР. К.

PhD, Senior Lecturer, English Language Department, Faculty of Languages and Linguistics

доктор, доцент кафедры английского языка факультета языков и лингвистики

shangeetha@um.edu.myIslamic Arts Museum MalaysiaМалазийский музей исламского искусстваUniversity of MalayaУниверситет Малайя15122020241VOL 24, NO1 (2020)ТОМ 24, №1 (2020)809524032020Copyright ©; 2020, Amirdabbaghian A., Shangeetha R.K.Copyright ©; 2020, Амирдаббагхьян А., Шангита Р.К.Copyright ©; 2020, Amirdabbaghian A., Shangeetha R.2020Amirdabbaghian A., Shangeetha R.K.Амирдаббагхьян А., Шангита Р.К.Amirdabbaghian A., Shangeetha R.https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0https://journals.rudn.ru/linguistics/article/view/23250

Translators’ ideology permeates all non-technical translations, and the need to study the extent to which ideology plays a vital role in the manipulation of literary texts with a political edge is undoubtedly important. As of Iran, the state ideology has been changed from secular to religious (Islamic) after the 1979 Islamic Revolution. This shift of ideology has influenced society in many facets, including language use. Therefore, individuals were encouraged to produce religious discourse to appear popular and this encouragement includes translation too (Amirdabbaghian 2019). This study aims to describe the ideological impact of the social situation (Islamic Revolution) in Iran on the translation of George Orwell’s well-known political novel, Animal Farm (1945) into the Persian language. The research will apply van Dijk’s (1998) theory of ideology and Lefevere’s (1992) theory of translation, rewriting and manipulation of literary fame, to discuss the paratextual differences in both the source and target texts. The target text which has been chosen for the current research is Hosseini and Nabi Zadeh’s (2003) version published by the Doostan publication in Tehran, Iran. Using the paratext of Animal Farm translated into Persian, this article makes an effort to prove that the translators’ ideology influenced by their life experience, social status, and occupation as well as the situation and environment in the target language country may be revealed in the set of tactics used in translating the literary work, in the use of language and in the interpretation of the source text author’s ideas expressed in the text.

Идеологические взгляды переводчика оказывают на все виды перевода, кроме технического. В связи с этим необходимо исследовать воздействие идеологии на манипуляции, которым подвергаются в процессе перевода литературные тексты с острой политической направленностью. После Исламской революции 1979 года иранская государственная идеология сменилась со светской на религиозную (исламскую), что оказало воздействие на разные стороны общественной жизни, включая использование языка. Применение религиозного дискурса стало средством повышения популярности индивидуума, что также сказалось на переводах. Цель настоящего исследования - описать идеологическое влияние социальной ситуации (Исламской революции) в Иране на перевод знаменитой повести-притчи Дж. Оруелла Animal Farm («Скотный двор») (1945) на персидский язык. Исследование опирается на теорию идеологии Т.А. ван Дейка (van Dijk 1998) и теорию перевода, переложения и манипуляции литературной славой А.А. Лефевра (Lefevere 1992). Оно направлено на обсуждение паратекстуальных различий в исходном тексте и переводе. В качестве материала настоящего исследования выступает перевод паратекста произведения Animal Farm (пер. Hosseini, Nabi Zadeh 2003), опубликованный издательством “Doostan” в Тегеране (Иран). В статье сделана попытка доказать, что идеологическая позиция переводчиков, сформированная под влиянием жизненного опыта, социального статуса и профессиональной деятельности, а также ситуация и окружение в стране, для которой предназначен перевод, может быть выявлена с помощью анализа тактик, используемых в процессе перевода литературного произведения, языка и интерпретации содержащихся в тексте идей автора.

paratexttranslationIdeologyPersianAnimal Farmпаратекстпереводидеологияперсидский языкAnimal Farm («Скотный двор»)Al-Mohannadi, S. 2008. Translation and ideology. Social Semiotics 18 (4). 529-542. doi: 10.1080/10350330802489050Amirdabbaghian, A. 2019. Ideological Perspectives in the Persian Translations of Animal Farm and Nineteen Eighty-Four. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: University of Malaya Ph.D. Thesis.Amirdabbaghian, A. & Shunmugam. K. 2019. The Translator’s Ideology: A Study of Three Persian Translations of George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four. Lebende Sprachen: Zeitschrift für interlinguale und interkulturelle Kommunikation 64 (1). 1-22. doi:10.1515/les-2019-0001Amirdabbaghian, A. & Solimany, S. 2013. The Application of Baker’s Taxonomy on Translation of Literary Texts A Case Study of George Orwell's Animal Farm. International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR) 2 (12). 280 - 284.Atefmehr, Z. 2016. Translator’s Paratextual Visibility: the case of Iranian Translators from 1906 until 1926. inTRAlinea 18. 7-14. Retrieved from http://www.intralinea.org/archive/article/2209Balockaite, R. 2014. On Ideology, Language, and Identity: Language Politics in the Soviet and Post-Soviet Lithuania. Language Policy 13. 41-61. doi: 10.1007/s10993-013-9301-zBassnett, S, & Lefevere, A. 1990. Translation, History and Culture. London and New York: Pinter.Davison, P. 2002. The Complete Works of George Orwell (Vol. 19). London, UK: Secker & Warburg.Dimitriu, R. 2009. Translators’ Prefaces as Documentary Sources for Translation Studies. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 17 (3). 193-206. doi: 10.1080/09076760903255304Faghih, E. & Moghiti. R. 2017. Persian Renderings of English Conceptual Discourse Patterns: A Case Study of Animal Farm. International Journal of Comparative Literature & Translation Studies 5 (3). 55 - 66. doi:10.7575/aiac.ijclts.v.5n.3p.55Fairclough, N. 1992. Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.Gellately, R. 2013. Stalin’s Curse: Battling for Communism in War and Cold War (Vol. 1st). Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.Genette, G. 1997. Paratexts: Thresholds of interpretation. (J. E. Lewin, Trans.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Gray, J. 2015. Afterword: studying media with and without paratexts. In L Geraghty (eds.), Popular Media Cultures, 230-237. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Harris, K. 2017. A Social Revolution: Politics and the Welfare State in Iran. Oakland: University of California Press.Haslina Haroon. 2017. The translator’s preface as a paratextual device in Malay-English literary translations. Translation & Interpreting: The International Journal for Translation & Interpreting Research 9 (2). 100-113. doi: 10.12807/ti.109202.2017.a07Hatim, B, & Mason, I. 1997. The Translator as Communicator. London & New York: Routledge.Hermans, T. 2014. Translation in Systems: Descriptive and System-oriented Approaches Explained. New York: Routledge.Hijjo, N F. & Kaur. S. 2017. The Paratextual Analysis of English Translations of Arabic Media Narratives on Daesh. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies 23 (3). 21 - 36. doi: 10.17576/3L-2017-2303-02Hosseinzadeh, M. 2015. Translatorial Prefaces: A Narrative Analysis Model. International Journal of English Language, Literature and Translation Studies 2 (3). 311-319.Irvine, J. 1989. When Talk isn’t Cheap: Language and Political Economy. American Ethnologist 16 (2). 248-267.Irvine, J. & Gal. S. 2000. Language Ideology and Linguistic Differentiation. In P V Kroskrity (eds.), Regimes of Language: Ideologies, Polities, and Identities, 35-83. Santa Fe: School of American Research.Islami, M. 2003. درباره ترجمه های 1984 [About 1984 Translations]. Haft. 12-13.Khorsand, M. & Salmani. B. 2014. Anthems as Propaganda: A Discoursal Translation Quality Assessment. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World (IJLLALW) 5 (3). 222-237.Koş, A. 2009. Analysis of the Paratexts of Simone De Beauvoir’s Works in Turkish. In A Pym & A Perekrestenko (eds.), Translation Research Projects 1, 59-68. Tarragona: Intercultural Studies Group.Kovala, U. 1996. Translations, Paratextual Mediation, and Ideological Closure. Target: International Journal of Translation Studies 8 (1). 119-147.Kung, S W. 2013. Paratext, an Alternative in Boundary Crossing: A Complementary Approach to Translation Analysis. In V Pellat (eds.), Text, Extratext, Metatext and Paratext in Translation, 49-67. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars.Lefevere, A. 1985. Why Waste Our Time on Rewrites? The trouble with interpretation and the role of rewriting in an alternative paradigm. In T Hermans (eds.), The Manipulation of Literature: Studies in Literary Translation, 215-243. New York: Routledge.Lefevere, A. 1992. Translation, Rewriting and the Manipulation of Literary Fame. London & New York: Routledge.Munday, J. 2008. Style and ideology in translation: Latin American writing in English. New York: Routledge.Neveu, A. 2017. How Paratexts Influence the Reader’s Experience of English Translations of La Fontaine’s Fables. New Voices in Translation Studies (16). 23-54.Núñez, G G. 2014. When a Translator Joins the Revolution: A Paratextual Analysis of Manuel García de Sena’s La Independencia. TTR: Traduction, Terminologie, Rédaction 27 (1). 189-211. doi:10.7202/1037123arOrwell, G. 1945. Animal Farm. London: Secker and Warburg.Orwell, G. 1947. Preface to translation of “Animal Farm: A Fairy Story”. In G Orwell, Kolghosp Tvaryn (I. Szewczenko [Shevchenko], Trans., p. APPENDIX II). Germany: Prometej.Orwell, G. 2003. Animal Farm. (S. Hosseini, & M. Nabi Zadeh, Trans.) Tehran: Doostan Publication.Panahi, M. 2003. جامعهشناسي شعارهاي انقلاب اسلامي ايران [Sociology of Islamic Republic of Iran Slogans]. Tehran: Anidishe Moaser.Pellatt, V. 2013. Packaging the Product: A Case Study of Verbal and Non-Verbal Paratext in Chinese-English Translation. JosTrans (20). 86-106.Pym, A. 1997. Method in Translation History. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Qasemi, F. 2016. جمهوری اسلامی ایران: از بازرگان تا روحانی [Islamic Republic of Iran: From Bazargan to Rouhani]. New York: HandS Media.Seyyedi, R. 2013. The Ideological Perspective towards Literary Translation: A Discourse Analysis of George Orwell’s 1984 (the novel) and Its Three English into Persian Translations. Quchan, Razavi Khorasan, Iran: Islamic Azad University Master Dissertation.Shuping, R. 2013. Translation as Rewriting. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science 3 (18). 55-59.Simón, E T. 2015. An evolution of Korean literary translation into English through its paratexts (1951-2000). Asia Pacific Translation and Intercultural Studies 224-234. doi:10.1080/23306343.2015.1100780Smith, H, & Wilson, L. 2011. Renaissance Paratexts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Tahir-Gürçağlar, Ş. 2002. What Texts Don’t Tell, the Uses of Paratexts in Translation Research. In T Hermans (eds.), Crosscultural Transgressions: Research Models in Translation Studies II - Historical and Ideological Issues, 44-60. Manchester: St. JeromeVan Dijk, T A. 1998. Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. New York: Sage.Williams, R. 1971. George Orwell. New York: Columbia University Press.Wolf, W. 2006. Introduction: Frames, Framings and Framing Borders in Literature and Other Media. In W Wolf & W Bernhart (eds.), Framing borders in literature and other media, 1-40. New York: Rodopi.Woolard, K A. & Schieffelin. B B. 1994. Language Ideology. Annual Review of Anthropology 23. 55-82.Yazdanimogaddam, M. & Fakher. M. 2011. Examining the Effect of Ideology and Idiosyncrasy on Lexical Choices in Translation Studies within the CDA Framework. Journal of English Studies 1 (3) 27-36.Zareh-Behtash, E. & Chalabi. K. 2016. Ideology in Translation: The Impact of Socio-political Factors on Lexical Equivalents in Two Persian Translations of Animal Farm. Translation Journal 19 (2).Shahid Chamran University, Ahvaz, Iran. n.d. دکتر صالح حسینی [Dr. Saleh Hosseini]. http://portal.scu.ac.ir/HomePage.aspx?TabID=4889&Site=Lite.scu.ac&Lang=fa-IR (accessed 06 February 2018).