TY - JOUR
T1 - Translation and power
T2 - A Hong Kong case study
AU - Cheung, Martha P.Y.
N1 - Funding Information:
This is the revised and expanded version of a paper first presented at the '4th Language International Conference on Teaching and Interpreting: Building Bridges', held at Shanghai in December 1998. I am grateful to the Hong Kong Baptist University for providing me with a Faculty Research Grant (FRG/97-98/II-49) to conduct research on this topic. 1. Such an emphasis characterizes the general orientation of the contributors to two recent volumes of essays that together provide a rich diversity of perspectives on the issue of translation and power. See Alvarez and Vidal 1996, and Bassnett and Trivedi 1999. 2. Yet another aspect of the relation between translation and power can be studied by looking at translators as image-makers. For translators have the power to create, or invent, or construct, or project an image of a particular culture through the selection of works of that culture for translation. This falls beyond the scope of this article. 3. Inspiration for this heading is drawn from the chapter 'Translators and the Reins of Power' in Translators throughHistory. The book has also provided me with a number of ideas with which to structure and organize the material for this article. 4. John Morrison was already serving as interpreter and translator for the British government during the Opium War. As soon as Hong Kong became a British colony, he was made the Chinese Secretary of the first Governor of Hong Kong, Henry Porringer. The post allowed him direct access to the governor. For biographical information on Morrison, see Endacott 1962: 113. 5. Gützlaff held this post until his death in 1851. For a short account of Gützlaff's life, and information on his major works, see Wylie 1967: 54-66. 6. James Legge spent almost thirty years in Hong Kong (1843-1873). For a short account of his life, see Endacott 1962: 135-140. 7. For an illuminating discussion of Legge's education philosophy, see Pfister 1988: 251-254, and Pfister 1993: 192-198. 8. The Chinese title of this textbook, first published by the London Missionary Society Press in 1856, was . It gained great popularity and in 1859 was adopted as a standard textbook in the government schools. Later, it was even translated into Japanese for use in Japanese schools. My authority for this piece of information is Wong 1996:61. 9. Central College was renamed Queen's College in 1894 and is still one of the most prestigious schools in Hong Kong today. 10. Eitel spent some twenty-seven years in Hong Kong (1870-1897). For an account of Eitel's life, and information on his major publications, including his translations and his pioneering and authoritative work on Hong Kong history, Europe in China (later severely attacked for its Eurocentric views of history), see Endacott 1957. 11. What Eitel did to establish such a trend was discussed in Ng 1984: 54-63. 12. For a more thorough discussion of how these four Protestant missionary-translators rose to power through their work of translation, the various positions they held within the Hong Kong government, the committees they sat on, details of the policies they made and implemented, why some of the policies, not necessarily the best for Hong Kong, could last while some others, well-intentioned and truly enlightened, only had a brief lifespan, see Cheung (Forthcoming). 13. Gützlaff played a very important role in the early history of the translation of the Bible into Chinese. When it was decided that Robert Morrison's 1823 Chinese Bible
PY - 1998
Y1 - 1998
N2 - Developments in post‐structuralist theories and post‐colonial theories have led to an exploration of the issue of translation and power in Translation Studies in the last few decades. The mimetic approach towards translation, which sees translation as a mere copy of, and therefore subservient to, the original, has gone out of critical favour. Researchers are focusing their attention on the power relationships within textual practice that can be delineated in works of translation and on how these power relationships reflect power structures embedded in the wider cultural context. This article aims to examine the issue of translation and power from a sociological perspective by taking translation as an activity and analyzing how such an activity, carried out in a particular historical context, allowed the translators to gain access to power. The focus is on the Protestant missionary‐translators based in Hong Kong from 1842 until the end of the nineteenth century.
AB - Developments in post‐structuralist theories and post‐colonial theories have led to an exploration of the issue of translation and power in Translation Studies in the last few decades. The mimetic approach towards translation, which sees translation as a mere copy of, and therefore subservient to, the original, has gone out of critical favour. Researchers are focusing their attention on the power relationships within textual practice that can be delineated in works of translation and on how these power relationships reflect power structures embedded in the wider cultural context. This article aims to examine the issue of translation and power from a sociological perspective by taking translation as an activity and analyzing how such an activity, carried out in a particular historical context, allowed the translators to gain access to power. The focus is on the Protestant missionary‐translators based in Hong Kong from 1842 until the end of the nineteenth century.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85008794285&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/0907676X.1998.9961340
DO - 10.1080/0907676X.1998.9961340
M3 - Journal article
AN - SCOPUS:85008794285
SN - 0907-676X
VL - 6
SP - 259
EP - 274
JO - Perspectives: Studies in Translation Theory and Practice
JF - Perspectives: Studies in Translation Theory and Practice
IS - 2
ER -