Calls for papers

Since the emergence of complexity thinking, scholars from the natural and social sciences as well as the humanities are renewing efforts to construct a unified framework that would unite all scholarly activity. The work of Terrence Deacon (2013), at the interface of (at least) physics, chemistry, biology, neurology, cognitive science, semiotics, anthropology and philosophy, is a great, though not the only, example of this kind of work. It is becoming clear that this paradigm of complex relational and process thinking means, among others, that the relationships between fields of study are more important than the differences between them. Deacon’s contribution, for instance, lies not (only) in original findings in any of the fields in which he works but (also) in the ways in which he relates bodies of knowledge to one another. An example would be his links between a theory of work (physics) and a theory of information (cybernetics) by means of a theory of meaning (semiotics). This line of thinking indeed situates semiotics and biosemiotics in the centre of the abovementioned debate (also see Hoffmeyer, 2008; Kauffman, 2012). In semiotics, Susan Petrilli’s (2003) thought-provoking collection covers a wide variety of chapters focused on translation, which she conceptualizes as semiotic process. Her work made it possible to link biosemiotics and semiotics through the notion of “translation”, which is what we aim to explore further in this conference. Michael Cronin’s work in translation studies links up with the above through his use of the notion of “ecology”. To apprehend interconnectedness and vulnerability in the age of the Anthropocene, his work challenges text-oriented and linear approaches while engaging in eco-translational thinking. He calls tradosphere all translation systems on the planet, all the ways in which information circulates between living and non-living organisms and is translated into a language or a code that can be processed or understood by the receiving entity (Cronin, 2017, p. 71).  The aptness of Cronin’s work on ecology finds a partner in that of Bruno Latour, whose development of a sociology of translation (2005) responds to the need to reconnect the social and natural worlds and to account for the multiple connections that make what he calls the ‘social’. In an effort further to work out the implications of this new way of thinking, Marais (2019, p. 120) conceptualized translation in terms of “negentropic semiotic work performed by the application of constraints on the semiotic process” (see also Kress 2013). Building on Peirce, namely that the meaning of a sign is its translation into another sign, translation is defined as a process that entails semiotic work done by constraining semiotic possibilities. This conceptualization allows for the study of all forms of meaning-making, i.e. translation, under a single conceptual framework, but it also allows for a unified ecological view for both the sciences and the humanities. “The long standing distinction between the human and social sciences and the natural and physical sciences is no longer tenable in a world where we cannot remain indifferent to the more than human” (Cronin, 2017, p. 3). These kind of approaches open ample possibilities for a dialogue between Translation Studies, Semiotics and Biosemiotics, exploring translation not only in linguistic and anthropocentric terms, but as a semiotic process that can take place in and between all (living) organisms – human and non-human organic and inorganic, material and immaterial alike. Not only the translation of Hamlet into French, or of oral speech into subtitles, but also communication between dolphins or between a dog and its master, or moving a statue from one place to another, or rewatching a film are translation processes. However, many of the implications of this line of thinking still need to be explored, and if the references to Deacon, Petrilli and Cronin holds, this should be done in an interdisciplinary way that tests, transgresses and transforms scholarly boundaries. It is for this reason that we call for papers for a conference in which we hope to draw together biosemioticians, semioticians and translation studies scholars to discuss the interdisciplinary relations between these fields and the implications of these relations for the study of social and cultural reality as emerging from both matter and mind. We invite colleagues to submit either theoretical or data-driven or mixed proposals, reflecting on the complexity of social-cultural emergence as a translation process. Some of the topics that colleagues could consider would be the following: Is translation, as semiotic work and process, indeed able to link all of the biological world, including humans, with the non-living world in one ecology, and if so how? What conceptual constructs in each of the three fields are relevant for the other fields, and how? Could the fields learn methodological and epistemological lessons from one another? If so, what would these entail? Could collaborative scholarship enhance an understanding of social-cultural emergence, and if so, what would this scholarship entail? How, if at all, does entropy and negentropy play out differently in social-cultural systems compared to biological and/or physical systems? How does social-cultural emergence differ from biological and even physical emergence? Systems thinking tends to ignore differences like the intentionality of biological agents in contrast to physical agents. Thus, if one were to consider the possibility that intention has causal effect, how does one factor intention into thinking about complex adaptive systems? We plan an interactive conference. Firstly, we invited three keynote speakers, one from each of the fields involved, to give their views on the relationships between these three fields. Secondly, apart from the normal responses to papers, we would like to end each day of the conference with a session (about one hour) in which the keynote speakers reflect, round-table style, on the papers of the day and in which participants have the opportunity to engage them and one another in open debate style. Confirmed keynote speakers: Biosemiotics – Terrence Deacon (University of California, Berkeley) Semiotics – Frederik Stjernfelt (Aalborg University, Copenhagen) Translation studies – Michael Cronin (Trinity College Dublin) Deadline for submissions: 1 December 2020 For more information, click here

Ewha Research Institute of Translation Studies (ERITS, erits.ewha.ac.kr) and Korea Legislation Research Institute (KLRI, klri.re.kr) are co-hosting 2020 ERITS-KLRI International Conference on Law and Language. The conference will take place at Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Republic of Korea on November 20, 2020. Under the theme of legal translation and interpreting as an interface between law and language, various issues relating to law and language, and legal translation and interpreting will be explored from research, professional practice and training perspectives. The conference will enable the participants from home and abroad to hold in-depth discussions on the role of translation and interpreting in legal settings. Deadline for submissions: 10 July For more information, click here

Deadline for abstracts: 30 August 2020 For more information, click here

The envisaged book will describe, reflect on and evaluate the role of translation and interpreting (henceforth “T&I”) in crisis settings, including but not limited to pandemics, health emergencies, severe weather events, earthquakes, terrorist attacks, mass accidents etc. Empirical and theoretical contributions will be considered. We particularly want to encourage reflections on practice, implementation and recommendations for future action that would allow for more effective multilingual communication in the case of future crises across all stages - mitigation, preparation, response and recovery. In addition to standard contributions from the academic community, shorter chapters from those operating in key international crisis response organisations will also be considered. Chapters written jointly by academic and response representatives are also encouraged. Deadline for submission of abstracts: 13 July 2020 For more information, click here

“Translations do not take place in a vacuum” (Blakesley 2018). They cannot be seen as isolated textual entities, detached from the field in which they are produced and that provides for their signification (Sapiro 2008). It is indeed important to investigate translated literature as “part and parcel of the target literature’s literary corpus” (Sisto 2019), by conceiving translations as the actual selections (position-takings) by literary producers and mediators among all the possibilities (positions) in a target literary field (Bourdieu 1996). Although the notion of translated literature dates back to Even-Zohar’s seminal work, this approach has only recently been adopted by scholars working on the Italian literary field (Billiani 2007; La Penna 2008; Milani 2017; Baldini et al. 2018) and the translation of Italian literature within specific target fields (Bokobza 2008; Schwartz 2018). The aim of the conference is to foster critical discussion on translated literature as part of the target literature, by focusing on literary institutions (publishing houses, book series, journals) and agents (translators, literary agents, editors), and the composite sociocultural factors driving the selection, production, and publication of literary translations. “Calling into question the politics of canonisation and moving resolutely away from ideas of universal literary greatness”(Bassnett and Trivedi 1999), we are particularly interested in social categories of writers who have been dismissed by literary critics who insisted on “the autonomy of the aesthetic” (Bloom 1994); in other words, writers who challenge the ‘Western canon’. The conference aims to explore the mechanisms of reception, dissemination, recognition and popularisation in the Italian literary system of foreign literature. This could include literature by women authors in translation, by feminist translators, authors from non-hegemonic/non-central languages, non-white, minoritarian and marginalised authors/groups and collectives. We are also interested in similar mechanisms by which Italian literature is translated and received beyond Italy. Keynote speakers at the conference will be Prof Susan Bassnett (Professor Emerita of Comparative Literature at the University of Warwick and Professor of Comparative Literature at the University of Glasgow; President of the British Comparative Literature Association), Dr Jacob Blakesley (Associate Professor in Comparative Literature and Literary Translation at the University of Leeds) and Dr Cecilia Schwartz (Associate Professor in Italian at Stockholm University). Topics may include, but are not limited to: translation and reception of literature(s) in translation in Italy and of Italian literature abroad reception of literature by women in translation and feminist translation translation and reception of post-colonial literature and of authors from non-hegemonic/non-central languages, non-white, minoritarian and marginalised authors/groups and collectives in Italy/from Italy translation, reception and circulation of non-hegemonic literatures in Italy and Italian literature in non-hegemonic contexts microsociology and microhistory of cultural mediation socio-cultural constraints influencing modes of practice networks of intellectuals publishing houses book series and literary journals translators, editors, mediators and literary agents censorship and control   Deadline for submissions: 1 September 2020 For more information, click here

Volume Editors Peter J. Freeth, University of Leeds, UK Rafael O. Treviño, Gallaudet University, Washington, DC, USA Correspondence: beyondinvisibilitybook@gmail.com    In The Translator’s Invisibility (1995), Lawrence Venuti argued literary translations are deemed most acceptable by Anglophone readers and critics when they appear to be transparent, original texts with an invisible translator. Focusing on the ethical implications of this illusion of transparency, Venuti calls for translators to become more visible in their work by adopting “foreignizing methods” that minimize the “ethnocentric violence of translation” and resist the hegemonic linguistic and cultural position of English (1995:20). The limitations of Venuti’s selectively Anglophone and literary focus, as well as the challenges that stem from his distilling of complex theoretical concepts into binary oppositions, have been criticized by several scholars (Pym 1996, Delabastita 2010). Nonetheless, the concept of the translator’s invisibility and its ethical implications have seen widespread migration across the discipline, proving fruitful for research into translator and interpreter (in)visibility in textual, paratextual and extratextual spaces (Koskinen 2000). For instance, research on the visibility of translators in non-Anglophone contexts (Corbett 1999, Bilodeau 2013) and in other historical periods (Coldiron 2012, 2018) has expanded on Venuti’s original work and demonstrated the relevance of translator (in)visibility across a variety of cultural and historical contexts.  However, as we turn to sociologically informed and multimodal research contexts, and the scope of translation and interpreting studies as a discipline continues to broaden, the theoretical concept of translator (in)visibility has been increasingly applied in contexts far removed from Venuti’s original focus on literary translation. For example, Littau (1997) and Hassen (2012) highlight the relevance of the translator’s (in)visibility in digital contexts, while others have applied visibility to other translational practices, such as Bielsa and Bassnett (2008) focus on political and news translation and the visibility of translators within such organizations, and Baker’s (2010) and Ellcessor’s (2015) interpreting-based perspectives. As such, the issue of visibility has stretched beyond specific literary texts and individual translators, to the overall visibility of translation and interpreting within a variety of contexts, thereby creating new challenges for researching the notion of visibility within these spaces and requiring alternative approaches.   This volume therefore seeks to critically reflect upon current theoretical understandings of visibility across translation and interpreting studies, as well as to highlight potential new directions and approaches for visibility focused research. Doing so will provide new insights into how we can continue to investigate the visibility of translation and interpreting outside the realms of Venuti’s original theoretical approach, such as in digital, multimodal or sociological research contexts. To achieve this, the volume understands translation and interpreting studies in the broadest sense by incorporating intralingual and intersemiotic translational practices, such as subtitling, sign-language interpreting, rewriting and adaptation, alongside a traditional understanding of translation and the translator’s (in)visibility.    The editors welcome contributions of 6,000–8,000 words focusing on, but not limited to, the following issues:   the adoption and spread of translator (in)visibility as a theoretical concept from literary translation studies to other subfields within translation and interpreting studies;  critical reflections on current theoretical understandings of (in)visibility within translation and interpreting studies;  the (in)visibility of translators and translation outside of Anglophone contexts and the impact of this on existing theoretical approaches;  the (in)visibility of translators and translation outside of literary contexts, for example audio-visual translation, spoken and sign-language interpreting, adaptation, and rewriting;  the impact of digital media and texts on the (in)visibility of translators and translation; and  the (in)visibility of translators and translation in relation to other textual producers and practices, such as authors and editors.   Deadline for submissions: 15 September For more information, click here

Editors: Margherita Dore and Giacinto Palmieri The volume aims to explore the self-translation of humour. Generally speaking, self-translation is described as a type of translation in which the translators happen to be the same people as the authors of the source text. It represents an atypical case which, as such, was somewhat neglected by Translation Studies scholars. More recently, however, self-translation has attracted a good deal of attention, as demonstrated by Gentes’s (2020) 212-page bibliography on this topic. Notwithstanding this, the self-translation of humour appears to be a remarkable blind spot. A text search for the word “humour” in the aforementioned bibliography returns only one match (Noonan 2013), searching for “humor” returns one more (Palmieri 2017a), while “comedy” returns three (Palmieri 2017a; Palmieri 2017b; Sebellin 2009; Palmieri 2018) and “comic” returns only one (Cohn 1961). Another aspect that makes the research gap on humour self-translation so remarkable is that the translation of humour in general has also been the object of much attention, not least because it offers a wide range of challenges, spanning from dealing with wordplay to the importance of culturespecific references (Chiaro 1992, 2005; Zabalbeascoa 1996; Attardo 2002; Dore 2019). Moreover, the success or failure in humour translation is often constrained by the translation mode used (cf. for instance Zabalbascoa 1994; Dore 2019; Dore, forthcoming). Interestingly, many authors who have written on self-translation (e.g. Fitch 1988; Eco 2013) have stressed that self-translators enjoy a level of freedom greater than that allowed to allographic translators. Similarly, the challenging nature of humour translation makes the case of self-translation the more interesting and intriguing, as it often requires exercising great freedom in adapting the humours content to the target audience (as discussed, with reference to stand-up comedy, in Palmieri 2018). Therefore, observing specific cases of humour self-translation is likely to unveil specific characteristics of this process in different context (cf. e.g. Palmieri 2018) and of humour translation in general. It is envisaged that the exploration of this fascinating phenomenon will further contribute to enhance the ongoing debate on the (un)translatability of humour (Delabastita 1996; 1997; Chiaro 2000; Dore 2019). Since the self-translation of humour can potentially cover several fields of enquire and application, as well as genres, an edited book can become a particularly promising tool. With these premises in mind, we would like to launch a Call for Papers to encourage scholars to give a contribution to mapping this problem space, by identifying instances of humour self-translation in their specific areas of competence, both in terms of language(s) and medium/ text type. Deadline for submissions: 30 June 2020 For more information, click here

The Centre for Legal and Institutional Translation Studies (Transius) will hold its next international conference from 30 June to 2 July 2021 in collaboration with IAMLADP’s Universities Contact Group (UCG). The conference will provide a forum for dialogue between scholars and practitioners with a common interest in legal translation and institutional translation settings more generally. It illustrates the Centre’s commitment to fostering international cooperation and advocating translation quality in the field. The 2021 conference will combine keynote lectures, parallel paper presentations, a poster session and thematic roundtables, so that all participants, from high-level experts to translation trainees, can benefit from the exchange of experiences. Contributions on the following themes are welcome:  Problems, methods and competence in legal translation, including comparative legal analysis for translation Terminological issues in legal and institutional translation The use of corpora and computer tools for legal and institutional translation practice, training and research Sociological and ethical issues in legal and institutional translation Developments and implications of institutional policies of translation and multilingual drafting Thematic specialisation in institutional translation (technical, scientific, financial, etc.) Translation quality control, quality assurance and management practices in institutional settings Court translation and interpreting Legal and institutional translator training Deadline for submissions: 30 October 2020 For more information, click here

We are happy to announce that the 1st International conference: Translating Minorities and Conflict in Literature will be held in Cordoba, 10-11 June 2021 Confirmed keynote speakers: Maria Tymoczko and Loredana Polezzi Call for papers International conference: Translating Minorities and Conflict in Literature Following in the footsteps of recent conferences (Translation and Minority, University of Ottawa, 2016; Justice and minorized languages under a postmonolingual order, Castelló de la Plana, 2017) and publications (Translation and minority, lesser-used and lesser-translated languages and cultures, JoSTrans, 2015), the aim of this conference is to explore the ways in which translating literature can serve to protect and empower minority, minor and lesser-used languages, both in contexts of multilingualism where the power balance of the languages spoken in the same country is often unequal, and in situations of conflict, where authors and translators face the threat of physical harm, coercion, censorship and/or exile. In this way, “the struggle to sustain languages in danger often equally implies the need to redress longstanding problems of marginalisation, stigmatisation and misrepresentation” (Folaron 2015: 16). Moreover, in a world where ‘minority’ is understood as a struggle against the mainstream and where Anglo-American-led processes of globalization and cultural export are reshaping transnational literary production and circulation, translation flows from minor and minoritized languages are largely uneven. Since the publication of The Manipulation of Literature (Hermans, 1985), Comparative Literature scholars have been obliged to confront the manipulation involved in any cultural transfer, particularly through translation. Institutions of culture and the state play an important role in determining the ways texts cross tangible and intangible borders. Hermans denounced three types of marginalisation: the status of translation in Literary Studies and Comparative Literature, the peripheral position of translations in literary corpora, and the absolute supremacy of the source text. Underwriting these critiques, we welcome proposals dealing with non-canonized literature, objects of study rejected by dominant circles of culture and literary movements that aimed to destabilise established literary repertoires. More than three decades after their arrival, we want to (ap)praise the Manipulation school and Polysystem Theory for the vital role they played in the discipline of Translation Studies. Indeed, the Polysystem Theory focused on the target text as a manipulated text that was produced in a specific literary, historical, political and social context. As Snell-Hornby points out: “Translation is seen as a text type in its own right, as an integral part of the target culture and not merely as the reproduction of another text” (1988: 24). Their legacy was to help abolish epistemological slaveries that biased Otherness and made room for countercultural manifestations. Their heuristic tools enabled the analysis of literature as a complex and dynamic system, stressed the necessary interaction between theory and practice, introduced a descriptive, target-text-oriented approach and laid the groundwork for the study of norms that condition the production and reception of translations within a specific context, the position of translations within the literary system and the interaction between different national literatures. With the cultural and the current sociological turns in mind, we would like to stress Bassnett and Lefevere’s words “Rewriting can introduce new concepts, new genres, new devices, and the history of translation is the history also of literary innovation, of the shaping power of one culture upon another. But rewriting can also repress innovation, distort and contain, and in an age of everincreasing manipulation of all kinds, the study of the manipulative processes of literature as exemplified by translation can help us toward a greater awareness of the world in which we live” (1993; vii). In this spirit, we welcome contributions on the following (or related) topics: Translation from/into indigenous languages Literary translation and sexual minorities Translation in Gendered Contexts Migrant literature Postcolonial literature Translation from peripheral languages and cultures Translation in situations of censorship and war The literary translator as an activist The manipulation of national images through translation Deadline for submissions: 15 September 2020 For more information, click here

Edited by: James Hadley, Kristiina Taivalkoski-Shilov, Carlos S. C. Teixeira, and Antonio Toral Many of the translation tools in use today were initially designed to cater for technical, repetitive texts. This is still their main niche 25 years after the first versions of these tools appeared. Computer-aided translation (CAT) and Machine translation (MT) were long regarded as unsuitable for the translation of creative texts, claimed to be the last bastion of human translation. Creative-text translation in this context refers to the translation of texts from one language to another where the texts themselves pivot broadly on the human creativity employed in their production. They rely heavily on aesthetics for their existence, more than texts that aim to bring about an outcome directly, as in the case of technical texts. Such creative texts include, but are not limited to: fictional works, such as novels, short stories, poems, plays, and comics; non-fictional texts, such as philosophical works, didactic books, and self-help books; performative works, such as songs, speeches, films, TV shows, and computer games; and promotional texts, such as commercials, advertisements, and propaganda. The end of the second decade of the twenty-first century appears pivotal to a shift in machine-assisted literary translation. MT has experienced a sea change over the last five years, thanks to the adoption of methods based on deep neural networks, to the point that there are now even claims of some MT systems reaching parity with human translators. In turn, human translators,including translators of creative texts, have benefited from advances in technology, through which internet search engines and online dictionaries and encyclopedias have made information mining significantly easier than in previous decades and centuries. While many translators of creative texts continue to shun translation technology or assume it is not relevant to them, others already make heavy use of CAT tools. These positive consequences of the technologization of translation in general are paving the way for a spread and development of technologies to support the translation of creative texts in particular. This book will embody the state of the art of translation technologies in the field of creative-text translation. At the same time, it will reflect on literary translators’ attitudes towards translation technology, and ethical aspects, as well as recent trends and technical developments in the field. The book invites chapters of no more than 8,000 words (all inclusive) addressing key questions,that include, but are not limited to: To what extent are translators of creative texts already making use of technology intheir work? What are the specific issues pertaining to literature and other types of creative textsthat prove difficult for MT systems today? What challenges do translators face when using technology for translating creativetexts? What are the attitudes of translators to the use of technology in the translation ofcreative texts? How do readers respond to literary works translated using machines? Apart from MT, what other kinds of computer-based tools could be used by literarytranslators? What are the ecological and ethical implications of increasing literary translators’ reliance on technology in their work? How should copyright issues be taken into account in the use of MT in literarytranslation? In the first instance, abstracts are sought from parties interested in contributing to the book. Deadline for submission of abstracts: 1 June 2020 For more information, click here

The e-journal Lexis, Journal in English Lexicology, is planning to publish its 17th issue devoted to “Humor, creativity and lexical creation” in 2021. Co-editors: Lucile Bordet (University of Lyon (Jean Moulin Lyon 3) & Frédérique Brisset (University of Lille) will be happy to receive your abstracts up to 15 June 2020 at the following address:  lexis@univ-lyon3.frPlease clearly indicate the title of the paper and include an abstract of no more than 5,000 characters as well as a list of relevant keywords and references. All abstract and paper submissions will be anonymously peer-reviewed (double-blind peer reviewing) by an international scientific committee composed of specialists in their fields.Papers will be written preferably in English or occasionally in French. Analyses may rely on various domains of linguistics, such as semantics, phonology, lexicography, morphology, stylistics, etc. Comparative studies involving translation are welcome too. All theoretical frameworks are welcome. For more information, click here

This Special Collection of The Comics Grid: Journal of Comics Scholarship will focus on the global circulation of comics in digital forms, from webcomics to subscription services from traditional comics publishers. The Collection’s emphasis will be on the international, multi-lingual, multi-format, diverse nature of “comics”.Comics have circulated in their original language and in translation since the inception of print: as a physical object, comics (including strips in newspapers) can travel across international borders with their readers, or they can be translated for publication in new locales. Recent technologies have made digital distribution possible, theoretically allowing for global access to comics published online anywhere in the world as well as the possibility of distributing translated versions within a proprietary system.Translation is central to the global circulation of comics and comics as an art form are often experienced in translation (Evans 2017).  While there is a growing body of work on the translation and circulation of comics (Zanettin 2008, Altenberg and Owen 2015, Mälzer 2015, Reyns-Chikuma and Tarif 2016; see overview in Zanettin 2020), little has yet addressed the new world of digital distribution and how this is affecting translation practices. Work on the digital distribution of comics (e.g. Priego 2010, Steirer 2014, Crucifix et al. 2017-19, Augureau et al. 2018) has tended not to address this at a global scale or to investigate how comics are distributed across languages.Translation can be both official and unofficial: scanlation -- the fan translation (Evans 2020) of comics -- is a vibrant practice that has found a home online, but it is unclear how the shift towards digital publishing by legacy publishers such as Marvel and DC has changed the environment for the practice. Nor is it clear how extensively platforms such as Comixology  have embraced translation and international distribution, as the French language site includes large quantities of untranslated, English language materials. Web comics as born digital objects may easily be distributed online, but there is less understanding of how they cross linguistic and cultural borders.For this Special Collection, we are open for submissions that explore the intersections between the translation and distribution of comics, the latter understood in its most diverse, international sense, with a particular focus that goes beyond dominant themes that are over-represented in current scholarship. The Special Collection seeks original research articles that investigate the ways in which digital distribution has opened up, or closed down, access to comics produced globally. Are the old centres of the USA, France and Japan still central to comics production? Or has comics production been democratised and decentralised? How have different comics cultures adapted to and capitalised on digital distribution, and how are they reaching readers in other cultures (through translation)?We are especially interested in the reception and translation of comics outside of the Anglosphere, which are typically overlooked, but also welcome work on American comics. We encourage research on the underrepresented areas of non-English language comics, LGBT+ comics, women’s comics and comics by people of colour. Contributions may use any relevant methodology to address the topic, but should follow the journal’s guidelines for submissions.We call for submissions that are professionally written and presented, incorporating high-quality images that authors discuss directly and in detail. We will consider submissions from affiliated senior or early career scholars, practitioners and independent researchers, as long as they fit the journal’s call for papers, scope and editorial guidelines. Deadline for first drafts: 30 June 2021 For more information, click here