2015 9 31-56 (complicate) 2014 10 30 2015 1 6 2015 6 26 E-mail: jill@mail.tku.edu.tw
Compilation and Translation Review Vol. 8, No. 2 (September 2015), 31-56 Telling the Story Again: Translation and Adaptation Pei-yun Chen Although the more recent development of intermedial translation foregrounds the connection between translation discourses and visual culture and thus the issue of adaptation, the relationship between translation and adaptation has been discussed in the scholarship for at least the last fifty years. Current studies in this field range from the comparison of translation and cinematic adaptation to theoretical elaborations of the concept of adaptation and the problem of establishing a common ground. This paper argues that translation should not be seen as being analogous to adaptation (and vice versa), but rather that we need to see the connection between the two in terms of coexistence and complication. Foregrounding the problem of fidelity, the paper suggests that translatability is closely tied to the issue of how translation and adaptation can benefit (from) each other. Here we should note that adaptation refers to the praxis of making changes in a text or work (e.g. a play or film) so that it may better fit a different environment. Moreover, just as no film adaptation can be divorced from visibility, no translation can be divorced from written language (i.e. from a linguistic text). Therefore one must focus on the tension between seeing and reading when considering the relationship between translation and adaptation. Keywords: translation, adaptation, fidelity, intertextuality, translatability Received: October 30, 2014; Revised: January 6, 2015; Accepted: June 26, 2015 Pei-Yun Chen, Associate Professor, Department of English, Tamkang University, E-mail: jill@mail.tku.edu.tw
33 (Cronin, 2003) 2007 (Journal of Visual Culture) (Acts of Translation) (Bal & Morra, 2007, p. 5) (the visible) (Bal & Morra, 2007, pp. 5-6) ( The Task of the Translator ) (kinship) (Benjamin, 1996) (intersemiotic/intermedial
34 translation) 1 (Lawrence Venuti) ( Adaptation, Translation, Critique ) (Venuti, 2007, p. 26) (origin) (intertextuality) 1 (Roman Jakobson, 1896-1982) (interlingual) (introlingual) (intersemiotic) (linguistic) (intermedial translation) Bal Morra (intertextual) (intersemiotic) (interdisciplinarity) (Bal & Morra, 2007, p. 7)
35 (dialogism) (Roland Barthes) (from work to text) (death of the author) (Michel Foucault) (what is an author) (Julia Kristeva) (Gerard Genette) (transtextuality) (Literature and Film: A Guide to The Theory and Practice of Film Adaptation) (Robert Stam) (Stam & Raengo, 2005, p. 25) (Stam & Raengo, 2005, p. 25) ( Beyond Fidelity: The Dialogics of Adaptation ) (Stam, 2000, p. 64) (Stam, 2000, p. 66)
36 2006 (Linda Hutcheon) (A Theory of Adaptation) (Julie Sanders) (Adaptation and Appropriation) (de-hierarchizing) (Hutcheon, 2006, p. 12) (transposition) (Hutcheon, 2006, pp. 7-9) 2006 (p. 20) (Hutcheon, 2006, p. 174)
37 (Sanders, 2006, p. 1) 2006 (Sanders, 2006, pp. 21-24) 2006 (p. 25) (Mireia Aragay) ( Reflection to Refraction: Adaptation Studies Then and Now )
38 (Aragay, 2005) (Dudley Andrew, 1980) (Christopher Orr, 1984) (John Ellis, 1982) (Aragay, 2005, p. 19) (Novel to Film: An Introduction to the Theory of Adaptation) (McFarlane,1996, p. 8) (McFarlane) (transfer) (adaptation proper) 2011 (True to the Spirit: Film Adaptation and the Question of Fidelity) (Colin MacCabe)
39 (MacCabe, Myrray, & Warner, 2011, p. 7) (MacCabe et al., 2011, p. 9) (Andrew, 1980; Naremore, 2000; Ray, 2000; Stam & Raengo, 2005; Venuti, 2007; MacCabe et al., 2011) (Patrick Cattrysse) ( Film (Adaptation) as Translation: Some Methodological Proposals ) (Even-Zohar) (polysystem theory) (Gideon Toury)
40 (extra-textual context) (Cattrysse, 1992, p. 67) (contextualistic semiotic perspective) (Cattrysse, 1992, p. 68) (reworking) (Robert Stam) (Stam, 2000, p. 62) Stam, 2000, pp. 62-63, (creative mistranslation) (2007)
41 (Philip Lewis) (abusive fidelity) (Lewis, 1985) (Lewis, 1985, p. 42) (Venuti, 2007, p. 39) (Ray, 2000, p. 48)
42 (Hutcheon, 2006, p. 174) (Walter Benjamin) (translatability) (Benjamin, 1996, p. 253; 2009 217) 2 (Benjamin, 1996, p. 254; 2009 220) 2 2009
43 (quality) (distinction) (Benjamin, 1996, p. 262; 2009 243) (Rodolphe Gasché) ( Saturnine Vision and the Question of Difference: Reflections on Walter Benjamin s Theory of Language ) (Gasché, 1986, p. 76)
44 (Überleben) (Benjamin, 1996, p. 256; 2009 226) (Fredric Jameson) ( Adaptation as a Philosophical Problem )
45 (Jameson, 2011, p. 230) 2011 (antagonism) (incompatibility) (p. 231) 2011 (Adorno) (pp. 230-231) (Jameson, 2011, p. 232) (Gasché, 1986, p. 76)
46 (Harry Zohn) (mode) (Benjamin, 1968, p. 70) (form) (Benjamin, 1996, p. 254) ( Des tours de Babel ) (Joseph Graham) 2011 (Andrea Arnold)
47 (Heathcliff) ( Wuthering Heights Realises Brontë s Vision with its Dark-Skinned Heathcliff, The Guardian, FilmBlog, 2011 Oct. 21) (Onanuga, 2011) 2005 (Sara Martin) ( What Does Heathcliff Look Like? Performance in Peter Kosminsky s Version of Emily Bronte s Wuthering Heights ) (Martin, 2005, pp. 54-55)
48 (Venuti, 2007; Milton, 2009; Tsui, 2012) (Hutcheon, 2006) (Hutcheon, 2006, p. 16) (complicate) 2012 (Translation, Adaptation and Transformation) (Lawrence Raw) (Jean Piaget) (adapt) (assimilation) (accommodation) (Raw, 2012, p. 10; Piaget, 1997, p. 330)
49 (reaction) (action)
50 (Jacques Derrida) (The Truth in Painting) (Shapiro, 2007, p. 20) (leictophobia) (Michel Foucault) (Foucault, 1970, p. 9; Shapiro, 2007, p. 13) (Gary Shapiro) (Shapiro, 2007, p. 20)
51 (Emily Apter) ( Untranslatable? The Reading versus the Looking ) (Apter, 2007, pp. 149-156)
52 (Shapiro, 2007, p. 22) (Cattrysse, 1992) (Evans, 2014)
53 (adapt) (Eugene Nida) (dynamic equivalence)
54 2009 2 1 189-247 Andrew, D. (1980). The well-worn muse: Adaptation in film history and theory. In J. Naremore (Ed.), Film adaptation (pp. 28-37). London: Athlone. Apter, E. (2007). Understandable? The reading versus the looking. Journal of Visual Culture, 6(1), 149-156. Aragay, M. (2005). Books in motion: Adaptation, intertextuality, authorship. Amsterdam & New York: Rodopi. Bal, M. & Morra, J. (2007). Editorial: Acts of translation. Journal of Visual Culture, 6(1), 5-11. Benjamin, W. (1968). The task of the translator. In H. Zhon (Ed.), Illuminations (pp. 69-82). New York, NY: Schocken Books. Benjamin, W. (1996). The Task of the Translator. In M. Bullock & M. Jennings (Eds.), Selected writings vol. 1 (pp. 253-263). Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Cattrysse, P. (1992). Film (adaptation) as translation: Some methodological proposals. Target, 4(1), 53-70. Cronin, M. (2003). Translation and globalization. London & New York: Routledge. Ellis, J. (1982). The literary adaptation: An introduction. Screen, 23(1), 3-5. Evans, J. (2014). Film remakes, the black sheep of translation. Translation Studies, 7(3), 300-314. Foucault, M. (1970). The order of things: An archaeology of the human sciences. New
55 York, NY: Random House. (Original work published 1996) Gasché, R. (1986). Saturnine vision and the question of difference: Reflections on Walter Benjamin s theory of language. Studies in 20th Century Literature, 11(1), 69-90. Hutcheon, L. (2006). A theory of adaptation. London & New York: Routledge. Jameson, F. (2011). Adaptation as a philosophical problem. In C. MacCabe, R. Warner, & K. Murray (Eds.), True to the spirit: Film adaptation and the question of fidelity (pp. 215-234). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lewis, P. (1985). The measure of translation effects. In J. Grapham (Ed.), Difference in translation (pp. 31-62). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. MacCabe, C., Myrray, K., & Warner, R. (2011). True to the spirit: Film adaptation and the question of fidelity. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Martin, S. (2005). What does Heathcliff look like? Performance in Peter Kosminsky s version of Emily Bronte s Wutherng Heights. In M. Aragay (Ed.), Books in motion: Adaptation, intertextuality, authorship (pp. 51-67). Amsterdam & New York: Rodopi. McFarlane, B. (1996). Novel to film: An introduction to the theory of adaptation. Oxford: Clarendon. Milton, J. (2009). Translation studies and adaptation studies. Translation Research Projects, 2, 51-58. Naremore, J. (Ed.). (2000). Film adaptation. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Onanuga, T. (2011, October 21). Wuthering Heights realises Brontë's vision with its dark-skinned Heathcliff. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/ film/filmblog/2011/oct/21/wuthering-heights-film-heathcliff Orr, C. (1984). The discourse on adaptation: A review. Wide Angle, 6(2), 72-76. Piaget, J. (1997). The origin of intelligence in the child, (M. Cook, Trans.). London &
56 New York: Routledge. (Original work published 1952) Raw, L. (2012). Translation, adaptation and transformation. London & New York: Continuum. Ray, R. B. (2000). The field of literature and film. In J. Naremore (Ed.), Film adaptation (pp. 1-16). London: Athlone. Sanders, J. (2006). Adaptation and appropriation. London & New York: Routledge. Shapiro, G. (2007). The absent image: Ekphrasis and the infinite relation of translation. Journal of Visual Culture, 6(1), 13-24 Stam, R. (2000). Beyond fidelity: The dialogics of adaptation. In J. Naremore (Ed.), Film adaptation (pp. 54-76). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Stam, R. & Raengo, A. (Eds.). (2005). Literature and film: A guide to the theory and practice of film adaptation. Malden & Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Tsui, C. S. K. (2012). The authenticity in adaptation: A theoretical perspective from translation studies. In R. Laurence (Ed.), Translation, adaptation and transformation (pp. 54-60). London & New York: Continuum. Venuti, L. (2007). Adaptation, translation, critique. Journal of Visual Culture, 6(1), 25-43.