Exophony and literary translation: What it means for the translator when a writer adopts a new language
When writers of literary prose adopt a new language—a phenomenon known as exophony—this often leads them to mould the new language until it becomes suitable for their purposes, in a manner analogous to the strategies of appropriation observed in post-colonial literatures (Ashcroft, Griffiths and Tiffin 1989). This process often results in a defamiliarisation of the new language through stylistic innovation, which, in turn, has implications for the translation of these texts. This article, influenced by Berman’s ‘analytique négative’ (1985), proposes a series of guidelines for the translation of exophonic texts and illustrates these with examples taken from German exophonic prose texts by Franco Biondi, Emine Sevgi Özdamar and Yoko Tawada.
Table of contents
- Abstract
- Keywords
- 1.Understanding exophony
- 2.Translating the German exophonic text
- 2.1The creativity of the exophonic writer should not be attributed solely to a process of literal translation from the mother tongue
- 2.2Seeming ungrammaticalities in exophonic texts should not immediately be attributed to the writer’s imperfect command of his or her adopted language
- 2.3The translator should not be tempted to bridge the “metonymic gap” in the exophonic text
- 2.4The translator should be aware that the exophonic writer may push his or her adopted language beyond its communicative function
- 3.Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- References
- Résumé
- Address for correspondence
When deliberating on the title of this essay, I initially considered calling it ‘On writing in a language which is not one’s own and what this means for the translator’. But to do so would be to uphold two stubborn myths: one, that a language belongs to a certain territory and body of people, which in fact no language does—German does not belong to the Germans (the Austrians would enthusiastically agree), French does not belong to France (nor is Québec the only Francophone community in Canada), and English, with its current status as both the standardbearer and bugbear of globalization, most certainly does not belong to the former seat of the British Empire.