The Feminist Theory: Theoretical Framework
Scholars such as Luise von Flotow (1997) and Sherry Simon (1996) argue
that the feminist movement has powerfully influenced the practice of
translation. Its biggest contribution was to identify and draw attention
to certain gender-related issues. The feminist theory of translation,
for instance, critiques the concepts which undermine the role of both
women and translations in literary practice (Chamberlain 1998). They too
are concerned with the recovery of lost female writers’ works. Usually,
those translated works are accompanied by prefaces and commentaries that
inform readers how patriarchal values had previously deliberately
limited its publication (von Flotow 1997:30). Moreover, as von Flotow
(1997:14) contends, feminist thought has had an impact on the choice of
translated texts; the increased interest in feminism has resulted in a
greater demand for the translation of experimental female writing. The
term ‘female writing’ immediately evokes the name of Hélène Cixous
(Cixous, Clément and Wing, 1986, Cixous, Cohen and Cohen, 1976) and her
concept of écriture
feminine [feminine writing] . Her two essays -
“The Newly Born Woman ”, co-authored with Catherine Clément, and
“The Laugh of the Medusa ”- theorise some aspects related to
this type of writing. She defines it as a sort of bisexual writing, not
in the sense of being neuter, but rather one in which neither of the
halves is repressed (Conley c1991:51). Its source of inspiration is the
female body, objectified and defamed in a patriarchal world. Inevitably,
this requires the creation of a new language equipped with new forms and
meanings. As von Flotow (1997:17) shows, feminist translators have
become particularly interested in this area. They tackle the censored
anatomical vocabulary and try to find or create such language that would
address women’s erotic needs. In the practice of translation, such
innovative writing has further implications. A translator frequently
faces difficulties related to word choice, gender forms, and the
presence of neologisms.
Feminist theory also evokes issues of grammatical gender marking. In
this, they follow the ideas already noted by such scholars as Roman
Jacobson (2012). In “On the Linguistic Aspects of Translation ”,
Jacobson (2012:130) shows that in the language of art, poetry and
mythology, grammatical gender may acquire a symbolic meaning. This may
pose a problem in translation because two different language systems may
have different gender for the same word. For feminist theorists,
however, this idea of gender-marking in language has, after all, an
ideological importance. In this respect, it is worth mentioning the
technical aspects of constructing the biological sex of the characters
within the text. Monika Fludernik distinguishes two ways of doing it:
explicit in forms of, for instance, “(pro)nominal expressions”, and
implicit through, for instance, “the paraphernalia of our gendered
culture (shirt vs. blouse)” (Fludernik 1999:154)..
Taking these motives into consideration, the value of the feminist
approach arises. I do not think there exists either a female or male
approach of translating and I am not alone in this. Anna Bednarczyk
(2006:33) also criticises feminist theory, calling it an artificial
creation whose value has been overstated because many of those aspects
concern translation studies in general. For instance, gender-marking and
translating neologisms are problems that face any translator regardless
of whether they are male or female. On the other hand, creating an
erotic language that is supposed to appeal to the opposite sex may be an
issue, because as Jacques Derrida says, “it is impossible to know what
the other [sex] feels” (Royer 1991:84). In
contrast, Zbigniew Białas (2006:55) doubts any gender-related
differences regarding erotic language. He questions in what way male
erotic language should be spicier than female. Nevertheless, most of the
problems emphasised by feminist theoreticians concern another matter,
namely cultural awareness.
In the 1990s, translation theorist Susan Bassnett (2007:13) drew
attention to the role of extra-textual factors, such as culture, in
translation practice. Although she does not contest that translation is,
after all, a linguistic transfer, she notices that those aspects related
to a language only account for some part of this process. Factors such
as social context, cultural convention, the subjectivity of the
translator, and the particular historical time when the translation
takes place also participate in this act. This is in line with another
translation theorist, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak (2012:312), who also
sees translation as a process more complex than a mere equivalence
transfer. In her essay, “The Politics of Translation ” (Spivak
2012:312), she states that she is aware that a translator is a
free-acting individual with the ability to make a choice.
Notwithstanding the freedom, a translator still has a responsibility
towards the original text, which is paying careful attention to both
rhetoric (form) and logic (content) of the original and, in the case of
the feminist translator, to trace any gender-related issues in the
language used. (Spivak 2012:313). The last claim of Spivak is
controversial as it encourages an ideological approach to translation.
As such, it may lead to text manipulation, which I will prove later in
the text was the case with Polish translation of “A Room’s of
One’s Own ”.
Basnett (2007:19) argues that by comparing the original with the
translated text we may note the strategies implemented by a translator
and see what role each text takes in their literary systems. This
comparison should also reveal the translator as an individual, his
views, and his ideology. In constructing the methodological tools, she
uses concepts from the sociology of Pierre Bourdieu, which I also use in
analysing the chosen texts. In this essay, I apply only three of his
concepts, which are as follows: habitus, unconsciously acquired
norms guiding human behaviour; capital , the material, cultural,
intellectual, and social assets; and illusio , motivations
stimulating people’s activity (Navarro 2006:16, Ighillieri
2005:134-137).