During my research for the literature review, I realized that my essay mostly hinges upon establishing a connection between cultural appropriation and linguistic translational equivalence and the problems associated with both, then offer Itamar Even-Zohar’s linguistic theory, polysystem theory*, as a tool to interpret and understand appropriation. Because polysystem theory (PST) now plays such a major role in my work, most of my additional research following the literature review has shifted away from appropriation and more toward gaining a more nuanced understanding of the theory, beyond Even-Zohar’s own iterations.
I’ve more or less split this research into two parts: examining how other scholars conceptually approach and discuss polysystem theory as well as how scholars/translators functionally apply polysystem theory to a translated work. I have initially found a journal article that re-articulates the significance of PST in light of other emerging theories, where the author both argues its importance and breaks down its significant components and features.The article seems particularly useful, as one of the aspects it primarily focuses on is Even-Zohar’s idea of cultural repertoire and how this repertoire may be actively or passively used by producers and consumers.
The largest problem I’m facing so far is that I’m finding it a little difficult to see how some of Even-Zohar’s concepts are used in translation. The topic is fairly niche, and much writing about it is not actually in English. At this point, however, I still have a couple articles to look through that may help, and I don’t think I’ve exhausted the databases if I need additional research.
*In translation, polysystem theory deals with the problem of equivalence, the way in which the target relates to the source text and a measure of the adequacy of the transfer. Polysystem theory aims to understand the complexity of the relationship between two languages/cultures, recognizing them as interrelated systems of communication that are not static and homogenous, but rather dynamic and open systems. I believe this has very interesting implications when applied to the transfer of cultural aesthetics.
Your paper seems extremely interesting but because I have no prior knowledge regarding this topic it is difficult to help provide feedback or locate gaps in your discussion. I think your definition of the polystem theory was helpful in providing me with a general understanding of what you are talking about. I think for your paper itself, it might be more useful to present this first, instead of at the end of your analysis. So that your reader clearly understands your analysis as they had the background information to do so. I'm excited to see what you do with this paper and glad that you still have potential for more successful research, goodluck! -Rhea Bhatia
ReplyDeleteI'm having trouble understanding the topic since all of the terms are so niche and academic. Could you explain this to someone who is not an expert? I'm interested to learn further, but the barrier of entry seems pretty high. Are there scholars across both of these fields that dabble in research in other areas or are they mostly committed to this? You mentioned how this has "interesting implications when applied to the transfer of cultural aesthetics." What are some of these implications and do we see them in daily life? Is it more common in certain cultures more than others, like maybe collectivistic vs individualistic cultures display differences?
ReplyDelete- Ethan Saber