Competence and Creativity in Translation: Multilingual Perspectives Carmen Ruschiensky A Thesis in The Department of Études françaises Presented in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts (Translation Studies) at Concordia University Montreal, Quebec, Canada April 2015 © Carmen Ruschiensky 2015 CONCORDIA UNIVERSITY School of Graduate Studies This is to certify that the thesis prepared By: Carmen Ruschiensky Entitled: Competence and Creativity in Translation: Multilingual Perspectives and submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts (Translation Studies) complies with the regulations of the University and meets the accepted standards with respect to originality and quality. Signed by the final examining committee: _____________________________________Chair Christine York _____________________________________Examiner Reine Meylaerts _____________________________________Examiner Sherry Simon _____________________________________Supervisor Deborah Folaron Approved by ___________________________________________________________________ Chair of Department or Graduate Program Director April 10, 2015 _______________________________________________________ Dean of Faculty iii Abstract Competence and Creativity in Translation: Multilingual Perspectives Carmen Ruschiensky This thesis addresses competence and creativity in translation by focusing on the translator as a multilingual, historically grounded subject. Drawing on recent multilingualism research and integrating insights from translation studies, hermeneutics, sociolinguistics, and second-generation cognitive science, it is argued that translators do not simply transfer meaning between words, texts or cultures; they embody a relation to the languages and cultures they are translating, just as multilinguals do in code-switching, performing identities, and symbolically identifying with different linguistic and cultural meanings. To explore these ideas, I conducted a qualitative study on multilingual translation students in Montreal to learn more about their diverse backgrounds. Research results—covering a broad range of languages, age groups, life experience, education, and employment histories—suggest that the translation process cannot be defined without considering the sociocognitive complexity of translation and that translators, at every stage of their development, actively draw on their unique linguistic and sociocultural repertoires. A working definition of translators’ symbolic competence is proposed as a framework for analysing students’ interests in, attitudes about, and approaches to translating and for considering how translators, especially translation students, can potentially develop their competence and creatively in translation by exploring this nuanced terrain. iv Acknowledgements I would like to thank my advisor Deborah Folaron, whose innovative undergraduate course Web Theory and Translation introduced me to the vast terrain of translation studies and the pivotal role of translation in society, culture, history, and everyday life. Her critical and creative approach to both translation research and teaching has inspired me throughout my time at Concordia. I would also like to express my sincere gratitude to professors Judith Woodsworth and Sherry Simon, whose generous advice, support, and encouragement have been invaluable. I feel very fortunate to have received support from both the SSHRC (Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council) and the FQRSC (Fonds québécois de la recherche sur la société et la culture). Last but not least, I would like to extend my appreciation to all the students who responded to my questionnaire and, in particular, those who generously took time to participate in interviews. v Table of Contents Introduction 1 Chapter 1: Competence and Creativity in Translation 1.1 The Task of the Translator 5 1.2 Defining Translation Competence 6 1.3 Experimental Research on Translation Competence 8 1.4 Defining Creativity in Translation 10 1.5 Experimental Research on Creativity in Translation 11 1.6 Literary/Cultural Studies Approaches to Creativity in Translation 12 1.7 The Hermeneutical Approach 15 1.8 Conclusion 17 Chapter 2: Multilingual Perspectives 2.1 The Multilingual Turn 18 2.2 The Multilingual Subject 24 2.3 Symbolic Competence 26 2.4 Conclusion 30 Chapter 3: Who Translates? The Translator as a Historically Grounded Subject 3.1 The Translator’s Turn 30 3.2 Subjectivity, Intersubjectivity and Embodied Cognition 31 3.3 Translators’ Identity, Agency and Performativity 36 3.4 Translators’ Symbolic Competence 42 Chapter 4: Research Design and Methodology 4.1 Research Design 45 4.2 Research Methodology 47 Chapter 5: Research Results 5.1 Presentation of Questionnaire Results 49 5.2 Conclusion 71 Chapter 6: Individual Profiles and Analyses 72 6.1 Engaging the Whole Translator 73 6.2 Multilingual Identities and Plural Habituses 80 6.3 Translators’ Positioning and Self-reflexivity 87 Chapter 7: Conclusion 95 7.1 Translation as Practice 97 7.2 Theory and Practice in Translator Training 98 7.3 Interdisciplinary Dialogue 99 Bibliography 101 Appendices I Transcription Conventions 122 II English Translation of Questionnaire Data 122 III Multilingualism and Translation Questionnaire 127 IV Questionnaire sur le Plurilinguisme et traduction 134 V Human Research Ethics Committee Summary Protocol Form (SPF) 142 VI Certification for Research Involving Human Subjects (2013/14) 152 VII Human Research Ethics Committee Status Report 153 VIII Certification for Research Involving Human Subjects (2014/15) 156 1 Introduction Multilingualism as a social phenomenon often refers to situations in which multiple languages exist side-by-side in society but are used separately by different segments of the population. It is sometimes distinguished from “plurilingualism”—or multilingualism at the individual level— which designates a person’s competence in more than one language and ability to switch between languages according to circumstances. The notion of heteroglossia (Bakhtin 1981 [1934]) adds yet another layer of complexity, alluding to variation within single languages, such as dialects, sociolects, idiolects, slang, and code-switching. Montreal is a city that encompasses all of these multilingualisms. It is ethnically and linguistically diverse like any major urban centre but also has an exceptionally high percentage of bi- and trilingual speakers—the highest in Canada and possibly in North America (Lamarre 2003: 64).1 As Sherry Simon (2006) has observed, Montreal is a city where “on the sidewalks teenagers start their sentences in one language and finish them in another, where graffiti send out truly mixed messages” (10) and where multilingualism, mixed languages, and code switching are “preferred modes of communication, forms of translation specific to its polyglot sensibility” (ibid.). Montreal’s high rate of multilingualism, particularly among allophones,2 can be partly attributed to Quebec’s efforts to protect the French language as a minority language within Canada, which is officially bilingual but, in practice, dominated by English outside of Quebec (cf. Lamarre 2003: 64). These factors have made Montreal not only a hub of bi- and multilingualism but also an important centre for translation and translator-training programs. Montreal has four universities that offer translation courses and two that offer comprehensive translation programs—Concordia University and the Université de Montréal. At Concordia, students choose between French to English or English to French translation, usually translating into their native or “dominant” language. At the Université de Montréal, students primarily translate from English into French and have the option of adding a third source language. While studying at Concordia, I had the occasion to meet a number of multilingual 1 Census data from 1996 revealed that 46.8% of Quebec allophones spoke both of Canada’s official languages compared to 5.4% in the rest of Canada, implying that, at the time, trilingualism was nine times higher in Quebec (Marmen and Corbeil 1999). Recent evidence suggests that Quebec’s multilingualism is continuing to rise, particularly in the Montreal area, with its high immigrant population (Pagé and Lamarre 2010). However, as Pagé and Lamarre (ibid.) point out, traditional survey methods often define linguistic groups according to a single language, thus obscuring complex multilingual dynamics across different contexts. 2 The Canadian Oxford Dictionary (Barber 2004), defines “allophone” as “(esp. in Quebec) an immigrant whose first language is neither French nor English.” 2 translation students whose first or dominant language was neither French nor English. Some of these students were born and raised in Quebec; others have recently immigrated to Canada. I also met a number of multilingual students who have either French or English as a first language but have acquired other languages that they use personally or professionally on a regular basis. As for the French-English bilinguals, I found their backgrounds to be equally diverse, encompassing Québécois, Acadian, French, Belgian, Haitian, Mauritian, Senegalese, American, and Canadian varieties of French and English, among others. I couldn’t help remarking how animated many of these students became when discussing their linguistic and cultural backgrounds. They seemed proud of their multilingualism and spoke of having a passion for languages. I had the feeling they were drawn