TÜRKİYE'DE ÇEVİRMENLİK MESLEĞİNDE İNSAN DIŞI AKTÖRLER: AKTÖR-AĞ KURAMI ÜZERİNDEN SEKTÖRE BİR BAKIŞ

Öz

Bu makale, Türkiye’de çevirmenlik mesleğinin içinde bulunduğu konumu mesleğin icrasında yer alan temel aktörler üzerinden incelemektedir. Bu inceleme ile alanda faaliyetler yürüten kurum/kuruluş ve işletmeleri sosyolog bilim insanı Bruno Latour’un aktör-ağ kuramında yer alan insan dışı aktörler açısından değerlendirmektedir. Türkiye’de mesleki faaliyetleri gerçekleştiren ve çevirmen adaylarını mesleğe hazırlayan çeşitli kurum, kuruluş ve işletmeler ve mesleğin gelişimine katkı sunan bazı mevzuat düzenlemeleri ve ilgili yasal kanunlar söz konusudur. Bunların her biri insan dışı aktör olarak çeviri alanında insan olan aktörlerin etkileşimlerine, birbirleri ile olan ilişkilerine etki etmektedir. Sektöre dair genel bir inceleme yaparak var olan aktörlerin mesleki faaliyetlere olan katkısı ve sonrasında alandaki eksik aktörlerin neler olduğu ve bu aktörlerin alana kazandırılması ile kurulan mesleki ağların nasıl etkilenebileceği, alana ne katkılar sunabileceği tartışılmıştır. Eksik olan insan dışı aktörler olarak meslek odası ve sertifikasyon kurumu gibi düzenleyici örgütler ve meslek yasası gibi yasal mevzuat düzenlemelerinin alandaki uzmanlık ve denetim gibi temel sorunlara çözüm bulmak adına önemli bir boşluğu doldurabileceği gibi piyasadaki aktörlerin aktör-ağ kuramında belirtildiği şekilde yeni ittifaklar ve ağlar kurmalarına imkan tanıyabileceği, uzman çevirmenlerin istihdamı ile çevirmen olarak bazı aktörlerin var olan ağlardan uzaklaşabileceği gibi yeni aktörlerin devreye girebileceği, işletmelerin uzman çevirmen istihdam edebilmesi noktasında bu insan dışı aktörlerin arabulucu bir rol oynayacağı ve nihayetinde mesleğin gelişimi için ciddi katkı sunacağı düşünülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• çeviri
• insan dışı aktörler
• aktör-ağ kuramı
• meslek
• ağ

NON-HUMAN ACTORS IN THE PROFESSIONAL AREA FOR TRANSLATORS AND INTERPRETERS IN TURKEY: A LENS INTO THE SECTOR THROUGH ACTOR-NETWORK THEORY

Abstract

This paper examines the current status of the translation profession in Turkey through the lens of the primary actors involved in the professional area. It evaluates the institutions, organizations, and companies operating in the field from the perspective of non-human actors as conceptualized by sociologist Bruno Latour’s actor-network theory. In Turkey, various institutions, organizations, and businesses undertake professional activities and prepare translator candidates for the profession, while certain regulatory legislations and related laws contribute to the development of the profession. Each of these entities functions as non-human actors influencing the interactions and relationships of human actors within the translation field. This paper conducts a general examination of the sector, discussing the contributions of existing actors to professional activities and identifying the missing actors. It further explores how the integration of these missing actors, such as regulatory bodies like professional chambers and certification authorities, and legal frameworks like professional laws, could address fundamental issues such as specialization and oversight. The paper argues that the presence of these non-human actors could allow market actors to form new alliances and networks as outlined in actor-network theory, facilitate the employment of specialist translators, and potentially lead to some existing actors withdrawing from the networks. Additionally, these non-human actors could play a mediating role in the employment of specialist translators by companies, ultimately contributing significantly to the profession's development.

Keywords

• translation
• non-human actors
• actor-network theory
• profession
• network

References

1. Akçayoğlu, D. I. & Özer, Ö. F. (2020). The occupational status of translators and interpreters in Türkiye: Perceptions of professionals and translation students. Journal of Translation Studies, (29), 61-82. https://doi.org/10.37599/ceviri.805117
2. Alcouffe, S., Berland, N., & Levant, Y. (2008). Actor-networks and the diffusion of management accounting innovations: A comparative study. Management Accounting Research, 19(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2007.04.001
3. Anderson, C. & Paskeviciute, A. (2006). How ethnic and linguistic heterogeneity influence the prospects for civil society: A comparative study of citizenship behavior. The Journal of Politics, 68(4), 783-802. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2508.2006.00470.x
4. Bufetova, A., Khrzhanovskaya, A. A., & Kolomak, E. (2020). Cultural heterogeneity and economic development in Russia. Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences, 13(4), 453-463. https://doi.org/10.17516/1997-1370-0582
5. Callon, M. (1984). Some elements of a sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. The Sociological Review, 32(1), 196-233. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954x.1984.tb00113.x
6. Follman, J. (2015). An overlooked lens: Applying structuration theory, actor-network theory, and theories of space to service-learning. International Journal of Research on Service-Learning and Community Engagement, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.37333/001c.21565
7. Griffin, S. (2001). Occupational therapists and the concept of power: A review of the literature. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 48(1), 24-34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1630.2001.00231.x
8. Guo, L., Luo, Z., & Zhu, Y. (2013). Heterogeneity and subjectivity in binary-state opinion formation systems. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2013(11), P11013. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/2013/11/p11013

9. Hausvik, G. I., Thapa, D. & Munkvold, B. (2019). The role of mediators in transforming and translating information quality: A case of quality assurance in a Norwegian hospital. Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS). ISSN 1530-1605. 52(1), (pp.4115–4124). https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2019.499
10. Hofmeyr, A., Burns, J., & Visser, M. (2007). Income inequality, reciprocity and public good provision: An experimental analysis. South African Journal of Economics, 75(3), 508-520. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1813-6982.2007.00127.x
11. Justesen, L. & Mouritsen, J. (2011). Effects of actor‐network theory in accounting research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 24(2), 161-193. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513571111100672
12. Kafi, M., Khoshsaligheh, M., & Hashemi, M. R. (2017). Translation profession in Iran: Current challenges and future prospects. The Translator, 24(1), 89-103. https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2017.1297693
13. Kasapoğlu, A. & Odabaş, Y. (2009). Sosyolojik açıdan teknoloji odağında güncel sorunların yorumlanması. Elektrik Mühendisliği, 436 (Haziran), 31-33.
14. Kaya, O. (2015). Çeviri sektöründe meslekleşme ve örgütlenme. F. Karabacak (Edt.), Çeviri kitabı: Çevirmenler ne işler çeviriyor içinde. https://www.ceviriblog.com/2016/04/01/ceviri-sektorunde-mesleklesme-ve-orgutlenme-osman-kaya-2/
15. Küçükyağcı, N. & Avcı, B. (2011). Türkiye’de çevirmenlik mesleği araştırma raporu. T.C. Başbakanlık İdareyi Geliştirme Başkanlığı. https://tuced.org.tr/design/arastirmaraporu.pdf
16. Latour, B. (1992) Where are the missing masses? The sociology of a few mundane artifacts. In W. E. Bijker, & J. Law (Eds.), Shaping technology/building society: Studies in sociotechnical change (pp.225-258).
17. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40878163
18. Latour, B. (2013). Biography of an inquiry: On a book about modes of existence. Social Studies of Science, 43(2), 287-301. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312712470751
19. Law, J. (1992). Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy, and heterogeneity. Systems Practice, 5(4), 379–393. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01059830
20. Lerch, J. C., Frank, D. J., & Schofer, E. (2023). The social foundations of academic freedom: Heterogeneous institutions in world society, 1960 to 2022. American Sociological Review, 89(1), 88-125. https://doi.org/10.1177/00031224231214000
21. Lissandrello, E. (2008). Reassembling the social – an introduction to actor network theory. Comparative Sociology, 7(4), 500-502. https://doi.org/10.1163/156913308x336453
22. McBride, N. (2003). Actor-network theory and the adoption of mobile communications. Geography, 88(4), 266–276. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40573881
23. Morgan, D. (2017). The subject in question. Journal of Material Culture, 22(4), 476-484. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359183517740008
24. Salt, D., Polhill, J. & Wang, Y. (2017, September). Normalizing Callon's theory of translation. Social Simulation Conference (pp.1-18). Dublin, Ireland. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324106844_Normalizing_Callon's_Theory_of_Translation
25. Sayes E. (2014). Actor-network theory and methodology: Just what does it mean to say that nonhumans have agency?. Social Studies of Science, 44(1), 134–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312713511867
26. Senemoğlu, O. (2017). Tüketim, tüketim toplumu ve tüketim kültürü: Karşılaştırmalı bir analiz. İnsan ve İnsan, 4(12), 66-86. https://doi.org/10.29224/insanveinsan.313030
27. Siippainen, A., Toivonen, H., & Paakkari, A. (2023). Toward a democracy of translations? local evaluation actor networks in Finnish early childhood education. Global Studies of Childhood, 13(3), 217-231. https://doi.org/10.1177/20436106231175026
28. Tosun, M., Akin, A., & Simsek, F. (2015). Courses on specialized field in undergraduate programs of translation & interpretation departments in Turkey: The importance of courses on specialized field in the specialization process of translator candidates. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 192, 4-10.
29. Uysal, N. M. (2017). Türkiye’de çevirmenlik mesleği ve çevirmen sertifikasyon sistemi [Doktora tezi, Sakarya Üniversitesi]. Açık Akademik Arşiv Sistemi. https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12619/77037
30. Winner, L. (1993). Upon opening the black box and finding it empty: Social constructivism and the philosophy of technology. Science, Technology & Human Values, 18(3), 362-378. http://www.jstor.org/stable/689726
31. Yıldırım, Ö. & Bilican Demir, S. (2022). Inside the black box: do teachers practice assessment as learning?. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 9(Special Issue), 46-71. https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.1132923