An Overview of a Peripheral Literary Exchange: A Bibliography of Portuguese Literature in Turkish Translation

Abstract

This paper offers a bibliography of Portuguese literature translated into Turkish in book format and an analysis of it. The need to create a bibliography emerged from the lack of a complete bibliographic resource to consult to provide a background for a doctoral study on the reception of Portuguese author José Saramago’s works in Turkish. The bibliography prepared through consulting existing bibliographies, archives, previous studies on translation into Turkish, and other resources confirms the peripheral position of Portuguese literature in the Turkish literary system, while offering an overview of the dynamics of this one-way literary movement. The findings show that the translation of Portuguese literature into Turkish is a relatively recent phenomenon. The fact that most of the translations have been produced within the last 25 years may be related to the shift of attention onto Portuguese literature after Saramago’s Nobel win in 1998. The bibliography also confirms Johan Heilbron’s (1999) hypothesis that central languages tend to be used as mediating languages to translate peripheral literature. In the case of the translation of Portuguese literature into Turkish, Spanish, English, and French appear as mediating languages in the scarcity of translators working directly from Portuguese.

Keywords

• literary translation
• Portuguese literature
• Turkish translation
• peripheral languages
• translation bibliography

References

1. Arusoğlu, Sezai. 2003. “Tercüme Bürosu et la Revue Tercüme: De L’enjeu Textuel à L’objet Culturel et Intellectuel: Une Étude sur L’apport de la Traduction à la Restructuration Culturelle de la Turquie Moderne.” [Translation Bureau and the Tercüme journal: From textual issues to cultural and intellectual objects: A study on the contribution of translation to the cultural restructuring of modern Turkey.] PhD diss., Hacettepe University.
2. Assis Rosa, Alexandra, Hanna Pięta, and Rita Bueno Maia. 2017. “Theoretical, Methodological and Terminological Issues Regarding Indirect Translation: An Overview.” Translation Studies 10 (2): 113–132. doi:10.1080/14781700.2017.1285247.
3. Atay, Hakan. 2016. “Waiting for Pessoa: The Works of Fernando Pessoa in Turkish.” Pessoa Plural, no. 9, 260–269. doi:10.7301/Z08G8HXQ.
4. Aytaç, Gürsel. 1999. Çağdaş Dünya Edebiyatı Çeviri Seçkisi [Translation selection from world literature]. T.C. Kültür Bakanlığı Yayınları: Ankara.
5. Belanger, Terry. 1977. “Descriptive Bibliography.” In Book Collecting: A Modern Guide, edited by Jean Peters, 97–101. New York: R. R. Bowker.
6. Berk Albachten, Özlem, and Şehnaz Tahir Gürçağlar, eds. 2019. Studies from a Retranslation Culture: The Turkish Context. Singapore: Springer.
7. Berk, Özlem. 1999. “Translation and Westernisation in Turkey (From the 1840s to the 1980s).” PhD diss., University of Warwick.
8. Bloom, Harold. 1994. The Western Canon: The Books and Schools of the Ages. New York: Harcourt Brace & Company.

9. Cadera, Susanne M., and Andrew Samuel Walsh, eds. 2022. Retranslation and Reception: Studies in a European Context. Leiden: Brill.
10. Chesterman, Andrew. 2000. “A Causal Model for Translation Studies.” In Intercultural Faultlines: Research Models in Translation Studies I: Textual and Cognitive Aspects, edited by Maeve Olahan, 15–27. Manchester: St Jerome.
11. Deregözü, Aysel. 2021. “Türkiye ve Avrupa’da Yabancı Dil Eğitimi: Bir Durum Değerlendirmesi.” [An evaluation of foreign language education in Europe and Turkey.] Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, no. 58, 501–521. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/maeuefd/issue/61832/762412.
12. Feijó, António M., João R. Figueiredo, and Miguel Tamen, eds. 2020. O Cânone [The canon]. Lisbon: Edições Tinta da China.
13. Genette, Gérard. 1997. Paratexts: Thresholds of Interpretation. Translated by Jane E. Lewin. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14. Heilbron, Johan. 1999. “Towards a Sociology of Translation: Book Translations as a Cultural World-System.” European Journal of Social Theory 2 (4): 429–444. doi:10.1177/136843199002004002.
15. Heilbron, Johan. 2000. “Translation as a Cultural World System.” Perspectives 8 (1): 9–26. doi:10.1080/0907676X.2000.9961369.
16. Heilbron, Johan. 2010. “Structure and Dynamics of the World System of Translation.” Paper presented at the UNESCO, International Symposium ‘Translation and Cultural Mediation,’ Paris, February 22–23.
17. Heilbron, Johan. 2020. “Obtaining World Fame from the Periphery.” Dutch Crossing: Journal of Low Countries Studies 44 (2): 136–144. doi:10.1080/03096564.2020.1747284.
18. Kolcu, Ali İhsan. 1995. “Tanzimat ve Servet-i Fünûn Devirlerinde Batı Edebiyatından Yapılan Şiir Tercümeleri Üzerinde Bir Araştırma (1859-1901).” [A study of poetry translations from the Western literature during the Tanzimat and Servet-i Fünun periods.] PhD diss., Atatürk University.
19. Koskinen, Kaisa. 2019. “Revising and Retranslating.” In The Routledge Handbook of Literary Translation, edited by Kelly Washbourne and Ben Van Wyke, 315–324. London: Routledge.
20. Öncü, Mehmet Tahir. 2017. Türkçe Çeviriler Bibliyografyası: Dünya Edebiyatından Çeviriler [Turkish translation bibliography: Selections from the world literature]. İstanbul: Hiperyayın.
21. Pięta, Hanna. 2010. “A Procura de Traduções da Literatura Polaca em Portugal. Algumas Questões Sobre o Uso de Fontes Bibliográficas na História da Tradução.” [In search of translations from Polish literature in Portugal. Some remarks on the use of bibliographical sources in translation history.] Itinerarios 11:121–138. https://itinerarios.uw.edu.pl/resources/html/article/details?id=224302.
22. Pięta, Hanna. 2019. “Indirect Translation: Main Trends in Practice and Research.” Slovo.Ru: Baltijskij Accent 10 (1): 21–31. https://journals.kantiana.ru/upload/iblock/324/4-%D0%9F%D0%B8%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%B0_21-36.pdf.
23. Poupaud, Sandra, Anthony Pym, and Ester Torres Simón. 2009. “Finding Translations. On the Use of Bibliographic Databases in Translation History.” Meta 54 (2): 264–278. doi:10.7202/037680ar.
24. Pym, Anthony. 1998. Method in Translation History. Manchester: St. Jerome.
25. Sapiro, Gisèle. 2016. “The Metamorphosis of Modes of Consecration in the Literary Field: Academies, Literary Prizes, Festivals.” Poetics 59:5–19. doi:10.1016/j.poetic.2016.01.003.
26. Sapiro, Gisèle. 2024. “The Circular Relationship Between the Nobel Prize and Literary Translations.” Working paper, Nobel Symposium “Literary Translation and Consecration,” 16.5.2024. https://shs.hal.science/halshs-04861924v1/document.
27. Tahir Gürçağlar, Şehnaz. 2008. The Politics and Poetics of Translation in Turkey, 1923-1960. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
28. Tahir Gürçağlar, Şehnaz. 2020. “Retranslation.” In Routledge Encyclopaedia of Translation Studies, edited by Mona Baker and Gabriela Saldanha, 484–489. Third edition. London: Routledge.
29. Toury, Gideon. 2012. Descriptive Translation Studies — and beyond. Revised edition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
30. Wagner, Stephen C. 2001. “The Role of Bibliography in Historicizing Science and Literature.” Social Epistemology 15 (1): 3–4. doi:10.1080/02691720110049170.
31. Yağcı, Öner, ed. 1999. Cumhuriyet Dönemi Edebiyat Çevirileri Seçkisi [The selection of translations during the republic period]. Ankara: T.C. Kültür Bakanlığı Yayınları.
32. Yazıcı, Mine. 2004. Çeviri Etkinliği [Translation activity]. İstanbul: Multilingual.