Kurumsal Alanda Venuti’nin Görünmezlik Kavramı: Türkiye Cumhuriyeti AB Başkanlığı Örneği

Öz

Bu çalışma Lawrence Venuti'nin çevirmen görünmezliği kavramını edebi çeviri alanından kurumsal alana taşıyarak yeniden incelemektedir. Venuti görünmezliği metinsel akıcılıkla ilişkilendirirken bu çalışma söz konusu durumu çevirmenin profesyonel bir özne olarak yapısal silinmesi şeklinde tanımlayarak edebi yaklaşımdan ayırmaktadır. Çalışma, kurumsal görünmezliğin bir tercihten ziyade, organizasyonel normlardan ve birleşik bir kurumsal sese duyulan ihtiyaçtan kaynaklanan yapısal bir gereklilik olduğunu savunmaktadır. Edebi çeviri yapan meslektaşlarının aksine, kurumsal çevirmenler, çalışmalarını anonimleştiren, karar verme yetkilerini sınırlayan ve karmaşık iş akışları içindeki bireysel katkılarını gizleyen üretim süreçlerinin doğası gereği görünmez kılınırlar. Bu nedenle çalışma, Venuti’nin çerçevesinin bağlamsal bir uyarlamasını önermekte; metinsel görünmezlik yapısal bir zorunluluk olarak kalsa da çevirmen eylemliliğinin “organizasyonel görünürlük” aracılığıyla yeniden müzakere edildiğini ileri sürmektedir. Bu çerçeve, çevirmenlerin görünürlüklerini stilistik direniş yoluyla değil, kurumun dilsel altyapısını inşa eden katılımcı eylemlilik yoluyla ortaya koyduklarını savunmaktadır. Çalışma, söz konusu dinamikleri incelemek amacıyla, Avrupa Birliği Başkanlığı'nı bir vaka örneği olarak temel almaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kurumsal çeviri
• çevirmen görünmezliği
• organizasyonel görünürlük
• katılımcı eylemlilik
• Venuti

Venuti’s Invisibility in the Institutional Field: The Case of Türkiye’s Directorate for EU Affairs

Öz

This study re-examines Lawrence Venuti's concept of translator invisibility by shifting its application from literary translation to the institutional field. While Venuti links invisibility to textual fluency, this study distinguishes this effect from the structural erasure of the translator as a professional subject. It argues that institutional invisibility is a structural necessity rather than a choice, stemming from organizational norms and the requirement for a unified institutional voice. Unlike their literary counterparts, institutional translators are rendered invisible by the very nature of production processes that anonymize their work, limit their decision-making authority, and obscure their individual contributions within complex workflows. Therefore, the study proposes a contextual adaptation of Venuti’s framework, suggesting that while textual invisibility remains a structural requirement, translatorial agency is renegotiated through “organizational visibility.” This framework suggests that translators assert their visibility not through stylistic resistance, but by exercising participatory agency to construct the institution’s linguistic infrastructure. To analyze these dynamics, the study draws on the Directorate for EU Affairs as an illustrative case.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Institutional translation
• translator invisibility
• organizational visibility
• participatory agency
• Venuti

Kaynakça

1. Arrojo, R. (1997). The "death" of the author and the limits of the translator's visibility. In M. Snell-Hornby, Z. Jettmarová, &
2. K. Kaindl (Eds.), Translation as intercultural communication: Selected papers from the EST Congress - Prague 1995 (pp. 21–33). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.20
3. Dam, H. V., & Ruokonen, M. (2024). Bringing in the translators’ views on their (in)visibility: The forms and significance of visibility in research on translator status. In P. J. Freeth & R. Treviño (Eds.), Beyond the translator’s invisibility: Critical reflections and new perspectives (pp. 73–95). Leuven University Press.
4. Dam, H. V., & Zethsen, K. K. (2008). Translator status: A sociological survey. The Translator, 14(1), 71–96. https://doi.org/10.1075/target.22.2.02dam
5. Delabastita, D. (2010). Histories and utopias [Review of the book the translator's invisibility: A history of translation (2nd ed.), by L. Venuti]. The Translator, 16(1), 125–134. https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2010.10799296
6. Freeth, P. J., & Treviño, R. (Eds.). (2024). Beyond the translator’s invisibility: Critical reflections and new perspectives. Leuven University Press.
7. Giustini, D. (2024). Towards a sociological redressing of interpreters’ (in)visibility. In P. J. Freeth & R. Treviño (Eds.), Beyond the translator’s invisibility: Critical reflections and new perspectives (pp. 95–115). Leuven University Press.
8. Kaindl, K. (2024). Visibilities of translation – Visibilities of translators: Reflections on the theoretical foundations of an opaque concept (P. J. Freeth, Trans.). In P. J. Freeth & R. Treviño (Eds.), Beyond the translator’s invisibility: Critical reflections and new perspectives (pp. 31–49). Leuven University Press.

9. Kang, J. H. (2008). Institutional translation. In G. Saldanha & M. Baker (Eds.), Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies (pp. 141–146). Routledge.
10. Kang, J. H. (2014). Institutions translated: discourse, identity and power in institutional mediation. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology. 22(4), 469-478. https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2014.948892
11. Koskinen, K. (2000). Beyond ambivalence: Postmodernity and the ethics of translation. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Tampere University.
12. Koskinen, K. (2008). Translating institutions. An ethnographic study of EU translation. St. Jerome. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315759760
13. Koskinen, K. (2011). Institutional translation. In Y. Gambier & L. van Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook of translation studies (Vol. 2, pp. 54-61). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/hts.2.ins1
14. Martín Ruano, M. R. (2020). Translation vis-à-vis democratic deficit in the digital era: Policies, practices and possibilities of institutional translation in increasingly diverse societies. The International Journal for Translation & Interpreting Research, 12(2), 48-62. https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.11222.2020.a05
15. Mossop, B. (1988). Translating institutions: A missing factor in translation theory. TTR: Traduction, Terminologie, Rédaction, 1(2), 65-71. https://doi.org/10.7202/037019ar
16. Mossop, B. (1990). Translating institutions and ‘idiomatic’ translation. Meta: Translators’ Journal, 35(2), 342-355. https://doi.org/10.7202/003675AR
17. Myskja, K. (2013). Foreignisation and resistance: Lawrence Venuti and his critics. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 12(2), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.35360/njes.283
18. Pym, A. (1996). Venuti's visibility. Target, 8(1), 165-177. https://doi.org/10.1075/target.8.1.12pym Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Directorate for EU Affairs. (2017). The guide for translation of the EU acts. https://www.ab.gov.tr/44498.html
19. Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Directorate for EU Affairs. (2017). The annex booklet. https://www.ab.gov.tr/44498.html
20. Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Directorate for EU Affairs. (2024). 2023 yılı idare faaliyet raporu [2023 administrative activity report]. https://www.ab.gov.tr
21. Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Directorate for EU Affairs. (2025). 2024 yılı idare faaliyet raporu [2024 administrative activity report]. https://www.ab.gov.tr
22. Ruokonen, M., & Mäkisalo, J. (2018). Middling-status profession, high-status work: Finnish translators’ status perceptions in the light of their backgrounds, working conditions and job satisfaction. Translation & Interpreting, 10(2), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.110201.2018.a01
23. Schäffner, C. (2018). Translation and institutions. In F. Fernández & J. Evans (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of translation and politics (pp. 204-221). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315621289
24. Schäffner, C., Tcaciuc, L. S., & Tesseur, W. (2014). Translation practices in political institutions: A comparison of national, supranational, and non-governmental organisations. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology, 22(4), 493-510. https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2014.948890
25. Venuti, L. (1995). The translator's invisibility: A history of translation. Routledge.
26. Venuti, L. (1998). The scandals of translation. Towards an ethics of difference. Routledge.
27. Venuti, L. (2005). Translation, history, narrative. Meta: Translators’ Journal, 50(3), 800-816. https://doi.org/10.7202/011597ar
28. Yıldırım, O., & Altay, A. (2023). AB Tasarruflarının Türkçe Çevirilerinin Revizyon Süreci. DEÜ Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(1), 89-112.