LOW SOCIAL STATUS, HIGH INDIVIDUAL STATUS: TURKISH TRANSLATORS IN THE STATE AND PRIVATE SECTORS

Öz

The translation literature indicates a negative perception regarding the translator status and the translation profession. This study aims to explore how the state and private sector translators’ social, symbolic, cultural capital and translatorial habitus are related to their self-perceptions of status as a professional group in Turkey. With this aim in mind, semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with thirteen translators who work in the state and private sectors in Turkey. The results of the interviews are discussed in the light of Pierre Bourdieu’s key concepts of capital and habitus. According to the findings of the study, translation is not still a fully established profession in Turkey. The findings also indicate that translators don't assign the same value to all the capital forms. Especially the possession of a distinctive cultural capital in an unregulated field leads them to develop a professional habitus of proud, satisfied, committed experts. In light of the qualitative findings this study argues that the social negative narratives regarding the translation profession in Turkey clash with the translators’ personal narratives in terms of their social, symbolic, cultural capital and translatorial habitus.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Translator Status
• Status Perception
• Habitus
• Capital

DÜŞÜK TOPLUMSAL STATÜ, YÜKSEK BİREYSEL STATÜ: TÜRKİYE'DE KAMU VE ÖZEL SEKTÖR ÇEVİRMENLERİ

Öz

Çeviribilim araştırmalarında çevirmen statüsü ve çevirmenlik mesleğine ilişkin olumsuz bir algı söz konusudur. Bu çalışmanın amacı Türkiye’de özel sektörde ve kamu sektöründe çalışan çevirmenlerin bir meslek grubu olarak statülerine yönelik öz algılarının sosyal, sembolik, kültürel sermayeleri ve çevirmen habituslarıyla ilişkisini araştırmaktır. Bu amaç doğrultusunda, özel sektörde ve kamu sektöründe çalışan toplam 13 çevirmen ile yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmeler yapılmıştır. Bu görüşmelerin verileri Pierre Bourdieu’nun habitus ve sermaye kavramları ışığında incelenmiştir. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre, Türkiye’de çevirmenlikte meslekleşme süreci tamamlanmış değildir. Ayrıca araştırma sonuçları, çevirmenlerin farklı sermaye türlerine eşit derecede değer vermediklerine işaret etmektedir. Özellikle düzenlemelerin eksik olduğu bir alanda ayırt edici bir kültürel sermayeye sahip olmaları, çevirmenlerin işiyle gurur duyun, iş tatmini yüksek, kendini mesleğe adamış uzman şeklinde bir mesleki habitus geliştirmesine yol açmaktadır. Araştırma Türkiye’de çevirmenlik mesleğine ilişkin olumsuz toplumsal anlaıların, çevirmenlerin sosyal, sembolik, kültürel ve çevirmenlik habitusları açısından kişisel anlatıları ile çatışmakta olduğunu savunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Çevirmen Statüsü
• Statü Algısı
• Habitus
• Sermaye

Kaynakça

1. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
2. Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education (pp. 241–258). Editor John Richardson. Westport, CT: Greenwood.
3. Bourdieu, P. (1987). Choses dites. Paris: Éditions de Minuit.
4. Bourdieu, P. and Wacquant, L. (1989). For a Socio-Analysis of Intellectuals: On "Homo Academicus", An Interview With Pierre Bourdieu, by Loïc J.D. Wacquant. Berkeley Journal of Sociology. 34: 1-29.
5. Bourdieu, P. (1993b). The Field of Cultural Production: Essays on Art and Literature. UK: Polity Press.
6. Bourdieu, P. (1994). Texts of Sociology. Athens: Delfini.
7. Bourdieu, P. (2000). Practical discourses for the theory of action. Athens: Plethron.
8. Bourdieu, P. (2006). The sense of practice. Athens: Alexandreia.

9. Chan, Andy Lung Jan (2005). Why are most translators underpaid? A descriptive explanation using asymmetric information and a suggested solution from signalling theory. Translation Journal. 9 (2) http://accurapid.com/journal/32asymmetric.htm. (05.02.2019)
10. Chesterman, A. (2006). Questions in the sociology of translation. Translation Studies at the Interface of Disciplines (pp. 9-27). Editors Ferreira Duarte, João/Assis Rosa, Alexandra/Seruya, Teresa (Eds.). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
11. Dam, H.V. and Zethsen, K.K. (2008). Translator Status: A Study of Danish Company Translators. The Translator. 14: 71–96.
12. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13556509.2008.10799250, (02.02. 2019).
13. Dam, H.V. and Zethsen, K.K. (2009). Who Said Low Status? A Study on Factors Affecting the Perception of Translator Status. The Journal of Specialised Translation. 12: 2–36. http://www.jostrans.org/issue12/art_dam_zethsen.php, (09.02.2019).
14. Dam, H.V. and Zethsen, K.K. (2010). Helpers and Opponents in the Ongoing Battle of an Emerging Profession. Target. 22(2): 194–211.
15. Dam, H.V. and Zethsen, K.K. (2011). The Status of Professional Business Translators on the Danish Market: A Comparative Study of Company, Agency and Freelance Translators. Meta. 56(4), 976–997.
16. Dam, H.V. and Zethsen, K.K. (2012). Translators in international organizations: a special breed of high-status professionals? Danish EU translators as a case in point. Translation and Interpreting Studies 7(2): 211–232.
17. Eruz, S. (2012). Çeviri Derneği Ve Türkiye’de Çevirmenlik Mesleğinin Statüye Kavuş(a)ma(ma)sı Üzerine On Üç Yıllık Gel Gitli Bir Öykü [The Translation and Interpreting Association of Turkey and the 13-Year Story of the Status of the Translation Profession in Turkey]. Proceedings of the Ministry for EU Affairs Translation Platform (pp.17–23), organized by the Ministry for EU Affairs. İstanbul. June 9, 2012.
18. http://www.ab.gov.tr/files/ceb/Ceviri_Platformu_Resimleri/platform_bildirileri.pdf.(12.02.2019).
19. Heino, A. (2017). Contemporary Finnish Literary Translators and Symbolic Capital (pp.52-63). Editors Keng, Nicole/Nuopponen, Anita/Rellstab, Daniel. Ääniä, Röster, Voices, Stimmen. VAKKI-symposiumi XXXVII. VAKKI Publications 8.
20. Gouanvic, J.M. (1999). Sociologie de la traduction- La science-fiction américaine dans l’espace culturel français des années 1950. Arras: Artois Presses Université.
21. Gouanvic, J. M. (2005). A Bourdieusian theory of translation, or the coincidence of practical instances. The Translator. (11)2: 147-166.
22. Katan, D. (2009a). Translation Theory and Professional Practice: A Global Survey of the Great Divide. Hermes. 42: 111–154.
23. https://tidsskrift.dk/her/article/view/96849, (19.11.2018).
24. Katan, D. (2009b). Occupation or Profession: A Survey of the Translators’ World. Translation and Interpreting Studies. 4(2): 187–209.
25. Kartal, K. (2012). Çeviri Sektörü: Sorunlar ve Çözüm Önerileri [The Translation Sector: Problems and Proposals for Solution]. Proceedings of the Ministry for EU Affairs Translation Platform, (pp.40-42), organized by the Ministry for EU Affairs. İstanbul. June 9, 2012.
26. http://www.ab.gov.tr/files/ceb/Ceviri_Platformu_Resimleri/platform_bildirileri.pdf, (15.02.2019).
27. Meylaerts, R. (2010). Habitus and Self-description of Native Literary Authors-Translators in Diglossic Societies. Translation and Interpreting Studies. 1-19.
28. Millerson, G. (2001). The Qualifying Associations: A Study in Professionalization. London: Routledge.
29. Öner, I.B. (2012). Sektörde ve Akademide Kronometre Çalışmaya Başladı. Yarışı Göğüslemek İçin Ne Yapmalıyız?. Proceedings of the Ministry for EU Affairs Translation Platform, (pp.4-9), organized by the Ministry for EU Affairs. İstanbul. June 9, 2012.
30. http://www.ab.gov.tr/files/ceb/Ceviri_Platformu_Resimleri/platform_bildirileri.pdf, (02.02.2019).
31. Özaydın, Ü. (2012). AB Sürecinde Sözlü ve Yazılı Çeviri Standartları [Translation and Interpreting Standards in the EU Process]. Proceedings of the Ministry for EU Affairs Translation Platform, (p.64), organized by the Ministry for EU Affairs. İstanbul. June 9, 2012.
32. http://www.ab.gov.tr/files/ceb/Ceviri_Platformu_Resimleri/platform_bildirileri.pdf, (01.02.2019).
33. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
34. Prime Ministry Directorate for Administration Development = Başbakanlık İdareyi Geliştirme Başkanlığı. (2015). Türkiye’de Çevirmenlik Mesleği [The Translation Profession in Turkey]. http://buder.org.tr/Kutuphane/ ÇEVİRMENLİK%20RAPORU10.08.2015.pdf (05.05.2019).
35. Pym, A., Grin, F., Sfreddo, C., Chan, A.L.J. (2012). The Status of the Translation Profession in the European Union. Studies on Translation and Multilingualism. Luxembourg: Publication Offices of the European Union. http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/translation/publications/studies/translation_profession_en.pdf, (20.12.2018).
36. Pym, A. (2013). Translator Associations-from gatekeepers to communities. Target. 26(3): 1-22. Ruokonen, M., Svahn, E. & Salmi, L. (2016). Panel 10. Translator status and identity: constructed and experienced boundaries of the translation profession. [Abstract] EST Congress 2016, Aarhus, Denmark. http://bcom.au.dk/research/conferencesandlectures/est-congress-2016/panels/ panel-10-translator-status-and-identity-constructed-and-experienced-boundariesof-the-translation-profession. (15.06.2019).
37. Ruokonen, M. (2016). Realistic but not pessimistic: Finnish translation students’ perceptions of translator status. The Journal of Specialized Translation. (25): 188-212
38. Ruokonen, M. and Mäkisalo, J. (2018). Middling-status profession, high-status work: Finnish translators’ status perceptions in the light of their backgrounds, working conditions and job satisfaction. The International Journal for Translation&Interpreting Research. (10:1): 1-17
39. Saldanha, G. and O’Brien, S. (2014). Research Methodologies in Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge.
40. Sela-Sheffy, R. (2010). ‘Stars’ or ‘Professionals’: The Imagined Vocation and Exclusive Knowledge of Translators in Israel. MonTI2: Applied Sociology in Translation Studies (pp.131-152). Editors Esther Monzó and Oscar Diaz Fouces. Publicaciones de la Universidad de Alicante.
41. Simeoni, D. (1998). The Pivotal Status of the Translator’s Habitus. Target 10(1): 1-39.
42. Swartz, D. (1997). Culture and Power: The Sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
43. Toudic, D. (2012). The OPTIMALE Employer Survey and Consultation. https://www.euatc.org/images/Optimale_WP4_Synthesis_report.pdf (15.02.2019).
44. Uysal, N.M., Odacıoğlu, M.C., Köktürk, Ş. (2015). Current Position of Translatorship in Turkey in Terms of Professionalization, Problems and Suggestions. The Journal of International Social Research. 8(36): 257–266. http://www.sosyalarastirmalar.com/cilt8/sayi36_pdf/1dil_edebiyat/uysal_muge_cemodacioglu.pdf, (15.10.2018).
45. Uysal, N.M. (2017). Çevirmenlikte meslekleşme ve çevirmen sertifikasyonu. Ankara: Gece Kitaplığı.
46. Volti, R. (2008). An introduction to the sociology of work and occupations. Los Angeles: Pine Forge Press.
47. Wolf, M. (2006). The Female State of Art: women in the ‘translation field’. Sociocultural Aspects of Translating and Interpreting (pp.129-141). Editors Pym, Anthony, Miriam Shlesinger and Zuzana Jettmarová. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins.
48. Wolf, M. (2011). Mapping the field: sociological perspectives on translation. International Journal of the Sociology of Language. 2011(207): 1-28.
49. Wolf, M. (2014). The sociology of translation and its ‘activist turn’. Sociological Turn in Translation and Interpreting Studies (pp.7-21). Editor Claudia Angelelli. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
50. Yılmaz-Gümüş, V. (2018). Solidity and professionalization of translation: Turkey as a case in point. Hermes - Journal of Language and Communication in Business. 58: 43-63.