An Interdisciplinary Journal of Translation, Interpreting and Intercultural Communication ||

Calls for Papers

CLINA                             VERSIÓN EN ESPAÑOL

An Interdisciplinary Journal of Translation, Interpreting and Intercultural Communication

Revista Interdisciplinaria de Traducción, Interpretación y Comunicación Intercultural



Volume 6 Issue 2 (December) 2020

DEADLINE FOR ABSTRACT SUBMISSION (300 words approx.) by email to MAY 30, 2020


DEADLINE FOR THE SUBMISSION OF FULL PAPERS (accepted abstracts only) on (6000-8000 words): September 15, 2020





With this issue, we set out to continue the idea and wish of the journal Clina to focus on contexts of translation and interpreting from the point of view of intercultural mediation. This special issue of the journal will be devoted to phraseology in translation and interpreting with the aim of providing new perspectives that will enable us to advance the current state of knowledge in its threefold aspect: research, training and professional practice.

Phraseology has undergone great strides in recent years; proof of this is the large number of researchers who have devoted their work to this field of knowledge (Corpas Pastor, 1996, 2018; Mellado Blanco, 2013; Timofeeva, 2008; Ruiz Gurillo, 2010; Torijano Pérez & Recio Ariza, 2019). Its relevance in translation and interpreting is a noticeable and undeniable fact due to the contributions made by research in this field.

At the textual level, phraseological units (PU) and their translation represent an undeniable complexity added to the translation task, a difficulty that probably lies in the degree of transparency or opacity of these units. Increasing the degree of opacity of a PU makes it easier to locate it; however, it is precisely that opacity that makes it difficult to understand the meaning of the PU.

Among the theoretical-practical aspects that have begun to become relevant is, for example, Cognitive Grammar. Against this background, questions such as the following arise: what is the role of Cognitive Grammar in the process of phraseology acquisition? Can the idiomaticity of a language be explained through Cognitive Grammar? These approaches, along with other relevant aspects, seem to be gaining importance in the phraseological research of recent years. Cognitivism has begun to develop strategies applied to phraseology, such as the concepts of metonymy, metaphor and encyclopedic knowledge. To what extent cognitive strategies, as well as Cognitive Grammar itself, can shed light on this regard is another aspect that this issue aims to address, for which it proposes to present the main methodological aspects in the field of phraseology in its relationship with translation studies, contrastive linguistics, and corpus linguistics, and to offer the international readership a series of research studies on topics related to the field of translation and phraseology, aspects that can be studied from very different (inter)disciplinary approaches (linguistic, contrastive, sociological, cultural, etc.).

We, therefore, welcome proposals addressing topics including, but not limited to:

  • Theory of phraseology (contributions of phraseology in translation and interpreting and its most recent research trend)
  • Translating aspects of phraseology
  • Textual linguistics
  • Corpus linguistics (contribution of corpora of phraseology in translation and interpreting, the possibilities and limits of corpora in translation and interpreting, features of translated language through corpus approach), corpus-based terminology, new developments in corpus design)
  • Translation didactics (corpus as a tool for translation didactics and its reflection in translation didactics)
  • Phraseology teaching in FL
  • Phraseopragmatics (contribution of the pragmatic turn in phraseology)
  • Computer-aided translation (CAT). (Memsource, DeepL, etc.)


  • Corpas Pastor, Gloria (1996). Manual de fraseología española. Madrid: Editorial Gredos, 1996.
  • — “Laughing One’s Head off in Spanish Subtitles: A Corpus-based Study on Diatopic Variation and its Consequences for Translation”. In MOGORRÓN HUERTA, Pedro / ALBALADEJO MARTÍNEZ, Antonio (eds.): Fraseología, Diatopía y Traducción. John Benjamins, 2018.
  • Mellado Blanco, Carmen (2013). “La gramaticalización de las restricciones y preferencias de uso de las unidades fraseológicas del español y alemán desde un enfoque cognitivo-pragmático”. In OLZA, Inés / MANERO RICHARD, Elvira (eds.): Fraseopragmática. Berlín: Frank & Timme, pp. 303-331.
  • Ruiz-Gurillo, Leonor (2010). “Interrelaciones entre gramaticalización y fraseología en español”, Revista de filología española Tomo 90, Fasc. 1, p. 173-194.
  • Timofeeva, Larissa (2008). Acerca de los aspectos traductológicos de la fraseología española. Universidad de Alicante: Tesis doctoral.
  • Torijano Pérez, J. Agustín & Recio Ariza, M.ª Ángeles (2019). “La problemática de los Komposita en la Fraseología”. In DEL REY QUESADA, Santiago; DEL BARRIO DE LA ROSA, Florencio & GÓNZALEZ GÓMEZ, Jaime (eds.): Lenguas en contacto, ayer y hoy. Frankfurt a. M.: Peter Lang, p. 383-404.


The journal Clina was born as a vehicle for dissemination which, on the one hand, aims to respond to the growing need for forums where to publicise advances in the area of Translation and Interpreting and related disciplines and, on the other hand, to promote research in the lines defined as being of interest to the journal.

The journal’s name alludes to the complex and contingent nature of translation and communication phenomena. In a number of fields such as biology, economics, genetics, linguistics, mathematics and meteorology, a cline is a space of transition, a gradient that traces a path from one space to another while establishing relative models, forms, types, and norms. The variation and the difference between words said and how those words are reproduced, between an original text and a translation, between truth and how truth is represented, between oneself and the other are all characteristics of translation, interpreting, and fields akin to ours. This is the spirit behind the journal Clina, which with this issue takes its first step forward.

Created by the Department of Translation and Interpreting of the University of Salamanca -established in 1992 and, therefore, one of the pioneers in Spain-, the journal Clina has a conceptually open and transdisciplinary approach, although with a clear focus on Translation Studies. It is a concrete and consolidated discipline that has become increasingly important in a globalized universe such as the theoretical and practical investigation of that set of activities in which one text refers to another, trying to reactivate or reconstruct the communicative acts codified in it, adapted to a new linguistic, cultural and ideological context. Since communication is the core of any human activity, and recontextualization through languages and cultural environments an undeniable feature of the contemporary world, the focus must necessarily be broad. The journal includes contributions on translation and interpreting as a process and as a product, as well as studies from other areas of interest for interlinguistic and intercultural communication.

Periodicity: Two issues per year
Length of papers (between 6 and 9 per volume) 6,000-8,000 words (all inclusive)
Length of reviews: 2,000-2,500 (all inclusive)
Languages of the journal: English and Spanish

Reviews of publications related to each of the monograph topics (translation, interpreting and intercultural communication) are accepted. Reviews will be submitted through the journal Clina online site (

Proposals for future monograph topics are also accepted. If you are interested, you should contact the editors:



DEADLINE FOR ABSTRACT SUBMISSION (300 words approx.): 7th December, 2019.


DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF PAPERS (for accepted abstracts):1st March, 2020.




LIU, Jian; MARTÍN RUANO, M. Rosario and  WANG, Chenying (Eds.): Translating and Interpreting between Chinese and Spanish in the Contemporary World. Research, Training, Professional Practice / La traducción e interpretación entre el chino y el español en la época contemporánea. Investigación, formación, práctica profesional

Following in the footsteps of recent issues published by the Journal, which have focused on translation and interpreting contexts that have so far received less attention from academia, this special issue will be devoted to examining the ins and outs of translation and interpreting involving Chinese and Spanish. The aim is to offer new insights into the state-of-the-art in the threefold dimension of research, training and professional practice.

Both Chinese and Spanish are undoubtedly amongst the most widely spoken languages in the world. According to the latest report by the Cervantes Institute (2019) on the role of Spanish at a global level, these languages occupy the first and second place, respectively, in the classification of languages as determined by the number of native speakers, and the second and third place, behind English, according to the total number of speakers. On the other hand, as the Elcano Report on Spain-China relations (2018) also highlights, concurrent with the significant development experienced in their national contexts, in recent decades there has been a remarkable intensification of bilateral relations between China, Spain and the rest of the Spanish-speaking countries, as well as an increasing interest in learning the Chinese language and discovering Chinese culture in Spanish-speaking contexts and vice versa. In spite of this, the volume of research devoted to studying translation between these languages in various specialised fields, to identifying the specific difficulties faced today by those who carry out translation and intercultural mediation tasks involving these languages in different professional contexts, and to reflecting on the challenges faced both by practising translators and by those who have the responsibility of training future professionals can still be described as scant.

In this context, this special issue of the journal Clina aims to serve as a platform for disseminating studies that will deepen our knowledge of the realities and challenges of the practice and teaching of translation between these two intrinsically “poly-” or “pluricentric” languages (Quesada Pacheco 2008; Rovira Esteva 2010: 271; Amorós-Negre and Prieto de los Mozos 2017) which, from “super-central” positions, interact within a system whose “hyper-central” position is indisputably occupied by English (Moreno Fernández 2015: 5). For that purpose, the concepts and approaches offered by contemporary theories of translation and other related disciplines and developed by researchers located both in the vast geography of the Spanish-speaking world on both sides of the Atlantic and on the Asian continent will be particularly useful. In addition to broadening our perspectives regarding the complex linguistic dynamics of contemporary globalisation and the processes of identity construction that take place in intercultural exchanges between the Chinese and Hispanic cultural spheres, the volume will also aim to fine-tune, enrich and diversify the theoretical-methodological basis of Translation Studies. Indeed, as more and more critical voices have been raised against certain research biases, including Eurocentrism, which may limit the development of our discipline (Tymozcko 2009; van Doorslaer and Flynn 2013), the calls to broaden the understanding of the phenomenon of translation through a greater integration of the plurality of visions, conceptions and translatological traditions that coexist around the globe have also recently gained strength.

We therefore welcome proposals for articles adopting various (inter)disciplinary approaches (linguistic, contrastive, sociological, cultural, etc.) and addressing issues including, but not limited to:

  • Realities and current needs of translation: translation and intercultural mediation between Chinese and Spanish in specialised contexts (i.e., legal, scientific-technical, literary, political, tourism, industry, trade, new technologies, the media, etc.).
  • Negotiation of cultures and identities in translation: analysis of translations and professional practices in different specialised domains between Chinese and Spanish, reception of authors and cultural production from China in Spanish-speaking contexts and vice versa, analysis of the dynamics of translation and cultural transfer between Spanish and Chinese in the globalised era, etc.
  • Current choices and future challenges in professional practices and translator training: resources and tools available for translation, description of professional and pedagogical practices in Chinese and Spanish contexts, critical approaches, etc.
  • Challenges of translation research: identification of new translation situations and new professional scenarios in the Chinese-Spanish language pair, application of translation theories of Chinese origin to the study of translation in Spanish-speaking areas, reception of Spanish-speaking translation theorists in China, etc.



Amorós-Negre and Emilio Prieto de los Mozos. 2017. “El grado de pluricentrismo de la lengua española”, Language Problems and Language Planning 41(3): 245-264.

Esteban, Mario (coord.). 2018. Informe Elcano. Relaciones China-España. Madrid: Real Instituto Elcano. Available at:

Fernández-Vítores, David. 2019. El español: una lengua viva. Instituto Cervantes: Centro Virtual Cervantes. Available at:

Moreno-Fernández, Francisco. 2015. “La importancia internacional de las lenguas”, Informes del Observatorio de la lengua española y las culturas hispánicas en los Estados Unidos, 0010-04, doi: 10.15427/OR010-04/2015SP. Available at:

Quesada Pacheco, Miguel Ángel. 2008. “De la norma monocéntrica a la norma policéntrica en español. Algunas reflexiones históricas según testimonios y actitudes lingüísticas”, Lecture given at the II Conference on Multiculturality and Polycentric Norm: Applications in the Teaching of Spanish as a Foreign Language. Available at:

Rovira-Esteva, Sara. 2010. Lengua y escritura chinas. Mitos y realidades. Barcelona: Edicions Bellaterra (Library of Contemporary China, 21).

Tymoczko, Maria. 2009. “Why translators should want to internationalize Translation Studies”, The Translator 15 (2): 401–421.

van Doorslaer, Luc and Peter Flynn (eds.). 2011. Eurocentrism in Translation Studies. Special issue of Translation and Interpreting Studies 6 (2).


About Clina:


CLINA is a Translation Studies journal that addresses the growing need for dissemination platforms to showcase recent advances in Translation, Interpreting and neighbouring disciplines. It also seeks to promote the growing body of research currently being produced along these avenues of inquiry. Under the auspices of the Department of Translation and Interpreting at the University of Salamanca, one of the earliest champions of the discipline in Spain since 1992, this broad-based, cross-disciplinary journal clearly focuses on the field of Translation Studies. Understood as the theoretical and practical study of a set of activities which results from one text referring to another in an attempt to reactivate or reconstruct within a new linguistic, cultural and ideological context the communicative acts encoded in the first text, Translation Studies is a distinct, widely-recognised discipline that is becoming increasingly prominent in an ever more globalised world. Because human communication is the essence of every human activity, and because the re-contextualisation of this communication in other languages and cultural contexts is an undeniable feature of the world we inhabit, the journal’s focal point is wide-ranging and all-inclusive. The contributions on these pages examine translation and interpreting as processes and products, and they also include studies on interlinguistic and intercultural communication.
The journal’s name, CLINA, alludes to the complex and interconnected nature of translatorial and communicative phenomena. In a number of fields such as biology, economics, genetics, linguistics, mathematics and meteorology, a cline is a space of transition, a gradient that traces a path from one space to another while establishing intermediate models, forms, types and norms at significant waypoints of development. The variation and the difference between words said and how those words are reproduced, between an original text and a translation, between truth and how truth is represented, between oneself and the other are all characteristics of translation, interpreting and fields akin to ours. This is the spirit behind the journal CLINA.

Periodicity: Two issues per year

Length of articles (6-9 contributions per volume): 6,000-8,000 words (all inclusive)

Length of reviews: 2,000-2,500 (all inclusive)

Languages of the journal: English and Spanish

Clina stylesheet:

For further information, contact the editors:




AUROVÁ, Miroslava & PEŠKOVÁ, Jana & TORIJANO, J. Agustín (Eds.):

Translation and Interpretation of Smaller Languages in the EU (II) – Slavic Languages (Czech)

La traducción e interpretación de lenguas de menor difusión en la Unión Europea (II) – Las lenguas eslavas (checo)

This issue aims to give continuity to the idea of presenting different minority languages that started with the issue on Dutch edited by Goedele De Sterck and Anna Vermeulen (2016/2). In this case, we will now focus on Slavic languages and Czech in particular. Czech has been an official language of the EU since May 1, 2004, and it is the mother tongue of approximately 10.6 million people. In spite of its undeniable position as a minority language within the context of European languages, we defend the idea that it is a language with a long and significant linguistic and literary tradition, as proven by the existence of the Prague Linguistic School, all the Czech research on the field of translation theory (particularly in the seventies of the past century) and an enormous development of contrastive linguistics due to the creation and design of linguistic corpora, both monolingual and parallel.

The most emblematic element of Prague linguistics is function, a concept that is reflected in its research on the fields of literature, semiotics, linguistics (Mukařovský, Vachek, Daneš), etc. It is only normal that the concepts of functionality and potentiality gave way to new ideas in the field of translation studies that, thanks to the work of the Charles University on this field, have been reintroduced in the global scenario through recent translations of the most relevant publications into different languages (for example, with the work by Jiří Levý, that was translated and spread by Králová and Cuenca, among others). Therefore, within the enormous complexity of the topics related to the Prague structuralism, and considering its relevance for Translation, we can highlight the concept of language function, which plays an essential role in Translation Studies. Nevertheless, the contributions of Czech linguistics are not only related to the past. On the contrary, there are exceptional recent pieces of research in this field, including the design, methodology and development of electronic tools, such as the different types of linguistic corpora or other CAT tools (e.g.: Memsource), with remarkable quality.

Some of the practical aspects that may be mentioned here are, for example, the status of translators and interpreters from and into Czech in the current European scenario, considering the predominance of English. Consequently, the following questions may be considered: is it worth it nowadays to train translators and interpreters on minority languages, and particularly Czech? What is their position among the translators/interpreters of the “top ten” languages among the institutions of the EU? What is the future of translation and interpreting of minority languages in the context of a globalized Europe? With regard to a world that is (not only) linguistically globalized, what is the role played by the linguistic corpora of minority languages and what are their possibilities and their limits?

This issue wants to present the main methodological lines in the fields of Translation Studies, Contrastive Linguistics and Corpus Linguistics, and to offer different studies on topics related to the field of translation and to the Czech languages to an international audience. In this sense, there is a wide range of topics that go from the more theoretical to the more practical.

Therefore, the following thematic lines are proposed for this issue of the journal, although it will not be limited strictly to them:

  • Translation Theory (contributions of the translation schools from the old Czechoslovakia and their reception in Spanish-speaking countries; the Prague Linguistic School and its contributions to translation)
  • Corpus Linguistics (contribution of parallel corpora of minority languages to translation; possibilities and limits of corpora in translation; features of translated languages from the perspective of corpora; corpus-based terminology; new advances in corpus design)
  • Didactics of translation (the corpus as a tool for the didactics of translation; main typological features of the Slavic languages and their contribution to the didactics of translation)
  • The translator and the interpreter in the context of minority languages (position of translators and interpreters from and into Czech in the European field; training of translators and interpreters from and into Czech in European universities; the points of view of translators and interpreters).
  • Literary translation (translations of works from Czech authors into Spanish and vice versa; works by Spanish-speaking authors translated in the old Czechoslovakia; translations of works by Spanish-speaking authors in the aristocratic libraries of Bohemia).
  • Computer-assisted translation(CAT) (MemsourceDeepL, etc.).


MARIACHIARA RUSSO & ICÍAR ALONSO ARAGUÁS (Eds.). Interpreting in International Organisations. Research, Training and Practice.

For the multilingual and multicultural profession of interpreting, the last decades of the XX century and the first of the XXI have served to take stock of recent advancements and to reassess the role of the profession in society. Since the very inception of simultaneous interpreting in the 1920s (Baigorri-Jalón 2000 and 2004) and the creation of the first specialized schools which began training interpreters for large international organizations (mainly the United Nations and the European Union), the profession and training for the profession have been racked by political, sociological and technical changes.  On the one hand, these many changes have had to do with keeping apace with the expectedly heightened societal demands, which have triggered both international organizations and higher education training centers to adapt to the times. On the other hand, the unstoppable development of information and communication technologies have enabled new modalities of interpreting to emerge and have improved the technical quality of existing modalities.

As we have pointed our elsewhere (Garzone & Viezzi 2002), the unrelenting evolution of the interpreting profession has also changed significantly the skill set that professional interpreters need to posses, the technical means that they need to be familiar with, and the working conditions within international organizations where their services are needed. These specific changes have also affected each and every one of the working environments where interpreters mediate between languages and cultures (Schäffner et al. 2013; Iliescu & Ortega 2015).

In addition to legal interpreting (Biel & Engberg 2013; Del Pozo & Blasco 2015), interpreting for public services is probably where the greatest challenges for advancement of the profession lie (Valero-Garcés et al. 2011; Valero-Garcés & Martin 2008). International organizations, which are well aware of these challenges, are also faced with new technical and professional hurdles to overcome.

This special issue of Clina will provide a forum for reflection on the recent developments, present state and future goals of interpreting in international organizations. Contributions centered on the latest research, on training initiatives and on professional best practices are welcome. The main objective in bringing together the expertise of all manner of international organizations that provide interpreting is to look back on the recent changes and how they have been implemented, to identify the future prospects and challenges that loom ahead, and to disseminate descriptions and reflections about best practices that will allow specialized interpreter training centers to envision the new scenarios where their graduates are expected to perform professionally.



Baigorri Jalón, J. (2000) La interpretación de conferencias: el nacimiento de una profesión De París a Nuremberg. Granada: Comares. (2000) De Paris à Nuremberg: naissance de l’interprétation de conférence (traduit sous la direction de C. Foz). Ottawa: Presses de l’Université d’Ottawa. (2014) From Paris to Nuremberg: the Birth of Conference Interpreting. (Translated and edited by H. Mikkelson and B. S. Olsen). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Baigorri Jalón, J. (2004) Interpreters at the United Nations: A History. Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca.

Biel, L. & Engberg, J. (eds.) (2013) Research models and methods in legal translation. Linguistica Antverpiensia, nº 12.

Del Pozo. M. & M. J. Blasco (eds.) (2015) Legal interpreting at a turning point. La interpretación en el ámbito judicial en un momento de cambio. Monti. Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación. Special Issue 1.

Garzone, G. & M. Viezzi (eds.) (2002) Interpreting in the 21st century. Challenges and Opportunities. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.

Iliescu Gheorghiu, C. & J.M. Ortega Herráez (eds.) (2015) Insights in interpreting. Status and developments. Reflexiones sobre la interpretación. Presente y futuro. Monti. Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación. Special Issue 2.

Schäffner, C. et al. (eds.) (2013) Interpreting in a Changing Landscape. Selected papers from Critical Link 6. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Valero-Garcés, C.& A. Martin(eds.) (2008) Crossing Borders in Community Interpreting. Definitions and Dilemmas, Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Valero-Garcés, C. et al. (eds.) (2011) Traducción e Interpretación en los Servicios Públicos en el siglo XXI. Avanzando hacia la unidad en medio de la globalización (DVD), Madrid: Publicaciones Universidad de Alcalá.


Topics of interest to be included (but not restricted)

  • Past and present history of the interpreting in international organizations;
  • Settings: at headquarters vs. missions (including conflict zones), diplomatic settings, international courts, beyond conference interpreting…
  • Working conditions and modes used:  consecutive, simultaneous without and with text, sight interpreting/translation, whispered interpreting, remote interpreting. Insights on evolution and challenges;
  • Selection process, recruitment testing, skills and candidate (changing) profiles;
  • Linguistic challenges and strategies: speed, accents, topics/compression, stress, creativity, and others;
  • Internal and external specific training at international organizations: synergies and interactions between institutions and universities, initiatives to improve training and selection processes, good practices;
  • Information and communication technologies and simultaneous interpreting;
  • Interpreting quality and users’ expectations; perceptions of the profession from providers, institutions and interpreters themselves.


DE STERCK, GOEDELE & VERMEULEN, ANNA (eds.). Translation and interpretation of smaller languages in the EU.

The European Union currently has 24 official languages spoken throughout its 28 Member States. The EU multilingualism policy is unique in the world. Although all official languages enjoy equal status, it is well known that some are more equal than others, especially from a political, social and economic point of view. In fact, the three core languages of the European Union are English, French, and German, with English being the dominant language, the lingua franca. According to the Special Eurobarometer 386: Europeans and their Languages (2012), it is the most widely spoken language, whereas the most widely spoken mother tongue is German (16%), followed by Italian and English (13% each), French (12%), and Spanish and Polish (8% each). In terms of number of native speakers, these six languages usually are considered to be ‘big’ languages, as compared to all other languages, generally referred to as ‘relatively small’ or ‘small languages’.

How does the aforementioned state of play affect translation and interpretation from and into smaller languages in the EU context? The proposed special issue seeks to shed some light on the challenges and opportunities arising from this particular situation. As it is impossible to deal with all “smaller” languages within the scope of this volume, we aim to focus on one of them, assuming that the findings may apply, at least to some extent, to the others. The final choice has fallen on Dutch, which could be defined as a kind of “in-between” language in so far as it concerns a ‘relatively small’ European language and a ‘small global language’ in the words of The Dutch Language Union. About 23 million people (in the Netherlands, Belgium, Suriname, Aruba, Curaçao and Sint Maarten) speak Dutch as a mother tongue. For the purpose of this publication, we will refer to European Dutch only.

The proposed special issue will explore the current status of translation and interpretation from and into Dutch in the European context. The aim is to examine the linguistic and extralinguistic factors influencing quality and quantity of oral and written translation as well as translation and interpretation process, product and methodology in an intercultural setting.

In order to achieve a comprehensive overview, we welcome contributions that benefit from recent research in the field of interpretation, literary translation, specialised translation (legal, economic, scientific, technical, medical, audiovisual, localisation, etc.), terminology and translation, technology and translation, corpus use and translation, from and into Dutch and from a theoretical or/and an empirical perspective.

Themes to be addressed may include but are not restricted to the following:

  • What are the current trends in interpretation from and into Dutch, with special attention paid to intercultural mediation and community interpretation?
  • What factors influence the selection of a Dutch/Flemish literary work for translation? Do translators adapt their translations in anticipation of publishers’ demands or readers’ expectations? Which strategies do they use?
  • How do translators deal with language variety (Belgium Dutch vs. Netherlandic Dutch) and cultural diversity (hybridisation)? For example, in the particular case of audiovisual translation or the translation of literary works written in Dutch by immigrant authors.
  • Is there still any need for scientific and technical translation or should we speak of a critical shift to English-only? Should a distinction be made between specialised discourse and popularisation?
  • What are the most recent terminology tools in Dutch? Is there still any need for specialised bilingual or multilingual glossaries? How do institutions, scientists, technicians, journalists and translators deal with neologisms?
  • What are the most recent findings based on parallel corpora?
  • Industrial developers of language technology tend to focus their efforts on the major languages because of their economic potential and the larger target market. What are the consequences for the development of Dutch language technology?


SHAMMA, TAREK (ed.). Arabic literature in translation: Politics and poetics.

Arabic literature, declared Edward Said in 1990, “remains relatively unknown and unread in the West, for reasons that are unique, even remarkable.” More than twenty years later, it is hard to say that the situation has remained the same: there has been a notable rise in the quantity of Arabic literary works available in several European languages. Yet, considering the increased interest in Arab and Muslim societies following various political events and the remarkable growth of Arabic literature (especially the novel) in recent years, it is rather surprising that translating and publishing Arabic literature in European languages is often seen as something of a gamble.

Whether it is their illustrative social value, exotic appeal, or confirmation of established political views or representations, the translation of Arabic literary works has often had to be justified in terms other than those of aesthetic merit or literary value. This intersection of literary and socio- political factors is one of the main questions this collection aims to investigate.

The proposed special issue will explore the current status of translated Arabic literature in Europe and North America from various angles. The aim is to examine the factors influencing the selection of works for translation, and the choices and dilemmas facing translators and publishers in the process of transporting Arabic literary works into a new environment. The editor is especially interested in the combination of literary, social, and political elements that play out in the selection, translation, framing, publication, and reception of Arabic works.

We welcome contributions that benefit from recent research in translation studies, especially those engaging critically with traditional paradigms in translation theory or scholarship on Arabic literature.

Themes to be addressed may include but are not restricted to the following:

  •  What factors influence the selection of an Arabic literary work for translation
  • Do translators (in anticipation of publishers’ demands or readers’ expectations) foreground, or exaggerate, particular stylistic or thematic aspects in the works they translate? And what strategies do they use for this purpose?
  • Have recent political developments in the Middle East and globally (the 9/11 attacks, the invasion of and withdrawal from Iraq, the “Arab Spring”), and the ensuing interest in the culture and politics of the Arab World, had any impact on the perception of Arabic literature and the conditions surrounding its translation?
  • How valid are the conventional paradigms of Orientalism and exoticism in understanding current translator choices and audience reactions in European languages?
  • To what extent are Arab institutions, intellectuals, and writers themselves to blame for perpetuating the marginalization of Arabic literature in the global arena?
  • Does Edward Said’s description of Arabic literature as “embargoed” still illustrate (if it did in the first place) the way Arabic literature is being treated by translators, publishers, and readers? Is there a deliberate intent, as Said stated, to “interdict any attention to texts that do not reiterate the usual clichés about ‘Islam,’ violence, sensuality and so forth”?
  • To what extent do the conditions and modes of reception of translations from Arabic differ across audiences and countries?
  • In what ways could the prospect of being selected for translation into a European language influence an Arab writer’s choice of style and theme?
  • Are the conditions in which Arabic literature is translated and received comparable to those governing the reception of literary works from other marginalized communities, especially “Third World” countries?
  • Recent years have seen a growing number of immigrant Arab authors writing in ex- colonial languages, such as English and French. Has this phenomenon had any effect on the perception of Arabic literary works, their selection for translation, or readers’ expectations?





Clina frontpage

Política de privacidad