últimas corrientes teóricas en los estudios de traducción - Gredos ...

OVIDI CARBONELL–IDENTITY IN TRANSLATION
any of the series published by Ediciones del Oriente y del Mediterráneo. Salvador Peña reveals
himself as the translator-enunciator in several instances in the novel; in this passage he opts
on three occasions for certain strategies that reverse or even interrupt (Bhabha 136) what we
may call the traditional orientalist/ exoticist discourse, thus helping build an analogy
between the (Spanish) Same and the (Arab) Other that for me is a sort of subversive
familiarization. The first instance is the use of campiña in the second line. A much-needed
corpus approach to Spanish vocabulary would clarify further the implications of this
choice. However, a short glance into the best Spanish dictionaries such as María Moliner’s
Diccionario de uso del español, confirms that the frames conjured up by campiña are not readily
associated to an Egyptian landscape:
The stranging effect is precisely achieved by means of a domestic (familiar) concept
that is not generally applied to unfamiliar, exotic Arab world frames. If I am not wrong,
this sort of effect is what Venuti advocates when he talks about a minoritising translation
project, Africa Vidal when she advocates a transversal ethics for translation, or Spivak’s call to
“hold the agency of the translator and the demands of her imagined or actual audience at
bay”.
The next option is the translation of ilà ismin ‘akhirin nakiratin «another
indeterminate/ unknown name» by sino un nombre árabe. What is the need for saying that it is
an Arabic name if the source text does not specify it? Clearly, in order to draw a distinction
between the Italian name mentioned earlier and the fact that an «indeterminate» name, a
neutral, unmarked name in the source culture should become a qualified Arabic name in the
target culture. Here the translator is commenting upon his translated work, and his is yet
another enuntiator voice, but unlikely d), which is the tacit assumption that the work has
been translated, here we encounter e), a voice who is aware of the possibility of the reader
thinking that foreign names are not at all uncommon in Alexandria, but are the norm. Now,
you might say that this voice is in the same position as the translator-cum-orientalist,
drawing unnecessary differences where they are probably not needed, but I think that does
not apply to this autobiographical text. Were it a traditional third-person narrative, the
author’s agency would be restrained and the translator-narrator’s voice (figure d)) would be
substituted for native voices.
The third option is a reelaboration on source text jama c at islamiyya «Islamic groups»
which, in fact, allude to radical Islamic political activists. These are rightly translated as
islamistas (“Muslim extremists; fundamentalists”), a recent coinage in the Spanish language
which opposes to musulmanes (“muslims in general”). The point of view is that of a
[Christian] Copt, and therefore the implicit ideological implications of the source text
address need to be made explicit in Spanish. This shows at the least a sound understanding
of the characters’ circumstances on the part of the translator, and adds to the e) voice I
mentioned. All in all, the first-person narrator’s experience is intermingled with the reader’s
experience and world view thanks to these rendering options, and not differed. But then a
gap has been filled that leaves certain uneasiness: far from reassuring readers with their
stereotypes, the passage challenges traditional views bringing closer actions, characters and
voices, identities in the text. So islamistas, which is an essentialist concept, is used
strategically and affirmatively to challenge the general representation of Arabs as Muslims
116