A Method for Microhistorical Translation/Translator Research: With a Focus on the Iranian Context

Authors

  • Zahra Atefmehr Allameh Tabataba'i University
  • Farzaneh Farahzad Allameh Tabataba’i University

Keywords:

Microhistory, Translation studies, Translator studies, Method, Archives, Primary sources

Abstract

Microhistory can serve two functions in historical translation/translator studies. One is to discover the forgotten individual translators or to address the previously neglected issues concerning translations, translators, translational events, translation institutions, etc. And the other is to provide the translation/translator studies scholar with the means to take a fresh look at previously investigated topics. The two functions can be fulfilled through conducting a microscopic investigation of a topic and in light of discovering the overlooked primary sources as well as critical re-reading of the previously used sources. The purpose of this article is to propose a practical step-by-step method for microhistorical translation/translator research in the Iranian context. The article first briefly introduces microhistory. Because archives and primary sources are of great importance in microhistorical research, different types of sources are introduced afterwards. The paper then provides an overview of some of the existing microhistorical studies in the field of translation studies. After that, primary sources for a microhistorical translation/translator research are introduced and finally, a tentative method is proposed.

Author Biographies

Zahra Atefmehr, Allameh Tabataba'i University

Ph.D. Candidate of Translation Studies, Department of English Translation Studies, Faculty of Persian Literature and Foreign Languages, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran;

Farzaneh Farahzad, Allameh Tabataba’i University

Professor, Department of English Translation Studies, Faculty of Persian Literature and Foreign Languages, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran;

References

Adamo, S. (2006). Microhistory of translation. In G. L. Bastin, & P. F. Bandia (Eds.), Charting the future of translation history: Current discourses and methodology (pp. 81–100). Ottawa: University of Ottawa.

Bandia, P. F. (2014). Response. The Translator, 20(1), 112–118.

Cohen, T. V. (2017). The macrohistory of microhistory. Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies, 47(1), 53–74.

De Vivo, F. (2010). Prospect or refuge? Microhistory, history on the large scale: A response. Cultural and Social History, 7(3), 387–397.

Donnelly, M., & Norton, C. (2011). Doing history. London & New York: Routledge.

Ginzburg, C. (1980). Morelli, Freud and Sherlock Holmes: Clues and scientific method. History Workshop, 9, 5–36.

Ginzburg, C. (1993). Microhistory: Two or three things that I know about it. Critical Inquiry, 20(1), 10–35.

Gomez, H. (2017). A closer look into the life of ordinary translators through unordinary sources: The use of obituaries as a microhistory tool to study translators and translation in Ohio. New Voices in Translation Studies, 16, 55–83.

Howell, M. C., & Prevenier, W. (2001). From reliable sources: An introduction to historical methods. Ithaca & London: Cornell University Press.

Levi, G. (1992). On microhistory. In P. Burk (Ed.), New perspectives on historical writing (pp. 93–113). Pennsylvania: Penn State University Press.

Levi, G. (2012). Microhistory and the recovery of complexity. In S. Fellman, & M. Rahikainen (Eds.), Historical knowledge: In quest of theory, method and evidence (pp. 121–132). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publising.

Lundy, K. S. (2008). Historical research. In L. M. Given (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (Vol. 1 & 2, pp. 395–399). California: Sage.

Magnússon, S. G. (2003). The singularization of history: Social history and microhistory within the postmodern state of knowledge. Joural of Social History, 36(3), 701–735.

McCullagh, B. C. (2000). Bias in historical description, interpretation, and explanation. History and Theory, 39(1), 39–66.

Munday, J. (2013). The role of archival and manuscript research in the investigation of translator decision-making. Target, 25(1), 125–139.

Munday, J. (2014). Using primary sources to produce a microhistory of translation and translators: theoretical and methodological concerns. The Translator, 20(1), 64–80.

Paloposki, O. (2016). In search of an ordinary translator: translator histories, working practices and translator–publisher relations in the light of archival documents. The Translator, 1–18.

Pearce-Moses, R. (2005). A glossary of archival and records terminology. (L. Baty, Ed.) Chicago: The Society of American Archivists.

Saldanha, G., & O’Brien, S. (2013). Research methodologies in translation studies. London & New York: Routledge.

Santoyo, J.-C. (2006). Blank spaces in the history of translation. In G. L. Bastin, & P. F. Bandia (Eds.), Charting the future of translation history: Current discourses and methodology (pp. 11–43). Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.

Szijártó, I. (2017). What does microhistory look like today? In T. Robisheaux (Ed.), Microhistory today: A roundtable discussion (pp. 8–10). North Carolina: Duke University Press.

Tendler, J. (2013). Opponents of the Annales School. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

Ventresca, M. J., & Mohr, J. W. (2002). Archival research methods. In J. A. Baum (Ed.), The Blackwell companion to organizations (pp. 805–828). New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell.

Downloads

Published

2021-07-18

How to Cite

Atefmehr, Z., & Farahzad, F. (2021). A Method for Microhistorical Translation/Translator Research: With a Focus on the Iranian Context. Translation Studies Quarterly, 19(74), 55–71. https://dorl.org/dor/20.1001.1.17350212.1400.19.2.6.0

Issue

Section

Scientific Research Paper

DOR

Most read articles by the same author(s)

<< < 1 2 3