Attitude of the (Artificial) Translator towards Signs of Gender Discrimination and Violence
Didem Tuna KüçükSexism leaking from reality into literature as an extension of discrimination has been spread time and again through translation in different cultural versions. The signs constructing inequality are so integrated into literature that they commonly remain unnoticeable due to excessive ordinarization. O. Henry’s "A Harlem Tragedy" is an extreme case, where physical violence is treated as a matter of envy and pride by female characters. Silent treatment, deprivation, impoverishment, and servitude as forms of violence are interspersed in the story in normalised forms. Furthermore, the cliché of women being pitted against each other is reproduced through the female character’s attempt to make another woman experience the trauma she herself has gone through. In this study, violence and discrimination signs both in the published Turkish translations and the output from DeepL are analysed from the perspective of semiotics of translation to compare artificial and human translators’ attitudes towards these signs, using Systematics of Designification in Translation (Öztürk Kasar, 2021) as the evaluation criterion. Moreover, the Harlem dialect, slang, and invective discourses as complementary to the context are discussed on the basis of different meaning transformations and cause-effect relationality to evaluate the need for post-editing pertaining to artificial or human translators.
Cinsiyet Ayrımcılığı ve Şiddet Göstergeleri Karşısında (Yapay) Çevirmenin Tutumu
Didem Tuna KüçükCinsiyetçilik, ayrımcılığın bir uzantısı olarak gerçeklikten kurgusala sızmış ve çevrilerek farklı kültürel versiyonlarıyla tekrar tekrar yayılmıştır. Eşitsizliği inşa eden göstergeler aşırı sıradanlaştırma nedeniyle birçok durumda fark edilmeyecek derecede yazınla bütünleşiktir. Öte yandan, feminist eleştirinin olguya ve kurguya yöneltilmemiş olduğu evvel zamanlarda yazılan kimi yapıtlarda günümüzde görece örtükleşmiş şiddet göstergeleri yönünden bariz bir aleniyet söz konusudur. O. Henry’nin “A Harlem Tragedy” adlı öyküsü, fiziksel şiddete maruz kalmanın kadın karakterlerce gıpta ve kıvanç meselesi olarak işlendiği bir uçta olup, sessiz muamele, yoksunlaştırma, muhtaçlaştırma ve hizmetkârlaştırma gibi farklı şiddet türleri öyküye normalize formlarda serpiştirilmiştir. Diğer yandan, kadın karakterin bir başka kadına kendi yaşadığı travmayı yaşatma çabası üzerinden kadının kadına kırdırılması klişesi öyküde yeniden üretilmektedir. Bu çalışmada ayrımcılık ve şiddet göstergelerinin Türkçeye aktarımları, yayınlanmış çevirilerin yanı sıra DeepL ile elde edilen çeviriler üzerinden incelenerek bu göstergeler karşısında yapay ve insan çevirmenlerin tutumları çeviri göstergebilimi bakış açısıyla karşılaştırılmakta ve değerlendirme ölçütü olarak Çeviride Anlam Evrilmesi Dizgeselliği (Öztürk Kasar, 2021) kullanılmaktadır. Öte yandan, bağlamın tamamlayıcısı olarak Harlem ağzının, argo ve hakaret söylemlerinin çevirileri, farklı düzeylerde anlam evrilmeleri ve neden-sonuç ilişkiselliği üzerinden tartışılarak çeviri sonrası düzeltme gereksiniminin insan veya yapay çevirmene göre ne derece değişkenlik gösterebileceği değerlendirilmektedir.
The stranglehold of sexism and violence entangled in women’s lives as an extension of discrimination has overflowed from reality into fiction and leaked into literary works, and while taking over all times and spaces, it has been translated and spread time and again with its different cultural versions. The signs that construct representations of inequality in literary works are so integrated into the flow that in many cases they become almost unnoticeable due to excessive ordinarization. On the other hand, in many of the literary texts written earlier, when feminist criticism was not fully directed towards fact and fiction, there is a blatant overtness in terms of signs of violence that are now relatively implicit. American author O. Henry’s story "A Harlem Tragedy" remains an extreme case, where physical violence is clearly normalised by the female characters and even treated as a matter of envy and pride. Moreover, different forms of violence, such as silent treatment, deprivation, impoverishment, and servitude, are frequently interspersed in the story in normalised forms. In addition, the clichés such as women being pitted against each other are reproduced through the female character’s attempt to make another woman experience the trauma she herself has gone through. In this study, the ways in which the signs of discrimination and violence are translated into Turkish are analysed through published translations by Nuri Eren (1945), Mehmet Harmancı (1954), and Erol Esençay (1983) as well as through outputs obtained from DeepL, and the attitude of human translators towards these signs is compared with the attitude of the artificial translator. In these evaluations, the signs created by human and artificial translators are handled on the basis of overinterpretation of meaning, underinterpretation of meaning, darkening of the meaning, sliding of the meaning, alteration of the meaning, opposition of the meaning, perversion of the meaning, destruction of the meaning, and wiping out of the meaning as defined by Sündüz Öztürk Kasar within the context of Systematics of Designification in Translation (2021, 28). On the other hand, the extent to which these signs, as well as the Harlem dialect, slang, and invective discourses, are reflected in the target texts as complementary to the context, is discussed through different levels of meaning transformations and cause-effect relationality, and the extent to which the need for post-editing may vary based on the human or artificial translator factor is evaluated.
As a result of the comparative analyses, the following conclusions are drawn from the study:
• Meaning transformations are observed in both human and artificial translators’ texts.
• In human translators’ texts, the transformations usually remain within the field of the meaning or peri-meaning.
• In the case of the artificial translator, there are usually no over-interpretations due to the excess of signs or no wiping-out of the meaning due to the absence of signs.
• As a result of word-for-word translation, slang and idioms are relatively less reflected in the artificial translator’s text.
• In cases where human translators do not translate the idiom as an idiom, they still manage to convey the meaning despite under-interpretations caused by not following the style.
• Situations in which human translators fail to convey the non-standard language can be attributed to their decisions, whereas instances in which they fail to account for idiom and slang usage might be related to inadequate analysis.
• The intervention of the human translator seems to be essential to bring the translation output of the artificial translator into a coherent and consistent form in terms of expression, fluency, and style.
• Even if the solutions it provides need post-editing, the artificial translator can help expedite the translation process by displaying a draft of the target text on the screen and providing ideas.
• Since the artificial translator lacks the ability to analyse and understand the literary text, it does not yet seem possible for it to fully function efficiently on its own.
• Using the artificial translator in literary translation seems to be possible only with the human translator’s critical approach and post-editing intervention. Finally, the analysis of the meaning transformations carried out through a feminist reading from the perspective of semiotics of translation within the scope of this study goes beyond words or signs; the transformations turn out to be factual in the case of gender discrimination and violence discourses, invading the literary text in particular and women’s lives in general.
