Foreignization and Domestication

This document discusses the concepts of foreignization and domestication in translation. Foreignization prioritizes maintaining differences between the source and target texts/cultures, while domestication aims to make the foreign text more accessible to the target audience. These concepts were first discussed by Schleiermacher and later defined by Venuti. Foreignization preserves source text uniqueness and expands readers' perspectives, while domestication removes strangeness and is more widely understandable. A translator may use both approaches depending on factors like the audience and text type. Overall, the goal is good communication across languages and cultures.

Uploaded by

Ishrat Fatima

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

0% found this document useful (0 votes)

134 views

Foreignization and Domestication

Uploaded by

Ishrat Fatima

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

You are on page 1/ 4

Foreignization and Domestication

Translation is not a very ancient field although translation has been

there for thousands of years. Its history is so old that origin is unknown.
As a separate discipline firstly as a branch of art then in the last century
it was recognizing as scientific discipline. Whether art or science branch
there has always been difference of opinion and debates on how
translation should be performed. Initially the debate was on whether
translation should be word-for-word or sense-for-sense. Translation of
religious text like bible has ignited a fierce debate on strategies applied
in translation. More the work was done on translation more theories
were formulated, more ways were suggested like liberal or literal,
pragmatic, or sematic or dynamic, overt, or covert, foreignization or
domestication. To be more precise topic of foreignization and
domestication has political affect on it to some extent. These concepts
of foreignization and domestication were suggested by Schleiermacher,
but the terms were coined later Venuti. According to Schleiermacher
either translator leave the author in peace as much as possible and
move the reader towards him or leave the reader in peace as much as
possible and move the writer towards him. According to him a
translator must choose only one of these as both are entirely different
from each other, however some translator does believe in using both
with balance. Venuti, an American scholar put forward this concept in
1995 in his book The Translator’s Invisibility. He himself was in favor of
foreignization as according to him difference of language and culture of
source text and target text should be available, in other words he was
supporter of source text dominance. On the other hand, domestication
is supported by well-known translator and theorist like Nida. Both the
concepts need deep understanding of linguistic and cultural especially
cultural understanding because for a translator to be bicultural is more
important then being bilingualism. So, we can safely say that this all
debate is directly or indirectly connected to culture and language when
to what extend we must except their affect is acceptable in translation.
Like to what extend the source language culture must be introduce in
target language and how much of source language cultures
transformation into target language culture is safe.so for this purpose
lets have a bird eye review on culture and language relationship.
Culture and Language: Culture is the set of norms, believes,
thoughts, ideas, and concept of society whereas language is all about
how we express, spread our believes ideas, concepts, and norms. In a
society or community both language and culture evolve almost at the
same time, also both have quiet same characteristic as adaptation,
change and evolve with time. Of course, language is an integral part of
culture. We can say that language takes its shape from culture and then
is used to transmit, convey, or reflect this culture. As I have mention
earlier that for a translator although knowledge of linguistics is must be
without the good concept of culture a translator can never give his
100% work.
Major difference one can see in translation in past 2 to 3 centuries is
drastic improve in involvement and importance of culture in
translation. As translation is not just mere transfer of words or meaning
or even intention but it is to transmit how it was thought and impacts
on readers of source so without the good understanding of culture that
is quiet impossible for the reader of translated text. It is not wrong to
say that translation is actually the transfer of culture.
Literal and liberal VS Foreignization and Domestication: Most
of the people think of both the concepts as one. Although both are
quite similar in many perspectives and sometime touch each other at
some point but foreignization and domestication are concepts in lot
more detail. Literal and liberal translation are more related to linguistics
whereas other two are more involved in culture rather than just
linguistics.
Foreignization and Domestication in translation let’s talk about
foreignization. Many theorist including venuti himself supported this
form of translation and gave many points like: -
 It is source text centered and represents the culture of source
text.
 Maintain the uniqueness of source text and maintain the
difference between original and target text.
 Takes the reader out of their comfort zones and introduce them
of source culture thus increasing their horizon and view about
world. Introducing them to different ways of thinking and to
different colors that exists in this world.
If we take the domestication on the other hand then: -
 It is target text or reader oriented and represents the foreign
culture in shape of their own thinking level
 It removes the strangeness of foreign culture and makes it easy
for reader to understand.
 It is for wider range of audience then foreignization and
overcomes the linguistic and cultural difficulties.
It always do not depends upon the translator to decide the path but on
other variety of factors target audience, reason of translation and what
is the nature of text whether it is literal, or is official, economical work
or religious. Both the concepts have their own importance. Aim of both
are to emphasize on the communication as good communication
resolve many problems. It is not necessary to strictly follow one rule at
a time and not to touch other, but we are allowed to use the
domestication or foreignization according to our need. Sometimes
translator invites the reader to travel with him to foreign lands and
sometimes he drags the foreigners to cozy rooms of readers. Thus, both
are important and have their own significance.