Globalization compresses the time and space in which we live and accelerates exchanges among nations, cultures, and peoples. It goes without saying that we need even greater effort to understand one another. As China’s role has grown in world affairs, we have seen a surge of interest in Chinese language in the West and an unprecedented enthusiasm to learn about Chinese culture, yet the myth of the Chinese language as exceptionally difficult to learn and of China as enigmatic remains a truism for many.
We feel a sense of urgency when more than 304,000 students from China are currently studying on U.S. campuses,1 while few American students have the language competence to study in Chinese in China. Norman Denison had, as early as 1976, called attention to the fact that there were places in the world where “adult multilingual competence is the rule, not the exception” (Delabatista and Grutman 2005, 12). Beneath the surface of official monolingualism of most nation-states, multilingualism has become a fact of life. It is in our students’ best interest to embrace this phenomenon with innovative approaches to language and culture education.
Michael Cronin contextualizes the problem thus: English is a minority language in translation terms because “it is not a language of translation but a language for translation” (1998, 160). His perspective is a call for a new model of proactive participation in “a world of continuous relational adjustments.” The “constantly shifting power nexus” requires “endless calibration” of our strategy of engagements (161). This book takes a first step toward an ambitious goal—adjusting current Chinese language and cultural learning strategies for the education of future global citizens who will embrace this new model.
•••
This parallel textbook integrates the learning of Chinese language with the learning of Chinese literature and culture for advanced students. The format helps overcome the plateau in language and culture learning by facilitating reading original Chinese texts with English translation and by developing critical skills necessary for in-depth interactions with China today.
Because of the genre’s formal properties and its popularity in China, the short-short story2 is key to achieving the goal of integrated learning. Averaging fifteen hundred characters in length, the selected stories have proven particularly effective for classroom study. The parallel format allows students to participate in the construction of a necessarily large repertoire of vocabulary and usages. The active cross-references between Chinese and English also accelerate the learning of how to use terms properly in context. A combined glossary and usage guide is also provided for each story, to define in context verbal, idiomatic, and local or colloquial expressions that resist interpretative mastery. The selection of words and expressions is based on their uniqueness of usage and pronunciation and the possibility for ambiguity rather than on the frequency of their appearance. For detailed suggestions on how to use this book for a course, seminar, or independent study, please look at the short essay “How to Use This Parallel Text to Teach Chinese Language and Culture” at the end of this volume.
This volume is based upon the conviction that the learning of culture complements mastery of language. The selected stories are all original works by contemporary Chinese writers. They offer authentic glimpses of Chinese society and address issues of common concern. However, these stories provide more than convenient access to everyday life in China. They are also pathways to China’s past and traditions, in that China’s five thousand years of culture and tradition are best conveyed by the lives of its people. The thirty-one stories are grouped by theme into nine chapters, each of which centers on a traditional concept that still permeates those lives. These nine themes are: li (礼 ritual or propriety) and ren (仁 humanity or benevolence); the concept of being filial (孝 xiao); the working of yin-yang (阴阳); approaches to governance ([统]治); the sense of identity (自我[特性、身份、认同]); the importance of face (脸面); (romantic) love (情爱); the issue of marriage (婚姻); and the meaning of yi (易 change).
Each of the nine chapters is prefaced with a short essay. Though it does not mean to chart the course of the reading experience, the essay does function as a guide to the meanings of the concept in Chinese cultural tradition. The essay should open up rather than limit the reader’s understanding of each chapter’s theme, broadening the interpretative horizons of the stories. When a chapter preface invokes particular Chinese cultural or historical practices or experiences, it anchors particular understandings in their specific contexts. Reading and reflection are further guided by a series of open-ended discussion questions at the end of each story. Generated from Aili Mu’s experience of teaching these stories in the United States, these questions anticipate and target problem areas of understanding.
The thirty authors selected belong to three different groups of writers. One third of them are celebrity writers such as Han Shaogong, Wang Meng, Ge Fei, Chi Zijian, Liu Xinwu, Shi Tiesheng, Liu Zhenyun, Nie Xinsen, Wu Nianzhen, and Zou Jingzhi. They represent the genre at its most literary. The second group is composed of literary professionals unique to contemporary China. They either hold offices in state institutions for art and literature or work as writers and editors for these institutions. The last third, though nationally known as short-short writers, are ordinary people from all walks of life. Among them you will find a village leader, some government officials, a migrant worker, a retired civil servant, a project manager, a security guard, a handicapped daughter of a farmer, a business owner, a teacher, and an accountant. They, like many others trying to live a successful life in contemporary China, represent those at the grass-roots level who value writing as an essential part of life. A brief biography of the author follows each story. The additional information on authorship, background, and reception encourages readers to approach each story proactively to gain nuanced perspectives on each story’s culture of origin.
The goal of facilitating Chinese language and culture learning has compelled the translation process. The texts in English attempt to remain faithful in lexical meaning to their Chinese originals but are also informed by our knowledge of both English language literature and Chinese culture to maximize learning efficiency. That the English must be natural and read well has been a driving principle. We paid close attention to the reproduction of the aesthetics of each story to make sure that connotative meaning might be grasped in addition to denotative understanding. To achieve this, we strove to preserve the “accents” of the original works and as much of their “defamiliarizing” effects as possible. The intention is to activate the readers’ agency of inquiry, reflection, and discovery.
The primary audience for this text is intermediate and advanced learners of Chinese language and culture, but our translations are also aimed at the general reader interested in contemporary Chinese fiction and literary translation. The book is designed to serve as both an intensive primary text or supplemental reading text and a text for self-study. Advanced learners of Chinese will also profit from the wealth of resources included, which will aid in maintaining and improving their Chinese proficiency or help to develop new cultural perspectives. Of course, the main goal of any literary translation is to allow new readers the experience of learning new aspects of culture and language. In the Chinese-speaking parts of the world, this volume may also benefit native Chinese speakers learning English.
In the preface we have elaborated on how the collaboration between two faculty members from two different languages and cultures resulted in this volume. The following pages describe the benefits of the particular format of the book, especially how the parallel arrangement and translation practice encourage self-directed language learning, critical reflection, and cultural discovery. Walking the fine line of preserving the complexity of the original and maintaining the integrity of the English language has been a most exciting part of this project. Analytical scrutiny of what we have done is a necessary part of the critical composition of using this book. We hope that our translation “disturbs” and that the feeling of “unsettledness” motivates students to consider the interpretive act of translation.
INTEGRATION OF LANGUAGE AND CULTURE LEARNING
Learners of Chinese are many; graduates with professional proficiency are few. How do we train a student who can greet a Chinese associate at the airport into someone who also understands Chinese culture well enough to develop and sustain collaborative relationships? This is an urgent issue for Chinese language and culture education.
As the title of Developing Chinese Fluency by Phyllis Zhang (Cengage Heinle 2010) suggests, the current pedagogical strategies at the intermediate and advanced levels of Chinese instruction are pragmatically oriented and only peripherally concerned with culture. Reading Into a New China (Cheng & Tsui 2009) places the emphasis on reading strategies and Chinese in Motion (Cheng & Tsui 2011) on performance-based language competency and skills. The five-volume Readings in Chinese Culture Series (Cheng & Tsui 2007–2014) stresses the importance of culture learning but the goal is for Advanced Placement and standardized test preparation. The same is true of the four-volume series Tales and Traditions (Cheng & Tsui 2009–2010). These textbooks and Chaoyue: Advancing in Chinese (Columbia University Press 2010) do a fine job of building practical skills, just as Reading Into a New China (Cheng & Tsui 2009) and Discussing Everything Chinese (MyChineseClass LLC 2008) help improve retention with increased word frequency, but they generally lack contemporary cultural components and are less concerned with in-depth systematic understanding of cultural behavior.
If what happens at Iowa State University (ISU) indicates a national phenomenon, we have far more students from disciplines other than the liberal arts and traditional humanities learning Chinese. Besides a few students from history, political science, linguistics, and anthropology, students from the schools of design, engineering, agriculture, business, and education are the ones most often taking courses on China today and Chinese cultural traditions at ISU. These students are motivated to learn because they are likely to have at least as much real-life interaction with Chinese society and culture in their future professions as those who wish to become China specialists in academia. We must take these nonspecialist students’ general needs into consideration and afford them systematic knowledge in both Chinese language and culture to facilitate their future engagements.
Language and culture learning must be integrated in such a way that the understanding of China’s diverse values, reasoning methods, rhetorical tendencies, systems of government, and ways of life occur in the process of language acquisition. In her opening remarks at the 2015 NEH Summer Institute “What Is Gained in Translation?,” translator and theorist Françoise Massardier-Kenney called attention to the fact that everybody knows the importance of cross-cultural communication: “Few teachers of world literature today have any wish to…confine students within the imperial boundaries of English” (Damrosch 2009, 4). Yet she is far from optimistic that cross-cultural communication can be facilitated: “That being said, they lack the materials to do so.”
There have been a few collections of Chinese short-shorts published in recent years. Harry J. Huang’s An Anthology of Chinese Short-Short Stories (Foreign Language Press 2005) is a comprehensive volume with stories from ancient times to the present, while Loud Sparrows: Contemporary Chinese Short-Shorts (Columbia University Press 2006) pays more attention to English readers’ tastes and values. There is also The Pearl Jacket and Other Stories: Flash Fiction from Contemporary China (Stone Bridge Press 2008). Individuals: Flash Fiction by Lao Ma in paperback (Make-Do Publishing 2013) focuses on the absurd and the hilarious in contemporary Chinese life. None of these are concerned with language learning or intended for comprehensive culture study.
In the combined short-short genre and the parallel text format we find a bridge for students to reach the essentials of Chinese culture while crossing over from the intermediate to the advanced/professional level of language proficiency. The former supplies the necessary content of cultural complexity and the latter the pedagogical setup to activate student agency in gaining language fluency.
This volume is the first short-short bilingual reader in English and Chinese for classroom teaching. It is inspired by such bilingual texts as John Balcom’s Short Stories in Chinese: New Penguin Parallel Text (2013), the Bilingual Series on Modern Chinese Literature (Chinese University Press 2003–), and Best Chinese Flash Fiction: An Anthology (Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press 2007). They all provide convenient access to meanings of words and expressions without the need to constantly check a separate Chinese-English dictionary.
The first two of these bilingual readers select canonical works from such famous writers as Lao She, Lu Xun, and Xiao Hong, or more contemporary ones like Ma Yuan and Liu Rui. As important as these authors are, the length of selected works presents pedagogical challenges for today’s classroom. An eclectic coverage of contemporary Chinese society does not seem to be a focus of these bilingual readers. The flash fiction collection from Shanghai, with no instructional tools to facilitate learning, falls short of the goal of integrated language and culture learning. Making up for what these texts do not have, this parallel reader carefully selects contemporary short-short works of broad representation and uniquely groups them with key cultural concepts and accompanies them with various learning tools. Divided into nine chapters for a regular semester course, all thirty-one stories are in manageable sizes for traditional class meetings.
PEDAGOGICAL STRATEGIES
LANGUAGE LEARNING
Making adjustments to current pedagogies with parallel format does not negate the communicative approach or immersion methodology. Rather, this volume complements previous approaches with new strategies to meet the challenges of changing instructional environments. If communication and interaction are among the goals of language and culture learning, it is only logical that we also try to reach these goals by way of immersion in the communication and interaction between the two languages and cultures.
The methodology of this volume is but an additional way of learning through using, since communication between the two languages and cultures are embedded in the parallel format. Although some students are able to go to China or to their Chinese friends for oral communication opportunities and interactions, volumes like this one will allow many more to experience profound intellectual exchanges in the quiet of their rooms. To use this book is to begin a dialogue of discovery.
The most valuable aspect of this methodology of communication is its self-directedness. Self-directed learners need affirmation and encouragement. The parallel texts communicate these messages right back to them. In the space of parallel text, there is no room for embarrassment, because right or wrong are not evaluative norms. When students reflect on the stories and the translations, it is very likely that the process will provoke questions and desires for creative changes. The communication between students and the text and the interaction between the two languages and cultures thus continue as students think about what happens next or write a new ending to a story or come up with different translations for words, phrases, paragraphs, even entire texts incorporated here.
To immerse students in a Chinese environment has become a more and more difficult dream to pursue. Even when we send students to China, their Chinese roommates, better groomed with knowledge of NBA stars and American pop artists, are oftentimes more interested in practicing their English. Host institutions often offer courses in English to draw bigger enrollments. Effective training for professional proficiency at the intermediate and the advanced levels has to go beyond the three to five hours of immersion in class each week.
CONCEPTUAL/TEXTUAL LEARNING
In the modern world, Proefriedt has argued, to be truly educated a person must have undergone the experience of moving from one society to another “in the reflective fashion” (Cook-Sather 2006, 40). Alison Cook-Sather echoes Proefriedt’s view and adds that education should involve “comparing values of societies” and “decentering of the world” (41). She actually defines education as translation in the sense that it is also about restructuring knowledge in light of newly acquired information. Education and translation share in the phenomenon of transformation. The classroom experience should be the platform for students to make themselves comprehensible and to allow transformation to take place through reflection (36). The concept of translation as education calls for a constructivist pedagogy wherein teachers create and present contexts for students to effect their own learning.
The reality of the world today has shown us that globalization cannot and will not iron out the fundamental differences between peoples and cultures. As teachers of languages and culture, we often face “impasses of non-communication.” Borges makes this point: “The first audience appreciated the fact that the whale died when it heard the man’s cry; the second, that there had ever been men who lent credence to any fatal capacity of such a cry” (Borges 2000, 40). Valid as the second audience’s response is, no comparison of values “in reflective fashion” happens, which does little to help us understand the first audience (i.e., the audience of cultural origin) or to facilitate communication between the first and the second audiences.
What do we do when issues of interest to American students are at odds with the concerns of readers of cultural origin? In Pierre Bourdieu’s opinion, “foreign readers are bound to perceive the text in different ways” due to their presence in “different field(s) of production”; the creations of “fictitious oppositions between similar things” or “false parallels between things that are fundamentally different” are but a common phenomenon in reading (Bourdieu 1999, 225). If, as a human being, one cannot avoid being limited by one’s particular “field of production,” is it responsible to tell students to do what they want with a text, to make acceptability by the target audience the priority, and to continue internalization of the familiar? When dealing with China, the critical focus of the West on political dissent and contestation has not resonated much with the Chinese public. Familiar and “scientific” methods and applications used to analyze China’s present, to predict its future, have not been particularly effective over the past thirty-some years.
Carol Maier regards the practice of applying our own categories of perception and appreciation to a foreign cultural product as “an uncritical assumption of difference” that exonerates readers from the task of ever reading cross-cultural texts (Dingwaney and Maier 1995, 312). For Françoise Massardier-Kenney and her colleague Brian James Baer, this means a double deprivation of a serious nature: students lose an opportunity to “see the behaviors and dispositions of others in their own terms,” and educators miss “a crucial step in developing an ethics of cross-cultural communication” (presentation at the 2015 NEH Summer Institute). It is therefore incumbent on us to familiarize students with local concerns, practices, values, and systems.
Naturalizing Chinese works for Western audiences can be helpful, but we need to adjust our strategies of engagement if we develop a dependence on naturalization. Among views of the relationship between the target language culture and that of the source, Lawrence Venuti’s seems extreme. In his opinion, keeping the opacity and the experience of resistance of the original for English readers should be a goal of translation. He goes as far as arguing that fluency in the target language, especially the convenience of “current usage,” “linguistic consistency,” “conversational rhythms,” and so on, could be detrimental to the “textual effect” of the original (May 1994, 6). This volume takes into consideration both what helps target readers and what Venuti worries about by putting students’ spontaneous interactions with the languages and their felt experiences of the culture at the center of learning.
The 2015 NEH Summer Institute at Kent University prepared us for a balanced approach—to make student interactions and experiences with unfamiliar texts and cultures pleasant and disturbing at the same time. Ethically responsible educators should work to cause intellectual discomfort. “You Are Here to Be Disturbed” is the title of Todd Gitlin’s article in the Chronicle of Higher Education in May 2015. He argues for discomfort and its odd-duck partner, reason, and sees them as driving forces of education. So when structuring this book, we selected stories that highlight differences of historical and cultural sensibilities for which equivalents are hard to find in the West. When setting up the parallel format, we were more concerned with closer approximation of the macrostructural impact of the original and the quality of signification in English than the levels of comfort for English readers. We followed the reviewers’ advice and eliminated the use of terms nonexistent in Chinese culture and cosmology. We theme-grouped the stories with a preface not to reinforce the known or the familiar, but to work against the tendency to cherry-pick elements as support for preexisting views. By theoretically framing the learning of language and culture with the problematics of translation, we anchor the issue of otherness in the dynamics of identification and difference, intimacy and alterity, and resonance and surprise.
THE PARALLEL FORMAT AND CRITICAL COMPETENCE
CRITICAL THINKING
According to theorist Pierre Bourdieu, literary imports are often dominated languages seeking legitimacy (1999, 222–225). We are more concerned, however, with the critical and aesthetic potential of these Chinese works than their political agency. The political and economic climate may have created the conditions for interest in Chinese language and culture to develop, but education and learning for political and economic expediency is bothersome. In our role as academic gatekeepers, we have no ulterior motive in offering students opportunities to take proactive account of the “prism effect” of limited fields of experience and to be able to think reflectively as part of critical self-development.
Students today know that views and values, ideas, and discourses are constituted historically and culturally and are shaped by ideology. They understand that it is necessary to suspend judgment and to engage differences when encountering another culture. This volume takes them further. It allows them to reach an “awareness and knowledge of the ways in which different national fields function” in sustaining different modes of life than their own (Bourdieu 1999, 226). This is necessary, because it leads to considerations of “the system of these differences” and “the reasons for this system” (Berman 2009, 31). Both considerations are crucial for successful suspension of judgment and the engagement of differences. As the authors of “The Silent Finn Revisited” have pointed out, perceptual biases are not simply “an issue of cognitions”; they are “social acts performed in discourse” (Sajavaara and Lehtonen 1997, 269). Only when students understand, at the discursive level, the virtue of “active silence” popular in China and Finland, for example, does true communication based on respect become possible.
The desire to allow students to search for systems of differences and to study reasons for different systems also influenced the translation of this volume. For example, instead of naturalizing expressions of estrangement for students, we translated them literally and footnoted them or listed them as new expressions where necessary. Such words and expressions include citations from the classics and canonical works, historical allusions, cultural specificities, idioms, local customs, institutional structures and practices, and references to artwork, myth, and mythologies. It is precisely at these unfamiliar places that effective learning of different values, systems, and categories happens.
Yet we do not assume a position of authority or claim absolute sufficiency of our translations. The paradox of our principle and practice—to present a reader’s version in order for students to engage themselves in the act of translation—encourages students to immerse themselves in critical unsettledness and asks them to take action. The parallel format was chosen exactly for this reason. We hope the “unsettling knowledge” that the parallel texts embody enlightens students about “the nature of that knowledge itself” (Maier 2006, 163).
THE PARALLEL FORMAT
The parallel format may seem a risky choice, especially in the light of Jacques Derrida’s famous statement—“translation is another name for impossible” (1998, 57). There is, however, an equally well-known view that regards risks and opportunities as two sides of the same coin. Translation should not and cannot be viewed as transference of a work from one language culture to another; to decry its defects at the micro level is not a productive endeavor. Antoine Berman advises us to move away from judgment and to focus instead on the potentialities of translation. He borrows Abdelkebir Khatibi’s paradoxical term “scriptural autonomy” to describe the relationship between a text and its potential (Berman 2009, 73). Lyn Hejinian believes that there is a “resilient reciprocity” between one language and another that makes knowing possible (2000, 297). Indeed, as another famous line of Derrida’s goes, when “nothing is untranslatable;…everything is translatable” (1998, 57). There is space in translation for rigorous intellectual challenge, full of opportunities to negotiate meaning, to create free expressions from the constraints of the original, and to render the unpredictable plurality of both the original and translated texts.
When contemplating the relationships between discourse, ideology, and translation, Eva Hoffman expressed the idea that “in order to transpose a single word without distortion, one would have to transport the entire language around it” (Jaffe 1999, 47). Two decades ago, Ian Mason further elaborated on this idea. Words are invested with multiple meanings by virtue of the various contexts in which they are used and by different readers for distinct goals (1994, 23–34). Both Hoffman and Mason make it clear that there can be no lexical equivalence between the source and target languages at the level of word, sentence, or entire work. What is the implication of this for language and culture learners?
And what will be the impact on students when they realize that every word we put down here results from the personal decisions of translators of necessarily limited perspectives? Among the many different ways students may reflect on the works translated here, one, we hope, will be a stronger curiosity concerning the translators’ decisions. Every serious student of Chinese language who has read the first story will probably question our choice of “Skull Shave” as its title. In their desire to challenge the translators’ intervention, they not only (self)learn the multiple implications of “脑袋,” they may also find a way into the psyche of a scared eight-year-old child. Student reaction to the realization that all choices are open to criticism has proven to us that learning through translation is much like learning in translation; it is “fundamentally an epistemological project” that “studies—scrutinizes—the nature of knowing and the way in which any particular ‘knowing’ is circumstantially embedded” (Hejinian 2000, 296).
To be “circumstantially embedded” within the presence of a parallel format can be especially liberating. A student was once confused by the second use of “慌忙” in the story “Catharsis.” Why should the person giving an outcast the royal treatment be “慌忙”? She further engaged the text by looking into the history of the Cultural Revolution and by delving into the cultural tradition of “天地君亲师.” In the end, what she thought was a misuse or a mistranslation became key to unlocking the meaning of the entire text. In instances like this, the parallel format is at once a tool to build bilingual competence and an instrument to generate bicultural interactions. Linguistic, lexical, and semantic proficiency is achieved through a deeper understanding of why certain ways of saying and doing things are imperative for a particular people at a particular cultural moment.
This project is built with students’ active agency in mind. We debated and translated “省农展会” into “state fair” because we hope curious students will look into the similarities and differences in the constituencies, interests, organizers, and agendas of two comparable events. The translation of the rhetorical question “孩子怎么能不疼呢?” at the end of the first story departs from the literal on purpose. Readers have tended to miss the “acting out” parts of the story. By rendering the sentence “We can’t blame the kid for acting out” we call attention to them. But more importantly, the change of subject from “孩子” in the original to “we” in translation creates another occasion for students to dig into differences in cultural habits and speech patterns.3
The parallel format, as a critical mechanism, makes it difficult for us to impose our own perspectives or poetics through omission, addition, and embellishments. We chose it, however, for yet another important reason. The parallel format brings critical attention to the subjective nature of any translation. Our English versions are there beside the originals for every reader’s critical scrutiny. “To place a work in translation is to place it in transition and to leave it there unsettled” (Hejinian 2000, 297). When differences in understanding occur, opportunities of critical contemplation and learning occur too (Berman 2009, 73). When students start to evaluate, they enter the rich polysemy and indeterminacy of words and meaning; when they do not treat our translation, or anybody’s translation, as absolutely authoritative, but rather as a guide and opportunity to create their own meaning, poetry is probably in the making.
•••
This volume, designed for advanced students of Chinese with sufficient paratextual elements to that end, also facilitates the bringing over into English of important voices in contemporary Chinese literature; voices shaped by particular aesthetics and informed by distinct micro as well as macro cultures. When readers come to the texts in this volume, all that is required to start a beneficial communication with them is an earnest desire to learn and a willingness to allow whatever understanding to remain, at times, elusive. Perhaps we should encounter languages, texts, and translation much the way we engage people with whom we are committed to interact with respect while allowing them to remain enigmatic. Perhaps we, in so doing, can transcend the current obsession with borders and separateness by way of the felt and shared beauty of languages and cultures.
Aili Mu, Iowa State University
Mike Smith, Delta State University
All translations are by Aili Mu unless otherwise indicated.
REFERENCES
Berman, Antoine. 2009. Toward a Criticism of Translation. Translated by F. Massardier-Kenney. Kent, Ohio: Kent State University Press.
Borges, Jorge Luis. 2000. “The Translators of the Thousand and One Nights.” In The Translation Studies Reader, edited by L. Venuti, 34–49. London: Routledge.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1999. “The Social Conditions of the International Circulation of Ideas.” In Bourdieu, A Critical Reader, edited by R. Shusterman, 220–28. Oxford: Blackwell.
Cook-Sather, Alison. 2006. Education Is Translation: A Metaphor for Change in Learning and Teaching. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Cronin, Michael. 1998. “The Cracked Looking Glass of Servants: Translation and Minority Languages in a Global Age.” Translator 4 (no. 2):145–62.
Damrosch, David. 2009. Teaching World Literature (Options for Teaching). New York: Modern Language Association of America.
Delabatista, Dirk, and Ranier Grutman. 2005. “Introduction.” Linguistica Antverpiensia 4:11–34.
Derrida, Jacques. 1998. Monolingualism of the Other; or, The Prosthesis of Origin. Translated by Patrick Mensah. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.
Dingwaney, Anuradha, and Carol Maier. 1995. “Translation as a Method for Cross-Cultural Teaching.” In Between Languages and Cultures: Translation and Cross-Cultural Texts, edited by Anuradha Dingwaney and Carol Maier, 303–24. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Hejinian, Lyn. 2000. “Forms in Alterity: On Translation.” In The Language of Inquiry, 296–318. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Jaffe, Alexandra. 1999. “Locating Power: Corsican Translators and Their Critics.” In Language Ideological Debates, edited by Jan Blommaert, 39–67. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Maier, Carol. 2006. “The Translator as Theoros: Thoughts on Cogitation, Figuration and Current Creative Writing.” In Translating Others, edited by Theo Hermans, 1:163–80. Manchester, UK: St. Jerome.
Mason, Ian. 1994. “Discourse, Ideology and Translation.” In Language, Discourse and Translation in the West and Middle East, edited by Robert de Beaugrande, Abdullah Shunnaq, and Mohamed Helmy Heliel, 23–34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Massardier-Kenney, Françoise, and Brian Baer. 2015. Opening Day Presentation for NEH Summer Institute “What Is Gained in Translation.” Kent, Ohio: Kent State University.
May, Rachel. 1994. The Translator in the Text. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
Sajavaara, Kari, and Jaakko Lehtonen. 1997. “The Silent Finn Revisited.” In Silence: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Adam Jaworski, 263–84. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.