Translating into an endangered language: filling in lexical gaps as Language Making
Abstract In this article, we analyse translation in the context of revitalisation from the point of view of Language Making. Both translation and revitalisation are based on the idea of languages as distinct entities, and together they are doubly inclined to draw clear-cut borders between languages....
Published in: | International Journal of the Sociology of Language |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Walter de Gruyter GmbH
2022
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/ijsl-2021-0019 https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/ijsl-2021-0019/xml https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/ijsl-2021-0019/pdf |
Summary: | Abstract In this article, we analyse translation in the context of revitalisation from the point of view of Language Making. Both translation and revitalisation are based on the idea of languages as distinct entities, and together they are doubly inclined to draw clear-cut borders between languages. The data come from a series of translation courses targeted at speakers and learners of Karelian, a critically endangered Finnic language spoken in Finland and Russia. By analysing the reflective assignments of the translation course participants and focusing on how they report on encountering and overcoming lexical gaps, we examine a very concrete case of Language Making: the creation of new lexical items for Karelian for the purposes of a translation task. Since coining neologisms in our data is mostly based on borrowing or calquing, the data illustrate how the participants perceive language boundaries and the connections between Karelian and other languages. Contrary to what the intersection between translation and revitalisation suggests, a rather flexible view on linguistic borders is displayed. Participants fill in lexical gaps by drawing on all linguistic resources available to them: mainly Finnish and Russian, but also “international” resources and occasionally other languages or other Karelian dialects. To a lesser extent, the data also display the participants’ competing and conflicting ideologies of what is Karelian, what belongs to it and on which or whose model to base the neologisms. |
---|