See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/346295979

Retranslation and multimodality: introduction

Article  in  Translator · January 2020

DOI: 10.1080/13556509.2020.1755944

CITATIONS READS

2 92

2 authors, including:

Şehnaz Tahir Gürçağlar

Bogazici University
35 PUBLICATIONS   171 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Tension, Tradition and Translation in Turkey, Benjamins, 2015 View project

Translation Studies, 2013 View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Şehnaz Tahir Gürçağlar on 14 April 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The Translator

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rtrn20

Retranslation and multimodality: introduction

Özlem Berk Albachten & Şehnaz Tahir Gürçağlar

To cite this article: Özlem Berk Albachten & Şehnaz Tahir Gürçağlar (2020) Retranslation and
multimodality: introduction, The Translator, 26:1, 1-8, DOI: 10.1080/13556509.2020.1755944

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2020.1755944

Published online: 21 Oct 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 899

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rtrn20
THE TRANSLATOR
2020, VOL. 26, NO. 1, 1–8
https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2020.1755944

Retranslation and multimodality: introduction

Özlem Berk Albachten and Şehnaz Tahir Gürçağlar a

a
Department of Translation and Interpreting Studies, Boğaziçi University, Istanbul, Turkey

This special issue was born out of – what we saw as – a missing link in studies on
retranslation and multimodality. The growing number of works on retranslation coming
from increasingly diverse cultural and linguistic contexts have long surpassed the so-
called retranslation hypothesis (Berman 1990) that was, and perhaps still remains, one of
the main points of departure for research on retranslation. In parallel with the diversifica-
tion of linguistic and cultural contexts, studies on retranslation have also covered different
text types, historical periods and individual retranslators, offering detailed analyses of
a variety of motives and modes of retranslation. As well as individual articles on retransla-
tion published in a range of journals, a number of special issues (Bensimon and Coupaye
1990; Milton and Catherine Torres 2003; Alvstad and Assis Rosa 2015; Dore 2018; Van
Poucke and Sanz Gallego 2019), monographs (Deane-Cox 2014; O’Driscoll 2011) and
edited books (Kahn and Seth 2010; Monti and Schnyder 2011; Cadera and Walsh 2017;
Berk Albachten and Tahir Gürçağlar 2019a, 2019b) have contributed to the expansion of
the field. However, despite a handful of exceptions (Haug 2019; Eker-Roditakis 2019; Dore
2018), to date, research on retranslation has largely neglected multimodal texts.

Multimodality in translation studies and retranslation

Especially since the early 2000s, translation scholars have devoted increasing attention to
the theoretical and methodological challenges posed by fields characterised by the circula-
tion of texts created in different modes and media (in addition to or other than the written
word and the printed book). These include, among others, audiovisual translation (dubbing,
subtitling, voiceover, as well as fansubbing and fandubbing), opera and song translation,
and game and comic translation. As noted by Kaindl (2013), it has become clear that
‘multimodality is the norm, and not an exception’. Kaindl also argues, however, that the
pervasiveness of multimodality in the field of translation requires the development of
appropriate tools and concepts in translation studies, a field which has so far been marked
by language-oriented methods and terminology (ibid.).
The term multimodality is also crucial to the aims of this special issue. Our goal, from the
start, was to extend to contributors an invitation to expand the field of retranslation to its
multimodal dimension. Although Roman Jakobson’s ([1959] 2000) category of ‘intersemio-
tic translation’ has been around for a long time and has been used productively in various
forms of translation research, today the term falls short of describing the increasingly

CONTACT Özlem Berk Albachten ozlem_berk@hotmail.com Department of Translation and Interpreting Studies,
Boğaziçi University, Istanbul, Turkey
© 2020 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
2 Ö. B. ALBACHTEN AND Ş. T. GÜRÇAĞLAR

complex and rich texts that have become a part of the translation landscape. Jakobson’s
well-known tripartite categorisation of translation as interlingual, intralingual and inter-
semiotic carries a linguistic bias, evident from the way all three categories take as their
starting point the interpretation of the ‘verbal sign’ (Jakobson [1959] 2000, 114). His
conceptualisation of semiotics was largely based on Charles Peirce’s work, but unlike
Peirce, who did not restrict his theory to language, Jakobson focused firmly on linguistic
signs (Marais 2018, 15). Aligning it with his notions of interlingual and intralingual transla-
tion, Jakobson defined intersemiotic translation as ‘an interpretation of verbal signs by
means of signs of nonverbal sign systems’ (Jakobson [1959] 2000, 114). Even if it opens the
door for the study of such multimodal translation forms as the adaptation of novels into
film, theatre or comics, Jakobson’s ‘intersemiotic translation’ is therefore bound to a verbal
source text. That is why subsequent scholars have felt the need to broaden this category to
include translations among non-verbal modes of communication. The growing focus on
multimodality in translation studies is an outcome of the realisation that in its many current
forms, translation cannot be limited to linguistic source texts.
Multimodal approaches in translation studies focus on the use of various sign systems
within the same text in order to explore ‘how we make meaning by combining multiple
signifying means or modes – for example, image with writing, music and body movement,
speech with gesture – into an integrated whole’ (Pérez-González 2019, 346). The notion of
multimodality thus requires us to step beyond the conventional definitions and methods
used in translation studies. Following Maria Tymoczko’s discussion on translation as
a cluster concept (Tymoczko 2007) Tuominen, Jiménez Hurtado and Ketola suggest that
‘multimodal translation covers a multiplicity of activities that do not fit under a single
definition with clear boundaries’, and that ‘research could aim to explore as many
contexts and genres as possible in order to develop the most comprehensive under-
standing possible of the variety of ways in which this cluster concept becomes actualized’
(Tuominen, Jiménez Hurtado, and Ketola 2018, 4). Complicated by the inevitable mut-
ability of retranslation and the fine lines among various forms of retranslation, such as re-
edition, re-production and re-packaging (Berk Albachten and Tahir Gürçağlar 2019a, 3,
2019b, 2), the study of multimodal retranslation makes a broad interdisciplinary approach
imperative. This is also required by the very nature of the objects under scrutiny;
retranslations in film, music, graphic novels, etc., necessitate forays into the realms of
other disciplines that also offer critical frameworks for the study of the works in question.
To date, the most comprehensive volume focusing on the retranslation of multimodal
texts is the special issue of Status Quaestionis edited by Margharita Dore (2018), which,
however, deals exclusively with audiovisual retranslation. Contributions to the issue mostly
tackle retranslation of films and television programmes and explore the topic in its various
aspects, including: the economic, historical, linguistic and political reasons behind the
retranslation of films and TV material (Chaume 2018); the use of archival material in
retranslation research (Zanotti 2018); the concept of ‘improvement’ as a motive for redub-
bing (Raffi 2018); and the reception of dubbed and subtitled films (Sandrelli 2018). Two
volumes by the editors of the present special issue (Berk Albachten and Tahir Gürçağlar
2019a and b) also feature works on the retranslation of multimodal works, including music
(Haug 2019; Güven 2019) and the interaction between film and printed versions of fiction
(Eker-Roditakis 2019). What is evident in these works, as well as in contributions to the
present issue, is that the tools and frameworks used by translation scholars in dealing with
 THE TRANSLATOR 3

printed texts fail to provide the breadth needed when approaching material that straddles
multiple modes (written, visual, audial, etc.) and multiple media (film, TV, digital media,
comics). For instance, visual analysis has become an indispensable component of most
studies on retranslated multimodal texts – and this raises questions of method. Even
a simple question such as what can be identified as a unit of translation in multimodal
texts becomes a challenge. Translation scholars working in the field of multimodality now
appear ready to tackle methodological challenges. A recent issue of Linguistica Antverpiensia
was devoted to methods for the study of multimodality in translation (Tuominen, Jiménez
Hurtado, and Ketola 2018). Contributors to the issue demonstrate a rich range of methodol-
ogies that are informed by varied disciplines, such as linguistics, psychology, cognitive
studies, visual design and reception studies. The studies included in the special issue attest
to the soaring interest not only in the practice of multimodal translation but also in its
theoretical and methodological underpinnings. They each explore innovative approaches to
the study of translated texts, such as visual design (El-Farahaty 2018), visual analysis
(Tercedor Sánchez and Casado Valenzuela 2018), geosemiotics (Liao 2018), gamer interac-
tion (Mejías-Climent 2018), corpus research in multimodal translation (Jiménez Hurtado and
Martínez Martínez 2018; Soler and Luque 2018), multimodal conversation analysis (Hirvonen
and Tiitula 2018) or social neuroscience (Chica Núñez 2018), to mention a few.
We believe that the current special issue will further open up the field, inviting readers
to think about the specific challenges brought on by investigations on retranslated
multimodal texts and their processes of retranslation, an aspect that is not systematically
tackled by any of the contributions in the Linguistica Antverpiensia volume.
The major point of departure of the current issue was the need to understand and
explore the expanding boundaries of retranslation beyond the printed page and the verbal
mode. The incorporation of multimodality into the theme came as a natural extension of
this central question. Retranslation operates on a range of different levels and confining its
study to interlingual translation and to the printed page denies its potential to offer greater
understanding of processes of meaning-making in our contemporary world, where we are
surrounded by images and sounds travelling in multiple directions. While translation is
a mediated form of discourse, it can be argued that retranslation is hypermediated and
involves multiple processes and agents. The authors included in this issue illustrate this
point in more than one instance, while also posing a challenge to the conventional framing
of retranslation as an exclusively literary and verbal phenomenon. Additionally, just like
translation, and perhaps even more than translation, retranslation can constitute
a conceptual tool in discussing shifting and evolving cultural and literary images and
memories – a thread also present in the articles in this issue.
In addition to shedding light on the complexities of multimodal retranslation, this issue
has a strong focus on the agency of the retranslators, as they engage in intricate networks
across various media. Each of the contributions brings the various agents involved in the
production and reception of retranslated multimodal works into focus and shows how
their interpretive stances shape trajectories of texts and images moving both through
time and across audio-visual and printed media.
4 Ö. B. ALBACHTEN AND Ş. T. GÜRÇAĞLAR

Overview of contributions
The authors contributing to the present special issue adopt interdisciplinary
approaches, confirming the methodological trend that characterises recent research in
multimodal translation. They engage in the joint problematisation of the two main
topics under study, raising questions about the nature of both retranslation and multi-
modality. The articles centre around combinations of texts in various modes, such as
written and graphic texts or stage performances and the language of cinema, and in
various media including the printed book, film, television and theatre. They not only
draw upon (re)translation studies but also bring insights from drama translation, dub-
bing, and subtitling, adaptation studies, comic studies, fandom studies, postcolonial
studies, and memory studies.
The issue opens with a contribution by Zofia Ziemann, who applies the concept of
retranslation to a graphic novel adaptation of Kafka’s life and work. Written by David Zane
Mairowitz in English and illustrated by Robert Crumb, Kafka, offers an account of the
writer’s biography as well as a graphic adaptation of a selection of his writings, including
short stories such as ‘The Judgement’, ‘The Metamorphosis’, ‘The Burrow’, ‘In the Penal
Colony’, ‘A Hunger Artist’, and the novels The Trial, The Castle, and America. Ziemann
analyzes Mairowitz and Crumb’s Kafka, with its complex structure, together with its
German and Polish (re)translations, and she examines the role played in each version by
visual and verbal modes. In Ziemann’s article, retranslation works at different levels.
Mairowitz and Crumb’s English language Kafka is itself considered as a retranslation,
since it represents both a rewriting of Kafka’s texts and of his cultural image. However,
retranslation also refers to the ‘back translation’ of Kafka’s texts which takes place when
the graphic novel is translated into German. Furthermore, in both the German and Polish
translations, retranslation also indicates the rewriting of Kafka’s image for the German and
Polish readers.
Rachel Weissbrod and Ayelet Kohn stretch the concept of retranslation even further,
considering translations and retranslations that take place within one and the same text.
Applying the concept of retranslation within the context of ‘cultural self-(re)translation’,
they focus on Israeli artist Yohanan (Hans) Simon’s biography, demonstrating how Simon
translated and retranslated himself as an individual and as an artist. Inspired largely by
Rushdie’s metaphor of ‘translated men’ (Rushdie 1991) and Bhabha’s work on hybridity
and the concept of ‘third space’ (Bhabha 1990, 1994), Weissbrod and Kohn trace the
artist’s evolution through his public art and illustrated correspondences to reveal how
migration and the experience of different countries and languages changed Simon’s
artistic identity as well as his ideology. These transformations, as the authors argue,
‘translated’ and ‘retranslated’ Simon as the process of migration – in both literal and
metaphorical sense – were repeated.
In her contribution, Stephanie Faye Munyard examines multimodal retranslations of Un
sac de billes, a Second World War autobiographical novel by the French Jewish author
Joseph Joffo which tells the story of his flight, together with his brother, from Nazi-
occupied France, as a young boy. Adopting Boase-Beier’s work on ‘stylistic silence’ (Boase-
Beier 2015) as a model, Munyard shows how the loss and absence described in Joffo’s
memories were first adapted into a French-language bande dessinée in 1989 by Alain
Boutain and Marc Malès and subsequently retranslated in 2011/2012 by Vincent Bailly and
 THE TRANSLATOR 5

Kris, as well as transposed into two French films in 1975 and 2017. Her analysis demon-
strates the potential displayed by (re)translations into the visual mode to provide new
possibilities for narrating the silences that insist in the original text, thus transmitting
traumatic memories, especially in Holocaust narratives.
Francesca Raffi’s article is a novel contribution to the otherwise scant literature on
audiovisual retranslation/resubtitling. Focusing on De Sica’s Ladri di biciclette (Bicycle
Thieves, 1948) and Fellini’s La strada (1954) and examining the English screened and
DVD versions of two canonical films separated by several decades, Raffi questions the
validity of the retranslation hypothesis with respect to resubtitling. She carries out
a comparative analysis of the English subtitles of Bicycle Thieves dating from 1963 and
2001, and of those for La strada, from 1972 and 2009. As the first English subtitles for both
films were produced in 1950 and 1955, respectively, all the subtitles analysed in Raffi’s
article are retranslations. The comparison reveals that while, on the technical level, major
improvements can be identified in the most recent versions, as far as the translation of
culture-specific realia is concerned, it is not possible to draw general conclusions about
the ‘improvement’ or greater ‘closeness’ of the retranslated subtitles to the original texts.
Raffi’s article thus confirms the complexity of the retranslation phenomenon and the
multiplicity of the factors affecting retranslations, pointing to similarities between audio-
visual retranslation and the findings of research conducted in the field of literary
retranslation.
In her contribution, María Laura Spoturno looks at the French and Spanish (re)transla-
tions of Bashir Lazhar (2003), a one-character play by Québécois playwright Evelyne de la
Chenelière. The author also discusses a stage performance of the play delivered by the
French-Mexican actor and translator Boris Schoemann in Spanish. Building on Pavis’
model of concretisations (Pavis 1992), Spoturno adopts the notion of ‘retranslation
chains’, showing how the Spanish version of the dramaturgical text, the stage perfor-
mance in Spanish, and the text created as a result of the reception on the part of the
audience can all be seen as retranslations of the original French play, following its initial
translation into Spanish. Furthermore, Spoturno argues that each stage performance
should be considered as a new retranslation, since each performance, whether in the
original language or in translation, remains unique. As a case study, Bashir Lazhar fore-
grounds various multimodal meaning-making processes in drama translation. Arguing
that the verbal component of a dramatic text is only one of its many modes, Spoturno
offers a definition of retranslation that incorporates inter/intra/multilingual, intertextual,
intermodal, and intermedial processes and products.
Finally, Mengying Jiang investigates the role of intralingual and intersemiotic retran-
slations of The Story of Yanxi Palace, a historical period drama set in China, as a form of
collective resistance against heteronormativity and a communal celebration of lesbian
identity. More specifically, Jiang’s article explores how in this TV show the sisterhood
narrative is reinterpreted and retranslated into lesbian-themed slash fictions, fakesubs
and videos by the series’ fans. Jiang highlights the collective role of fandom in forming
and disseminating a resistant space for lesbians within the hegemonic, heteronormative
culture, as well as the transgressive force of retranslation and its ability to subvert
hierarchies.
With their diverse theoretical and methodological approaches, the articles in this
special issue enrich the field not only by extending the definition of retranslation but
6 Ö. B. ALBACHTEN AND Ş. T. GÜRÇAĞLAR

also by posing a challenge to the verbal bias in (re)translation. They explore a range of
modes and media where retranslation surfaces as both a shaping force and an outcome
of a variety of cultural processes, including cases where it emerges as a powerful
metaphor for remembering, movement and transformation. They reveal that the
study of retranslation on the printed page, on stage, in film, or in the digital world
can help illuminate individual as well as collective experiences of migration, trauma,
resistance and resilience. We hope that this heuristic capacity of retranslation will open
up new avenues of research and create new areas of inquiry in translation studies and
beyond.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes on contributors
Özlem Berk Albachten is professor in the Department of Translation and Interpreting Studies at
Boğaziçi University in Istanbul. She has an M.A. and PhD in Translation Studies from the University of
Warwick. Her main research interests and publications lie within translation history, intralingual
translation, retranslation, and Turkish women translators. She has published two books and co-
edited two books with Şehnaz Tahir Gürçağlar on retranslation.
Şehnaz Tahir Gürçağlar is professor of translation studies and teaches in the graduate programs at
Glendon College (York University) and Boğaziçi University (Istanbul). Her main fields of interest are
translation history, retranslation and periodical studies. She is the author of Politics and Poetics of
Translation in Turkey (Rodopi, 2008) and among the editors of Tradition, Tension and Translation in
Turkey (John Benjamins, 2015). She also co-edited Perspectives on Retranslation: Ideology,
Paratexts, Methods (Routledge, 2019) and Studies from a Retranslation Culture: The Turkish
Context (Springer 2019) with Özlem Berk Albachten.

ORCID
Özlem Berk Albachten http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9868-1187
Şehnaz Tahir Gürçağlar http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0332-2323

References
Alvstad, C., and A. Assis Rosa, eds. 2015. “Voice in Retranslation.” Special Issue of Target 27 (1): 3–24.
Bensimon, P., and D. Coupaye, eds. 1990. “Retraduire.” Special Issue of Palimpsestes 13 (4).
Berk Albachten, O. ̈ ., and S. ̧ . Tahir Gürçağlar, eds. 2019a. Perspectives on Retranslation: Ideology,
Paratexts, Methods. London and New York: Routledge.
Berk Albachten, Ö., and Ş. Tahir Gürçağlar, eds. 2019b. Studies from a Retranslation Culture: The
Turkish Case. Berlin: Springer.
Berman, A. 1990. “La Retraduction Comme Espace de la Traduction.” Palimpsestes 4: 1–7.
doi:10.4000/palimpsestes.
Bhabha, H. K. 1990. “The Third Space.” In Identity: Community, Culture, Difference, edited by
J. Rutherford, 207–221. London: Lawrence and Wishart.
Bhabha, H. K. 1994. The Location of Culture. London: Routledge.
Boase-Beier, J. 2015. Translating the Poetry of the Holocaust: Translation, Style and the Reader.
London: Bloomsbury Advances in Translation.
 THE TRANSLATOR 7

Cadera, S. M., and A. S. Walsh, eds. 2017. Literary Retranslation in Context. Oxford and New York: Peter
Lang.
Chaume, F. 2018. “The Retranslation and Mediated Translation of Audiovisual Content in
Multilingual Spain: Reasons and Market Trends.” Status Quaestionis 15: 12–27.
Chica Núñez, A. J. 2018. “Methodological Contributions of Social Neuroscience for the Study of the
Multimodality of Emotions in Translation.” Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series: Themes in
Translation Studies 17: 246–259.
Deane-Cox, S. 2014. Retranslation. Translation, Literature and Reinterpretation. London: Bloomsbury.
Dore, M., ed. 2018. “Exploring Audiovisual Retranslation.” Special Issue of Status Quaestionis 15.
Eker-Roditakis, A. 2019. “Perspectives on Retranslation: Ideology, Paratexts, Methods.” In
Repackaging, Retranslation, and Intersemiotic Translation: A Turkish Novel in Greece, edited by
O. ̈ . Berk Albachten and S. ̧ . Tahir Gürçağlar, 67–86. London and New York: Routledge.
El-Farahaty, H. 2018. “A Multimodal Analysis of Political Satire: Webcomics and GIFs in Post-Arab
Spring Egypt.” Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series: Themes in Translation Studies 17: 37–57.
Güven, M. 2019. “Studies from a Retranslation Culture: The Turkish Case.” In Why ‘Sway’ Again?
Prosodic Constraints and Singability in Song Re-translation, edited by O. ̈ . Berk Albachten and
S. ̧ . Tahir Gürçağlar, 177–194. Berlin: Springer.
Haug, J. I. 2019. “Perspectives on Retranslation: Ideology, Paratexts, Methods.” In Critical Edition as
Retranslation: Mediating ʿalī Ufuḳī’s Notation Collections (C. 1630–1670), edited by O. ̈ . Berk
Albachten and S. ̧ . Tahir Gürçağlar, 107–128. London and New York: Routledge.
Hirvonen, M., and L. Tiitula. 2018. “How are Translations Created? Using Multimodal Conversation
Analysis to Study a Team Translation Process.” Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series: Themes in
Translation Studies 17: 157–173.
Jakobson, R. [1959] 2000. “On Linguistic Aspects of Translation.” In The Translation Studies Reader,
edited by L. Venuti, 113–118. New York: Routledge.
Jiménez Hurtado, C., and S. Martínez Martínez. 2018. “Concept Selection and Translation Strategy:
Subtitling for the Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing.” Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series: Themes in
Translation Studies 14: 114–139.
Kahn, R., and C. Seth, eds. 2010. La Retraduction. Rouen: Publications des Universités de Rouen et du
Havre.
Kaindl, K. 2013. “Multimodality and Translation.” In The Routledge Handbook of Translation Studies,
edited by C. Millán and F. Bartrina, 257–269. New York: Routledge.
Liao, M. H. 2018. “Translating Multimodal Texts in Space: A Case Study of St Mungo Museum of
Religious Life and Art.” Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series: Themes in Translation Studies 17:
84–98.
Marais, K. 2018. A (Bio)semiotic Theory of Translation: The Emergence of Social-Cultural Reality.
New York: Routledge.
Mejías-Climent, L. 2018. “Multimodality and Dubbing in Video Games: A Research Approach.”
Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series: Themes in Translation Studies 17: 99–113.
Milton, J., and M. H. Catherine Torres, eds. 2003. “Tradução, Retradução E Adaptação.” Special Issue of
Cadernos De Tradução 11 (1).
Monti, E., and P. Schnyder, eds. 2011. Autour De La Retraduction. Paris: Orizons.
O’Driscoll, K. 2011. Retranslation through the Centuries: Jules Verne in English. Oxford and New York:
Peter Lang.
Pavis, P. 1992. Theatre at the Crossroads of Culture. Translated by Loren Kruger. London: Routledge.
Pérez-González, L. 2019. “Multimodality.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, edited by
M. Baker and G. Saldanha, 346–351. London and New York: Routledge.
Raffi, F. 2018. “Retranslation as Resubtitling. The Case Study of Federico Fellini’s La Strada.” Status
Quaestionis 15: 86–110.
Rushdie, S. 1991. Imaginary Homelands: Essays and Criticism 1981–1991. London: Granta Books.
Sandrelli, A. 2018. “An Italian Crime Series in English. The Dubbing and Subtitling of Suburra.” Status
Quaestionis 15: 161–189.
 8 Ö. B. ALBACHTEN AND Ş. T. GÜRÇAĞLAR

Soler, S., and M. O. Luque. 2018. “Paintings to My Ears: A Method of Studying Subjectivity in Audio
Description for Art Museums.” Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series: Themes in Translation Studies
17: 140–156.
Tercedor Sánchez, M., and A. Casado Valenzuela. 2018. “Visual Metaphors in Representing Medical
Knowledge.” Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series: Themes in Translation Studies 17: 174–195.
Tuominen, T., C. Jiménez Hurtado, and A. Ketola. 2018. “Why Methods Matter: Approaching
Multimodality in Translation Research.” Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series: Themes in
Translation Studies 17: 1–21.
Tymoczko, M. 2007. Enlarging Translation, Empowering Translators. Manchester: St. Jerome.
Van Poucke, P., and G. Sanz Gallego. 2019. “Retranslation in Context.” Special Issue of Cadernos De
Traduçao 39: 1.
Zanotti, S. 2018. “Archival Resources and Uncertainties in Film Retranslation Research.” Status
Quaestionis 15: 58–85.

View publication stats