Censorship and self-censorship in translation: reasons and results

Abstract

The article deals with some aspects of deliberate modification of the source text in the process of interlingual transference. It is noted that such interference may be due to a variety of reasons. Linguistic (or translation-related) aspects resulting from discrepancies between the source and target languages— and manifested through different types of translation transformations—are recognized as practically inevitable. Quite often it becomes necessary to employ techniques aimed at eliminating various types of lacunae that reflect the ethnocultural specificity of the original. A certain role may also be played by subjective factors related to the translator’s personal characteristics, which may lead to a significant alteration of the original text’s content.

In those cases where interference in the text during translation is motivated by ideological reasons (in the broad sense of the term), it is advisable to distinguish between ‘indirect’ (public) and ‘direct’ (official) censorship. Formally, the former is a private initiative of individuals or groups without the executive powers; the latter is implemented by special institutions, and their decision has the directive authority. At the same time, the official censors must follow the existing instructions and are responsible for their decisions, whereas those who speak as if from themselves are not constrained by such considerations, and their demands regarding translations may therefore be even more hardline. At the same time well-known are the cases of ‘censorial paradoxes’ in relation to translated literature, when foreign texts that were not in line with official ideology were nevertheless legally published.

References

1. Barkhudarov L.S. 1975. Yazyk i perevod [Language and Translation]. Mezhdunar. Otnosheniya Moscow. (In Russ.)

2. D’yakonov I. 1973. Drevneevreiskaya literatura [Old Hebrew Literure]. Poehziya i proza Drevnego Vostoka. Izdatel’stvo «Vsemirnaya literatura» Moscow, pp. 537–55. (In Russ.)

3. Zelenov M.V. 2013. Tsenzura: podkhody k opredeleniyu ponyatiya [Censorship: Attempt to Define the Notion]. Otkrytyi tekst. Ehlektronnoe periodicheskoe izdanie, pp. 94–103. URL: https://opentextnn.ru/old/data/files/zelenov-tsenz.pdf (accessed: 10.02.2025). (In Russ.)

4. Karpuk D.A. 2012 Dukhovnaya tsenzura v Rossiiskoi imperii v seredine XIX veka (na primere deyatel’nosti Sankt-Peterburgskogo dukhovnogo tsenzurnogo komiteta) [Ecclesiastical Censorship in Russian Empire in the Middle of the `9^th Century]. Trudy Prervinskoi pravoslavnoi dukhovnoi seminarii, no. 6 (3), pp. 46–74. (In Russ.)

5. Klishin A.I. Praktika perevoda i tsenzura [Censorship and Practice of Translation]. Izvestiya Sankt-Peterburgskogo gosudarstvennogo ehkonomicheskogo universiteta, no. 5-1 (119), pp. 151–154. (In Russ.)

6. Konashev M.B. 2005. Charles Darvin i tsenzura v Rossii i Anglii v XIX veke [Charles Darvin and the Censorship in Russia]. Tsenzura i dostup k informatsii: istoriya i sovremennost’. Rossiiskaya natsional’naya biblioteka, St Peterburg, pp. 134–139. (In Russ.)

7. Levchenko I.E. 2000. Vidy tsenzury [The Types of the Censorship]. Aktual’nye problemy kul’turologii: materialy nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii, posvyashchennoi pamyati V.I. Kolosnitsyna, Ekaterinburg, 14–15 aprelya 2000 g., pp. 14–18. (In Russ.)

8. Savin A.I. 2020. Bibliya v Sovetskom Soyuze: k istorii vvoza iz-za granitsy, izdaniya i rasprostraneniya [Bible in the Soviet Union: the History of Import from Abroad, Publication and Distribution]. Istoricheskii kur’er, no. 2 (10), pp. 33–50. (In Russ.)

9. Sdobnikov V.V. 2022. Pereosmyslenie perevodovedcheskikh kategorii — pereosmyslenie perevoda [Reassessment of the Categories of the Translatology — the Reassessment of the Translation]. Voenno-gumanitarnyi al’manakh. Seriya «Lingvistika», vypusk no. 7, tom 1, Voennyi universitet, Moscow, pp. 60–75. (In Russ.)

10. Khukhuni G.T. 2021. «Perevodcheskaya tsenzura» v Rossii i Sovetskom Soyuze: legendy i fakty. [The ‘Translation Censorship’ in Russia and the Soviet Union: Legends and Facts]. In N.I. Reingol’d (ed.) Novatsii i traditsiya russkoi shkoly perevoda: monografiya [Innovations and Traditions of the Russian School of Translation: Monograph]. Rossiiskii gosudarstvennyi gumanitarnyi universitet; RGGU. Moscow, pp. 108–120. (In Russ.)

11. Khukhuni G.T., Valuitseva I.I., Osipova A.A. Mozhet li volya zakazchika yavlyat’sya «kategoricheskim imperativom» pri perevode? [Can the Customer’s Will be the “Categorical Imperative”?]. Rossiiskii sotsial’no-gumanitarnyi zhurnal. Setevoe izdanie, no. 2, 2024. URL. Available at: https://www.evestnik-mgou.ru/jour/article/view/1437/1294. (accessed: 10.02.2025). (In Russ.)

12. Chukovskii K.I. 2012. Vysokoe iskusstvo [The High Art]. Sobr. soch. v 15 tt. T. 3. M.: Agentstvo FTM, Ltd. Moscow. (In Russ.)

13. Shveitser A.D. 1988. Teoriya perevoda: Status, problemy, aspekty [Theory of Translation; Status, Problems, Aspects]. Nauka. Moscow. (In Russ.)