Adapting, Translating, Transforming

In recent years adaptation studies has tried to establish itself as a discipline in 
its own right, with the appearance of several works - both theoretical and 
empirical - such as Linda Hutcheon's "A Theory of Adaptation" (2005) and 
Thomas Leitch's "Adaptation Studies and Its Discontents" (2007). While 
adaptation studies considers itself interdisciplinary in focus, the bulk of its 
activity to date has been restricted to literature and/or film studies 
departments, focusing on questions of textual transfer - i.e. what is gained 
and what is lost by transforming a literary text into a film. There needs to be 
further research into what the act of adaptation involves and whether it 
differs from other acts of textual rewriting.

Meanwhile the ‘cultural turn’ in translation studies has prompted many 
scholars, following Jakobson, to consider adaptation as a form of inter-
semiotic translation, and to produce a growing body of work on 
the ‘translation’ of literary forms into other media, including film. There seems 
to be a need to revisit both translation studies and adaptation studies, 
focusing in particular on possible differences between the two disciplines, as 
well as areas of crossover. This kind of research can open up new areas of 
interdisciplinary study in both subject areas - translation and adaptation 
studies - as well as in other areas such as media studies.
 
With this in mind, we seek to put together a collection of essays from 
colleagues in both disciplines, focusing in particular on what the 
terms 'adaptation' and 'translation' actually mean; whether they are 
interchangeable or whether they are fundamentally different processes. We 
would welcome contributions that focus on the following issues:
 
•	the role of the translator and whether it differs from that of an 
adapter 
•	the metaphorical meanings of both terms: translation as 
transformation or transfer, adaptation as psychological adjustment to a 
particular context. 
•	translation and adaptation as politically loaded terms 
•	the semiotic systems underlying translation and adaptation 
•	'openness' versus 'restriction' - do translations differ from 
adaptations in the way they approach either the source or the target text? 
•	social constructions: the translator as mediator between two 
languages and two cultures; the adapter as mediator between media and 
cultures; 
•	the role of the imagination and/or the emotions in the act of 
translation or adaptation 
•	the role of the academy and/or recent scholarship in shaping 
attitudes towards both disciplines
We are interested in various types of contribution:
a) theoretical interventions that deal with both translation and adaptation in 
terms of recent scholarship in both disciplines;
b) personal accounts of how a text was either adapted or translated in 
specific contexts, focusing in particular on those forces - social, political, 
cultural - that shaped the act of transformation. This might take the form of a 
critical analysis of a particular adapter’s or translator’s work.
c) first hand accounts from professional ‘re-writers’ as to what the terms 
mean to them. They may either take the form of response-papers, or 
accounts of their own work.
 
What we are looking for is a diversity of material, emphasizing the ways in 
which both 'translation' and 'adaptation' at once parallel yet are fundamentally 
different from one another. There is no hard and fast word limits, but 
contributions over 4000 words would be particularly welcome. The book can 
only help to strengthen the status of both disciplines.

Contributions, in the form of short (150-250 word) proposals, should be sent 
to the joint editors, Laurence Raw ([log in to unmask]) and Joanne 
Collie ([log in to unmask]) by 31 December 2009.