This article presents the results of a reader response study of Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness and two of its Italian translations. Specifically, data from an online questionnaire are used to test whether English and Italian readers respond differently to the potential racist implications of the fictional representation of the African natives. Whereas one translator removes completely all occurrences of nigger(s) and negro, the other adds additional uses of the slurs which are not present in the original. We explore with empirical methods whether these translational alterations have an effect on the readers’ perception of dehumanisation, discrimination and racism in the text, comparing responses to each translation with responses to the original. Our findings not only show evidence of significant differences in the responses between one translation and the original but also suggest that other linguistic and extra-linguistic factors could be influencing readers’ response. With this article, we aim to contribute to the under-researched application of reader response approaches to translation studies.
AchebeC (1990) An image of Africa: Racism in Conrad’s Heart of Darkness. In: Hopes and Impediments: Selected Essays. New York: Anchor Books, pp. 1–20.
2.
AllingtonD (2006) First steps towards a rhetorical psychology of literary interpretation. Journal of Literary Semantics35(2): 123–144.
3.
Assis RosaA (2006) Defining target text reader: Translation studies and literary theory. In: DuarteJFAssisRASeruyaT (eds) Translation Studies at the Interface of Disciplines. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 99–109.
4.
AtkinsR (2014) Instruments measuring perceived racism/racial discrimination: Review and critique of factor analytic techniques. International Journal of Health Services44(4): 711–734.
5.
Boase-BeierJ (2014) Translation and the representation of thought: The case of Herta Müller. Language and Literature23(3): 213–226.
6.
BosseauxC (2004) Translating point of view: A corpus-based study. Language Matters: Studies in the Language of Africa35(1): 259–274.
7.
BosseauxC (2006) Who’s afraid of Virginia’s you: A corpus-based study of the French translations of The Waves. Meta: Journal des Traducteurs/Meta: Translators’ Journal51(3): 599–610.
8.
CastiglioneD (2017) Difficult poetry processing: Reading times and the narrativity hypothesis. Language and Literature26(2): 99–121.
9.
ČermákováA (2015) Repetition in John Irving’s novel A Widow for One Year: A corpus stylistics approach to literary translation. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics20(3): 355–377.
10.
ČermákováAFárováL (2010) Keywords in Harry Potter and their Czech and Finnish translation equivalents. In: ČermákFKlégrACornessP (eds) InterCorp: Exploring a Multilingual Corpus. svazek 13: Studie z korpusové lingvistiky. Prague: Nakladatelství Lidové noviny/Ústav českého národní ho korpusu, pp. 177–188.
11.
ChanLT-H (2016) Reader response and reception theory. In: BaerBJAngelelliC (eds) Researching Translation and Interpreting. London: Routledge, pp. 146–154.
12.
ChesnokovaAZyngierSVianaV, et al. (2017) Cross-cultural reader response to original and translated poetry: An empirical study in four languages. Comparative Literature Studies54(4): 824–849.
13.
CuiY (2017) Reader responses to shifts in point of view: An empirical study. Language and Literature26(2): 122–136.
14.
D’EgidioA (2015) How readers perceive translated literary works: An analysis of reader reception. Lingue e Linguaggi14: 60–82.
15.
DukāteA (2009) Translation, Manipulation and Interpreting. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
FaloppaF (2004) Parole Contro: La Rappresentazione del Diverso in Italiano e nei Dialetti. Milano: Garzanti.
18.
FaloppaF (2011) Risposta al quesito di Paola Costantini sulle forme nero e di colore. Crusca per Voi43: 10.
19.
FarahzadF (2003) Manipulation in translation. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology11(4): 269–281.
20.
FishSE (1980) Is There a Text in This Class? The Authority of Interpretative Communities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
21.
GamstGCLiangCTHDer-KarabetiaA (2011) Racism- and prejudice-related measures. In: Handbook of Multicultural Measures. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE, pp. 251–333.
22.
GrayHMGrayKWegnerDM (2007) Dimensions of mind perception. Science315(5812): 619.
23.
GrayKKnobeJSheskinM, et al. (2011) More than a body: Mind perception and the nature of objectification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology101(6): 1207–1220.
24.
HardingJR (2014) Reader response criticism and stylistics. In: BurkeM (ed.) The Routledge Handbook of Stylistics. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 68–84.
25.
HawkinsH (2006) Heart of Darkness and racism. In: ArmstrongPB (ed.) Heart of Darkness. New York: W.W. Norton, pp. 365–375.
26.
HaysDGChangCYDeckerSL (2007) Initial development and psychometric data for the Privilege and Oppression Inventory. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development40: 66–79.
27.
HermansT (ed.) (2014 [1985]) The Manipulation of Literature: Studies in Literary Translations. London: Routledge.
28.
HughesG (2006) Encyclopedia of Swearing: The Social History of Oaths, Profanity, Foul Language, and Ethnic Slurs in the English-Speaking World. Armonk: M. E. Sharpe.
29.
JohnsonJH (2016) A comparable comparison? A corpus stylistic analysis of the Italian translation of Julian Barnes’ Il Senso di una Fine and the original text The Sense of an Ending. Language and Literature25(1): 38–53.
30.
KennedyR (2002) Nigger: The Strange Career of a Troublesome Word. New York: Pantheon Books.
31.
KressinNRRaymondKLManzeM (2008) Perceptions of race/ethnicity-based discrimination: A review of measures and evaluation of their usefulness for the health care setting. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved19(3): 697–730.
32.
KrugerH (2012) Reader responses to domesticating and foreignising translation strategies: An eye-tracking experiment. In: Postcolonial Polysystems: The Production and Reception of Translated Children’s Literature in South Africa. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 217–267.
33.
Kujawska-LisE (2008) Turning Heart of Darkness into a racist text: A comparison of two Polish translations. Conradiana40(2): 165–178.
34.
LefevereA (1992) Translation, Rewriting, and the Manipulation of Literary Fame. London: Routledge.
35.
LiP (2012) Ideology-oriented translations in China: A reader-response study. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology20(2): 127–137.
36.
MahlbergMConklinKBissonM-J (2014) Reading Dickens’s characters: Employing psycholinguistic methods to investigate the cognitive reality of patterns in texts. Language and Literature23(4): 369–388.
37.
MastropierroL (2017) Corpus Stylistics in Heart of Darkness and its Italian Translations. London: Bloomsbury.
38.
MastropierroLMahlbergM (2017) Key words and translated cohesion in Lovecraft’s At the Mountains of Madness and one of its Italian translations. English Text Construction10(1): 78–105.
39.
MillerJH (2006) Should we readHeart of Darkness? In: ArmstrongPB (ed.) Heart of Darkness. New York: W.W. Norton, pp. 463–474.
40.
MorenaMDQuilesMNCorreaAD, et al. (2016) Perception of mind and dehumanization: Human, animal, or machine?International Journal of Psychology53(4): 253–260.
41.
MoriniM (2007) Say what you mean, mean what you say: A pragmatic analysis of the Italian translations of Emma. Language and Literature16(1): 5–19.
42.
MundayJ (2008) Style and Ideology in Translation: Latin America Writing in English. London: Routledge.
43.
PeplowDCarterR (2014) Stylistics and real readers. In: BurkeM (ed.) The Routledge Handbook of Stylistics. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 440–454.
44.
SotirovaV (2006) Reader responses to narrative point of view. Poetics34(2): 108–133.
45.
VenutiL (2013) Translation Changes Everything: Theory and Practice. London: Routledge.
46.
WattsCE (1983) ‘A bloody racist’: About Achebe’s view of Conrad. The Yearbook of English Studies23: 196–209.
47.
WattsCE (1990) Heart of Darkness and Other Tales. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
48.
WhitleySCanningP (2017) Reader response research in stylistics. Language and Literature26(2): 71–87.
49.
WintersM (2009) Modal particles explained: How modal particles creep into translations and reveal translators’ styles. Target21(1): 74–97.
50.
WintersM (2010) From modal particles to point of view: A theoretical framework for the analysis of translator attitude. Translation and Interpreting Studies5(2): 163–185.
51.
YuJ (2017) Translating ‘others’ as ‘us’ in Huckleberry Finn: Dialect, register and the heterogeneity of standard language. Language and Literature26(1): 54–65.
52.
ZinsH (1982) Joseph Conrad and Africa. Nairobi, Kenya: Kenya Literature Bureau.
53.
ZyngierSvan PeerWHakemulderJF (2007) Complexity and foregrounding: In the eye of the beholder?Poetics Today28(4): 653–682.
