مقاله انگلیسی رایگان در مورد ترجمه، هژمونی و حسابداری: چارچوب تحقیقاتی انتقادی – الزویر 2021

Highlights

Abstract

Keywords

1. Introduction

2. Building a critical lens for translation research in accounting: Venuti, translation, hegemony

3. Empirical illustration: Finnish-language IFRS translation

4. Discussion

5. Conclusions

Acknowledgments

References

Abstract

     Translation research in accounting has in the past decades recognized the significance of translation for international accounting communication, but only recently started to discuss the relevance and legitimacy of the approaches in which translation is used and studied. Generally, translation in accounting has been seen as a technically challenging task that serves an assumedly neutral functional purpose. This perception is problematic in that it neglects the multifaceted cultural, political and societal implications of translation. In order to expand the theoretical repertoire of translation research in accounting, this paper introduces a critical lens that questions the seemingly neutral use of translation in various contexts. Drawing on the influential work of translation theorist Lawrence Venuti, it is argued that translation both reveals and factors in intercultural hegemonies, imbalances and asymmetries. To explore the relevance of Venuti’s theorizing for accounting, the context of IFRS translation is examined. Attempting to become a global institution across cultures and languages, the IFRS indeed depend on translation in their diffusion. The IFRS context is, however, embedded in current linguistic and cultural hegemonies: the dominant position of the English language and the canonical role of Anglo-American accounting. Combining a critical theoretical conceptualization and empirical data from the translation work of Finnish-language IFRS, this paper illustrates how translation in accounting is not a technical exercise but can entail linguistic and cultural conflicts between dominant and marginal(ized) concepts, traditions and values. Above all, this paper shows how applying a different theoretical lens to translation can yield critical insights.

Introduction

     Translation is vital for international accounting communication. It plays a pivotal role in multilingual corporate reporting (e.g., Nobes & Stadler, 2018), in the diffusion of international reporting frameworks (e.g., Kettunen, 2017, IFRS Foundation, 2018), and in conducting and reporting research (e.g., Andrew et al., 2020, Kamla and Komori, 2018). Crossing both linguistic and cultural borders, translation is a multifaceted phenomenon with cultural, political and societal implications (Bassnett and Lefevere, 1990, Robinson, 1997, Tymoczko, 2009, Evans, 2018). Still, accounting research has mainly perceived translation as a technical issue in need of practical solutions that would somehow create assumedly neutral communication and correspondences between different languages and accounting traditions (e.g., Aisbitt and Nobes, 2001, Doupnik and Richter, 2003, Doupnik and Richter, 2004, Nobes and Stadler, 2018). What this approach has neglected is the “ethical obligation to be mindful of [translation’s] implications” (Evans, 2018, p. 1863). There is indeed a pressing need for more critical research agendas (Evans, 2018, Evans and Kamla, 2018) and for theoretical approaches on which to build them.

Conclusions

     Despite the regnant approaches in extant studies, accounting is not a neutral, technical area of translation. Instead, ethical questions, such as the fate of linguistic and cultural diversity exist. Following Evans’ (2018) proposal of a paradigm shift in translation research, this study has presented and provided an exploratory application of a critical research framework, demonstrating how translation theory originally developed in eminently culturally-embedded literary translation can in the supposedly technical field of accounting make us see translation anew. It interrogates the questionably neutral view on the nature of translation adopted by the majority of prior accounting research, posing questions such as who translation serves, which structures it upholds or opposes, and how choices in different parts of translation processes affect the languages and cultures involved. In essence, it challenges the unproblematized, hegemonic perception that assumes either translation has no implications beyond its technical task or that the implications are irrelevant—as long as they do not affect the English-speaking constituents. Thus, this paper has shown that it is vital to minoritize research approaches and escape ethically limited ones so that they would not become canonized as a way of doing translation research in accounting.