Application of Polysystem Theory to English to Persian Translations of Rowling’s Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

Document Type : Original Article

Author

English Department, Faculty of Foreign Languages, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to investigate the acceptability of two Persian translations of Rowling's Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets by finding the position of each Persian translation in the literary polysystem of Iran. It also aimed to identify the most/least used translation strategies applied by each Persian translator, Morteza Madaninejad (2000) and Hamideh Ashkannezhand (2004), for translating culture-specific items (CSIs) from English into Persian. To do so, CSIs were extracted from the novel and classified based on Espindola and Vasconcellos's (2006) classification of cultural items. Then, Pederson's (2005) taxonomy of translation strategies was used to analyze the two Persian translations. The results indicated that Madaninejad preferred to use source oriented strategies. Thus, the translation he produced occupied the primary position in the literary polysystem. By contrast, Ashkannezhand had an interest in the use of target -oriented strategies. The findings have implications for translators of literary texts.

Keywords

1. Introduction

Getting to know other cultures and communicating with other societies are two important issues for each country that should be taken into consideration. One way to achieve this is translation. Cary (1957) states that "translation is playing the role of discovery" in such a way that it "discovers things from language to language, from country to country, from age to age, and from world to world" (pp. 183-5). The importance of translation in the human communicative acts has made it one of the most important branches of linguistics (Wilss, 1982). It implies that translation is oriented towards linguistic structures and seems to be one of the easiest types of activities.

Among various types of translation, literary translation is one way to communicate across cultures (Guerra, 2012).  According to Levy (1967/2000), literary translation is not only "a reproductive and creative labor" but also its goal is to produce an "equivalent aesthetic effect" (p. 62). It is rather to say, literary translation is not an easy task for many problems it certainly creates for translators. One problem that a translator faces is the translation of culture-specific items(CSIs) because of that the translator will face problem in finding equivalents for some cultural words in the target culture (TC) to explain objects, facts, and phenomena in the source culture (SC). In this relation, Larson (1998) believes that such a problem is due to "the difference of geography, customs, beliefs, worldview, and various other factors" (p.163).

In the translation of a literary text, it is necessary to know about the target language (TL) and also be familiar with the TC (Nida, 1964). Translation, as Delisle (1988) discusses, occurs "in the context of the relation between two cultures, two worlds of thought and perception" (p. 74). That is to say, the translator needs to have background knowledge of not only both languages but also both cultures because he should choose the closest term when translating the CSI (Fuadi, 2016).  The important recommendation made by almost all theorists is that all the effort of the translator must be targeted to produce an acceptable translation. To achieve this, many translation strategies/methods have been presented (see for example, Newmark's (1981) communication and semantic translations; Venuti's (1995) domestication and foreignization strategies; House's (1997) overt and covert translations). 

Even-Zohar (1978) considers two positions, primary and secondary positions, for the translated literature in his polysystemtheory. He argues that if the translated literature is in the primary position, translators "do not feel constrained to follow target literature models and are more prepared to break conventions" (Munday, 2001, p. 109). In a sense, translators tend to follow the structure of the ST and produce adequate translations. By contrast, if the translated literature occupies the secondary position, translators "tend to use existing target-culture models for the TT and produce more non-adequate translations" (p. 109) which refers to the TT orientation and acceptable translations. 

Using Even-Zohar's (1978) theory, the present study aimed to investigate the acceptability of two Persian translations of Rowling's Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets by discovering the position of each translation. Furthermore, the most/least used translation strategies by each translator were determined. To achieve this, the following research questions were answered:

  1. What translation strategies did each translator employ, based on Pederson's (2005) taxonomy, for the translation of CSIs?
  2. What position did each translation occupy in the literary polysystem, based on Even-Zohar's (1978) polysystem theory?

The findings of the present study help translators deal with CSIs included in literary works. This can help deepen their considerations about the importance of successful translation of such items. Thus, the present study can theoretically and practically be useful for translation scholars, teachers and students majoring in translation. Moreover, the findings of this study can be beneficial to translation students, trainee translators, and literary translators.       

2. Review of the Related Literature

CSIs are deeply rooted in the SL and express certain cultural aspects that do not exist in the TL. Thus, it is important to employ appropriate translation strategies/procedures to deal with such items. Obviously, it is not possible to produce CSIs perfectly, and have a complete and correct translation of them. The translation of so many literary works into other languages can prove this (Hariyanto, 2012). He further states that despite the difficulties that CSIs pose for translators, this does not refer to the fact that there is no way to translate such items.

The translator can fill the cultural gap through relying on several devices as well as on a wide range of translation strategies/procedures to cope with CSIs (Guerra, 2012). In a sense, this, as she notes, is the translator who decides to choose what kind of strategy to translate CSIs in the best possible way based on the purpose and target readers of the translation.  To overcome CSIs, many categorizations alongside translation strategies have been presented (for example, see Newmark (1988); Tomalin & Stempleski (1993); and Leppihalme (1997)).

Among different models, Espindola's and Vasconcellos's (2006) categorization is by far the most detailed. They listed twelve types of cultural references that were used for the discussion and identification of CSIs in this study. Their categorization is as follows:

  1. Toponyms: a place name, a geographical name, a proper name of locality, region, or some other part of Earth’s surface or its natural or artificial feature
  2. Anthroponyms: ordinary and famous people’s names and nicknames and names referring to regional background which acquire identification status
  3. Forms of entertainment: amusement or diversion including public performances or shows, it also encompasses hospitality provided, such as dinners, parties, business lunches, etc.
  4. Means of transportation: the facilities used for the movement of people and goods from one place to another
  5. Fictional character: a person in a novel, play, or a film who is related to fiction, works of imagination
  6. Legal System: rules of conduct inherent in human nature and essential to or binding upon human society
  7. Local Institution: an organization that helps or serves people in a certain area - health, education, work, political, administrative, religious, artistic
  8. Measuring system: units used in the determination of the size, weight, speed, length, etc. of something in the different cultures
  9. Food and Drink: any solid or liquid substance that is used by human beings as a source of nourishment
  10. Scholastic reference: related to school or studying
  11. Religious celebration: to do something special to mark a religious occasion
  12. Dialect: user-related variation, which determines speaker’s status as regards social class, age, sex, education, etc.

Extralinguistic culture-bound reference (ECR) was coined by Pedersen (2005) for CSIs and based on it, he provided his classification of cultural items. According to him, ECR includes "references to places, people, institutions, customs, food etc. that you may not know even if you know the language in question" (p. 91). He implies that ECRs are "expressions pertaining to cultural items, which are not part of a language system" (p. 2). He proposed the taxonomy of translation strategies and divided them into SL- and TL-oriented ones.

SL-oriented strategies cover three subcategories as follows:

  1. Retention: It is the most source language oriented strategy, as it allows an element from the source language to enter the target text. Sometimes the retained culture bound term is marked off from the rest of the target text by quotes and occasionally by italics. 

Example 1:

"Mr. Vernon Dursley had been woken in the early hours of the morning…" (p. 1)

"آقای ورنون دورسلی، صبح بسیار زود..." (مدنی نژاد، ص. 1)

"آقای ورنون دورسلی صبح زود..." (اشکان نژند، ص. 4)

  1. Specification: It means leaving the culture-bound term in its untranslated form, but adding information that is not present in the source text, making the target culture bound term more specific than the source culture-bound term. This is done in one of two ways: either through Explicitation or Addition:

Example 2:

"Never went hungry when I was at Smeltings" (p. 1)

a)      Explicitation: Explicitation could be seen as any strategy involving expansion of the text, or spelling out anything that is implicit in the source text.

"موقعیکه من مدرسه اسمل تینگز، می رفتم هیچ وقعت گرسنه نماندم." (مدنی نژاد، ص. 2)                     

b)      Addition: This means that the added material is latent in the source culture-bound term, as part of the sense or connotations of the term. By using this strategy, the translator intervenes to give guidance to the target audience. 

" من خودم وقتی که در کالج اسملتینگ بودم هرگز گرسنگی نکشیدم." (اشکان نژند، ص. 4)

  1. Direct translation: This strategy is like literal translation and it could hardly be used on proper names, but it is not uncommon for rendering the names of companies, official institutions, technical gadgetry etc. based on the outcome of translation, it has two subgroups; the first one is calque which is not familiar to target audience and it may sound odd to them, and the second one is shifted direct translation which refers to those terms that are common in target culture so the audience are familiar with them.  

Example 3:

"Ever since Harry had come home for the summer holidays" (p. 2)

"از روزیکه هاری برای تعطیلات تابستان به خانه آنها آمده بود" (مدنی نژاد، ص. 3)

 "از وقتی که هری برای تعطیلات تابستان به خانه برگشته بود" (اشکان نژند، ص.5)

TL-oriented strategies encompass three subcategories:

  1. Generalization: This strategy means replacing a culture-bound term referring to something specific by something more general. Typically, this may involve hyponymy or not.

Example 4:

"A bit of fried egg dangling from his bushy mustache" (p. 1)

"کمی از تخم مرغهایی که داشت میخورد از سیبیلش آویزان شده بود" (مدنی نژاد، ص.2)

  1. Substitution: This strategy involves removing the source culture-bound term and replacing it with something else, either a different term or some sort of paraphrase, which does not necessarily involve a cultural term. This strategy consists of two subgroups: cultural substitution and paraphrase as follows:

a)      Cultural substitution: This strategy means that the source culture-specific item is removed, and replaced by a different cultural term.

Example 5:

"I want more bacon." (p. 1)

"من باز هم دنبه می خواهم." (اشکان نژند، ص. 4)

b)      Paraphrase: This strategy involves rephrasing the source culture-specific item, either through reduction to sense, or by completely removing all trace of the cultural term and instead using a paraphrase that fits the context.

 

Example 6:

"Dudley, who was so large his bottom drooped over either side of the kitchen chair" (p. 1)

"دادلی که خپلو و چاق بود و کپل هایش نیز از دو طرف نیمکت آشپزخانه بیرون زده بود"

 (مدنی نژاد، ص. 2).

  1. Omission: As Toury (1995, p. 82) points out, Omission is a valid translation strategy, and in the present model it simply means replacing the ST ECR with nothing.

Example 7:

"Quidditch, the most popular sport in the wizarding world (six tall goal posts, four flying balls, and fourteen players on broomsticks)" (p. 2)

"پرداختن به بازی کیدیچ که معروفترین بازی در دنیای جادوگری بود." (مدنی نژاد، ص. 2)

" مخصوصاً کوئیدیچ ، پر طرفدارترین ورزش در دنیای جادو گرها." (اشکان نژند، ص. 5)

His taxonomy was applied as a valid criterion to investigate translation strategies employed by each translator to overcome CSIs.

2.1. Even-Zohar's Polysystem Theory

In the 1970s, Itamar Even-Zohar proposed polysystem theory which derived from the notion of the Russian Formalists of the 1920s, who had focused on literary historiography (Munday, 2001). Polysystem theory considers translation literature as "a system operating in the larger social, literary and historical systems of the target culture" (p. 107).

Even-Zohar (1978) discusses that translated literature are considered not only "an integral system within any literary polysystem," but also "a most active system within it" (p. 193). But there was a question about its position within the polysystem and the way this position was connected with the nature of its overall repertoire. He explains that the position translated literature occupies in the literary polysystem is dependent on the different layers of the polysystem. Even-Zohar implies that translated literature can be primary/central or secondary/peripheral and this position is connected with innovatory or conservatory repertoires.

If translated literature, as he notes, occupies the primary position in the literary polysystem, it is actively involved in forming the center of the polysystem. In such a situation, it is a major part of innovatory forces. Thus, there is no obvious difference between the ST and TT. Furthermore, translation is used to elaborate the new repertoire because of the emergence of new models according to him. Even-Zohar (1978) argues that the situation that influences the (home) polysystem plays the main role in determining the translated works; that is, they are selected based on how compatible they are with the new approaches and what innovative role they may have within the target literature.

If translated literature, as he states, occupies the secondary position, it establishes a peripheral system within the polysystem. Thus, translated literature "becomes a major factor of conservatism" (p. 195). In such a case, the original literature is supposed to develop new norms and models, whereas translated literature continues to obey norms "which have been rejected either recently or long before by the (newly) established center" (p. 195). That is to say, translation strategies, as he suggests, should be applied based on the position translated literature occupies. It alludes to the fact that if translated literature is in primary position, the translator can break the conventions and produce the TT that is oriented towards the structure of the ST. By contrast, if it occupies the secondary position, the translator has to employ strategies by which he is able to make the TT that is close to the TC. 

3. Method

3.1 Corpus  

The corpus of the present study includes the English version of one of Harry Potter book series Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets published by Bloomsbury Publishing Company in the United Kingdom on 2 July 1998, and its two Persian translations. The first translation was made by Morteza Madaninejad (2000) and published by Hirmand Publication in 338 pages. The second translation was produced by Hamideh Ashkannezhand (2004) and published by Goharshad Publication in 416 pages. It should be noted that the original book was written in 251 pages. The popularity of Harry Potter’ novel was correctly described as follows:

At a time when children were thought to be abandoning books for computers and television, these two novels proved that teenagers could still be attracted to reading, even become incredible fans knowing lines and characters by heart. Having acquired such a fame, they were sold in millions of copies all over the world and the translators’ job was to promptly and professionally find those equivalents that were as close as possible to the original text. (Chifane, 2009, p. 19)

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets is a fantasy novel and the second novel in the Harry Potter series that covers many types of CSIs that can pose many challenges for translators. All the above reasons were the rationales behind choosing this novel for the present study.  

3.2 Procedure

To conduct the study and to gather the data, two steps were followed: The first was to read the original book alongside its two Persian translations line by line to extract CSIs and their translations. The second included classifying the extracted CSIs based on Espindola and Vasconcellos's (2006) model. Then, a comparison was made between each CSI and its Persian translation to determine the type of translation strategies employed by each translator for the translation of CSIs from English into Persian. Thus, Pederson's (2005) taxonomy of translation strategies was applied for the analysis of the translations made by both Persian translators to test whether such translation strategies were applicable to the translation of CSIs and whether they were employed consciously or unconsciously by the two Persian translators to transfer these items into Persian and fill the cultural gaps. Moreover, some statistics, such as frequencies and percentages, were employed to show the usage of translation strategies and the number of CSIs in each category. The chi-square () test was employed to see whether there was a significant relation between the type of translation strategies and the number of them used by each Persian translator. At the end, a comparison was made between the two Persian translations as a whole, based on Even-Zohar's (1978) polysystem theory, to find out that what position each translation occupied and which translation was more acceptable and comprehensible.

3.3. Research Design

The current study is a comparative analysis study which employed a descriptive model and dealt with comparing the English version of Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets and its two Persian translations. Descriptive method is an innovative tool for researchers. It provides an opportunity to combine both quantitative and qualitative data as a means to reconstruct the "what is" of a topic.

4. Results

According to Table 1, the total number of Pederson's translation strategies employed by Madaninejad (N = 181) was equal to the total number of them (N = 181) used by Ashkannezhand.

  Table 1

Frequencies and Percentages of Strategies Used by Madaninejad and Ashkannezhand for Translating CSIs

Strategies used by Madaninejad

f

%

Strategies used by Ashkannezhand

f

%

Direct translation

54

30.0

Substitution

38

21.0

Retention

46

25.0

Direct Translation

34

19.0

Substitution

25

14.0

Generalization

31

17.0

Specification

23

14.0

Omission

30

16.5

Omission

17

9.0

Retention

27

15.0

Generalization

16

9.0

Specification

21

12.0

Total

181

100.0

Total

181

100.0

 

Figure 1.Pederson's Translation Strategies Used by Madaninejad and Ashkannezhand for Translating CSIs

As it is clear from Table 1, the most/least used translation strategies by Madaninejad were direct translation (n = 54) and generalization (n = 16) respectively, whereas substitution (n = 38) and specification (n = 21) were the most/least used translation strategies by Ashkannezhand for translating CSIs.  Table 2 indicates that the sum of the ST-oriented strategies (N = 123) used by Madaninejad was higher than the sum of the TT-oriented strategies (N = 58) employed by him. By contrast, the sum of the ST-oriented strategies (N = 82) used by Ashkannezhand was less than the sum of the TT-oriented strategies (N = 99) employed by her (see Table 3).

Table 2

Frequency and Percentage of the ST and TT-Oriented Strategies Used by Madaninejad for Translating CSIs

ST-oriented strategies

f

%

TT-oriented strategies

f

%

Direct translation

54

44.0

Substitution

25

43.0

Retention

46

37.0

Omission

17

29.0

Specification

23

19.0

Generalization

16

28.0

Sum

123

100.0

Sum

58

100.0

Table 3

Frequency and Percentage of the ST and TT-Oriented Strategies Used by Ashkannezhand for Translating CSIs

ST-oriented strategies

f

%

 TT-oriented strategies

f

%

Direct Translation

34

41.0

Substitution

38

38.0

Retention

27

33.0

Omission

31

31.5

Specification

21

26.0

Generalization

30

30.0

Sum

82

100.0

Sum

99

100.0

                 

4.1 Reliability Test

The Interrater reliability test was run to check the reliability of all scores given by the three raters, who were asked to assess the reliability of findings. Table 4 indicates correlation coefficient among the three raters.

 

Table 4

Summary of Intercorrelations of the Three Raters

Raters

 

1

2

3

1. Rater 1

r

1

.881

.712

2. Rater 2

r

.881

1

.633

3. Rater 3

r

.712

.633

1

Note. r = estimate of the Pearson product—moment correlation coefficient. Correlation is significant at *p < .05, two-tailed.

As Table 4 shows, the correlation among the three raters is acceptable. That is to say, the agreement among all raters is perfectly accurate. Furthermore, the highest amount of correlation is between first and second raters (r = .881), and the lowest is between second and third raters (r = .633).

4.2 Chi-Square Test (X²)

According to Best and Kahn (2006), a chi-square () is not considered an appropriate test to measure values. It is usually used to discrete data, counted. They imply that the "is not a measure of the degree of relationship"; it is only applied to evaluate the probability that "some factor other than accounts for the apparent relationship" (p. 434).  In a sense, the X² provides the researcher with the opportunity to estimate the probability that the observed relationship obtained from the chance. Thus, the researcher applied the to find whether the relation between the type of translation strategies and the number of them used by each Persian translator was significant.  

Table 5 illustrates that the relationship between the type of translation strategies and the number of them used by Madaninejad at .05 level of significance (p = 3.821, p > .05) was not significant.  Thus, the null hypothesis was not rejected and it was accepted at the .05 level of significance. By contrast, there was a significant relation between the type of translation strategies and the number of them employed by Ashkannezhand (p = .003, p < .5). Hence, the null hypothesis was not accepted at the .05 level of significant and it was rejected (see Table 6)

 

Table 5

Summary of the Chi-Square Test for the Translation Strategies and the Total Number of Them Used by Madaninejad

Types of Translation Strategies

N

df

p

n

6

181

5.5276

5

3.821

Table 6

Summary of the Chi-Square Test for the Translation Strategies and the Total Number of Them Used by Ashkannezhand

Types of Translation Strategies

N

df

p

n

6

181

.3402

5

.003

                 
  1. Discussion

In the previous section, the results of the analysis were reported. In other words, Pederson's translation strategies applied by each translator alongside the most/least used strategies employed by each of the translators were identified. In this section, the results derived from the analysis will be discussed under each category of CSIs proposed by Espindola and Vasconcellos (2006).

All toponyms that covered the names of places, geographical names, and proper names were translated by both Persian translators through three strategies, including retention, specification, and direct translation strategies. Retention was not an appropriate strategy for translating CSIs due to that fact toponyms were not well clarified via this strategy. For instance, Majorca was translated into ماژورکا and ماژورک by Madaninejad and Ashkannezhand respectively without the use of explanatory endnotes, footnotes, or any additional description to clarify where these towns were exactly located. 

Both translators were somehow successful in translating most CSIs through specification strategy because of that they used an additional description alongside each CSI. For example, Smeltings were translated into  کالج اسملتینگby Ashkannezhand and into  مدرسه اسملتینگز  by Madaninejad. In this case, Madaninejad was more successful than Ashkannezhand because of that the additional descriptions used by him (for instance, مدرسه) were more understandable for target readers than those used by Ashkannezhand (for example, کالج ).   

Direct strategy was correctly used by Madaninejad because the meanings of names were well clarified for the target readers, whereas Ashkannezhand was not able to transfer the meaning of such names clearly into TT due to the use of a mixed strategy, retention and direct translation strategies. For example, at number four, Privet Drive was translated into درمنزل شماره چهارساختمانهای خصوصی  by Madaninejad and into درخانه شماره چهار خیابان پریوت درایو  by Ashkannezhand.

In order to translate anthroponyms, retention strategy was correctly applied by both Persian translators. Pederson (2005) argues that retention is "the most SL-oriented strategy, as it allows an element from the SL to enter the TT" (p. 4). For example, Harry Potter,Mr. Vernon Dursley,Dudley,andMr. Mason, were translated into ،دادلی ،آفای ورسون دورسلی ،هری پاترآقای ماسونthrough this strategy. Anthroponyms, as Espindola and Vasconcellos (2006) imply, encompass the names of ordinary and famous people as well as nicknames. In this context, Newmark (1998) states that when the translator encounters with such cases, he should use the method of transference which is "the process of transferring a SL word to a TL text as a translation procedure" (p. 81). The same strategy was applied to translate the fictional characters, such as Lord Voldemort and Dobby that were translated into لورد وولمورت and دابی respectively.

CSIs related to forms of entertainment were translated differently by both Persian translators via different strategies. For example, the cultural word dinner party was translated into پارتی شام by Madaninejad and into   مهمانی شام by Ashkannezhand. As it is clear, the former translator used retention strategy and produced the translation which was almost uncommon for the target readers. By contrast, the latter translator applied direct translation strategy and translated the cultural item literally that was more clear to the target audiences.

In the case of means of transportations, Ashkannezhand had better performance than Madaninejad because of translation strategies she applied. For instance, the cultural words the underground, Hogwarts Express,and car were rendered into ، قطار زیرزمینی   قطار سریع السیر هاگوارتزand اتوموبیلby the two Persian translators. The first two cultural items were correctly transferred via substitution strategy and the meanings of them were completely conveyed to the target readers. This strategy was employed for most CSIs under this category. The problem goes to a few items, such as car, that the CSI is replaced with another ST item, اتوموبیل, in the TT. It is true that اتوموبیل  is completely familiar to the target readers, but cannot be considered an appropriate equivalent for the cultural word "car" because of that both items are Latin words. The word خودرو, which is specific to the TC, would be used instead of اتوموبیل

Local Institutions, as Espindola and Vasconcellos (2006) state, encompass organizations that were stablished to provide people with helps and serve them in different areas based on their needs, such as health, education, work, political, administrative, etc. Direct translation was the strategy used by Madaninejad in all cases and by Ashkannezhand in most.  For example, the cultural words the Ministry, an antiques shop, and hospital were literally translated into ،وزارت خونه ،مغازه عتیقه فروشی andبیمارستان by both Persian translators respectively. In some cases, the meanings of CSIs were not well conveyed by the two translators. For instance, the cultural word a Muggle shop that was translated into مغازه جادوگرها    by Madaninejad and into  مغازه مشنگها by Ashkannezhand. In the story, Muggle refers to one who has not any magical ability. Thus, the first translation جادوگرها had nothing to do with the intended cultural word. The second one that was somehow close to the meaning of the ST-item was somehow confusing that could be more understandable through an additional description.

Almost all measuring systems were transferred into the TTs correctly by both Persian translators. For example, the words feet, minute, and second were translated into   ،متر دقیقه and ثانیه  by them respectively. In a few cases, Madaninejad retained the cultural item and transferred the CSI directly into the TT. For instance, pound was rendered into پوند. He also employed the same strategy for translating most food items, such as bacon and pudding that were translated into بیکن and پودینگ respectively. By contrast, Ashkannezhand had better performance in the translation of such items and transferred them into the TT via generalization and substitution strategies. For example, fried egg was generalized and translated into تخم مرغ and porridge bowl rendered into کاسه سوپ via substitution strategy.

The controversial item was the cultural word drink that was transferred differently by the two Persian translators. It was translated into مشروب by Madaninejad and into نوشیدنیby Ashkannezhand. As drink refers to all kinds of alcoholic liquid in the foreign culture, the former translator tried to convey the meaning of the original via direct translation strategy and was successful in this. The problem is that such kinds of liquid have been prohibited in Islam and forbidden to be used by the target people. Thus, such a translation was not considered an appropriate one for the intended cultural word.

Ashkannezhand made an acceptable translation for the above cultural item via generalization strategy. She attempted to generalize the cultural item and convey the general meaning of this item through domestication strategy. She had also better performance in translating some challenging food items, such as a loin of roast pork that was translated into یک ران گوسفند   via substitution strategy. The fact is that pork is a kind of animal that its meat is forbidden in Islam. Thus, sheep, as a halal animal, is correctly substituted for pork in her translation.

Translation strategies used by the two Persian translators for translating scholastic references were somehow different. That is to say, Madaninejad used a mixed strategy for dealing with such references; whereas Ashkannezhand applied generalization and substitution strategies to overcome them. For example, the cultural item a Hover Charm was translated into جادو by Ashkannezhand via generalization strategy and into عمل جادویی by Madaninejad via direct translation strategy; or the cultural word vampire into گرگینه ها by Ashkannezhand through substitution strategy and into غول ها و جن های ساکن by Madaninejad through substitution and specification strategies. Both translators made an attempt to clarify the scholastic references to the target readers via the TT-oriented strategies that were successful in doing this.

Religious celebrations usually pose serious challenges for translators due the fact that such celebrations are specific to the SC and need additional explanations. In the translation of religious celebrations, both translators relied on retention and specification strategies. These strategies are not considered appropriate choices for making clear the meanings of such items to the target readers. For example, the cultural item Halloween was translated into جشن هالووین by Ashkannezhand and into هالووین   by Madaninejad without using explanatory footnotes or additional descriptions.

In order to transfer dialect into the TTs, the two Persian translators were successful and had good performances. They conveyed clearly the meanings of such items to the target readers and made all dialects understandable to them through the strategies they employed. For example, the dialect, bad Dobby! Bad dobby that was used by Dobby, one of the fictional characters in the story, was translated into دابی بدجنس!  دابی بدجنس! by Ashkannezhand and into دابی بده! دابی بده!  by Madaninejad via direct translation; or the cultural word nonsense, as a formal word, was translated into چه حرف ها میزنی؟  by Ashkannezhand and into این چه حرفیه که می زنی   by Madaninejad via substitution strategy.

In the process of translating, it is important to look deeply beyond the surface meanings of words and phrases. Leppihalme (1997, p. viii) states that "it is not enough to work out how best to render the words of the source text; it is much more important to work out what the words mean in a particular situational and cultural context" when translating CSIs.

The aim of the present study was to discover the position of each translation to find out the acceptability of each under Even-Zohar's (1978) polysystem theory. This study also attempted to investigate translation strategies employed by the two Persian translators for translating CSIs extracted from Rowling's Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets and classified based on Espindola and Vasconcellos's (2006) model of CSIs. 

As the results indicated, Madaninejad had the preference for the use of ST- oriented strategies over TT-oriented ones which led to his ST orientation at macro level. Thus, the translation produced by him occupied the primary position in the literary polysystem.  From Even-Zohar's (1978) point of view, such translations are considered adequate because of that the translation tends to "subscribe to the norms of the source text, and through them also to the norms of the source language and culture" (Toury, 1995, p. 201). The same results derived from the study done by Abdi (2019). That is to say, the freshmen and senior MA translation students employed the ST-oriented strategies to deal with CSIs which referred to their ST orientation at macro level.

By contrast, the translation made by Ashkannezhand was in the second position and described a peripheral system within the literary polysystem because she employed the TT-oriented strategies in preference to the ST–oriented ones. This gave the indication of her TT orientation at macro level. This was in contrast to the results reported by Fahim and Mazaheri's (2013) study due to that the Persian translators interested to employ the ST-oriented strategies which pointed to their faithfulness to the ST structure. In this context, Munday (2001) implies that the TT-oriented translation never represents the central system within the literary polysystem and "becomes a conservative element, preserving conventional forms and conforming to the literary norms of the target system" (p. 109).

6. Conclusion

In general, the discussion taken place in the present study reflects the role the translator plays as a cultural mediator in opening channels of communication between human beings. The results of the study can reveal how different polysystems can result in different translation strategies. In conclusion, the translator needs not only to be familiar with both the SC and TC but also have mastery over translation strategies to overcome CSIs and give the target readers the clear image of the foreign culture. In this regard, Espindola and Vasconcellos (2006) state that "exposure to the other would give the TT spectator a chance to become aware of the diversity of the SC" (p. 54).

Abdi, H. (2019). Translating culture-specific items (CSIs) as a conundrum for Iranian M.A. translation students: Considering the level of study. Journal of new advances in English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 88-109.
Best, J. W. & Kahn, J. V. (2006). Research in education (10th ed.). New York: Pearson.
Cary, E. (1957). Théories soviétiques de la traduction. Babel, 3(4), 179-190.
Chifane, C. (2009). A systematic interpretation of J. K. Rowling’s “Harry Potter” and Stephenie Meyer’s “Twilight”. Translation Studies: Retrospective and Prospective Views (5), 18-23.
Delisle, J. (1988), Translation: An interpretive approach. Canada: University of Ottawa Press.
Espindola, E. & Vasconcellos, M. L. (2006). Two facets in the subtitling process: Foreignization and/or domestication procedures in unequal cultural encounters. Fragmentos (30), 43-66.
Even-Zohar, I. (1978). The position of translated literature within the literary polysystem. In L. Venuti (Ed.), The translation studies reader (pp. 199–204). London: Routledge.
Fahim, M. & Mazaheri, Z. (2013). A comparative study of translation strategies applied in dealing with culture-specific items of romance novels before and after the Islamic Revolution of Iran. Journal of Advances in English Language Teaching 1(3), 64-75.
Fuadi, C. (2016). Foreignization and domestication strategies in cultural term translation of tourism brochures. Journal on English as a Foreign Language, 6(2), 171-188.
Guerra, A. F. (2012). Translating culture: problems, strategies and practical realities. Art and Subversion (1), 1-27.
Hariyanto, S. (2012, November 19). Re: The implication of culture on translation theory and practice. Retrieve from http://www. translationdirectory.com/article634.htm
House, J. (1997). A model for translation quality assessment. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Larson, M. (1998). Meaning-based translation: A guide to cross equivalents. Lanham: University Press of America.
Leppihalme, R. (1997). Culture bumps: An empirical approach to the translation of allusions. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Levý, J. (1967/2000). Translation as a decision process. In L. Venuti (Ed.), The translation studies reader (pp. 148–59). London: Routledge.
Munday, J. (2001). Introducing translation studies: Theories and applications. London: Routledge.
Newmark, P. (1981). Approaches to translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Newmark, P. (1988). A textbook of translation. London: Longman.
Nida, E. A. (1964). Toward a science of translation. Leiden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill.
Pedersen, J. (2005). How is culture rendered in subtitles? MuTra 2005 – Challenges of Multidimensional Translation: Conference Proceedings, 1-18.
Rowling, J. K. (1998). Harry Potter and the chamber of secrets. London: Bloomsbury Publishing Company.
Rowling, J. K. (2000). Harry Potter and the chamber of secrets (M. Madaninejad, Trans.). Tehran: Hirmand Publication. (Original work published 1998).
Rowling, J. K. (2004). Harry Potter and the chamber of secrets (H. Ashkannezhand, Trans.). Tehran: Goharshad Publication. (Original work published 1998).
Tomalin, B., & Stempleski, S. (1993). Cultural awareness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Toury, G. (1995). Descriptive translation studies – and beyond. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
Venuti, L. (1995). The translator’s invisibility: A history of translation. London: Routledge
Wilss, W. (1982). The science of translation. Stuttgart: Gunter Narr verlag Tubingen.