<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

HAL
open science

# The Politics of Experimental Translation: Potentialities and Preoccupations

Lily Robert-Foley

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

## To cite this version:

Lily Robert-Foley. The Politics of Experimental Translation: Potentialities and Preoccupations. English, 2020, 69 (267), pp.401-419. 10.1093/english/efaa032. hal-04519942

HAL Id: hal-04519942

https://hal.science/hal-04519942

Submitted on 12 Apr 2024

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

Public Domain
The Politics of Experimental Translation: Potentialities and Preoccupations

ISSN 0013-8215 (PRINT) ISSN 1756-1124 (ONLINE)

English
THE JOURNAL OF THE ENGLISH ASSOCIATION

VOLUME 69 | 267 | WINTER 2020

academic.oup.com/english

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>

OXFORD
UNIVERSITY PRESS
## Volume 69, Issue 267, Winter 2020

Special Issue: Poetry in Expanded Translation. Guest edited by Zoi Shouldling and Jeff Hillson

### ARTICLES

#### Poetry in Expanded Translation: Set aims

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /></figure>

Zoi Shouldling

expanded translation: *Journal of the King's College Association*, Volume 69, Issue 267, Winter 2020, Pages 1006-1024, https://jdai-ang.jstor.org/englands/western-america

Abstract = View article

#### Poetry in Expanded Translation: Audre Lorde, Theresa Hak Ryung Chia, Harryette Mullen, Don Mee Choi

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /></figure>

Audre Lorde

expanded translation: *Journal of the King's College Association*, Volume 69, Issue 267, Winter 2020, Pages 1008-1020, https://jdai-ang.jstor.org/englands/western-america

Abstract = View article

#### Intimacy: An Alternative Model for Literary Translation

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /></figure>

Laïsphère Caline

expanded translation: *Journal of the King's College Association*, Volume 69, Issue 267, Winter 2020, Pages 1001-1006, https://jdai-ang.jstor.org/englands/western-america

Abstract = View article

#### The God-Awful Small Affair of the Invisible Organist: David Bowie Translated

<figure><img src="image_8.png" /></figure>

Jeff Hillson

expanded translation: *Journal of the King's College Association*, Volume 69, Issue 267, Winter 2020, Pages 1001-1006, https://jdai-ang.jstor.org/englands/western-america

Abstract = View article

#### The Trampollator: Performing the Translation of the Sound of Silence

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /></figure>

Vincent Birtles

expanded translation: *Journal of the King's College Association*, Volume 69, Issue 267, Winter 2020, Pages 1008-1020, https://jdai-ang.jstor.org/englands/western-america

Abstract = View article

#### Seven Types of Translation: Translation Tables

<figure><img src="image_10.png" /></figure>

Tim Atkins

expanded translation: *Journal of the King's College Association*, Volume 69, Issue 267, Winter 2020, Pages 1001-1006, https://jdai-ang.jstor.org/englands/western-america

Abstract = View article

### POEM

#### Poems

<figure><img src="image_11.png" /></figure>

Philip Terry

expanded translation: *Journal of the King's College Association*, Volume 69, Issue 267, Winter 2020, Pages 1007-1009, https://jdai-ang.jstor.org/englands/western-america

Abstract = View article

### ARTICLES

#### The Politics of Experimental Translation: Potentialities and Proxifications

<figure><img src="image_12.png" /></figure>

Lily Robert-Fallacy

expanded translation: *Journal of the King's College Association*, Volume 69, Issue 267, Winter 2020, Pages 1001-1006, https://jdai-ang.jstor.org/englands/western-america

Abstract = View article
# The Politics of Experimental Translation : Potentialities and Preoccupations

## Abstract/Intro

In this article, I will attempt to sketch out a translation practice that runs counter to conventional ideas about translation, that I theorize as ‘experimental translation.’ I will first try, and perhaps fail, to situate a definition of experimental translation, to delimit the borders of what might fall into this category; as we shall see, it is a problematic one. Experimental translation opposes itself to the norms, the doxa of current translation practices. But what norms? Whose translation practice? Situating norms is obviously a fluid and problematic, culturally specific activity. Examining its opposition serves to accentuate this. And what are the political implications of this opposition, if there are any? To what extent is translation, and in particular, experimental translation a space where justice is negotiated? Lastly, I will discuss the politics of the translator’s voice. Much attention has historically been given to the politics of the voice of the author, in particular to either debunking its transcendent quality, or critiquing the dynamics of whose voice gets heard and whose doesn’t. Translation very often is inflected with political or ethical aims, a desire to right wrongs in the original or to intervene in the landscape of authority and canon formation. What does this imply for the role the translator’s voice plays in experimental translation, in how it appears, or doesn’t? Can experimental translation hope to achieve utopian dreams?

## Can it be classified? Can it be defined?

The working definition I am using here for what falls under the rubric of experimental translation is any translation practice that opposes itself to translational norms. These practices can take many forms. They can be mistranslations of a sort, keeping too close to the original<fnref n="1" />, or straying too far<fnref n="2" />, or mistaking the what or the how of what is to be translated<fnref n="3" />. They can be translations that tamper with the very idea of what is considered a signifying unit<fnref n="4" />, or that divert from common conceptions of the intended meaning of a text<fnref n="5" />. They can translate one dimension of the text but not another, such as the sound<fnref n="6" /> or the shape<fnref n="7" />. They can vary in quantity<fnref n="8" />, translating one word as many<fnref n="9" /> (beyond reason), or many words as one (beyond reason). They can

<footnote n="1">¹ For example, literalizing translation strategies such as Holderlein’s translation of Sophocles as read by Berman in *L’Age de la traduction* (136), or Niranjana’s translation of a twelfth century *vacana* by the saint Allama Prabhu (175). We see this also in the literal translations of proverbs in postcolonial translation (Bandia: 178), or in the book *Sky my husband!* (A literally translation of the French expression of surprise, “Ciel, mon mari!”)</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Erin Mouré’s *Sheep’s Vigil by a Fervent Person*; Brandon Brown’s *The Poems of Gaius Valerius Catullus; Flowering Mall*.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Craig Dworkin, *Parse*, which translates A Edward Abbott’s Latin Grammar into it’s own grammar.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Outranspo’s Microtranslations break down individual words and translate their parts, whereas exotranslation elaborates upon them (see below in the body of the text).</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ Douglas Barbour and Stephen Scobie’s ‘metonymic translation’ in *The Pirates of Pen’s Chance*. Outranspo’s hommeaux translations translate bilingual homophones, for example translating “Il danse, rue, puis se lance dans l’air”/“He dances, he streets and spears in the air.”</footnote>

<footnote n="6">⁶ Luis d’Antin Van-Rooten’s *Mot d’heures, Gousses, Rames*; Outranspo’s sonotraductions and traduit partouzes ; Jonathan Stalling’s *Yingelishi*, literal translations of Chinese transliterations in English language learning manuals back into English.</footnote>

<footnote n="7">⁷ Santiago Artozqui’s collaborative “Waves”, where a poem is passed from language to language each time in a bilingual format preserving the shape of the poem like a sound wave.</footnote>

<footnote n="8">⁸ Karen Van Dyck’s translation of Yiannis Efthymiades *9/11 or Falling Man*, which translates the original 27 poems of 27 lines of 27 syllables (meant to symbolize the 27 falls from the World Trade Center on 9/11) into 27 20 syllable lines with a natural break in speech between syllable 9 and syllable 11; Caroline Bergvall’s “Via” (in *Fig*).</footnote>

<footnote n="9">⁹ Benedicte Vilgrain’s *Ka*, and her other long translations of individual Tibetan letters.</footnote>
be translations that change mediums<fnref n="10" />, registers, genres, text type<fnref n="11" />, lexical field<fnref n="12" />, or perhaps even create a new made up language<fnref n="13" />. They can travel backwards or forwards in time<fnref n="14" />. They can translate between orality and writing<fnref n="15" />. They can be translations that use (in the wrong way) external tools such as the internet<fnref n="16" />, automatic translation generators<fnref n="17" />, employ filters, physical material, substances or other devices (like a shower<fnref n="18" /> or a shot gun<fnref n="19" />). They can be cut-ups<fnref n="20" />, collages<fnref n="21" />, or pastiches, combining translations or languages together<fnref n="22" />. They can appropriate, reappropriate or disappropriate. They can translate one language into many<fnref n="23" /> or many languages into one<fnref n="24" />. They can be playful self-translations<fnref n="25" /> or bilingual genesis<fnref n="26" />. They can translate texts that don't exist<fnref n="27" />. They can be models of constraints, games or text generators that can be applied time and time again<fnref n="28" />, or they can be singular transformations of a specific text<fnref n="29" />. They can use writing as a form of translation, translation as a form of reading, reading as a form of writing, writing as a form of reading, reading as a form of translation or translation as a form of writing (or translation as a form of dance, music, game, cuisine, knitting, derive... or the inverse, ad infinitum). They use proliferation, multiplication, erasure, deviation, *détournement*, distortion, recreation, rewriting, adaptation, localisation, relocalisation, commentary, interpolation, cannibalism, recombination, ekphrasis, calque, paraphrase, illegibility, lyric re-embodiment, and footnote-as I have done here in what I hope serves to heighten the visibility of these experiments in the margin, rather than the opposite. This list is by no means exhaustive, and

<footnote n="10">¹⁰ Khairani Barokka’s intersemiotic translation of Rajsthani women’s folk songs into images.</footnote>

<footnote n="11">¹¹ Holly Pester’s “Katrina Sequence” transcribed from ham radio transmissions of Hurricane Katrina.</footnote>

<footnote n="12">¹² Eliana Vicari’s unpublished Archimboldo translations, which translate an extract from Jacques Roubaud’s *la Belle Hortense*, changing the lexical field of one extended metaphor (Mme Groichant as patisserie) for others: Mme Groichant as fruit, Mme Groichant as meat, as fish, etc.</footnote>

<footnote n="13">¹³ Erin Mouré’s translation of Wilson Bueno’s *Paraguyan Sea*, originally in Portunhol with Guaraní into her own invited ‘Frenglish’ with Guaraní; Samantha Gorman’s *Lingua Ignota*; Outranspo’s neotranslation.</footnote>

<footnote n="14">¹⁴ Philip Terry, *Dante’s Inferno*; Stacy Doris’s *Cheerleader’s Guide to the World: Council Book*</footnote>

<footnote n="15">¹⁵ Gabriel Okara; Eliza Griswald’s translation of Pashtun Landays; Katalin Monar’s transcription of her Hungarian inflected French speech into writing.</footnote>

<footnote n="16">¹⁶ Zoe Skoulding’s “In Search of Lost Time” from *The Museum of Disappearing Sounds*.</footnote>

<footnote n="17">¹⁷ Annie Abrahams’s performance with Martina Rusham, Jana Wilcoxon and Chantal van Mourik *What do you mean?* in which each author wrote on a shared textpad, which was then google translated into Slovenian, fed into Alpineon’s TTS software and diffused live. The sound recording (or what could be understood of it) was then transcribed by Milena Gros. The resulting text was then retranslated back into English to give the poem: “You have to accept (a FEW times). New language.”; Oli Hazzard’s “Blotter” who used google translate to create new poems from Russian from his hacked Twitter Feed.</footnote>

<footnote n="18">¹⁸ Jen Cobb & Allison Coleman, who translated a poem while listening to it over the sound of a shower running or translating a poem by looking at it through smeared glass.</footnote>

<footnote n="19">¹⁹ Christian Hawkey’s translations of Georg Trakl.</footnote>

<footnote n="20">²⁰ Kanchuka Dharmasiri’s interweaving of translations of texts by Buddhist nuns from the fourth century with excerpts from Beauvoir and Wollstonecraft; Stacy Doris’s *Paramour*</footnote>

<footnote n="21">²¹ Rachel Allen’s « 4 Chan poems ».</footnote>

<footnote n="22">²² Code-switching in Achebe; Caroline Bergvall’s *Meddle English* mixes different source texts and different kinds of Englishes together.</footnote>

<footnote n="23">²³ The Outranspian ‘Renga-O’, initiated by Camille Bloomfield, which used Outranspian constraints to translate individual quatrains written by one Outranspian and then passed round in a circle, translated into a different language by a different Outranspian with each turn.</footnote>

<footnote n="24">²⁴ Outranspo’s “Cazétranslation: to retranslate a text back and forth between the source-language and other languages until the final translation corresponds exactly to an existing text from a different author in the original source-language. The name of this procedure comes from Antoine Cazé, who envisioned this utopic translation procedure.” (from the “Classifications”)</footnote>

<footnote n="25">²⁵ Nathanael *Je Nathanaël*, Térèz Leotin’s *Alice au Pays des Merveilles/Aliss nan mèveylann* adapted and translated into French and Créole.</footnote>

<footnote n="26">²⁶ Aurélia Lassaque’s bilingual poetry.</footnote>

<footnote n="27">²⁷ Outranspo’s “Le poème perdu d’Emily Dickenson”; Robert Sheppard’s *A Translated Man*; Trevor Lafoy’s *nemanilC*; also known as pseudotranslations, of which Don Quixote is a well known example.</footnote>

<footnote n="28">²⁸ Outranspo</footnote>

<footnote n="29">²⁹ For example, the practices of ‘machines’ I have developed in *graphemachines* and *Jiji*.</footnote>
indeed, I have not even tried to make it so, as experimentation summons invention and escapes beyond limits.

In some instances, but not all, the creative practice has been displaced from the text, the writing itself, to the development of the device that would be used to transform the text. Another possible appellation could be ‘conceptual’ translation, or translation that takes the very definition of translation as its subject matter; translations that ask the question: What is translation? For this reason, it is a form of research, as it examines the theoretical substrate of translation. A good example of this happened in the classroom when I presented a homophonic translation to some Masters students in translation and asked them if they thought it deployed a literalizing or an adaptive translation strategy. Half the class said literalizing and the other half adaptive, showing that the experiment challenged the dichotomy and questioned its terms. It has been referred to under other guises as creative translation (by Santiago Artozqui), poetic translation (by Tim Atkins), potential translation (by Pablo Martín Ruiz and Irène Gayraud), translucinación (by Vincent Broqua by way of Andrès Ajens by way of Jena Osman and Juliana Spahr), transcreation (Haroldo de Campos), translation (Erin Mouré) and queer translation (by yours truly), for starters; once again the list is non-exhaustive. It poses a threat to the mainstream dogma of translation, in particular the place of fidelity, equivalence, accuracy, transparency, smoothness and legibility.

I have chosen the term experimental translation to highlight the extent to which it defines itself in contrast, or in opposition, to other more frequent forms of translation. The word opposition is especially important as, like much experimental writing, it—at times, perhaps—seeks to define itself to mainstream practices not solely for aesthetic reasons, but for social and political reasons. Or rather, it is—at times, perhaps-supported by a belief that the structures of aesthetics and poetics are profoundly and radically political. In this case we can add to that the idea that translation is also radically political, never neutral, always inflected or even generated by the ideologies that frame it and give it its pulse. For this reason, experimental translation perhaps even doubles down on the resisting potential in experimental writing as a more general category (or perhaps runs greater risks). Finally, what separates this practice from other forms of experimental writing, is the question of language, of the foreignness of languages, and the act of translating in its formal sense and amidst the chaos of its cultural negotiations. For that reason, I include intrilingual or intersemiotic translations in this rubric only when interlingual or the conceptual question of interlingual translation is truly at stake in the work.

Experimental translation is not a recognized literary form, although some attempts have been made to survey it. The location of the practice itself in-between forms, texts, languages and cultures, makes it hard to catalogue and classify, as any translation practice becomes slippery in the transition to theory. The series of events that formed the Expanded Translation network, from which this volume is issued, represent to my knowledge the most extensive exploration. One stimulating attempt at classification is Tim Atkins’s “7 Translation Types”, as part of his unpublished PhD dissertation, which identifies seven discrete practices including constraint, editing & domestication, misreading, allusive referential, derangement of the senses, intersemiotic, and hoax & parody. Each of these is divided into more specific sub-practices corresponding to examples. These seven types are formally oriented and concern quite often translations of canonical texts. Indeed, Atkins rigorously situates his research and experimentation in the context of the history of English poetry and in particular of English translation of Petrarch. Atkins’s is clear as to where his centre is, and that if these examples are perhaps playful deconstructions of this centre, it is because conceiving of translation as an original poetic creation (or vice versa) is likewise so.

Another classification attempt has been made by the Outranspo (Ourvroir de Translation Potencial), a group of experimental translators on the model of the Oulipo founded in 2012 by Camille Bloomfield, Rachel Galvin and Pablo Martín Ruiz. The international group meets once a month online to discuss their various appearances and projects, one of which is their (or our, I
should say) “Classification of translation constraints and procedures”. This classification includes a list of translational constraints, generators of potential translations, each defined by its prefix. For example, a sonotranslation is a homophonic translation, translating only the sound (“C’est une langue belle”/ “Satan Long Bell”), a microtranslation translates only the smallest unities of words in a sentence (“d’une étoile”/ “of its web”); an exotranslation paraphrases extensively the translated meaning of the source text, etc. The major difference between Tim Atkins’s text types and the Outranspo’s is of course that Tim Atkins’s text types are descriptive, describing existing experimentations, whereas Outranspo’s are potential, generative, setting up instructions for the making of a translation. Outranspo likewise has a desire to subvert the status quo. From the “Acts de fundación”: “To the devil with Fidelity! .... Potential translation is translation that regards itself luxuriously in the mirror in a gesture of determined self-reinvention.”

An effort not to classify but to anthologize exists in Sophie Collins’s remarkable 2016
*Currently & Emotion: Translations* which gathers together poetry in translation according to their
“potential to challenge dominant perceptions of poetry translation, whether due to the source
texts from which they derive (in terms of their coming from under-represented languages and
cultures), or through the kinds of strategies applied.” In this vision, Collins opens the door to
both critique and potentiality with regard to the previous examples mentioned, directly
connected to the problem of situating the norms or the “dominant perceptions” of translation,
which for Collins is not limited to the strategies deployed but also to the source text itself. For
Collins, the question of fidelity is proportional to the text, and most importantly to the context
of manipulation and power dynamics in which it is situated. She cites unequal translation
statistics, making reference to the fact that the percentage of books translated into English is
much lower than those translated from English. Paul F Bandia shows us that a similar dynamic
exists in the translation flows between North and South (Bandia: 148). The implication here is
that to translate *faithfully* an author who does not have much visibility represents a homologous
subverting of norms to a translation that, for example, shoots holes in a source text with a 12-
gauge shotgun and translates the resulting text. Put this way, it seems almost aberrant, and yet it
is not. And this is because of each practice’s relationship to the norm.

What norm?

Translation, and translation theory must always be a profoundly situated (in the sense
Donna Haraway gives it in “Situated Knowledges”) practice, if for no other reason than it is
impossible to speak all languages, or to have intimacy with all cultures. But also because
translation always brings out dimensions of cultural context that might be otherwise invisible,
reveals what might first appear as transcendent universals as situated specificities. As I am always
reminding students: as soon as one begins to translate, the questions arise: “For whom, in what
context, and to what end?” One must practice what Maria Mies refers to as “Conscious
partiality” (38). When we speak of norms then, the first question that arises is: whose norms?
When we say “we”, what we?<fnref n="30" /> In this case we are talking about the urban, European and North
American, white, bourgeois, contemporary centre, of the linguistic hegemony of the major
languages and all the strategies by which they have become dominant and the other forms of
domination they enable and keep intact. If we take a look at the examples cited in Tim Atkins’s 7
translation types, the majority of the source texts are canonical works from the Western North,
and the majority of the experiments, carried out by white males in Westnorthern centres. As for
Outranspo, all Outranspian native tongues are hegemonic ones (English, French, Spanish,

<footnote n="30">³⁰ I owe this reflection to Heta Rundgren’s analysis of the French masculine gender neutral “nous” in French literary academic discourse in her doctoral dissertation, *Vers une théorie du roman postnormâle: Féminisme, réalisme et conflit sexuel chez Doris Lessing, Märta Tikkanen, Stieg Larsson et Virginie Despentes*. Likewise my reflection on norms is much imbued with her notion of the “postnormâle”.</footnote>
Italian), the majority of us are white, and the majority of us hold positions in US or European Universities.

But there are of course other centres. In the case of African Europhone writing, Paul F Bandia writes, comparing African communicational norms to Gricean language maxims governing verbal interaction in Westnorthern society that “strategies of verbal interaction in the cultures of Africa… systematically violate Grice’s maxims and therefore pose a serious challenge to speakers, writers, or translators with a mainly Western mindset.” (220). Indeed, Bandia, in *Translation as Reparation*, demonstrates how postcolonial writing uses strategies of experimental translation. While he does not use the specific term, but he does write about literary experimentation and innovation as well as writing as translation, and reading as translation, placing the African Europhone writers he treats (Achebe, Okono, Tutoala, Ngugi wa Thiong'o, Beti, Laye, Oyono and Soyinka) squarely in the category of authors who deploy strategies of experimental translation in their writing. The experimental mixings of languages and literary forms, in particular the weaving of traditional oral narratives, their rhetoric or their translations into European languages and literary forms represent one such strategy. Another is the translation present in the initial writing of the text, for example what Chantal Zabus has called *relexification*: “the forging of a new literary aesthetic medium or ‘third code’ out of the alien dominant European lexicon” (Zabus: 350). For example, words might take on meanings in a postcolonial text that they might not have in the hegemonic language, perhaps because they represent literal translations from an indigenous language. Bandia gives the example of literal translations of proverbs, or of the transcription of repetitions common in the rhetoric of African oral narratives, but uncommon in the European literary tradition. Collocational or syntactical rules may be broken and remade as the Europhone writers “bend and stretch the European language to reflect the rhetorical aesthetic and idiomatic habits of the author’s indigenous linguistic community” (26).

If experimental translation practices are defined in relation to norms, these practices run into serious trouble if the location of these norms shift. As Bandia shows, translational norms for colonizing cultures are quite different from those of colonized ones:

> For the colonizing cultures, translation is based on hegemonic practices which involve domesticating strategies of choosing and translating particular foreign texts, and excluding foreignizing strategies in favour of narcissistic preservation of dominant and familiar values. For the colonized cultures, '[t]ranslation is seen as a significant intervention into the polylingualism and cultural hybridity that characterize colonial and postcolonial situations, a source of linguistic innovation useful in building national literatures and in resisting the dominance of hegemonic languages and cultures.' (Venuti 1998)." (230)

In other words, what I am calling experimental translation is actually a norm of postcolonial writing. That said, postcolonial writing often poses challenges to norms of European literature. At what point do we find ourselves living in a world where postcolonial writing is the norm (aren't we there already?)? And at that point, could we still call it experimental? Does calling something experimental in fact consign it to the margins? On the other hand, does designating something as a norm undermine its potential for resistance to domination? Raising the question of the capacity of experimental writing or translation for resistance or opposition shows to what extent norms do not represent the majority, but are always determined by power, and by the elite minority who wields it. When will we stop teaching linguistic “norms” in language classrooms all over the world? When will we stop teaching students that the only way to “succeed” is to bend to the conventions of the power that oppresses rather than embracing and unleashing the scathed and bridled power of the majority? At what point do we change the “we” and reclaim the norm?
The translational doxa that defines experimental translation by opposition is also temporal. At least some of what I've identified as experimental translation only finds itself in opposition to the norms of the modern era. Looking at translations of Ovid (Claire Paulian) or the 1001 Nights (Borges), or the history of the Belles Infidèles (Georges Mounin), quickly reveals that what I've identified as “experimental” translation may actually be read as anachronistically coinciding with different moments in global norms of translation (Atkins's as well points this out in his dissertation). Of course, notions of translation change throughout history, and what we now consider the doxa of accuracy, fidelity and smoothness has been many times traced back to advent of authorial designation, coinciding with the sacralization of the original, occurring around the start of the colonial era, and signaling the end of a medieval practice of circulating, adapting and rewriting texts fluidly (Bassnett and Trivedi, Bandia, Berman, Cheyfitz, Galvin, Hokenson and Munsen). I often say that Outranspo simply practices an antiquated style of translation.

And, as the translational doxa to which experimental translation opposes itself falls apart as one steps backwards in time in Europe, it likewise does so round the globe. One classic example is embodied in the Sanskrit word for translation, *anuvad*, which as Susan Bassnett and Harish Trivedi have remarked in their introduction to *Post-Colonial Translation* includes the notion of “imitation” which allows for texts to be creatively rewritten (9). This heritage of fluid textuality in India has not been curtailed as it was in Europe with the division of languages into their nation state borders (Berman), but rather:

> The act of translation has long been an inherent practice in India – the Hindi/Marathi terms ‘anuvad’ (‘speaking after or following’) and ‘rupantar’ (‘change in form’), as Sujit Mukherjee reminds us, ‘are the commonly understood sense of translation in India, and neither term demands fidelity to the original’ (1994: 80)....
> 
> Translation *is* the Indian context. (Palekar 17)

I might also point out here that other maxims of translational norms such as the notion of fidelity, outside of the realm of literary texts, has been questioned more recently with concepts like *Skopos* and audience design. Add to that that “fidelity” in the translation of poetry has always been esteemed impossible, and one has to wonder how the idea of “fidelity” even came about in the first place. Most likely it has more to do with the history of the unicity of the divine word of God (Pym), or with the history of colonialism and private property (Rachel Galvin) than with a desire to transmit voices.

## Translation as Justice

Another translational norm that is challenged by experimental translation in its various guises can be found in the rhetoric of equivalence. Sophie Collins, Paul F. Bandia and Tehaswini Niranjana have all shown that the notion of sense equivalence is deeply connected to a closed, un-situated relationship between two equal languages, and can even be associated to culturally blind sighted constructions of sense and sameness (Niranjana 55; Bandia 231). For equivalence to take place, there has to already be in place a kind of presupposition that the languages—and therefore the nations, cultures and people who speak them—are equal. As Don Mee Choi writes (cited in *C&E*, 236) with regard to her translation of Kim Hyesoon:

> I won't go into detail about why this word and not that word because details are suffocating to me... My translation intent has nothing to do with personal growth, intellectual exercise, or cultural exchange, which implies an equal standing of some sort. South Korea and the US are not equal. I am not transnationally equal. My
intent is to expose what a neocolony is, what it does to its own, what it eats and
shits. Kim Hyesoon's poetry reveals all this, and this is why I translate her work.

In other words, challenging the dogma of faithfulness and equivalence—if we follow
Choi’s logic here—only becomes interesting if we’re translating across two transnationally equal
language-cultures. Indeed, most of the “straight” translations (as opposed to queer translations?)
in *Currently & Emotion* pertain to translations occurring across lopsided power divides. Authorial
intention then becomes an instrument of justice: respect for the original is connected to the
desire to right a transnational wrong—specifically with regard to the “neocolony”.

We have seen this desire before in translation theory—the desire for translation to *right
wrongs*. Anthony Pym has suggested that translator ethics be concentrated on the potential of
translation to “improve” texts. George Steiner has written that “the enactment of reciprocity in
order to restore balance is the crux of the *métier* and morals of translation.” (quoted in Bandia : 147).
However, Bandia points out that this kind of statement “loses its force in the domain of
colonial or postcolonial translation practice, where power relations are decidedly unequal” (147).
This utopian, humanist rhetoric of translation has also been powerfully critiqued in Tehaswini
Niranjana, who associates it with “the notion of the transcendental signified that… is a founding
concept of Western metaphysics.” The very same Western metaphysics “that presides over the
beginnings of the discourse of Orientalism.” (55) For Niranjana, the colonial and postcolonial
power dynamics within which texts and languages are situated code for the translational practice,
and in the last chapter of her *Siting Translation*, “Translation as Disruption”, she proposes a
literalizing strategy:

The deliberate roughness of my version of the *vacana* allows the text to “affect”, a
Benjamin would have it, the language into which it is being translated, interrupting
the “transparency” and smoothness of a totalizing narrative like that of
Ramanujan..... I privilege the word over the sentence, marking thereby what
Derrida calls in ‘Des Tours de Babel’ a ‘displacement’ from the syntagmatic to the
paradigmatic level, and inserting my translation into the attack against
homogenizing and continuous narratives. (185)

Niranjana, in this final chapter, opposes her translation to two pre-existing domesticating
translations of the *vacana*. She associates this practice of domesticating with a translational
ideology of transparency, of the translator’s desire to render the text smooth and accessible to
the reader. Her literalizing strategy thus intervenes in the smoothness of the language of
reception in a way not dissimilar to Bandia’s postcolonial authors proclivity to “bend and
stretch” the colonial languages. She cites Benjamin and Derrida, but we also see similar calls for
and literalizing foreignization in Berman and Venuti, and a not dissimilar predilection for
literalizing can also be read in Bandia (102). And yet, situating the languages within the history
and present of global politics is paramount, as same strategies do not play out in the same way if
the direction of the translation is reversed. What are the politics of intervening in the “original”
Kannada, or Sanskrit (for, as Niranjana remarks, the “original” comes to us “already translated”,
the text was not produced in the context of Westnorthern translational norms that code for a
stable, unique and sacred original)? Would a canonical English text, translated into Kannada or
Sanskrit call for the same translational strategy? Indeed, postcolonial translation has also been
known to take another tack, appropriating, devouring and “cannibalizing”, to use Oswalde de
Andrades et Haraldo de Campos’s vocabulary, texts from the European centre (see here Else
Ribeiro Pires Vieira’s article on Haroldo de Campos’s practice of transcreation in *Postcolonial
Translation*).
In the tradition of feminist translation, one can likewise read a critique of translation as always inflected with power dynamics, as well as a desire to deploy the in-between space of translation in the negotiation of justice:

> *Traduire n'est jamais neutre.* C'est l'acte d'une subjectivité à l'œuvre dans un contexte socio-politique précis. *Le je* qui traduit inscrit son savoir, ses choix, ses intentions, ses convictions, dans le texte qui se réécrit. En effet il est possible, au moment du passage de la langue de depart à la langue d'arrivée, de faire apparaître un mot ou un monde. (27)

Translation is never neutral. It is the act of a subject at work within a specific social-political context. The *I* who translates inscribes her knowledge, her choices, her intentions and her convictions into the text she is rewriting. Translation can thus be a veritable political tool. Indeed, in the passage from departure to arrival language, it is possible to make appear or disappear, a word or a world. (My translation)

In Lotbinière-Harwood's 1991 *Re-belle et Infidèle*, as in other work by white Canadian feminist translators from the 1990s on, some of the problems of translation are likened to some of the problems of feminists: translators, like women, are underpaid (or not paid at all), marginalized, invisibilized, secondary and their voices muted or silenced. Making the translator and the translation visible is therefore one way that a translator can also be a feminist. Luise von Flotow's four strategies for feminist translation (supplementing, prefacing and footnoting, and hijacking) (1991) are instructions for experimental translators seeking to align themselves with the feminist cause. More recently, Carolyn Shread's "metramorphic translation" (at times in collaboration with von Flotow), is more intersectional, and seeks to acknowledge the positionality of women of color in her translation of Marie Vieux Chauvet's *Les Rapaces* where she introduces Kreyòl, absent from the original, into her English translation, motivated by the desire to tailor the translation to an English speaking Haitian public and account for the historical context which made it impossible for Vieux Chauvet to use Kreyòl in her original. I have elsewhere raised the issue of the positionality of a white University professor intervening in a text by a woman of color who lived in more precarious circumstances, as Sophie Collins's does in the introduction to her *Currently & Emotion* regarding Eliza Griswold's supplemented and parenthesized translations of the exclusively oral tradition of Afghanistan landays, short poems "exchanged like jokes or earworms among the more than twenty-million Pashtun women who occupy the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan." (307)

Likewise, Luise von Flotow, since the first appearance of her feminist translation strategies in 1991, has addended and revised her initial statements by situating them in the context of white Canadian feminism from the 1990's, and calls for more specificity in theorizing feminist translation. One such example of greater specificity can be found in the 2017 *Translating Women. Different Voices and New Horizons*, edited by von Flotow and Farahzad Farzaneh. Rim Hassen's contribution explores strategies of feminist-and I would argue experimental-translation, in the context of Western Female Converts to Islam translating the Quran. These women have complex, hybrid identities which are worked out in their translational approaches. Camille Adams Helminski for example invents a whole new pronoun, the pronoun "Hu" ("There is no god but Hu") which is actually a loan word from the masculine Arabic pronoun usually used to designate God, but which in English, loses its gender in the foreignizing. She does this as "a reminder that within the Universe and understanding of the Quran, God is without gender... In God's sight men and women are equal." (Hassen 29). Laleh Bakhtiar reinserts and makes the feminine ultra visible in her translation as she adds the graphic marker (f) after words that are gendered in the feminine in Arabic, but then lose their gender in translation into English. These hijacking strategies serve as critiques both of a Western patriarchy that uses
the figure of the Muslim woman as a pawn in the “institution of power between the West and the Muslim world” (19), and of a Muslim patriarchy that has subverted the meaning of the Qu’ran, “a non-patriarchal text that has been manipulated by the dominant male voice in order to serve the interests of men and deny women their rights.” (33). They also show that feminism is not the property of the “center”, does not originate there, and does not belong principally to white, English-speaking women. They also show that translating “faithfully” is not the only way to hear the subaltern speak. But when a subaltern speaks, must she (or he) speak, and translate, for themself?

A final, and more extreme example of feminist experimental translation of the Qu’ran does something quite different. The example was omitted from Hassen’s published paper, as inclusion would have threatened the safety of the translator, Somali activist, Hirsi Ali, as Luise von Flotow explains in her paper “On the Challenges of Translational Feminism” published on her academia.edu page. In Hirsi Ali’s translation, Quranic texts written across the bare shoulders of women are read allowed in a critique of Islam. This example I believe, highlights the extent to which to translate experimentally from a power center and as a member of a dominant class, race or gender, is profoundly different from translating experimentally from the margins. Let’s consider this translation carried out by a white, non-Muslim person, from a Western northern center. The politics would hardly be the same. We would be in the scandalous realm of the appropriative, ethnocentric and orientalist translation, such as in the example of Pound’s translations of Chinese poetry that he carried out without knowing the language or even understanding how it works, all while placing a Chinese poetry that he himself in fact invented, on a pedestal (Williams 145). We see here again the way in which experimental translation functions as a heuristic, or conceptual laboratory, for bringing the issues of translation to the surface.

## The Politics of the Voice of the Translator

Let’s go back to Sophie Collin’s fascinating alliance between translational *strategies* that pose a threat to translational doxa, and a *choice of text* in translation that does the same thing. Fidelity seems to play out differently depending on the cultural context, the situation of the source text within transnational asymmetries. By deforming, mistranslating or rendering unintelligible a white, male canonical text written in a hegemonic language in a power center, many experimental translators have political aims of posing a threat to forces of oppression (at the very least, I do). On the other hand, in Collins’s scheme, a faithful translation of a text written by a subaltern author, in a non-hegemonic language or in a marginal situation seeks to do the same thing. In a sense, these translations seek to “honor” these writers by imposing upon them a translational doxa that perhaps doesn’t even belong to them. And to what extent does it presuppose that the translator is translating from a position of power, from a Western northern center and into a hegemonic language? Does saying that source texts are “coming from under-represented languages and cultures” imply that they are going to over-represented ones? But on the other hand, what are the politics of appropriating a transnationally subaltern voice, unknown and unheard by speakers of my language and hijacking it with my own creative strategies, erasing their voice in favor of a perhaps decontextualized mechanism of experimental writing, substituting it with my own translational voice or perhaps deconstructing altogether the idea of voice in text as we often see in the rhetoric of conceptual writing? (Kenneth Goldsmith, Craig Dworkin, Vanessa Place and Robert Fitterman)

A powerful influence in this debate is of course Gayatri Spivak’s essay on the “Politics of Translation”, in which translation can only be done honorably so to speak if the translator has a certain “intimacy” with the original. For Spivak, although the original text is not transparent, the activity of translation is—and must be. Spivak advocates ultimate faithfulness, and by so doing as
well, a perverse logic of knowability with regards to a literary text whose “rhetoric or figuration disrupt logic” (202).

Spivak's essay is indeed paradoxical but as Irène Assiba d'Almeida has remarked, the moment of the “death of the author”, or the disappearance of the “lyrical subject” in experimental writing of the ‘60’s ‘70’s and beyond coincides with the “*prise d'écriture*” of women writers, writers of color and most specifically, women writers of color. In other words, the moment when white male theorists decided it was time to erase the voice of the original, just so happened to be the moment when “others” started to speak up—or write up, rather, in hegemonic languages, as practices of orature in indigenous languages were and are alive and well in women’s bodies as in men’s. It is the moment when they began to be able to make their voices heard transnationally and specifically in colonial empires and centers of power, and therefore threaten, as in the sense I’m given to experimental translation, the doxa and norms of what makes sense and how. It was the moment when the proverbial white male hegemony started to become afraid of losing their power.

On the other hand, if we “forbid” practices of experimental translation on subaltern source texts, either on the pretext that this would eclipse their voices, or on the pretext that translating a subaltern text faithfully already achieves the kind of political resistance embodied in the hopes of experimental translation, are we not imposing norms upon these texts that perhaps do not belong to them? And in writing this, am I not presupposing that the translating “we” at stake in these sentences is located in a Westnorthern center and translating into a hegemonic language? Indeed, as I wrote “we” I have extended my “I” into a “we”, carrying out the infuriatingly persnickety tendency of those in a position of power and privilege (as a white person with a permanent position in a European University) to glom their positionality and experience onto all others. At the very least, it seems that the question of experimental translation has manoeuvred me into a discursive situation where this activity is revealed, and I have to ask the question of who the “we” is that my sentence presupposed. And as I write this, the haunting thought re-emerges as it does from time to time, with greater and greater frequency, and with greater and greater urgency, that what “we” have to say is not really very important at all.

## A hopeless conclusion

Or perhaps experimental translation does not have political aims. Or at least not inherently so. Perhaps it is sheer coincidence that some of its practitioners have claimed a desire to negotiate justice or right wrongs by positioning themselves in opposition to norms. Perhaps this opposition to norms is merely an idle pastime of people with access to an elite education hoping to comfort themselves that spending their time doing exactly what pleases them with little regard or discomfort about the dire state of global affairs, is actually accomplishing some kind of noble yet immeasurable ideological goal. Certainly some experimental translators (it is a discussion that crops up from time to time in Outranspo), are not interested in giving experimental translation a politically resistant inflection. Indeed, does everything have to have an aim? Does what we do have to accomplish something? Does anything we do accomplish anything at all, regardless of our aims?

A final preoccupation lies in the rhetoric of creation itself. From the *Acts*:

> The Outranspo is an Ou-X-po whose acronym stands for « Ouvroir de Translation Potencial », enacting in its very name the idea that translation is a stammering reservoir of sublime—though totally incestuous—marriages between languages, the creative, un-lucrative site of glowballization, the very real crucible of a universal potentiality for human and cultural interaction.
Creation, like translation, has at times been prey to a utopian rhetoric that would situate it somehow *beyond* the ideologies that code for its generation, circulation and reception, or that the discursive potentiality of literature or translation provides in some sense a way “out” of oppressive ideologies. This is what I refer to as the “exceptionalism” of literature, and is in fact a way of closing writing off to the global political and theoretical developments happening all around it. It is the very same doctrine that posits literature as eternal and universal, that keeps the canon closed, and keeps us revering and obeying the voices of those who keep the keys to the kingdom.

## References

Sarah Ahmed, *Living a Feminist Life* (London: Duke University Press, 2017).

Santiago Artozqui ‘L’Outranspo et la traduction creative’, *En Attendant Nadeau*, dossier traduction, Summer 2017, URL: https://www.en-attendant-nadeau.fr/2017/07/18/outranspo-traduction-creative/ [last consulted June 4, 2019].

Irène Assiba d’Almeida, ‘La “Prise d’Ecriture” des Femmes Francophones d’Afrique Noire’, in *Moving Beyond Boundaries, Volume 2: Black Women’s Diasporas* ed. by Carole Boyce Davies (New York: New York University Press, 1995), pp. 136-153.

Tim Atkins ‘7 Types of Translation: Petrarch’s Canzione’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, Roehampton University, 2011).

Paul F Bandia, *Translation as Reparation* (London: Routledge, 2014).

Susan Bassnett and Harish Trivedi, ‘Introduction: of colonies, cannibals and vernaculars’ in *Post-colonial Translation; Theory and Practice*, ed. by Susan Bassnett and Harish Trivedi (London & New York: Routledge, 1999), pp. 1-18.

Antoine Berman, ‘De la translation à la traduction’, *TTR: traduction, terminologie, redaction* 1 (1988), 23-40.

- L’*Age de la Traduction: ‘La tâche du traducteur’ de Walter Benjamin, un commentaire* (Saint-Denis: Presses universitaires de Vincennes, 2008).

Jorge Luis Borges, ‘The Translators of the Thousand and One Nights’ trans. Esther Allan, in *The Translation Studies Reader*, ed. by Lawrence Venuti (London and New York: Routledge, 2000), pp. 34-48.

Vincent Broqua, ‘La traduction de poésie expérimentale comme *Translucinación*’, *La main de Thôt* n° 5 - *Traduire la poésie, Traduire au fil des lieux* URL: http://revues.univ-tlse2.fr/lamaindethot/index.php?id=671, [last consulted June 4, 2019].

Haroldo de Campos, *Novas: Selected Writings*, (Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 2007).

Eric Cheyfitz, *The Poetics of Imperialism: Translation and Colonization from the Tempest to Tarzan* (Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1997).
Don Mee Choi, 'This Morning News Is Exciting' in *Currently & Emotion*, ed. by Sophie Collins (London: Test Centre, 2016), pp. 43-58.

Sophie Collins, *Currently & Emotion* (London: Test Centre, 2016).

Craig Dworkin and Kenneth Goldsmith, *Against Expression* (Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press 2011).

Farahzad Farzaneh and Luise von Flotow *Translating Women: Different Voices New Horizons* (Ottowa: University of Ottowa Press, 2011).

Rachel Galvin, 'Poetry is Theft', in *Comparative Literature Studies*, 51.1 (2014), 18-54.

Irène Gayraud, 'Pour une traduction comme risque et désir : potentialisations de l'original', *Itinéraires* 3, (2019), URL : http://journals.openedition.org/itineraires/4846 ; DOI : 10.4000/itineraires.4846 [last consulted June 4, 2019].

Robert Fitterman and Vanessa Place, *Notes on conceptualisms* (Brooklyn, NY: Ugly Duckling Press, 2013).

Kenneth Goldsmith, *Uncreative Writing: managing language in the digital age* (New York: Columbia University Press, 2011).

Donna Haraway 'Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective' *Feminist Studies*, 14.3. (Autumn, 1988), 575-599.

Rim Hassen 'Negotiating Western and Muslim Feminine Identities through Translation: Western Converts Translating the Quran' in *Translating Women: Different Voices New Horizons*, ed. by Farahzad Farzaneh and Luise von Flotow (Ottowa: University of Ottowa Press, 2011), pp. 17-38.

Jan Hokenson and Marcella Munsen, *The Bilingual Text* (Manchester, UK: St. Jerome publishing, 2007).

Susanne de Lotbinière-Harwood, *Re-belle et infidèle, la traduction comme réécriture au féminin; the Body Bilingual, translation as rewriting in the feminine* (Québec: Les Editions du remue-ménage/Women's Press, 1991).

Jena Osman and Juliana Spahr eds. *Chain 10: Translucinación* (Honolulu, Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2003).

Maria Mies and Vandana Shiva, *Ecofeminism* (Halifax, Nova Scotia: Fernwood publications, 1993).

Georges Mounin, *Les Belles Infidèles*, (Villeneuve d'Ascq: Septentrion, 2016, original publication 1955)

Palekar, Shalmalee, 'Re-mapping translation', *Queer in Translaion*, ed. by BJ Epstein and Robert Gillet (London and New York, Routledge: 2017), pp. 8-25.

Claire Paulian, *Les Métamorphoses d'Ovide aujourd'hui* (Paris: Classiques Garnier: 2019).
Anythony Pym, “Translation Rules are Ethical Decisions” in *Translation and Text Transfer*
(Frankfrut am Main: Peter Lang, 1992), pp. 151-173.

Lily Robert-Foley ‘Vers une traduction queere’ TRANS- 23 (July 1st, 2018) URL:
http://journals.openedition.org/trans/1864; DOI: 10.4000/trans.1864 [last consulted June 4,
2019].

Pablo Martín Ruiz, ‘Ways to start looking at potential translation’, *MLN* 131.4: *Translating Constrained Literature/Traduire la literature à contrainte*, ed. Camille Bloomfield et al., John’s Hopkins University Press (September 2016), 919-931.

Heta Rundgren’s ‘Vers une théorie du roman postnormâle: Féminisme, réalisme et conflit sexuel chez Doris Lessing, Märta Tikkanen, Stieg Larsson et Virginie Despentes’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, Université Paris 8, 2016).

– ‘Vers un partage postnormâle de la littérature’, TRANS- 22 (October 24th, 2017) URL:
http://journals.openedition.org/trans/1711; DOI: 10.4000/trans.1711 [last consulted June 4,
2019].

Carolyn Shread, ‘Metamorphosis or Metramorphosis? Towards and Ethics of Difference in Translation,’ *TTR* 202 (2007), 213-242.

Gayatri Spivak, ‘The Politics of Translation’, *Outside in the Teaching Machine* (New York: Routledge, 1993), pp. 200-225.

Niranjana, Tejaswini, *Siting Translation: History, Post-Structuralism and the Colonial Context*, (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992).

Else Ribeiro Pires Vieira, 1999, ‘Liberating Calibans, Readings of *Antropofagia* and Haroldo de Campos’s poetics of transcreation’, in *Post-colonial Translation; Theory and Practice*, ed. by Susan Bassnett and Harish Trivedi (London & New York: Routledge, 1999), pp. 95-113.

Luise Vont Flotow, ‘Feminist Translation: Contexts, Practices and Theories’, *TTR* 42 (1991), 69-84.

— ‘Contested Gender in Translation: Intersectionality and Metramorphics’, *Palimpsestes*,
*Revue de traduction* 22 (2009), 245-256.

— ‘Translating Women: From Recent Histories and Re-Translations to “Queerying” Translation, and Metramorphosis’, *Quaderns. Revista de Traducció* 19 (2012), 127-139.

Chantal Zabus, ‘Othering the Foreign Language in West African Europhone Novels’, *Canadian Review of Comparative Literature/Revue canadienne de la literature comparée*, 17.3-4 (1990), 348-366.

**References to works of experimental translation**

Annie Abrahams, *from estranger to e-stranger*, (published in collaboration with CONA- Institute for contemporary arts processing, supported by the Municipality of Ljubljana, Department of Culture, 2014); URL: https://e-stranger.tumblr.com/post/89970789401/you-have-to-accept-a-few-times-new-language [last consulted June 4, 2019].

Chinua Achebe, *Arrow of God* (London: Heinemann, 1964).
Rachel Allen ‘4 Chan poems’ in *Currently & Emotion*, ed. by Sophie Collins (London: Test Centre, 2016), pp. 201-206.

Santiago Artozqui, ‘Waves’, in *Drunken Boat #24: Outtranspo folio* (April 2017). Site down for maintenance, text available at URL: http://www.outtranspo.com/waves-a-form-by-santiago-artozqui/ [last consulted June 4, 2019].

Douglas Barbour and Stephen Scobie, *The Pirates of Pen’s Chance* (Toronto: Coach House Press, 1981).

Camille Bloomfield, Rachel Galvin and Pablo Martín Ruiz, ‘Acts de fundación de l’Outranspo’, *MLN* 131.4: *Translating Constrained Literature/Traduire la literature à contrainte*, ed. Camille Bloomfield et al., John’s Hopkins University Press (September 2016), 985-992.

Khairani Barokka, ‘12 acres’ in *Currently & Emotion*, ed. by Sophie Collins (London: Test Centre, 2016), pp. 229-234.

Caroline Bergvall, Fig: *Goan atom 2* (Cambridge UK: Salt, 2005).

– *Meddle English* (New York: Nightboat, 2011).

Brandon Brown, *The Poems of Gaius Valerius Catullus* (San Francisco: Krupskaya, 2011).

– *Flowering Mall* (Berkeley: Roof, 2012).

Wilson Bueno, *Paraguayan Sea*, trans. by Erin Mouré (Callicoon: Nightboat Books, 2018).

Jean-Loup Chiflet, *Sky My Husband! / Ciel mon mari!* (Paris: Hermé, 2008).

Chang Tzu, ‘Come Out of Works: A Physical Translation’ trans. by Allison Cobb and Jen Coleman, *Chain 10: Translucinación* (Honolulu, Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2003), pp. 43-51.

Kanchuka Dharmasiri, ‘Voices from the Therīgāthā: Framing Western Feminisms in Sinhala Translation’, in *Translating Women: Different Voices New Horizons* ed. by Farahzad Farzaneh and Luise von Flotow (Ottowa: University of Ottowa Press, 2011), pp. 175-193.

Stacy Doris, *Paramour* (San Francisco: Krupskaya, 2000).

– *Cheerleader’s Guide to the World: Council Book* (New York: Roof Books: 2006).

Craig Dworkin, *Parse* (Berkely, CA.: Atelos, 2008).

Yiannis Efthymiades *9/11 or Falling Man* trans. Karen Van Dyck, in *Currently & Emotion*, ed. by Sophie Collins (London: Test Centre, 2016), pp. 321-326.

Samantha Gorman, *Lingua Ignota*, https://samanthagorman.net/Lingua-Ignota [last consulted June 4, 2019].

Eliza Griswald, ‘I am the beggar of the world’, in *Currently & Emotion*, ed. by Sophie Collins (London: Test Centre, 2016), pp. 307-320.

Ollie Hazzard, ‘Blotter’, in *Currently & Emotion*, ed. by Sophie Collins (London: Test Centre, 2016), pp. 277-288.
Aurélia Lassaque, *Pour que chantent les salamandres* (Paris: Bruno Doucey: 2013).

Trevor Lafoy, *nemanilc*, (Paris: E.B.I., 1984).

Térèz Léotin, *Alice au Pays des Merveilles/Aliss nan mèveylann*, (Fort-de-France: Exbrayat, 2013).

Gabriel Okara, *The Voice* (London: Heinemann, 1964).

Katalin Molnar, *quant à je* (Paris: POL, 1996).

Erin Mouré, *Sheep's Vigil by a Fervent Person : A translation of Alberto Caeiro/Fernando Pessoa's Oguardador de rebanhos* (Toronto: House of Anansi Press Ltd., 2004).

Nathanaël/Nathalie Stephens, *Je Nathanaël* (Toronto: Bookthug, 2006).

Outranspo, 'Classification of Translation Constraints and Procedures', in *Drunken Boat #24: Outranspo folio* (April 2017). Site down for maintenance, text available at URL: http://www.outranspo.com/classification-of-translation-constraints-procedures/ [last consulted June 4, 2019].

- 'Renga-O' in *Drunken Boat #24: Outranspo folio* (April 2017). Site down for maintenance, text available at URL: http://www.outranspo.com/renga-o-le-renga-revu-par-loutranspo/ [last consulted June 4, 2019].

- 'The Lost Poem of Emily Dickenson' in *Drunken Boat #24: Outranspo folio* (April 2017). Site down for maintenance.

Lily Robert-Foley, *graphemachines* (Wisconsin: Xerolage, coll. Xexoxial, 2013).

- *Jiji* (Chicago: Omnia Vanitas Press, 2016).

Robert Sheppard, *A Translated Man* (Bristol: Shearsman Books, 2013).

Zoe Skoulding, *The Museum of Disappearing Sounds* (New York: Seren, 2013).

Jonathan Stalling, *Yingelishi* (Denver: Counterpath, 2011).

Philip Terry, *Dante's Inferno* (Chicago: Carcanet Press Ltd., 2014).

Georg Trakl, *Ventrakl*, trans. by Christian Hawkey (New York: Ugly Duckling Presse, 2017).

Luis d'Antin Van-Rooten's *Mot d'heures, Gousses, Rames* (London: Angus & Roberston, 1968).

Bénédicte Vilgrain, *Ka, une grammaire tibétaine, chapitre un* (Toulouse: Contrat Maint, 2001).