JAITS

ArticleTranslating Theatre Language of Beckett's Texts‘Domestication’ and ‘Foreignization’

TAKEBE Yoshiko(Shujitsu University)

Abstract
This paper aims to analyze how Beckett's English texts are translated into Japanese productions
by looking into the correlation between language, body movement and space. Translating
Beckett's texts on the stage demonstrates the process of utilizing body and voice of the actors inaccordance with the aesthetics of limited space in the theatre. By focusing on the Japanese
productions performed in 2015 and 2016, this paper aims to discover the connection between
two different translation strategies: ‘Domestication’ and ‘Foreignization’. In other words,
translating the theatre language of Beckett's texts discloses the possibilities of adaptations
through nonverbal expressions. The fact that those theatrical texts written by Beckett from the1950's to 1970's are stilltranslated and adapted in 2015 and 2016 intersemiotically into

Japanese performing art proves the depth and deftness of Beckett's linguistic and nonlinguistic
dramaturgy. The theatrical codes hidden in Beckett's texts remain a challenge for actors anddirectors to grasp beyond the barrier of languages.
INTRODUCTION
Unlike the work of other dramatists that are categorized as the “Theatre of the Absurd”,
plays by Samuel Beckett have continuously been accepted and performed in Japan even after
the twentieth century. What makes those slow-tempo Beckett dramas still exceptional andalluring for Japanese directors and actors to put on stage in such an expeditiously globalized
world?
This paper examines how Beckett’s plays are translated and performed from two different
perspectives. The first part focuses on the translation strategy of ‘Domestication’ through theperformance of Waiting for Godot, staged at the Theatre X in Tokyo in December 2015,
emphasizing the aesthetics suggestive of Japanese butoh; and Beckett’s Rockaby, interpreted
TAKEBE Yoshiko, “Translating Theatre Language of Beckett's Texts: 'Domestication’ and ‘Foreignization.”
Invitation to Interpreting and Translation Studies, No.16, 2016. pages 15-26. © by the Japan Association forInterpreting and Translation Studies

15

『通訳翻訳研究への招待』No.16 (2016)

according to the principles of Japanese traditional Noh at Oe Noh Theatre in Kyoto in
December 2015.
As opposed to the ‘Domestication’ method, the second part discusses the other translation
strategy of ‘Foreignization’ through Beckett’s Happy Days, presented at Komaba Agora Theatrein Tokyo in February 2016 to demonstrate how voice is the only crucial tool for the main
character to express how she is stuck in a dead-end situation, and how the simplicity of thesetting specified in the ST (source text) enhance the effect.
Those three perspectives of Japanese butoh dance, Noh theatre, and contemporary stage
design, disclose the basic theatrical codes hidden in Beckett’s texts, which are the keys to thenever-ending enthusiasm for performing them.
1. Existing Scholarship on Beckett and Japanese Theatre LanguageEver since Shinya Ando introduced Waiting for Godot into Japan, Japanese productions ofBeckett’s drama have been the focus of numerous key scholars. Yasunari Takahashi is theprimary scholar who referred to the connection between Beckett and Noh. He had paid attention
to the common structure of Noh plays presented by Zeami and Beckett’s dramaturgy. Mariko
Hori Tanaka’s works included an examination of the influence of Beckett’s drama on Japanesetheatre. Her analysis extends to the shared physical pain required for both Beckettian and Noh
actors for theatrical aesthetics. Minako Okamuro, a prestigious scholar who illuminated thecorrelation between Yeats, Beckett and Noh, bears mentioning.
While other scholars have piled up the Japanese receptions of Beckett’s plays performedin the twentieth century and the first dozen years of the twenty-first century from biographicaland theatrical perspectives, this paper aims to bridge the gap between performance studies andtranslation studies by focusing on the particular productions translated and adapted in Japanafter 2015.
2. Translating Theatre Language
According to Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, ‘Drama translation’ isdistinguished from other types of literary works as follows. “Unlike the translation of a novel, ora poem, the duality inherent in the art of the theatre requires language to combine with spectacle,
manifested through visual as well as acoustic images” (Anderman, 2011:92). In her A Theory of
Adaptation, Hutcheon refers to ‘theatrical language’ suggested by Patrice Pavis that
distinguishes drama from other forms of literature and art.
Adapting across cultures is not simply a matter of translating words. For audiences
experiencing an adaptation in the showing or interacting modes of engagement,
16

Translating Theatre Language of Beckett's Texts

cultural and social meaning has to be conveyed and adapted to a new environment
through what Patrice Pavis calls the “language-body” (1989:30). The intercultural,
he says, is the “intergestural”: the visual is as important as the aural. In transfersfrom a telling to a performance mode, differences of philosophy, religion, national
culture, gender, or race can create gaps that need filling by dramaturgicalconsiderations that are as likely to be kinetic and physical as linguistic. Facial
expressions, dress, and gestures take their place along with architecture and sets toconvey cultural information that is both verisimilar and an “index of the ideologies,
values, and conventions by which we order experience and predicate activity”(Klein 1981: 4) (Hutcheon, 2013: 149-150).
The term ‘theatre language’ originally comes from the rehearsal method conceived by
Stanislavsky, also known as ‘psychotechnique’. This method allows the actors to live life on thestage by using their bodies and voices through meditation, concentration and self-discipline.
This concept of focusing on the importance of physicality and materiality of the body also
becomes the key to translating Beckett’s ST into the three-dimensional opuses beyond thebarrier of languages and cultures.
3-1. ‘Domestication’: Theatre Language of Butoh Dance in Waiting for Godot
The term ‘Domestication’ can be defined as “an ethnocentric reduction of the foreign text
to target language cultural values” (Venuti, 1995:20). In other words, “[the translator] leaves thereader in peace as much as possible and moves the writer toward him” (Schleiermacher, 2004:
49).
Waiting for Godot was staged in Japanese by a Japanese contemporary dancer Saburo
Teshigawara at Theatre X in Tokyo in June and December, 2015. All the lines of all thecharacters were uttered by this unique dancer while he moved his body on the stage in the stylereminiscent of Japanese ‘Butoh’. Butoh can be defined as follows:
It was a dance form of slow-motion movements and exaggerated gestures,
sometimes juxtaposed with incongruously shocking music or performed in utter
silence. Austere and mysterious, the Butoh performers’ Zen-like goal was toachieve spiritual enlightenment through rigorous physical training. They were often
naked, skins dusted with white or ashen clay, and the part fetuses, part boundmummies, thus symbolizing Butoh’s chosen subject of the space between birth anddeath. Intricately tied to ancient Japanese traditions – both priestly, as in the dancesof Bugaku, and magically theatrical, as in Noh – exponents such as Min Tanaka,17

『通訳翻訳研究への招待』No.16 (2016)

Sankai Juku, and Kauzuo Ono in Japan have in common their fascination with the
body as an instrument of transcendental metamorphosis (Goldberg, 1988: 206-207).
Such motifs of Japanese Butoh as ‘the space between birth and death’, ‘slow-motion
movements and exaggerated gestures’, or ‘fascination with the body as an instrument oftranscendental metamorphosis’ all coincided with the backbone of Beckett’s ST. The
awkwardness of a dancer talking while dancing heightens the dislocation and schizophrenia of
the characters in the play. According to Teshigawara, who directed the play as well, “Thisperformance is meant to be floating between verbal movement and physical flow, between thegenres of theatre and dance. Though difficult, I threw out myself to go beyond the frames oflanguage and body deeply and shallowly, across the borders of realities nearly and farther”(Teshigawara, 2015: trans. Mine). Through his physicality, Teshigawara successfully manifested
the tenuous border between tragic and comic elements by instantly shifting his facial
expressions and physical states in accordance with the lines of each character. The off-balance
movements of the dancer demonstrates the restless man on the stage. The audience may havebeen reminded of Charlie Chaplin, who also derived humour from intricate and often ironicalmovement.
Throughout the play, Beckett shows a distinct taste for miming that allows his characters
to behave like clowns. During his years at Trinity College in Dublin, Beckett is said to haveseen a lot of Buster Keaton and Charlie Chaplin films. As stated by Knowlson, the “love of oldmusic hall and circus routines was to remain with him and resurface later” (Knowlson, 1996:
57). By aligning his characters with buffoons, Beckett seems to weave tragic and comic
elements into one opus.
Vladimir: Hold that. Estragon takes Vladimir’s hat. Vladimir adjusts Lucky’s hat on
his head. Estragon puts on Vladimir’s hat in place of his own which hehands to Vladimir. Vladimir takes Estragon’s hat… (Beckett, 1954: II. 46).
This exchange of hats among three different people indicates not only comic interplay but also
the multiple aspects of the same personality. There is a subtle fusion of the characters whichsignifies the interchangeability of their relationships.
The qualities of namelessness, interchangeability, and unity of the characters in Waiting
for Godot particularly suited the 2015 Japanese one-man show by the contemporary dancer. He
expressed himself as a three-dimensional code that swims between the boundaries of theatre anddance heading nowhere. In other words, his performance discloses the process of creating anddestroying the boundaries between theatre and dance through combining and separating words
18

Translating Theatre Language of Beckett's Texts

and body. All the lines uttered by the multiple characters in Beckett’s text can be heard as theinternal thoughts confessed by one human being. The limped voice of Teshigarawa recorded inadvance is replayed on the stage along with his off-balance movements such as staggers, paces,
turns, gestures and facial expressions. The linguistic elements of Beckett’s text were treated aslive substances and were physically ‘choreographed’ by the dancer nonverbally with theatmosphere of Japanese butoh.
In fact, there was another actor standing still on the stage in silence with her back facing
the audience from the beginning until the end of the performance. As a result, this unmovable
actor symbolizes the sense of betrayal by the audience, which keeps expecting her to dance orsay something during the course of performance. The audience’s unfulfilled expectation isshared in common with the actual characters depicted in Beckett’s ST.
3-2. ‘Domestication’: Theatre Language of Noh Techniques in Rockaby
The Japanese traditional performing Noh techniques were efficiently utilized to translate
Beckett’s ST intersemiotically. Such techniques as kuroko (a stagehand dressed in black that theaudience is meant to ignore), kata (a stylized pattern of acting, reflecting the features of mime),
Shite (the primary role wearing a mask who comes from another world, remaining mysterious
until she is able to express herself through Noh dance to be purified in the end), Waki (thesecondary role, who lives in this world, guiding the audience, and chanting musical aria to let
Shite reveal her true self), and monomane (a form of mimicry which forms the basic movement)
were adopted in the performance of Beckett’s Rockaby.
The play, performed by NOHO in December 2015 at Oe Noh Theatre in Kyoto, was therevival of 2002 version. While the woman on the stage rocks her chair in accordance with thelines of an unseen Voice in ST, this production in TT (target text) featured the collaboration of anarrator that chanted the lines in the text in Japanese operatic form, kuroko who rocked the chair,and a silent masked performer. The recorded voice which is supposed to be heard frombackstage in ST became visible as a narrator on the stage in TT. Supported by the narrator in therole of Waki, the woman who is originally sitting on a rocking chair from the beginning in ST
turned out to be a masked Shite who mimes and dances in the stylized pattern of kata along withthe lines of the narrator, Waki, until the final scene where Shite sits on the rocking chair andslants her neck to signify that her life is over.
In May 1981, Jonah Salz and Akira Shigeyama started NOHO, which is described as “atheatre group dedicated to using traditional Japanese theatre techniques to perform Westernthemes and plays. By using the “Ho” of “Noh”, the Direction of Noh, in staging Western works,
NOHO hopes that a vital fusion will emerge” (Salz, 1981:3). In order to visualize the recorded
Voice in ST into a realistic character on the stage in TT, the convention of Shite and Waki
19

『通訳翻訳研究への招待』No.16 (2016)

became mechanically and artistically valid. Thus, the traditional Japanese Noh techniques
enabled them to convey the original motif of ST.
4-1. ‘Foreignization’: Theatre Language of Voice in Happy Days
In contrast to the ‘domestication’ method discussed above, this section analyzes Beckett’s
text through the other translation strategy of ‘foreignization,’ which exerts “an ethnodeviant
pressure on [target-language cultural] values to register the linguistic and cultural difference ofthe foreign text, sending the reader abroad” (Venuti, 1995:20). To put it in another way by using
the words of the initiator of this dichotomy, “… the translator leaves the author in peace asmuch as possible and moves the reader toward him” (Schleiermacher, 2004: 49).
In February 2016, Happy Days was presented at Komaba Agora Theatre in Tokyo by anavant-garde company named ‘Soshin Kikan’ the winner of a local theatrical award in 2012. The
name of the company ‘Soshin’ derives from the word ‘twin body’ or ‘double body’, denoting‘the body of an ancient Japanese god formed by both man and woman, endowed with both
virtue and evil.’ Yet, it is the company’s aim to get rid of the dualism of West and East, ofancient and modern. Instead of merely concentrating on the script’s verbal lines in the text, theyreexamine the text from the perspective of the relationship between body and space. Ultimately,
they seek to adapt the concept of ‘Soshin (twin body)’ to ‘Kikan,’ literally meaning‘organization’, which implies our system in contemporary society.
The compactness and density of the space at Komaba Agora Theatre in Tokyo let theaudience focus on the effectively simple black and white setting. Trapped in the black cloth
streaked with white strings, Winne, the main character, represented a spider-like figure that has
been building up her own web of territory. The colorless texture of the setting created a contrast
between shadow and darkness, highlighting Winnie in her spotlighted frame as a painting. This
made it easier for the audience to savor the play’s acoustic elements and concentrate on the flowof Winnie’s voice.
The setting must evince a “maximum of simplicity and symmetry” with “gentle slopes
down to front and either side of stage” (Beckett, 1986:9). Winnie, who is embedded up to her
waist in Act I, is in the same place but embedded up to her neck in Act II. In a blazing light, theimage of darkness makes a contrast through Winnie’s nostalgic line, “The shadows deepening
among the rafters” (Beckett, op. cit.: I. 15).
Winnie: . . . Well, I don’t blame you, no, it would ill become me, who cannot move,to blame my Willie because he cannot speak. [Pause.] Fortunately I am in
tongue again. [Pause.] That is what I find so wonderful, my two lamps,
when one goes out the other burns brighter (Beckett, op. cit.: I. 28).
20

Translating Theatre Language of Beckett's Texts

Here, “two lamps” symbolize words and actions. As a whole, while the symmetry in Beckett’s
drama plays an effective role, the characters do not succeed in keeping their physical andspiritual balance. It can be said that the more Beckett’s characters become asymmetrical, themore the symmetry in the drama itself takes on a unique and even mystical quality. In otherwords, Beckett’s use of symmetry in constructing the framework of his drama serves tocounterpoint its chaotic contents. Just as Beckett struggled with dualism, the Japanese company
endeavored to go beyond the concept of ‘twin body’ in order to emphasize the absurdity of‘organization’ in our reality.
As a result of translating through ‘foreignization,’ this production succeeded in creating
the same visual image conceived in ST by Beckett. Equally, the translated words heard from
Winnie’s voice became indispensable key elements to savor the language of TT.
4-2. Correlation between ‘Domestication’ and ‘Foreignization’: Language, Body and Space‘Domestication’ of Beckett’s texts became effective through ‘intersemiotic translation’,“an interpretation of verbal signs by means of signs of nonverbal sign systems” (Jakobson,
2004:139). Waiting for Godot, represented at Theatre X in Tokyo, explored how it might bepossible to translate all the lines of multiple characters into a single character’s internal thoughtprocess through recourse to the aesthetics closer to Japanese butoh dance. Rockaby, translated
within the context of Japanese traditional Noh theatre, unveiled the affinities between the stoic
requirements of Beckett’s texts and the conventions of Japanese Noh, including Shite, Waki,
Kuroko and Kata. Those adaptations thus clarified the nonverbal relationship between Beckett’s
ST and other live art in TT. "In many cases, because adaptations are to a different medium, they
are re-mediations, that is, specifically translations in the form of intersemiotic transpositions
from one sign system to another" (Hutcheon, op. cit.:16). The restricted aesthetics created in
Beckett’s dramaturgy as depicted through the Noh and the style similar to Japanese butoh danceis reminiscent of the Zen spirit incarnated in Japanese tea ceremony. In the ceremony, tea isserved in a confined space nonverbally with precisely defined manners, which trains the mind of
the server in silence to offer the tea with patience and sincerity.
On the other hand, ‘foreignization’ of Beckett’s text was demonstrated by ‘interlingualtranslation’, “an interpretation of verbal signs by means of some other language” (Jakobson, op.
cit.:139). Without transforming the visual image and characterization written as stage directions
in ST, Happy Days, performed at Komaba Agora Theatre in Tokyo, proved that voice on thestage may be compared to an effective role of ‘lip-synchronized dubbing’ in a film. “In the fieldof audiovisual translation, dubbing denotes the re-recording of the original voice track in thetarget language using dubbing actors’ voices” (Gonzalez, 2011: 17). The performance of Happy
Days by ‘Soshin Kikan’ enabled the actor to convey the original message linguistically in a21

『通訳翻訳研究への招待』No.16 (2016)

conventional way and to assert the significance of voice as the symbolical tool for translation.
Winnie, embedded up to her neck in the mound, demonstrated her presence through the
crescendo and diminuendo of her voice and accent in the target language in order not to destroy
the image of the ST by Beckett.
Whether translating through ‘domestication’ or ‘foreignization,’ both approaches “dealwith ‘the question of how much a translation assimilates a foreign text to the translating
language and culture, and how much it rather signals the differences of the text” (Munday, 2008:146). Those linguistic lines and stage directions in the ST written by Samuel Beckett weresuccessfully translated into TT with an indigenous artistry making use of body movement, facial
expression, and the voices of the actors on stage.
CONCLUSION
Unlike other dramatists that are categorized as “Theatre of the Absurd”, plays by SamuelBeckett have the unlimited potential to bring hope and light to the stage. Works that he wrote
from the 1950's to 1970's still maintain freshness and persuasiveness in Japanese productions in2015 and 2016. To revisit the question I raised in the Introduction: What makes Beckett’s
slow-tempo dramas still exceptionally appealing to Japanese directors and actors in today’s
globalized world? For the answers, we may usefully refer to the explanation that Peter Brook
gave in his The Empty Space as to the distinction between Beckett and other writers:
Sadly, it is the wish for optimism that many writers share that prevents them fromfinding hope. When we attack Beckett for pessimism it is we who are the Beckett
characters trapped in a Beckett scene. When we accept Beckett’s statement as it is,then suddenly all is transformed. There is after all quite another audience, Beckett’s
audience; those in every country who do not set up intellectual barriers, who do not
try too hard to analyze the messages. This audience laughs and cries out – and in theend celebrates with Beckett; this audience leaves his plays, his black plays,
nourished and enriched, with a lighter heart, full of a strange irrational joy. Poetry,
nobility, beauty, magic – suddenly these suspect words are back in the theatre once
more (Brook 66).
The Japanese artists cited above coped with Beckett’s texts faithfully, exploring the possibilities
of intersemiotic translations as well as interlingual translations to create a “Beckettian audience”
in Japan without deviating from the ST.

22

Translating Theatre Language of Beckett's Texts

Notes
This paper is based on ‘Translating Theatre Language of Beckett’s Texts’ presented at IFTR
(International Federation for Theatre Research) World Congress 2016 held at Stockholm
University between June 13th and 17th, 2016.
..................................................................
About the author:
Yoshiko Takebe is an Associate Professor of Interpreting and Translation Studies at Shujitu University.
................................................................ .........

References
English Sources
Albright, Daniel. (2003). Beckett and Aesthetics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Anderman, Gunilla. (2011). ‘Drama Translation’. Baker, Mona, and Gabriela Saldanha, eds. Routledge
Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. Second Edition (pp. 92-95). London: Routledge.
Beckett, Samuel. (1986). The Complete Dramatic Works. London: Faber and Faber Limited.
---. (1954). Waiting for Godot. New York: Grove Press.
Brandson, James R. (1997). No and Kyogen in the Contemporary World. Honolulu,

University of

Hawaii Press.
Brater, Enoch. (1987). Beyond Minimalism: Beckett’s Late Style in the Theatre. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Brook, Peter. (2008). The Empty Space. London: Penguin Modern Classics.
Bryden, Mary. (1998). Samuel Beckett and the Idea of God. London: Macmillan.
Burkman, Katherine H. (1987). Myth and Ritual in the Plays of Samuel Beckett. London and Toronto:
Associated University Presses.
Cima, Gay Gibson. (1993). ‘Beckett and No Actor’. Performing Women: Female Characters, Male
Playwrights, and the Modern Stage. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 184-222.
Essif, Les. (2001). Empty Figure on an Empty Stage: The Theatre of Samuel Beckett and His Generation.
Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Gidal, Peter. (1986). Understanding Beckett: A Study of Monologue and Gesture in theWorks of Samuel Beckett. New York: St. Martins.
Goldberg, RoseLee. (1988). Performance Art: From Futurism to the Present. Revised and enlarged
edition. New York: Henry N. Abrams, Inc., Publishers.
Gonzalez, Luis Pérez. (2011). ‘Audiovisual Translation’. Baker, Mona, and Gabriela Saldanha, eds.
Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. Second Edition (pp. 92-95). London: Routledge.
Happy Days. (6 February 2016). By Samuel Beckett. Dir. Jakounezuminopapa. Perf. Biwa Shishimi.

23

『通訳翻訳研究への招待』No.16 (2016)

Trans. Yasunari Takahashi. Komaba Agora Theatre.
Hori Tanaka, Mariko. ‘The Body in Pain and Freedom of the Mind: Performing Beckett and Noh’. Hori
Tanaka, Mariko, Yoshiki Tajiri, and Michiko Tsushima, eds. Samuel Beckett and Pain. (pp. 93-113).
New York: Rodopi, 2012.
Hutcheon, Linda. (2013). A Theory of Adaptation. Second Edition. London: Routledge.
Jakobson, Roman. (1959/2004). ‘On Linguistic Aspects of Translation’. Lawrence Venuti ed. The
Translation Studies Reader. Second Edition (pp. 138-143). New York: Routledge.
Kalb, Jonathan. (1989). Beckett in Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Katan, David. (1999). Translating Cultures: An Introduction for Translators, Interpreters and Mediators.
Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.
Klein, Michael, and Parker Gillian, eds. (1981). The English novel and the movies. New
York: Frederick Ungar.
Knowlson, James. (1996). Damned to Fame: The Life of Samuel Beckett. London: Bloomsbury,
Levy, Shimon. (2002). Samuel Beckett’s Self-Referential Drama: The Sensitive Chaos.
Brighton: Sussex Academic Press.
Matoba, Junko. (2003). Beckett’s Yohaku: A Study of Samuel Beckett’s Empty Space onStage in His Later Shorter Plays. Tokyo: Shinsui-sha.
McMillan, Douglad, and Martha Fehsenfeld. (1988). Beckett in the Theatre: The Author as Practical
Playwright and Director. London: Calder.
McMullan, Anna. (1993). Theatre on Trial: Samuel Beckett’s Later Drama. London: Routledge.
Munday, Jeremy. (2008). Introducing Translation Studies. London: Routledge.
Okamuro, Minako, ed. (2014). Samuel Beckett- The Door is Imperceptibly Ajar. Tokyo: Waseda
University Tsubouchi Memorial Theatre Museum.
Ortolani, Benito. (1990). The Japanese Theatre: From Shamanistic Ritual to Contemporary Pluralism.
Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Pavis, Patrice. (1989). “Problems of translations for the stage: Interculturalism andpost-modern theatre”. Scolnicov, Hanna, and Holland, Peter, eds. The play out of context:
Transferring plays from culture to culture. (pp. 25-44). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pym, Anthony. (2010). Exploring Translation Theories. London: Routledge.
Rockaby. (11 December 2015). By Samuel Beckett. Dir. Jonah Salz. Matsui Akira. Perf. Matsui Akira.
Kagari Asukai. Trans. Yasunari Takahashi. Oe Noh Theatre.
Rose, Marilyn Gaddis. (1997). Translation and Literary Criticism: Translation as
Analysis. Manchester: St. Jerome Press.
Said, Edward W. (1983). “Travelling theory”. The World, the Text, and the Critic. (pp.
226-47). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Salz, Jonah. (1981). NOHO’s Theatre Group’s first program.

24

Translating Theatre Language of Beckett's Texts---. (2015). Program for Noho Theatre Group 35th Anniversary Performance “No Where?”,Schleiermacher, Friedrich. (1813/2004). ‘On the Different Methods of Translating’. Lawrence Venuti ed.
The Translation Studies Reader. Second Edition (pp. 43-63). New York: Routledge.
Silva, Miguel. (2007). ‘Expanding Text’. Performance Research 12.1: 12- 19.
Suzuki, Daisetz T. (1959). Zen and Japanese Culture. New York: Bollingen Foundation.
Tajiri, Yoshiki, and Mariko Hori Tanaka. (2009). “The Reception of Samuel Beckett in Japan”. Nixon,
Mark ed. The International Reception of Samuel Beckett. London: Bloomsbury.
Takahashi, Yasunari. (1982) ‘The Theatre of Mind: Samuel Beckett and the Noh’. Encounter 58. 4(1982):66-73.
---. (1983). Morris Beja, S. E. Gontarski, and Pierre Astier (Eds.), ‘Qu’est-ce qui arrive? Some Structural
Comparisons of Beckett’s Plays and Noh’. Samuel Beckett: Humanistic Perspectives, (pp. 99-106),
Columbus: Ohio State University Press.
---. (1986). ‘The Ghost Trio: Beckett, Yeats, and Noh’. The Cambridge Review 107.2295:172-176.
Takebe, Yoshiko (2011). ‘The Effect of Translated Plays: Samuel Beckett and Japanese
Theatre’. Interpreting and Translation Studies. The Journal of the Japan Association forInterpreting and Translation Studies.
Teshigawara, Saburo. (2015). Program for Waiting for Godot. Tokyo: Theatre X.
Topsfield, Valerie. (1988). The Humour of Samuel Beckett. London: Macmillan Press.
Uhlmann, Anthony. (2006). Samuel Beckett and the Philosophical Image. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press,
Venuti, Lawrence. (1995) The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation. London and New York:
Routledge.
Waiting for Godot. (13 December 2015). By Samuel Beckett. Dir. Saburo Teshigarawa. Perf. Saburo
Teshigawara, Rihoko Sato. Theatre X, Tokyo.
Worth, Katharine. (1999). Samuel Beckett’s Theatre: Life Journeys. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Japanese Sources
高橋康也訳 （1990）. 『ベスト・オブ・ベケット１ ゴドーを待ちながら』 白水社.
---. （1991）『ベスト・オブ・ベケット３ しあわせな日々／芝居』 白水社.
武部好子 （2014）.「翻訳と翻案の差異―西洋演劇を通して」. 『翻訳研究への招待』 第 11 号.
日本通訳翻訳学会.
---（2015）「西洋演劇における非言語的様相の可能性」 『翻訳研究への招待』 第 14 号. 日本通訳翻訳学会
ハッチオン, リンダ （2012） 『アダプテーションの理論』（片淵悦久・鴨川啓信・武田雅史 訳）.
晃洋書房[ 原著：Hutcheon, Linda. A Theory of Adaptation. Second Edition. London: Routledge,
2013.].

25

『通訳翻訳研究への招待』No.16 (2016)

ピム, アンソニー (2010) 『翻訳理論の探求』（武田珂代子・訳） みすず書房 [ 原著：Pym, Anthony.
Exploring Translation Theories. London: Routledge, 2010.].
ベイカー, モナ、ガブリエラ・サルダーニャ 編 (2013)『翻訳研究のキーワード 27 のキーワー
ドで読み解く翻訳研究の世界』（藤濤文子 監修・編訳 / 伊原紀子・田辺希久子 訳）研究社 [ 原 著 ： Baker, Mona, and Gabriela Saldanha, eds. (2009) Routledge Encyclopedia ofTranslation Studies Second Edition. London: Routledge].

26