لخّصلي

Academia is in many parts strongly conventionalised, but at the same time often allows for a significant amount of mobility and flexibility for its participants. Every field, whether it is business or academia, has its own conventions, which might have additional effects and influence on our lives and work. In order to determine what role specific aspects of Granovetter’s approach with regard to strong and weak ties might play for the case of TS, a data set about the details of relations and personal contacts between TS researchers would ideally be available. Since the data set for this research project in hand focuses primarily on data from publication and citation, the following section will instead emphasise aspects in Granovetter’s study that to my knowledge have so far been neglected, and to which TS could contribute significantly to further revisions of his work as well as other work on strong weak tie theory. The issue of language and translation as facilitator of and access to knowledge is a major factor influencing the travel of ideas and information, and yet this has not received much attention so far. These initial observations might serve to initiate further discussion, not just from TS scholars, but also from other disciplines, to start bridging the gap and re- visiting the Weak Tie Theory with more awareness for linguistic issues. The inclusion of e.g. linguistic features in analyses of communication settings will allow for more nuanced insight and increased understanding of inter-personal connections and how language affects the exchange of information. The following section includes for instance an expansion of the analysis criteria that was used by Granovetter in his original study. It suggests to take into account, in addition to the category ‘frequency of contact’ between participants in the network, whether these communication instances were taking place between two native speakers, between native speaker and non- native speaker, or between two non-native speakers who may or may not be sharing the same native language. The Weak Tie theory and related model for communication between points in the network would be significantly strengthened by an understanding of whether information flows equally well between native speakers and non-native speakers.
142

As this thesis sets out to offer insight into some of the complexities of ideational shifts within and knowledge transfer between disciplines including a consideration for issues of language and translation, this work should provide a valuable contribution to the Weak Tie theory by expanding the horizon of enquiry into communication flow in networks with the notion of communication across linguistic barriers. In particular the aspects of language and theoretical works in translation, as discussed earlier in this chapter with the examples of texts by Adorno and Derrida, can serve as an ideal starting point to re-examine aspects in the transfer and adoption of new knowledge and information from one language system (or network) into another. The Weak Tie theory would also benefit from increased awareness, further insights and engagement from the field of translation studies as well as interpreting studies in general, since considerations of linguistic access to information as part of Granovetter’s model of information exchange between nodes in a network have so far been neglected.
2.4.3 Weak Ties and the Role of Language and Translation
In order to consider and discuss in more detail the implications of language and translation issues (or the absence thereof) on Granovetter’s study, this section firstly considers the make-up of a sample group that formed the basis for his study on the role of weak ties in a labour market setting. The original group was a “random sample of recent professional, technical, and managerial job changers living in a Boston suburb” (Granovetter 1973: 1371). The total sample comprised 282 people, while the subsample of people who were interviewed personally comprised only 100 people. Those people who had found a new job through contacts were then asked “how often they saw the contacts around the time that he passed on job information to them” (ibid.). The frequency of contact was then used to determine the respective ties as weak or strong. While aspects of segregation, different ethnic groups, and ethnic control over certain labour market niches are discussed in the original monograph, “Getting a Job”, the specific aspects of potential language barriers or hurdles between members of the job seeker group,
143

issues regarding possible prejudices towards sociolects or dialects, or issues of non-native speakers of English, are not analysed in more detail. The description and subsequent discussion of the sample group in “The Strength of Weak Ties” suggests a high level of linguistic homogeneity in the sample group, since the members of the sample group are not further differentiated in terms of languages, dialects or sociolects spoken. Given the range of labour fields that were included in the sample group (professional, managerial, but also technical jobs), and the history of Boston as an immigration area, it would be reasonable to assume that there were different local dialects and sociolects present in the sample group, and that at least some members of the sample group were not native speakers of English. Differences in languages, dialects, or even sociolects can however not just alter the amount and accuracy on information that is accessible to an individual from other contacts, but arguably it might also influence how individuals will feel about their contacts, and respectively, how they classify and describe these connections. In Granovetter’s case, there was a large proportion of his sample group who, when asked if they had heard of their new jobs through weak ties (contacts who they saw rarely) or through strong ties (contacts who they saw often), responded “occasionally” (1371), while 27.8% of those people who found a job through contacts had done so with information transmitted through contacts that they saw only “rarely” (ibid.). On this basis, Granovetter concludes that “[t]he skew is clearly to the weak end of the continuum, suggesting the primacy of structure over motivation” (ibid.). It is the aspect of motivation however, that is arguably more complex that just the frequency of contact. Motivation to pass on information depends on many different factors, but some important ones to mention here I believe are the relative ease of communication, the subjective sense of sharing values, and the mutual feeling of belonging and trust. All these aspects are to a strong degree influenced by language. A shared language, dialect or sociolect is a powerful connector between people, and can motivate individuals to share information respectively, independently of the motivation of frequent contact or close friendship bonds. From a linguistic and translation studies
144

perspective, it could therefore be beneficial to review and broaden the original categories used by Granovetter. The three original categories for frequency of contact (“often = at least twice a week; occasionally = more than once a year but less than twice a week; rarely = once a year or less” (ibid.)) could, for instance, be refined by adding communication and language- sensitive sub-categories, so that one would end up with categories that convey more information about the nature of communication across those ties:
Frequency of contact:
Communication
between two native speakers
Communication
between native speaker and non-native speaker
Communication
between two non- native speakers
Often
Occasionally
Rarely
Fig. 1, Suggestion for expansion of Granovetter’s categories by language-sensitive subcategories
The addition of communication-focused categories, in combination with Granovetter’s categories for the frequency of contact as a basis of determining the nature of the connection, could, for example, indicate not only whether job-related information is passed on via strong or weak ties, but also further differentiate and indicate whether such information tends to reach the job changer, and through which types of language channels or barriers. This could bring to light further insights about the balance of structure vs. motivation.
Ludwig Wittgenstein wrote “Die Grenzen meiner Sprache bedeutendie Grenzen meiner Welt” (The limits of my language are the limits of my world).5051 Languages and our ability to transcend those limits determine greatly to what extent we can participate in the information exchange and diffusion process when the respective information network operates across
50 “Tractatus 5.6”, in Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (Logisch-philosophische Abhandlung), London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner and Co, 1922 (first published 1921).
145

linguistic and cultural boundaries. However, accents, dialects, and sociolects can furthermore influence how individuals are perceived, and respectively how we perceive and judge the value of information and ideas they can bring to us, as well as our assessment on what information and ideas we will convey to them. Different dialects are often received very differently in terms of perceived level of education, friendliness, etc. Therefore, I believe it would be of great value for a future research project to re-examine Granovetter’s original study from a linguistic and translation studies point of view, with emphasis on the dialects, accents, and sociolects present in the sample group, and the respective connotations and consequences for the transmission or non-transmission of relevant information for the job seekers. Prejudices towards different languages and dialects should be taken into greater account for a better understanding of information diffusion patterns, and whether structure really does take primacy over motivation, as Granovetter’s findings suggest.
With regard to the relevance of a translation point of view in this context, there is another aspect to consider. If we assume that there is a general truth in the fact that the weaker the link, the more relevant the information and the more likely the information is used by or of use to the recipient, then that would mean the biggest value could be found in those links that are furthest apart. This would mean, though, that links across different languages would possibly hold an even higher value. This is because the link is more likely to be weak, since a different language often points to a different cultural and social setting, which tends to be either geographically distant, and/or has access to different resources and different sets of information and ideas, resulting in a larger value in terms on ‘newness’. While this would imply that information diffused through ‘translator ties’ has an inherently large value, this aspect also comes with its own considerable range of problems, since one could also argue that information disseminated through the ‘filter layer’ of translation is likely to have at least some deviations or perhaps even distortions compared to the ‘original’ information. This point was made earlier in this chapter with the discussion of
146

the cases of translations of Adorno and Derrida for an English audience. The high ‘newness’ factor that comes with information and ideas translated from a different language and culture is therefore one side of the medallion, while the level of accuracy or deviation from the original information represents the other. In order to assess what appears to be a form of co-dependency between ties, language and language perception, and translation more conclusively, an interdisciplinary collaboration between researchers from the different fields could yield differentiated and insightful results. The points of criticism expressed and the expanded model categories for assessment suggested here initially intend to merely outline a starting point as well as to highlight complexities regarding the role of language, linguistic barriers, and translation in processes of knowledge exchange and the spread of ideas.
2.5 Chapter Conclusion
This chapter has discussed various aspects of and changes in the manifold roles and significances of translators and translations, from the lack of attention given by most network analysis to linguistic access, to the significance of translation in the process of the dissemination of ideas, as has been exemplified by cases of translations of Adorno and Derrida. In discussing two exemplary cases of the significance of respective translations for both authors’ works, the potential influence of translation on the reception of the authors’ ideas and theories in the target language has become visible. Translation choices can be responsible for the understanding or misunderstanding of a theory, thereby influencing its reception and consequently its success and dissemination. Translation can therefore be seen as a factor in the spread and emergence of ideas that influences this process, while the original ideas and author sometimes have little influence on this particular part of the process. This further complements the multi- faceted line of enquiry taken by the project at hand, by showing the layer of interpretation and filtering by translation as an additional factor in the process of the spread of ideas that also determines whether an idea is successfully emerging and is being established or not. The idea itself can be seen as
147

secondary in this process: a good translation which is tailored to and fulfils the expectations and conventions of the receiving market can enable a scholar's idea to emerge onto a field, be well received and spread, and lead to commercial and academic success. A translation that is badly received, even if the original idea and text are outstanding, could cause an author or scholar and his ideas to become side-lined and disregarded.
This chapter has furthermore outlined examples of translation activity from different historical periods in order to illustrate the translators’ changing responsibilities, expectations, as well as the changing power relations and positions within the respective knowledge networks. We have seen translators as contact point between cultures, establishing relations and engaging in the import and export of knowledge (e.g. in the case of travellers like Marco Polo), or as researchers and thereby generators of knowledge (e.g. in the case of ‘enriched’ translations by commentaries, or cases where translators would undertake research of their own as an addition to the work they were translating). In many of the cases discussed, the role of the translator stretched beyond mere transcription of a manuscript. Often, it also involved personal travel, independent research, collaboration, or teaching, all in their capacity as a translator. The contact points of translators with the society and culture around them were therefore much more manifold, and not limited to the production of a text. Finally, various roles and options of translators and translations as part of networks have been outlined, and selected approaches to connect translation studies and network studies have been discussed, in order to highlight the challenges and opportunities of applying the frame of and strategies from network studies to translation studies research. This chapter sought to accentuate the significance of translation and translators as parts of knowledge networks, and their role as facilitators of knowledge diffusion in these developments. It has shown that networks, their structures, network membership, as well as the languages that are spoken in a particular knowledge network, can impact significantly on the diffusion or non-diffusion of ideas and knowledge, and the success or failure of an emerging idea or theory, since all these factors are
148

interconnected. This also further underlines the importance of ‘external’ factors in influencing the development of successful ideas. This chapter has shown additional dimensions and contributing factors to the process of ‘making’ or ‘breaking’ of emerging ideas (and by extension, scholars). Before further layers of analysis are added to this discussion, the following section will give a brief overview of the field of sociology as the exemplary focus for analysis of an emerging idea into the field of translation studies. Subsequently, the methodology used for collecting and analysing data, and the data itself will be presented and explained.