Domestication and foreignization are the two classic strategies a translator chooses between: domestication makes a translated text read fluently and naturally in the target language, while foreignization deliberately keeps the flavor of the source language and culture. This article explains both concepts and shows them at work in a real translation from French to English.
What are domestication and foreignization?
The two methods go back to the German theologian and translator Friedrich Schleiermacher, who in 1813 argued that a translator either leaves the reader in peace and moves the writer toward him (domestication), or leaves the writer in peace and moves the reader toward him (foreignization). The terms domestication and foreignization themselves were coined much later by the American translation theorist Lawrence Venuti.
Domestication removes anything that would challenge the reader or violate the conventions of the target language. Instead of forcing the reader to deal with unfamiliar concepts, the text is made fluent and familiar. Foreignization does the opposite: the reader is drawn into a new environment that challenges the literary tradition of his own cultural and linguistic community.
The French translator Antoine Berman analyzed the same act of translation by highlighting the deforming tendencies inherent in literary translation. He distinguished traduction ethnocentrique (ethnocentric translation) from traduction hypertextuelle (hypertextual translation). In ethnocentric translation, as in domestication, the translator adapts the text to the target culture and eliminates words and references foreign to the reader's linguistic background. In hypertextual translation, as in foreignization, the translator brings the new words and concepts of the foreign culture to the reader, so that the reader can understand the other's culture and language.
An example: translating Alphonse Daudet
To show these tendencies at work, here is an extract from La chèvre de M. Seguin, from the collection Lettres de mon moulin by Alphonse Daudet, with a literal translation and a free (domesticated and foreignized) translation.
Source text
Énorme, immobile, assis sur son train de derrière, il était là regardant la petite chèvre blanche et la dégustant par avance. Comme il savait bien qu'il la mangerait, le loup ne se pressait pas ; seulement, quand elle se retourna, il se mit à rire méchamment. - Ha ! ha ! la petite chèvre de M. Seguin ! et il passa sa grosse langue rouge sur ses babines d'amadou. Blanquette se sentit perdue… Un moment en se rappelant l'histoire de la vieille Renaude, qui s'était battue toute la nuit pour être mangée le matin, elle se dit qu'il vaudrait peut-être mieux se laisser manger tout de suite ; puis, s'étant ravisée, elle tomba en garde, la tête basse et la corne en avant, comme une brave chèvre de M. Seguin qu'elle était… Non pas qu'elle eût l'espoir de tuer le loup, - les chèvres ne tuent pas le loup, - mais seulement pour voir si elle pourrait tenir aussi longtemps que la Renaude…
Literal translation
Big, immobile, sat on a train of the back, he was there seeing the small white goat and tasting her in advance. As he knew well that he will eat her up, the wolf didn't hurry up; only, when she returned, he puts himself to laugh naughtily. Ha! Ha! The small goat of Mr. Seguin! And he passed his big red tongue on his lips of amadou. Blanquette felt lost… The moment she remembers the story of the old Renaude, who fought all the night for being eaten in the morning, she said to herself that maybe it's more worth to let oneself eaten in one go; then, she reconsidered, she got ready, the head low and the horns in front like a brave goat of Mr. Seguin that she was… No, she didn't have the hope to kill the wolf - the goats don't kill the wolf - but only to see if she could hold as long as Renaude…
Free translation (domesticated and foreignized)
There is this huge and immobile wolf resting on his haunches at a distance. He is looking at the small white goat, savoring her in advance in his thoughts. He knew well that he would kill and eat her. He laughed balefully as she turned around to see him. Ha! Ha! It's the small goat of Mr. Seguin! And he rolled his big, fat red tongue over his thirsty chops. Blanquette felt lost. For a moment she was reminded of the story of old Renaude, who fought the whole night but still got eaten in the morning. She thinks it would be much better if he would eat her in one go… and then she stood up - head lowered, horns in front, like the brave goat of Mr. Seguin she was - as she reconsidered her position. It's not that she had any hope of killing him; goats do not kill the wolf. But she stood up anyway, only to see whether she could hold out as long as Renaude had…
Notes
Blanquette - the white goat. Renaude - another goat. Seguin - the keeper of the goats.
What this example shows
The job of the translator is more than delivering meaning from one language to another. The translator must understand the text on first reading, then analyze it and go deep into the context in which it was written: the background of the author, the situation, the inferences the author makes through the characters. In the free translation above, the name Blanquette is left untranslated even though it means "little white one": keeping it links the translation to the original and preserves its foreign flavor. Replacing it with "white goat" would domesticate the text and disrupt its beauty.
Literal translation is rarely an option, because the actual sense gets lost. Take "assis sur son train de derrière": literally "sitting on the train of the back", which means nothing to an English reader. The translator must deliver the meaning, the form and the cultural value of the sentence - hence "resting on his haunches". Word choice matters just as much: dégustant is "tasting" in the literal version, but "savoring" fits the sentence far better.
Conclusion
A good translator uses both strategies. Domestication (Berman's ethnocentric translation) makes the text serve the reader; foreignization (hypertextual translation) respects and carries over the source culture. Delivering the actual sense of a text requires a deliberate balance of the two.
