As longtime readers may have noticed, I essentially never refer to the 'statistic' that only three per cent of all fiction published in the US is translated; I've heard the anecdotal evidence, but that's all it's always seemed to me; I've never seen any numbers that would really convince me it's anything more than the most ballpark of estimates.
The Three Percent Translation Database offers the best documentation of what fiction and poetry is published in (first) translation in the US in any given year, but without a corresponding measure of total comparable publications doesn't yield any useful percentages either.
Now Literature Across Frontiers has taken a closer look at UK and Irish publications to try determine the numbers there. The resulting study, Three percent ? Publishing data and statistics on translated literature in the United Kingdom and Ireland (warning ! dreaded pdf format !), by Jasmine Donahaye offers some insight -- but ultimately does little more than demonstrate how hard the hard numbers are to come by.
The findings "reveal a steady growth of translated titles" (between 2000 and 2008, the time period studied), and that may be accurate. But as to the actual numbers and percentages -- oh, no, no, no. I already dread how folks are going to irresponsibly claim that: "approximately 2.5% of all publications and 4.5% of fiction, poetry, drama (literature) are translations".
That is what the raw numbers might show -- but, boy, are those numbers raw.
By far the most useful part of this study is the section on: "proposed mechanisms for change", suggesting how data may better be presented and collected -- and, yes, metadata issues are a major issue.
As to what this study counted: well, admirably, they include the BNB Literary Translations Bibliography 2000_2005_2008 (warning ! dreaded pdf format !) -- the titles of all the books they count. And here, very easy for all to see, is the rub. Or rather: the very many rubs.
In the report they note several caveats, including:
Even a cursory examination shows there are a large number of titles of dubious value -- many that should not have been counted at all, or must be categorized with care. So many that they call any and all 'conclusions' into doubt.
- First off, there are a number of titles that are not translations into English at all: Moses Isegawa's Abyssinian Chronicles was admittedly first published in Dutch, but it was translated into Dutch; the 2000 UK publication is of the English original, not a translation from the Dutch.
- I'm not familiar with the book, by it seems obvious that the many mentions of Michael Rosen's We're Going on a Bear Hunt, listed in multiple languages, is again not a translation into English, but rather are bilingual editions (in various languages) of Rosen's originally-written-in-English kiddie-book. Not really what we're looking for.
- There are an incredible number of titles listed twice -- the first instance comes just ten titles in, Aḥmad Ibrāhīm Faqīh's Gazelles and other plays, and it just goes on and on and on. (And, yes, these clearly were counted separately for percentage-determining purposes.)
- There are an incredible -- really incredible -- number of new editions of previously published work included here. We're not talking new translations, we're just talking new editions of previously published translations -- some only a year or two earlier, some much, much earlier. Don't believe me ? Scroll down near the end and check out how many of those 2008 Turgenev translations are credited to ... Constance Garnett. (Many of these new editions of old work are also readily identifiable because a second, earlier copyright date is acknowledged.)
While there may be some argument for new (i.e. re-) translations being counted -- though note that these are explicitly excluded from the Three Percent Database -- there is not much good reason for including new editions of old translations; yes, it gives some idea of how popular books in translation are, but still ..... (I do note that every god damned republication of a Jane Austen novel also counts as a "new book" in those grossly inflated annual books-published lists (the ones against which the percentage of translated titles is, perforce, measured) -- it is a problem how to properly deal with all these.)
- There are an awful lot of children's books here, inflating totals. And pretty basic ones, too -- do we really want to count Philippe Corentin's 30-page picture book Splosh ! in trying to figure out how much literary fiction is being translated ? (And I remind you of Michael Rosen -- one the most-represented authors on the list .....)
- Plays are also included. Nothing against plays, but that's a pretty separate category (and yes, I'd love to see poetry separated out too).
These are my findings after scrolling more or less randomly through this bibliography for less than an hour -- and I can come to no other conclusion than that it is irresponsible to draw the conclusions they did about how many literary works in translation were published in 2000, 2005, and 2008 from this. With a little teasing -- weeding out those duplicates, those kids' books, etc. -- the data can yield better results -- it is a great foundation -- but no one should claim 4.5 or whatever per cent of UK/Irish literary publications were translated .....
This bibliography is actually a great starting point (though there are also issues of what isn't listed here -- I note, for example, two 2005 volumes from the Clay Sanskrit Library (NYU Press) are listed, but the several additional titles that came out in 2008 are missed), but it needs a lot more work than was performed on it to yield any truly useful data (weeding out duplicates would seem to be the minimum; as the totals in the language tables in the report proper show, not even that was done).
Honestly, the way this subject (and the data) is treated (i.e. manhandled) drives me nuts. I'm seriously considering applying for an NEA (or NEH ?) grant to do a proper count and study .....
Meanwhile, do me a favor and do not spread the oh so wrong word that 4.5 or whatever percent of all UK/Irish literary titles are translations. (Don't say it's three percent either .....)
Please.
Now Literature Across Frontiers has taken a closer look at UK and Irish publications to try determine the numbers there. The resulting study, Three percent ? Publishing data and statistics on translated literature in the United Kingdom and Ireland (warning ! dreaded pdf format !), by Jasmine Donahaye offers some insight -- but ultimately does little more than demonstrate how hard the hard numbers are to come by.
The findings "reveal a steady growth of translated titles" (between 2000 and 2008, the time period studied), and that may be accurate. But as to the actual numbers and percentages -- oh, no, no, no. I already dread how folks are going to irresponsibly claim that: "approximately 2.5% of all publications and 4.5% of fiction, poetry, drama (literature) are translations".
That is what the raw numbers might show -- but, boy, are those numbers raw.
By far the most useful part of this study is the section on: "proposed mechanisms for change", suggesting how data may better be presented and collected -- and, yes, metadata issues are a major issue.
As to what this study counted: well, admirably, they include the BNB Literary Translations Bibliography 2000_2005_2008 (warning ! dreaded pdf format !) -- the titles of all the books they count. And here, very easy for all to see, is the rub. Or rather: the very many rubs.
In the report they note several caveats, including:
Another potential problem is that hardback and paperback editions of the same title will appear as two publications, and some titles that appear in the record as 'intention to publish' may not in the end have been published. Also challenging is the matter of place of publication.But, in fact, it's so much worse than that. So horrendously much worse.
Even a cursory examination shows there are a large number of titles of dubious value -- many that should not have been counted at all, or must be categorized with care. So many that they call any and all 'conclusions' into doubt.
- First off, there are a number of titles that are not translations into English at all: Moses Isegawa's Abyssinian Chronicles was admittedly first published in Dutch, but it was translated into Dutch; the 2000 UK publication is of the English original, not a translation from the Dutch.
- I'm not familiar with the book, by it seems obvious that the many mentions of Michael Rosen's We're Going on a Bear Hunt, listed in multiple languages, is again not a translation into English, but rather are bilingual editions (in various languages) of Rosen's originally-written-in-English kiddie-book. Not really what we're looking for.
- There are an incredible number of titles listed twice -- the first instance comes just ten titles in, Aḥmad Ibrāhīm Faqīh's Gazelles and other plays, and it just goes on and on and on. (And, yes, these clearly were counted separately for percentage-determining purposes.)
- There are an incredible -- really incredible -- number of new editions of previously published work included here. We're not talking new translations, we're just talking new editions of previously published translations -- some only a year or two earlier, some much, much earlier. Don't believe me ? Scroll down near the end and check out how many of those 2008 Turgenev translations are credited to ... Constance Garnett. (Many of these new editions of old work are also readily identifiable because a second, earlier copyright date is acknowledged.)
While there may be some argument for new (i.e. re-) translations being counted -- though note that these are explicitly excluded from the Three Percent Database -- there is not much good reason for including new editions of old translations; yes, it gives some idea of how popular books in translation are, but still ..... (I do note that every god damned republication of a Jane Austen novel also counts as a "new book" in those grossly inflated annual books-published lists (the ones against which the percentage of translated titles is, perforce, measured) -- it is a problem how to properly deal with all these.)
- There are an awful lot of children's books here, inflating totals. And pretty basic ones, too -- do we really want to count Philippe Corentin's 30-page picture book Splosh ! in trying to figure out how much literary fiction is being translated ? (And I remind you of Michael Rosen -- one the most-represented authors on the list .....)
- Plays are also included. Nothing against plays, but that's a pretty separate category (and yes, I'd love to see poetry separated out too).
These are my findings after scrolling more or less randomly through this bibliography for less than an hour -- and I can come to no other conclusion than that it is irresponsible to draw the conclusions they did about how many literary works in translation were published in 2000, 2005, and 2008 from this. With a little teasing -- weeding out those duplicates, those kids' books, etc. -- the data can yield better results -- it is a great foundation -- but no one should claim 4.5 or whatever per cent of UK/Irish literary publications were translated .....
This bibliography is actually a great starting point (though there are also issues of what isn't listed here -- I note, for example, two 2005 volumes from the Clay Sanskrit Library (NYU Press) are listed, but the several additional titles that came out in 2008 are missed), but it needs a lot more work than was performed on it to yield any truly useful data (weeding out duplicates would seem to be the minimum; as the totals in the language tables in the report proper show, not even that was done).
Honestly, the way this subject (and the data) is treated (i.e. manhandled) drives me nuts. I'm seriously considering applying for an NEA (or NEH ?) grant to do a proper count and study .....
Meanwhile, do me a favor and do not spread the oh so wrong word that 4.5 or whatever percent of all UK/Irish literary titles are translations. (Don't say it's three percent either .....)
Please.