Translation Studies Orientations: A Case Study on Asian and European Journals

The present study aimed at determining whether there existed any significant differences among different Translation Studies (TS) research areas in Asian as well as European journals. This study focused on the twelve main areas of TS listed by Williams and Chesterman (2002). To do so, six TS journal (three Asian and three European ones) were selected based on simple random sampling. Then, out of each journal, twenty articles were selected through simple random sampling. Having determined the corresponding TS research areas, each paper was placed in one of the twelve listed research areas. The results of the frequency analyses showed statistically significant differences among the frequencies of TS research areas in Asian and European journals (p ˂0.05). While the most frequent research areas in Asian journals were ‘Translator Training’, ‘Interpreting’, and ‘The Translation Process’, the most frequent research areas in European journals were observed to be ‘Genre Translation’, ‘Text Analysis and Translation’, ‘Translation History’, and ‘The Translation Process’ The results also revealed that ‘Multimedia Translation’ and ‘Terminology and Glossaries’ were among the least frequent research areas, both in Asian and European journals.


Introduction
Translation Studies (TS) is defined as the field of study devoted to describing, analyzing and theorizing the processes, contexts and products of the act of translation as well as the (roles of the) agents involved (Williams & Chesterman, 2002). Throughout the history, TS has been regarded as an inter-disciplinary field of science. This was a common view about TS, especially during 1980s (Snell-Hornby, 1995). As Munday (2008) believes, it has been less than a century since the emergence of TS as an academic discipline.
On the other hand, research is defined broadly as a "systematic investigation towards increasing the sum of knowledge" (Chambers, 1989, p. 845). One would also agree with Gillham (2000, p. 2) that "research is about creating new knowledge, whatever the disciplines". Innovation is vital if a discipline is to grow and prosper. However, the definition of 'new knowledge' varies according to the level at which the research is undertaken. An essay at advanced B.A level will clearly differ in scope from a doctoral dissertation. Creating new knowledge can consist in summarizing new research in an emerging field or providing a very small amount of new evidence to support or disconfirm an existing hypothesis at one end of the scale, to developing a new methodology for translation history at the other. The aim of TS research is therefore to make a contribution to the field which increases the sum of our knowledge. According to Williams and Chesterman (2002), one can make his/her contribution in a number of ways. These are:  By providing new data;  By suggesting an answer to a specific question;  By testing or refining an existing hypothesis, theory or methodology; and,  By proposing a new idea, hypothesis, theory or methodology.

Statement of the Problem
Concerning TS, there are many issues to be investigated. One would be in favor of comparative research programs, when mostly a Source Text (ST) is compared to a Target Text (TT) within a defined context (e.g., Vinay & Darbelnet 1958, Catford 1965. Others might be oriented towards conducting correlational researches to figure out the relationship between two or more variables, the impact they have on each other, their levels of significance, and so on and so forth. All these studies are done with the aim of delving into a specific problem in the science of translation and their conductions seem crucial to the existence of this new field of science. In this regard, many studies are being carried out in different countries of the world. However, these studies might possibly differ in terms of their nature, methods, objectives, etc. According to Toury (1995), there might be many factors influencing these choices. Thus the present study will aim at investigating the orientations of different countries towards the science of translation through reviewing their TS journals. In fact, to figure out where the countries under investigation would stand in terms of their views about TS is the main purpose of this study.
As for some Asian countries, the pace of knowledge distribution seems to have been slower, compared with European and American countries. Machine Translation (MT), interpretation, translation as a profession, ethics in translation, etc., are some of the examples of modern TS growing in the advanced countries each and every day (Williams & Chesterman, 2002). These issues seem to have been neglected in Asian countries like Iran. In line with the brief introduction presented on the trends of TS, there remains a debating issue: To what extent do different countries of the world differ in terms of their orientations, achievements, etc., in TS? In other words, what are the basic differences between Asian countries on the one hand, and European countries on the other? In this study, TS research areas in different countries will be investigated. To this end, a detailed framework will be used, namely Williams and Chesterman's (2002) areas of TS, discussed on the methodology section. In addition, only the journals related to TS will be chosen as the corpus of the study.

Significance of the Study
The present study will aim at investigating the tendencies of TS within different countries of the world. This will be carried out with special reference to two continents (i.e., Asia and Europe). This topic enjoys a new methodology. In this regard, a number of issues are listed as follows:  Firstly, the scope of this research is related to two continents which, in turn, will present the readers with a more extended list of results and findings. Broadening the aims and scopes of a research program could possibly 'present more generalized data' (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2007, p.113).  Secondly, the orientations of Iranian researchers could be compared with those of other countries including Asian on the one hand, and European on the other. This could help Iranian researchers, professors, students, etc., in their decision makings while trying to select a topic in TS.  Thirdly, the most and the least worked areas in TS will be investigated in different countries under study, which will be done through a recent model presented by Williams and Chesterman (2002).
There are other issues making this study significant: few studies with similar frameworks and methodologies have been carried out inside Iran. In other words, no systematic comparison has been made among Iran and abroad. Hence, the present study is assumed to contribute well to TS researchers.

Objectives of the Study
The followings are the most addressed objectives of the present study:

Review of Literature
As mentioned before, throughout the history of translation, many models and frameworks have been introduced. Each of these models would tend to review a specific problem in TS. The first and the most systematic approach to TS was a classification made by Holmes (1988). Although the original work by this scholar was presented in 1972 in a conference in Copenhagen, it was not widely publicized until 1988. Holmes (1988) divided TS to 'pure' and 'applied' branches. The pure branch was subdivided into 'theoretical' TS on the one hand, and 'descriptive' TS on the other. While the former would deal with different theories generated in TS and thus would try to explain how TS should be, the latter would try to describe the phenomenon of translation and its related issues through explaining how TS was (cited by Munday, 2008). These main branches had in turn some sub-categories. The theoretical branch was, for instance divided into 'general' and 'partial' theories of translation, while the descriptive one was divided into 'product-oriented', 'process-oriented' and 'function-oriented' TS.
Holmes' (1988) work on TS roughly considered the applied branches of TS. In this regard, Toury (1995) tried to offer a complete overview on the sub-branches of applied TS neglected by Holmes (ibid.). To this end, Toury (ibid.) divided applied TS to three main branches including 'translation aids', 'translation criticism', and 'translator training'. Each of these branches was then sub-divided into some other narrowing categories. Hatim (2001) was another scholar to challenge the areas of research in TS by offering a complete overview of TS research topics and methods. However, he did not show the inter-disciplinary nature of TS compared to the areas of research and research methods listed in The Map (Williams & Chesterman, 2002). In another study carried out by Lan et al. (2009), the research results in journals and theses published between the years 2002 and 2008 from Taiwan and abroad were compared with the aim of extracting the similarities and differences of the focuses and the methods of research between Taiwan and abroad. The results of the work in question revealed that the research methods employed in these areas were similar and that translation theories were used to analyze and solve the phenomena and problems in translation. Also, a great number of theses in translation were meant to be 'translation with commentary'. While the authors of foreign publications would have more spirit and confidence to challenge existing theories and they were more willing to use the results of other scientific research to describe and explain translation phenomena and even to solve the problems. The results also suggested that the 'multimedia translation', 'translation and technology', 'translation history', 'translation ethics' and 'translation profession' were the areas to be worked in future based on the classifications made in The Map (Williams & Chesterman, 2002).

Materials
Three Asian TS journals along with three European ones were selected to be studied. These journals were chosen in a way to represent the continent they were being published in. In addition, in order to have a control over the probable effect of time, the researchers chose the articles published between 2003 and 2013. Therefore, a period of ten years was studied in this work, concerning both Asian and European journals. Another important issue left to be mentioned is about the frequency of TS journals. Unlike other language-related fields of study such as Linguistics, Teaching English as a Foreign/Second Language, etc., the number of TS journals are very limited. This fact is more supportive for Asian TS journals, as compared with European ones. Table 1. describes these journals:

The Model Used
Within the present work, Williams and Chesterman's

Data Collection Procedure
Twenty articles out of each journal were selected through random sampling. Generally, in each issue, there were about fifteen to twenty papers. However, it was different from journal to journal. In justifying the data collection procedure, these articles were chosen among the ones published between the years 2003 and 2013. In other words, a ten-year period of research in the so-called countries was investigated. Having gathered the data, each paper was given its own branch of TS research based on Williams and Chesterman's (2002) classification. Finally, the adhering branches of the articles published in Asian journals were summed up together in order to make a representative sample for this continent. The same procedure was carried out for the European articles.

Data Analysis Procedure
Having found the frequencies of each of the twelve main branches in TS research based on Williams and Chesterman's (2002) model, the differences among the frequencies of the so-called branches will be statistically tested. This was carried out through conducting several Chi-square tests, using SPSS software. The results and findings were then presented and further discussed. Each research question was separately addressed, too.

Results and Findings
This study aimed to target three Asian, as well as three European TS journals. These included Translation Studies, Chinese Journal of Translators and Compilation and Translation Review as the Asian ones. Likewise, Target, The translator and Across Languages and Cultures were selected as the European samples. Having selected the journals, the data were collected. Appendix 1 shows the title of each article studied, along with its corresponding research area in TS. The frequency of each research area in TS based on Williams and Chesterman's (2002) model is presented in Table 2 In order to understand the differences better, the researchers presented the results related to the collected data in a bar-graph, too. This is available in Figure 1., as follows: To see whether the differences among the research areas in each continent held any statistically significant differences, the researchers used the Chi-square procedure. In this regard, the test was carried out among pairs of each research area frequencies in different journals. It is important to mention that the areas with the frequencies of 0 were automatically omitted by the SPSS software. This means that the differences among these pairs have been observed to be statistically significant. These research areas included 'Terminology and Glossaries' on the one hand, and 'The Translation Profession' on the other. In addition, the areas with the similar frequencies in both Asian and European journals were not considered. For this study, there was only one research area detected to be so, i.e., 'Multimedia Translation' with the frequency of 1 in both continents. The results of the testes related to the other nine research areas are as followings:

Text Analysis and Translation
Concerning 'Text Analysis and Translation', the frequencies of related articles were observed to be 3 and 8 for Asian and European journals respectively. First, Table 3. provides a comparison among the frequencies of each journal type: To see whether the differences were of any statistical significance or not, the Chi-Square test was conducted. Table  4. presents the results of this test: As the results of the Chi-Square test revealed, in 'Text Analysis and Translation' research area, there did not exist any statistically significant differences among the frequencies of Asian and European articles (p>0.05). Table 5. contains some basic information on the frequencies of the articles in both Asian and European journals. These frequencies were observed to be 4 and 1 respectively. In order to find out whether the differences were of any statistical significance or not, the Chi-Square test was conducted. Table 6. presents the results of this test: As the results of the Chi-Square test showed, in 'Translation Quality Assessment' research area, there did not exist any statistically significant differences among the frequencies of Asian and European articles (p>0.05). Likewise, Table 7. contains some basic information on the frequencies of articles in both Asian and European journals. These frequencies were observed to be 3 and 12 respectively.

Genre Translation
In order to figure out whether the differences were of any statistical significance or not, the Chi-Square test was conducted. The results of this test are shown in Table 8., as follows: According to the results of the Chi-Square test, concerning 'Genre Translation' research area, there existed statistically significant differences among the frequencies of Asian and European articles (p˂0.05). Therefore, it could be stated that the frequencies of the Asian and European papers in this research area were observed to be statistically significant.

Translation and Technology
The same procure was carried out for the 'translation and Technology' research area. Accordingly, table 9. contains the basic information related to the Chi-Square test. It is important to mention that the frequencies of this research area were 5 for Asian and 3 for European journals. The Chi-Square test was then conducted as follows: Based on the findings of the Chi-Square test showed in table 10., in 'Translation and Technology' research area, there did not exist any statistically significant differences among the frequencies of Asian and European articles (p>0.05). Total 14 Table 11. shows the researchers' concern in terms of the differences within 'translation History' research area. The frequencies in question were 6 for Asian, while 8 for European journals. With insights from the results of the Chi-Square test presented in table 12., in 'Translation History' research area, there did not exist any statistically significant differences among the frequencies of Asian and European articles (p>0.05). Table 13. shows the basic statistics on the Chi-Square test applied by the researchers. This test was done with special reference to 'Translation Ethics' research area: As shown in table 13., the frequencies of the papers were observed to be 3 and 6 for Asian and European journals respectively. Accordingly, the following table shows the results and findings of the Chi-Square test. With insights from the results of the Chi-Square test presented in table 14., in 'Translation Ethics' research area, there did not exist any statistically significant differences among the frequencies of Asian and European articles (p>0.05).  Table 15. presents the basic information on the Chi-Square test applied by the researchers. This test was done with special reference to 'Interpreting' research area:

Interpreting
As illustrated in table 15., the frequencies of the papers were observed to be 10 and 6 for Asian and European journals respectively. Accordingly, the following table shows the results and findings of the Chi-Square test. With insights from the results of the Chi-Square test presented in table 16., in 'Interpreting' research area, there did not exist any statistically significant differences among the frequencies of Asian and European articles (p>0.05).

The Translation Process
The basic information on the Chi-Square test applied by the researchers concerning 'The Translation Process' research area is shown in the following table: As demonstrated in table 17., the frequencies of the papers were observed to be 9 and 8 for Asian and European journals respectively. Accordingly, the following table shows the results and findings of the Chi-Square test. With insights from the results of the Chi-Square test presented in table 18., in 'The Translation Process' research area, there did not exist any statistically significant differences among the frequencies of Asian and European articles (p>0.05).

Translator Training
Finally, the researchers tended to investigate the differences among the frequencies of Asian and European journals with insights form 'Translator training' research area. The frequencies related to these articles were 16 and 4 respectively. Some basic information are shown in the following table: Total 20 In order to figure out whether the differences were of any statistical significance or not, the Chi-Square test was conducted. The results of this test are shown in Table 20., as follows: According to the results of the Chi-Square test, concerning 'Translator Training' research area, there existed statistically significant differences among the frequencies of Asian and European articles (p˂0.05). Therefore, it could be stated that the frequencies of the Asian and European papers in this research area were observed to be statistically significant.

1. Discussion on the First Research Question
As the results of the study revealed, generally, there were statistically significant differences among the frequencies of Williams and Chesterman's (2002) TS research areas, comparing Asian and European journals. Among the twelve research areas presented by Williams and Chesterman (2002), four of them were observed to hold statistically significant differences (p˂0.05). These areas included 'Genre Translation', 'Terminologies and glossaries', 'Translator training', and 'The Translation profession'.

2. Discussion on the Second Research Question
As the findings of the study revealed, 'Genre translation' was the most frequent research area in European TS journals. This held the frequency of 12. Likewise, 'Text Analysis and Translation', 'Translation History', and 'The Translation Process' shared the fact of being the second most frequent research areas (f = 8).
The findings of the work supported Yuan and Tang's (2007) study who carried out a frequency analysis of the titles of 1610 articles in three different journals including "Shanghai Journal of Translation", "Chinese Translation Journal" and "Chinese Science and Technology Translation Journal". The results of their data analyses showed that in order of popularity, translation trends in china focused on the issues of 'translation', 'English', 'research', 'English translation', 'culture', 'theory', 'translation studies', 'interpretation', and 'technology' between the years of 2001 and 2006. The paper also pointed out the trends in certain areas.

Discussion on the Third Research Question
Based on the findings of the study, 'Translator Training', 'Interpreting', and 'the Translation Process' were the most frequent research areas in Asian journals. These areas were observed to have the frequencies of 16, 10, and 9 respectively. The

Discussion on the Fourth Research Question
The second and the third research questions tended to deal with the most frequent TS research areas based on Williams and Chesterman's (2002) classification. In contrast, the fourth and the fifth research question aim to deal with the least frequent research areas of TS based on the model in question. In other words, the most neglected research areas were targeted in these two research questions. As the findings of the study showed, 'Terminology and Glossaries' held the frequency of 0 as compared with the other eleven research areas. Thus, it could be stated that this research area seems to have been neglected by European scholars and researchers. The second least frequent areas were 'Translation Quality Assessment' and 'Multimedia Translation', both with the common frequencies of 1.

Discussion on the Fifth Research Question
According to the findings of the study, the 'Translation Profession' was the least frequent research area in Asian journals (f = 0). In addition, 'Multimedia Translation' and 'Terminology and Glossaries' shared the common frequency of 1.

Translation Studies Orientations: A Case Study on Asian and European Journals
Based on the observed data, 'Multimedia Translation' and 'Terminology and Glossaries' were among the least frequent research areas detected both in Asian and European journals. This might be possibly due to the reason that these types of research in TS have lost their popularity during the short developing history of TS. In other words, several different studies on the issues of multimedia translation along with the notion of terminologies and glossaries have been conducted to date. For example, the concept of equivalence was a core topic of discussion during the 1960s and 1970s (Newmark, 1988). Nowadays, other topics are being investigated. Therefore, it would not be surprising to see that these two research areas are being neglected, both in Asian and European journals.
All in all, the framework of the present study was in accordance with the one carried out by Liao (2007). In that study, the researcher reviewed eighteen interpretation-related theses between the years 1991 and 2004 in addition to forty-six papers related to the same area

Conclusions and Implications
The present study aimed at investigating the tendencies of TS within different countries of the world. The work carried out with special reference to two continents of Asia and Europe. As the scope of this research was related to two continents, it presented the audience with a more extended list of results and findings. As mentioned in chapter one, broadening the aims and scopes of a research program could possibly help the researchers in presenting more generalizable data' (Cohen et al., 2007). Secondly, throughout the research, the tendencies of Iranian researchers could be compared with those of other countries including Asian on the one hand, and European on the other. This could help Iranian researchers, professors, students, etc., in their decision makings while trying to select a topic in TS. Thirdly, the most and the least worked areas in TS were investigated in different countries under study, which was carried out through a recent model presented by Williams and Chesterman (2002). The list of findings of the study is presented as follwings: • As the findings of the study revealed, within the twelve research areas in Translation Studies (Williams & Chesterman, 2002), only four of the research areas held statistically significant differences, comparing Asian with European journals (p ˂ 0.05). These areas included:   The Translator's Aphasia and the Missing Link in Translation Teaching 11