Figure 11 - uploaded by Christina Delistathi
Content may be subject to copyright.
1 The 1933 edition of the Communist Manifesto by the KKE: front cover. Source: Αρχεία Σύγχρονης Κοινωνικής Iστορίας (ΑΣΚI) Digital Archive with kind permission.
Source publication
![Table 11 .2 Translation of the SL term Stände [orders] in different TTs](profile/Christina-Delistathi/publication/265071411/figure/tbl2/AS:667783314546695@1536223357498/Translation-of-the-SL-term-Staende-orders-in-different-TTs_Q320.jpg)
Similar publications
![Fig. 3. Best results on the MotorMark [13] dataset. For each triplets...](profile/Matteo-Fabbri/publication/329313122/figure/fig2/AS:723262220824576@1549450559065/Best-results-on-the-MotorMark-13-dataset-For-each-triplets-of-images-Leftmost-the_Q320.jpg)
Rec(2008)12 про релігійний вимір і нерелігійні переконання в інтеркультурній освіті) націлені на пояснення природи і завдань цієї галузі освіти. «Дороговкази» йдуть значно далі, пропонуючи поради для розробників освітньої політики, шкіл (зокрема вчителів, керівників шкіл та шкільних рад), для тих, хто займається підготовкою вчителів з усіх питань,...
Citations
In 1951, the Communist Party of Greece published a Greek translation of the Selected Works of Marx and Engels which included a statement on the work practices followed for its creation. This article considers work practices as processes of validated knowledge production. It investigates how they were enacted to create the 'correct' translation of Marxist texts, and advances our understanding of the relationship between social structures, power, and processes of validated knowledge production. It argues that the party's col-laborative, centralised, and professionalised organisational model alongside mechanisms of surveillance and discipline of agents in translation supported its claims of owning the 'correct' interpretation of Marxism. The statement on the work practices was intended to influence the publication's reception: the reader was encouraged to accept the party's translation as accurate. Adopting a Foucauldian perspective, the investigation draws on party publications and archival material to study translation work practices in novel ways.
Despite the centrality of translations in introducing Marxist ideas, we know little about the agendas that shaped them. This paper investigates how reviews of translated Marxist theoretical texts, issued between 1927 and 1934 by the Communist Party of Greece, were utilised in a struggle to appropriate Marxist discourse from its rivals. Drawing on Foucault’s procedures of discourse control, and calling attention to power struggles among forces with counterhegemonic ideas, the paper analyses the party’s rules and conditions under which it was legitimate for a translator to carry out a translation and for the translation to enter political discourse. It will be argued that political tensions triggered changes in reviewing practices and efforts to renew translation quality criteria. These tensions shaped contemporary debates on the correct interpretation of Marxism and helped advance the party’s position (a) by calling on readers to disregard earlier translations issued by political rivals; (b) by constructing its own translations as truth-objects; and by fashioning itself as the gatekeeper of Marxism. Studying translation reviews allows us to extend our understanding of the complexities of discourse formation, to trace the history of discourses, to document how knowledge can be a resource in power struggles, and to understand how power struggles can recast discursive practices.
