If this is a simple yes or no answer, I'd say yes! But I suppose also that it depends on each interpreter/translator. I'm sure they are 'trained' to become so in countries or institutions which also instil the 'rules' of translation. 

Dear Olha Lehka,

Munday (2004) rightly suggests the significance of cognitive and psychology sciences in translation studies. The works by Boeree (2006) and Coba (2007) demonstrate that translator' personality and cognitive styles play a pivotal role in the translations process.

Best regards,

R. Biria

I think this is linked in some way the notion that translating is somehow fundamentally different from other jobs. First one would have to prove this. Otherwise the assumption is that personality is a factor in professional translating as much or similarly as in any other profession, probably more so than for more "mechanical" jobs (but even that would have to be proven). An interesting distinction (to start with, among others) can probably be found between the different personalities of interpreters and translators of written texts. The next question should be, how can translator training help to enhance positive personality traits and overcome problems of certain personality profiles (e.g. shyness, ideology, social skills, creativity, responsibility, reliability, trust, confidence)? Finally, the origin of the question, going back to my initial thought, probably stems from the surprise (or resistance) some people have in realising that translating is not purely mechanical and cannot be reduced to impersonal objective formulae for how to get from text A to text B. Also, remember that translators have to deal with other aspects of their job apart from finding interlingual equivalences and producing versions of texts. They have to relate with other people, negotiate their contracts, find clients, convince editors and clients of the convenience of some of their decisions, design translation projects, work in teams, etc. Of course, personality is a factor! The question is not IF but HOW, I would say, and how that can affect training and hiring and day-to-day work.

Dear Olha

Apart from translator's competence, yes, personality is a factor. These traits do reveal themselves somehow in the target text. I agree with Patrick, the question we should ask is How. I think this would be an interesting question to ask when studying the style of the translator.

Dear Olha

The answer to this question is intrinsically linked to how the translation function differs from the interpreting function. A translator deals with written text. You should be prepared to spend many hours in "solitude" doing research about relevant issues. Translators translate ideas not words. You must be able to understand what you read in order to find the most suitable words to express those ideas in the target language. Linking this to personality, I would say some of the traits that will be to your advantage as a translator would be your ability to compare data, evaluating it critically and being decisive about the choices you make. A good translator must always be able to convince others about why s/he chose a particular word.

I suppose some of the above also holds true for interpreters, but interpreters do not always have the luxury of preparation time. Most of the time interpreters must be able to "think on their feet". As an interpreter you have to be able to deal with highly pressured and stressful working environments. If you are the type who enjoys an adrenaline rush, it would definitely increase your performance as interpreter.

i think you can do a experiment to test your opinion,first ,control the variable quantity,then,design a strict experiment.Maybe the data can explain everything,thankyou 

First of all thanks for your question, because it is highly intriguing and it implies far reaching consequences.

Well, I think you framed the matter properly in reference to traits, styles, and types. 

But there are, anyway, tow main things striking me in this approach.

1. It is the way we are building an ontology of humans the more and more similar to the ontology of Role Playing Games (RPG), when characters are moulded precisely on their belonging to a given "race", class, type, each of which having specified skills, feats and flaws. (e.g. an elf warrior forest-style of 3d level trained in stealth and acrobatics). 

This RPG ontological structure is intriguing because it derived from analysis of the narrative field, so that you can build up stories just having your narrative world populated by specified chars.

Then, just to be a little "French", we could see the same narrative structure as a dispositif able to mould discourses about itself, and now even about the way stories are translated. The same discourse will be able to cover the story and its translator as a character of the meta-story of its translation.

2. More seriously, I see a paradox in the current opposite trends of translation-studies and literary criticism, especially if we remind Lawrence Venuti praise to dismantle the "myth of the transparent translation". The paradox is that while literary criticism has evolved the more and more leaving aside the "Author", translation studies are growing the more and more focusing on the "Translator".

The final outcome could be a theory where authors, and their intentions, and their lives, are immaterial, whereas the traits and personality of the translator will become central.

Provided that these personalities are not appraised in "subjective" romantic terms, but in the "objective" terms of experiments or cognitive (stereo)types.

Finally a double paradox: from author's to translator's personality, and from a subjective to objective notion of personality.

In response to Pier Giuseppe Monateri's last point I would beg to disagree slightly or realign the point. To say that an author or translator's identity is immaterial is OK from one perspective (text analysis and quality of output). But a translator's personality is an interesting issue and factor even if we argue that a translator's personality should not influence the job, because if we can demonstrate first and foremost that the translator him/herself is a factor (some would dispute that), and we can also show that personality has an influence, then we need to train translator's to inhibit or control certain personality traits and exploit others. To start over, there is a difference between judging translated texts (where personality is so speculative as to be almost useless), and hiring and training translators and interpreters, where one would (legitimately) want to know which questions to ask in a job interview, for example, what to put on the curriculum, what workshops to do in universities or translation companies, etc.

Also, as I mentioned before a transltor's work-day includes other tasks and responsibilities apart from looking for equivalences. A transltor is often a member of a team, of a project, of a company, .... with all that that entails. Interpreters in particular have to deal with many different scenarios that require considerable command of social skills and restraint. All translators work under stress most of the time, and so on. So, it's from this angle, more than from the point of view of text analysis that personality matters. Of course, this is not invalidated by the fact that translators with very different personalities may do the same job equally well in certain cases, and that too is an interesting research question.

Oh yes, but i completely agree with Zabalbeascoa, and especially on his "institutional" concerns. I do not believe in the myth of transparency in translation, and it is rather true that translation must be perceived within its own proper and varying institutional context : a publishing House, the UNO, or the translation of a statute to be enforced throughout the EU.

I would just underlie a paradox of the literary theory, as such.

Maybe in the sense of Paul de Man, having only  theoretical interests.

Thanks.

Dear Olha,

this is indeed an intriguing question. Let me share with you two points:

1. I would strictly separate here professional translation and fiction or literature translation (I am not quite sure, if these are the proper terms for the disctionction), in other words those, who try to get the message as correctly through the language shift, as possible, and those, who need to look at style and individual manners of language-use. I guess in the second case individual character traits will play a more significant role.

2.As for literary translation, literary traditions will become all important, and primarily the tradition of the language into which the translation is done. For there are differences of expectations of "originality" even in the case of translations, in some cultures, while others try to focus on the plain facts, dfirst of all, on the message. In Hungarian literature, for example, there is a strong tradition of translating without the expected loyalty to the work translated, as translation used to be seen as an occasion for shining for the translator.

I wonder if that helps at all, or not,

with kind regards,

Ferenc

Hi Olha!

I'd recommend Birgitta Englund Dimitrova's new research project. You can read about it here: https://www.academia.edu/6482209/Translators_individual_space._Project_description

The project description is in English, but unfortunately I think her publications so far on the topic are only in Swedish. You should get in touch with her though, she's very forthcoming.

Best,

Elisabet

probably not

Yes, personality of a translator and/or interpreter may put its imprint on the "product", but this does not mean this product is subject to change-of-meaning, as compared to the source language text/speech. Indeed, not much has been researched in this field. However, psychometric studies have been made in neurolinguistics, in relation to interpreting skills and techniques. Cf. Trieste School or D. Gile, B. Moser-Mercer et al. 

Thanks a lot for all your invaluable advice!!! I'm very glad that my research idea has generated such a heated debate among scholars across the globe. It means to me that the gap in translator's personality research does exist and, moreover, that it badly needs careful investigation. I really hope that with all your guidelines and suggestions I will manage to contribute to the issue.

Once I have finished analysing my pilot study, I will post a report here.

Thank You very much for Your support!

Hello,

As a researcher, I would recommand reading the following article by Richard RYAN  to answer your question:

https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00701889/document

As a translator, I would say the question is a bit too general. You see what I mean after reading the article. There are so many different kinds of translation jobs and situations; and they all need different skills and are likely to attract one kind of people or another.

Good luck with your study

I also believe that translators' identity and habitus affect on translation strategies.

Dear Olha,

In my PhD dissertation, I worked on the impact of cognitive style on cognitive processes, ranging from low-level perception, to high-level decision making, and finally to language comprehension.

I have to say that yes, the cognitive style works significantly. Yet, I could not predict whether personality would play its significant role in interpreting. Since personality is very much multi-dimensional, and probably we need to focus on some specific dimensions to gradually move forward in this area of research.

Good luck with your research.

Best,

Junying

Please take a look at my work on the poem Tam o' Shanter by Robert Burns, which is very relevant to your question. There is a translation and an article about the translation challenges.

There is also a performance on Youtube - I recite my own translation (so translator as performer with a personal style).

You are welcome to use my work in your teaching and research.

Here it is.

* a new translation of Tam o' Shanter, which you will find on Youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-nBVIHJIAE

* a monograph on the influence of Old Norse on the poem

* a short article about the translation

* a slide set of the translation

All found here:

https://hcommons.org/members/markperkins/

I think it does:

First, depending on their personalities, translators are going to feel attracted to one type of translation or another, be it literary, pragmatic, specialised or technical. Which does not mean, prefering one type of translation means someone lacks the skills to do another one. A lot of translator love literature and make a living in specialised translation.

Second, depending on personality, more or less creative and inventive, translators are going to react to a text and feel more or less freedom to rewrite it, based on their interpretation and readers' reaction.

Third, the way translators do their research may have an influence on their findings. Translators who are perfectly happy with online research, exclusively, are probably not going to find the same answers as translators who enjoy meeting with people and asking questions about their field of expertise when translationg specialised texts.

And perhaps I should have put this first, there is also the choice of a carreer as a translator. Not everyone who has two or three languages has the skills or desire to translate.

Regardless of the kind of texts people end up translating, by choice or necessity, I think they probably share some personality traits and interests, which of course does not mean they are alike!

Hoping this very personal answer may contribute to the debate.