Introducción

Sexualidad y Escritura (1850-2000) is a collection of thirteen essays which focus on the complex relationship between gender and writing in Spain from 1850 to 2000. This collection aims to provide a specifically Spanish cultural and historical context to the study of gender and writing and to challenge the effectiveness and validity of applying and adapting some feminist theory (based mainly in French and Anglo literary traditions) to works by both male and female Spanish writers. The introduction sets the tone of the essays it contains by discussing the Gilbert and Guar’s concept of female authors anxiety of authorship, and the reasons why their notions of the male dominated writing profession does not necessarily apply to Spanish literature of the nineteenth century in particular. The notable presence and success of female writers during the Romantic period and the way in which they in effect managed to feminize the writing profession illustrates how very different the Spanish literary context is from French, English or American models. The editors state that, rather than needing to work up the courage to take up the pen and publish their works, the issue facing Spanish women writers during parts of the last 150 years has been how to either maintain or regain their authorial voice and their place in letters, fighting to keep their heads above the rising and falling tides of literary trends.

Traductoras gallegas del siglo XX:reescribiendo la historia de la traducción desde el género y la nación

Within the newly established field of Galician Studies, Feminist Theory has played a major role in revealing how women have contributed to the development of the Galician cultural polysystem. However, it is my contention that the translative facet of many women translators has not yet received enough critical attention. Therefore, within the framework of a growing interest in the roles played both by women and by translation in the development of societies, this article seeks to explore the history of translation in the context of Galicia, with a view to underscoring the contributions of women translators throughout the 20th century. The aim of the article is twofold: firstly, to offer an overview of translators such as Mercedes Vázquez Fernández Pimentel, Mari Luz Morales, Teruca Bouza Vila, María Barbeito, Amparo Alvajar, Xohana Torres, and Teresa Barro, in order to open up new areas for research so that subsequent studies can further examine their contributions in more depth. Secondly, it seeks to analyse the power relations which inform the activity of translation both from a gender and national approach.

Talking at cross-purposes? The missing link between feminist linguistics and translation studies

Following decades of feminist linguistic activism, and as a result of a greater awareness of the vital role that non-sexist language plays in achieving social equality, different campaigns were launched in many countries leading to a more frequent use of so-called inclusive language. Bringing this together with current theoretical approaches to translation studies which have been defining translation as an ideological act of intercultural mediation since the 1990s, this article seeks to examine to what extent feminist linguistics have had any influence on translation studies. My purpose is to assess whether particular feminist linguistic interventions in vogue when writing ‘original’ texts within the realm of the source language are also adopted when (re)writing ‘translated’ texts in the target language, bearing in mind the double (con)textual responsibility that translators have towards the source and the target (con)texts. I will examine the arguments for and against the use of inclusive language in (literary) translation through an analysis of the ‘ideological struggle’ that emerged from two ideologically disparate rewritings of gender markers into Galician of the British bestseller The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time, by Mark Haddon (2003), focusing on the ideological, poetic and economic pressures that (still) define the professional practice of translation. It is my contention that the close scrutiny of these conflicting arguments will shed light not only on the existing gap between the theory and practice of translation, but may be also indicative of a possible ‘missing link’ between feminist approaches to linguistics and to translation studies.