Entry | Genre and translation

contents
Introduction - The origins of the concept | Textual genre from the point of view of translation studies | Macro-genre, sub-genre and meta-genre | Research potential

Introduction - The origins of the concept

	The better our command of genres, the more freely we employ them, the more fully and clearly we reveal our own individuality in them (where that is possible and necessary), the more flexibly and precisely we reflect the unrepeatable situation of communication—in a word, the more perfectly we implement our free speech plan.
	Mijail Bajtín (1986: 80)

	At their most basic level, genres are formed in order to carry out actions and purposes.
	Christine M. Tardy & John Swales (2014: 166)

The study of genre dates to Aristotle's Rhetoric. However, we can say that the concept began to be used in its modern sense at the end of the 19th century. Since then, many disciplines have studied it: rhetoric, anthropology, literary studies, audiovisual communication and applied linguistics (Monzó 2002), which has resulted in a diversity of theoretical conceptualisations due to these different starting points. The starting point can be traced back to Bakhtin's (1979) insights, within stylistics, on the concept of discursive genre, as a relatively stable set of utterances, linked to a social sphere. This description of the concept had a significant influence on discourse studies (Ciapuscio 1994). Nevertheless, the discipline in which, undoubtedly, the greatest developmental research took place, and which had a significant influence on translation studies, is that of applied linguistics.

Within this discipline, the studies of the Australian School, or Sydney School, and those of the North American School, or New Rhetoric, stand out (Tardy & Swales 2014). Both schools have in common the explicit recognition of the prevalence of the social aspect in the understanding of genre and the fundamental role of context (Freedman & Medway 2004). However, while the former, strongly influenced by Halliday's Systemic Functional Grammar, focuses on explaining the textual characteristics of genres [without neglecting, however, their social and communicative purpose (Martin 1984)], the North American School focuses its attention on the analysis and typification of the rhetorical actions used in recurring communicative situations (Miller 1984) and on the sociological and ethnographic aspects of communication (García Izquierdo 2011).


John Swales. Source

Alongside these two schools, it is important to highlight the fundamental role of the research carried out in the field of language for specific purposes, especially by Swales (1990) and his disciple Bhatia (1993). For Swales (1990: 58), whose work is influenced by Aristotle's Rhetoric, functionalist approaches, sociolinguistics or discourse analysis, genre relates to a class of communication events in which the participants share a set of purposes, which are recognised by the expert members of the discourse community. Moreover, each example or manifestation of a genre has shared patterns of structure, style, content, and a shared prospective audience. If all expectations are met, the piece is regarded by the discourse community as a prototype. This is despite the fact that, as Orlinowski & Yates (1994a: 5) claim, a particular manifestation of a genre need not reflect all the rules that constitute the genre in order to be considered a genuine prototype of the genre. Bhatia (1993: 16), a disciple of the aforementioned author, insists on the conventional nature of genres and on the need to analyse them from a "socio-critical" perspective, taking into consideration the socio-cognitive restrictions that can be produced in the studied field and taking into account the socio-pragmatic space in which the professional genres invariably function (Bhatia 2002, 2012).

According to him (1997: 27), genres have several characteristics that make them dynamic, creative, and versatile that are linked to organisational differences, strategies for achieving similar genre purposes, etc. Any expert genre writer "needs to have sensitivity to inter-and cross-cultural constraints operating on genres across national, cultural and ethnic boundaries" (1997: 31).

Moreover, when it comes to defining this category, we must take into consideration the existence of different levels of realisation of the category, especially in the fields of specialisation. According to Bhatia (1997: 29), the versatility of the genres used in professional fields leads to the existence of generic frameworks with different levels of realisation (genre, sub-genre, sub-sub-genre, etc.).

Along with the levels of realisation, it is also useful, again for explanatory purposes, to use labels that allow us to group them according to different types of relationships. Broadly speaking (since conceptual differences can sometimes be deeper and more complex than it may seem at first sight, Spinuzzi 2004), following the main representatives of these approaches, we can establish the following types of relationships:

Systems of genres (Bazerman 1994). Or interdependent genres represented in typical related sequences whose purpose and form are the same. A system of genres captures the regular sequences in which one genre follows another in the typical communication flow of a group of people (Bazerman 2003: 464). Therefore, the concept refers to the genres involved in the same communication process (e.g., the genres involved in a judicial procedure will form a system). In a similar way Orlinowski and Yates (1994 a and b) define the repertoire of genres, or group of genres recognised by groups, organisations, or communities to accomplish their work, with acknowledged communicative purposes in relation to their audience. In a similar way Orlinowski & Yates (1994 a and b) define the repertoire of genres, or group of genres recognised by groups, organisations, or communities to accomplish their work, with acknowledged communicative purposes in relation to their audience. For these authors, genre systems, like individual genres, provide a specific community with expectations about the purpose, content, form, participants, and time and place of an interaction

Colony of genres (Bhatia 2004: 59), or groups of closely related genres that clearly serve similar communicative purposes, in the case that they serve more than one; and which do not necessarily share the same disciplinary field (e.g., the informative, pedagogical, instructional, normative genres, etc., would form colonies). This concept is similar to that of genre set, suggested by Devitt (1991).

The translator, therefore, as we shall soon see, in his role as an expert writer, will have to be well acquainted with them and take them into account. Moreover, all these perspectives will influence the studies carried out in the field of translation, as a discursive activity.

Textual genre from the point of view of translation studies

	There are, in fact, quite large numbers of genres that operate to support and validate the manufacture of Knowledge.
	John Swales (1996: 46)

	Genology, in its application to translation, could be considered as a unifying platform where linguistics (pragmatics, sociolinguistics, discourse analysis, textual linguistics, cognitive linguistics, systemic functional linguistics), semiotics, cultural studies of translation, philosophy, psychology, anthropology (cultural, cognitive) would come together.
	Esther Monzó Nebot (2003: 9)

It was not until the 1970s that the concept of genre began to be considered as relevant in translation studies (Bassnett & Lefevere 1990). Although the notion of it was introduced by the German functionalist School (Holz-Mänttäri & Vermeer), based on the concept used in applied linguistics, there is no doubt as to the importance of the studies of the North American School, and especially those of the Sydney School (Halliday, Martin, Matthiessen...), as well as the research carried out in language for specific purposes (Swales, Bhatia) in the field of translation.


	Anna Trosborg. (stiften.dk)

Although in the early days of research the concept was linked to the so-called "linguistic approaches", from the 1980s onwards new studies began to develop in the field of translation which incorporated elements from different schools of analysis in their definitions, this means that we can find insights on this category in studies from different schools of thought. As Baker (2000: 26) argues, once the early reluctance has been overcome, perhaps the time has come to give up some of our unproductive assumptions about clear-cut divisions in the discipline.

Therefore, and despite the fact that most of the reflections on genre were developed within the so-called "textual approach" - for some, wrongly so (Aragonés 2009), since it is an analysis that clearly goes beyond the textual barrier - we can assume that the polyhedral nature of genre, which we mentioned above, allows us to approach its analysis, at least in part, from any of the other approaches (sociocultural, cognitive, semantic, etc., cf. Monzó 2003, García Izquierdo 2005) or from a variety of theoretical schools (functionalism, Polysystems Theory, School of Manipulation, etc.) or from a diversity of theoretical schools (functionalism, Polysystems Theory, School of Manipulation, etc.).

We shall focus, however, on the ideas developed by the representatives of the Textual Approach, whose studies, far from dealing only with the system, will deal with questions such as the function of the original text (OT) and the target text (TT), the stylistic function of internal elements of the text, communicative factors (sender, receiver, conditions of exchange) or the intercultural nature of translation. Some of the most outstanding representatives of this approach in translation studies who have analysed the concept include Hatim & Mason (1990), Trosborg (1997) and Schäffner (2002).

The contribution by Hatim & Mason (1990) has been one of the most influential in the Spanish-speaking world. In their opinion, genre, according to scholars of audiovisual communication (Kress 1985) and systemic functionalists (Martin 1985), is defined as: “Genres are ‘conventionalised forms of texts’ which reflect the functions and goals involved in a particular social occasion as well as the purposes of the participants in them”.

Within the semiotic dimension of context, genre is therefore conceived as a concept in which formal aspects (conventionalised forms), sociocultural aspects (social occasions) and cognitive aspects (purposes of the participants) converge. This triple dimension, as we have already pointed out, will be crucial for understanding the complexity of genres in different languages and cultures. Consequently, it is conceived as an additional element in the description of context.

Trosborg (1997, 2000) follows an eclectic definition of genre, combining the considerations of Systemic Functional Linguistics with those of language studies for specific purposes (mainly the studies of Swales and Bhatia) and some aspects of pragmatics and stylistics. According to Trosborg (2000: 15), genre is a culturally determined category, an activity in which speakers engage as members of a cultural community, for specific purposes (Martin 1984); a superordinate category of register, which shows the overall purpose of communicative interaction. However, in her opinion, any analysis of genre from the perspective of translation must be able to capture its multiple purposes, both the expected ones and the less acknowledged ones, and thus respond to the expectations of the recipients. After all, as Bhatia (2002: 7) states, genres are constructed in each communicative occasion or ceremony, and their relevance must therefore be taken into account, since it is on the basis of this that the discursive means can be created to achieve new communicative purposes. In his characterisation, then, following closely the approach of the systemic functionalists, genre and register are considered as closely related categoriesSchäffner (2002: 4), leaning closer to the New Rhetoric approach, introduces a new consideration into the analysis: the sociological determination of the activities in which genres are involved. Although she defines it in a rather similar way, as “conventional, typical combinations of contextual (situational) or communicative-functional, and structural (grammatical and thematic) features”, she points out that genres reflect the actual, conscious and situationally appropriate choice of linguistic meanings, and adds that "they are involved in sociologically determined communicative activities" (2002: 4). She criticises Trosborg for the fact that her conception of genre does not correspond exactly to its widely accepted meaning in translation and interpreting studies (TIS), because, unlike other authors such as Hatim & Mason (1990), she does not consider genre as a semiotic notion linked to the mode of discourse. However, as Lee (2001) points out, there is more consensus on the definition of the category than the users of the category themselves consider, and there are many overlapping characteristics attributed to it from apparently conflicting approaches.

Overall, as we have seen, genre is a category that can be used in any field of communication, since it is a collective product, the result of each specific communication circumstance and, therefore, any form of conventionalised and culturally determined text, regardless of its field (specialised or not) in which the communication is inscribed, can be considered a genre (García Izquierdo 2007). However, some experts consider the concept of genre to be particularly relevant in the field of specialised communication. This is because there are certain variables that determine the structure of genres that are more specific to specialised communication. Mainly, we are referring to the discipline in which they are involved, the degree of conceptualisation and abstraction, and the scope of the communication they provide. In this sense, then, the category proves to be particularly productive in the field of specialised translation. Therefore, Hurtado (2001: 491) states that "to translate, or to teach how to translate, texts specific to each social and professional field, it is necessary to know the rules that regulate them. This is particularly evident in the case of specialised texts (technical, scientific, legal, etc.), as they are more standardised and stereotyped texts with very fixed conventions”.

In the Spanish context, the Gentt research group (García Izquierdo 2005) suggested a classification of genres in specialised communication in which, despite the clear influence of the work of Hatim & Mason (and therefore of the Sydney School), there is also an influence from other trends of analysis, such as the analysis of genre in language for specific purposes or sociology. Therefore, within the framework of this group's research, we find definitions such as the following one:

Genres are the communication units of a community. They consist of a synthesis of prototypical discursive situations and manifestations that represent an inherited knowledge and a means of acceptance of the different communities. [...] They are, of course, a mean for the transmission of content through discursive means in which the situation of the interlocutors in the community in which they participate can be appreciated.

(García Izquierdo & Monzó 2003)

From this definition we can see the importance of the discourse community (Swales, Aragonese), which is particularly in the case of specialised translation. Moreover, the fact that we must view genre from a cultural perspective shows that it is a means of socialisation (the social figure of the translator only has a raison d'être within the discursive community in which he or she is part of) (Martin 1982, Monzó 2002 & 2003, Aragonés 2009). Otherwise, in the words of Berkenkotter & Huckin (1995:7), knowledge of genre, rather than being explicitly taught, is transmitted through enculturation or socialisation into the ways of speaking of specific disciplinary communities.

The main difference between Gentt's proposal and the proposals reviewed so far lies in the place that the category occupies in the analysis. Thus, genre is seen as a category in which all textual and contextual matters that are relevant to the analysis of translation converge. And, following this principle, the model proposed in García Izquierdo (2002, 2005) shows that the analysis begins and ends with genre. García Izquierdo (2011) therefore advocates for a genological model of textual analysis of translation, in which genre, far from being just another category within the model, becomes the backbone of it.

Generally speaking, we can say that, regardless of more or less explicit wordings, most of the studies state that this category functions as a link between the text and the context and stress the need for a multidimensional characterisation of the concept. However, it is important to stress that the translator's categorisation of genre should always be based on observable factors, determined by the actions of the users of the language (Monzó 2002: 105). Furthermore, despite the conventional and recurring nature of the concept, the dynamism and possible hybridisation of the category (Bhatia 2002; Aragonés 2012), mentioned above, should be taken into account in any analysis, avoiding as far as possible prescriptive considerations and prioritising the characteristics of the context and the assignment over fixed characterisations. Any attempt to establish a taxonomy of genres will be inevitably restrictive (García Izquierdo 2009) and should only be considered for explanatory, informative or didactic purposes.

Macro-genre, sub-genre and meta-genre

As far as the levels of execution are concerned, they will have to be considered when analysing and systematising the reality of specialised translation. Let us recall that specialists in communication studies for specific purposes proposed the distinction between genre systems, which are usually related to specific field cultures; and genre colonies, which transcend disciplinary boundaries.

In the context of specialised translation, the Gentt team suggests the concept of macro-genre (García Izquierdo 2009), similar in its conception to that of a colony of genres, which does not refer to a tangible reality, but is only a label that pursues an organisational purpose and which in no case can be considered as defining of the genres that are included in it, since, as we have seen, they shall be classified according to many other parameters. Macro-genres are therefore abstract categories that attempt to organise the "map" of written communication in each field. Basically, it is a denomination that allows us to group the genres of a speciality according to their specific fields of use within the speciality and their main purpose. For example, within the medical field, we can find informative, clinical, or advertising macro-genres; or in the legal field, normative or pedagogical-didactic ones.

This labelling therefore allows us to systematise the information related to genres in our work languages. Sometimes, however, they will manifest themselves at a specific, but restricted, level of realisation. For such cases, we can use the label sub-genre, or genre which is at a lower level of realisation than genre, determined by the specific domain and which is not applicable in all cases - not all genres have subgenres (Ezpeleta 2012).

As a matter of fact, there are genres in which there is a single level of realisation, and therefore do not derive in sub-genres; and others in which, despite the high level of overlap (purpose, participants, etc.) there are slight differences which must be represented: let us consider, for example, the report genre, which, in addition to presenting a clear trait of hybridism (since it can be found in the legal, technical and medical fields), also has different levels of realisation (sub-genres). In the medical field, for example, we will find clinical reports, examination reports, preoperative reports, etc. As a result, the translator must be aware of these genre developments, from an intra- and interlinguistic perspective.

The concept of meta-genre "considered as tools for stabilising practices which rule the flow of information and the way it has to be provided" (Ezpeleta 2012: 329) for genres such as regulations, norms, etc., which help us understand the context in which some genres are produced is also of interest.

One final interesting distinction is proposed by Hatim (2001: 140), who reframes the concept of genre to distinguish between two different levels of abstraction: translation of the genre (understood as a macro-sign in whose framework the translator will judge the adequacy and in which syntactic, semantic, pragmatic and semiotic aspects are manifested); and translation as a genre (in terms of the extent to which a translation represents everything that the translated material is supposed to look or sound like). So far, as is easy to deduce, the considerations we have made would fall into the first category.

In Hatim & Mason's view (1997:11) "[t]ranslators' choices are constrained above all by the 'brief' for the job which they have to perform, including the purpose and status of the translation". Given the fleeting nature of this activity, the definition of genres is presented as an opportunity to reduce the progressive internalisation of conventions by (future) translators, who would otherwise have to get to know them in an unsystematic and ineffective way. This is despite the fact that "[g]enres are created naturally and spontaneously as the occasions for exchanging points of view within an institutionalised reality are repeated" (Aragonés 2009).

To conclude, translators must develop, in parallel to their translation competence, their multilingual and multicultural expertise on genres, which will define their professional identity and will be crucial for them in practice to act as interlinguistic and intercultural communicators (Montalt and García Izquierdo 2002). Depending on the fields of specialisation in question, the translator will encounter different types of restrictions that will have to be resolved through said expertise, and only through this can they acquire the appropriate writing and translation strategies.

Research potential

Based on what has been said above, it is clear that the use of the concept of genre reduces the cognitive effort in both the production and reception of texts and therefore, greatly simplifies the translator's task. This fact has led in recent years to the need for further research into the analysis of this category in the languages and cultures involved in translation, especially in the case of specialised fields, since genre is considered to be the most useful and practical level of categorisation (Lee 2001, Hurtado 2001, García Izquierdo 2007, 2012, 2016).

Many studies in the field of translation studies have used this concept in teaching and research, both from a theoretical and applied approach As a result, we are witnessing an increasing number of studies, both in Europe, Latin America and the United States, which highlight the usefulness of the concept in research.; to the specific didactic proposals, presented at conferences and applied in the classrooms of many universities, which show the links between the characteristics of genre and translation competence development (Montalt, García Izquierdo & Ezpeleta 2008); and the demand for a specific research methodology involving genres (Borja, García Izquierdo & Montalt 2009), which allows for an in-depth study of the formal aspects of texts in the languages and cultures in question (e.g., the analysis of grammatical and especially lexical interference in specific genres); in the analysis of the specific communicative situation of text production (e.g., the problems derived from the different power relations or educational levels existing between the participants in the act of communication (sender-receiver) in different cultures); and in the analysis of the specific communicative situation of text production (e.g., the problems derived from the different power relations or educational levels existing between the participants in the act of communication (sender-receiver) in different cultures: expert vs. expert - expert vs. non-expert, etc.); or the differences in the level of normalization and use - tradition - of genre in the cultures involved, etc.) or their cognitive load (we can interpret genres as templates of arguments and concepts which are repeated more or less regularly in the texts which represent them. In this way, we can find distinctions between the genres of the original language (OL) and term (TL) in terms of their cognitive load or conceptual complexity and, therefore, differences in interpretation requirements depending on the addressees (relevance expectations). A methodology that allows us to combine theoretical approaches (contrastive textology, textual approach, cultural approach, cognitive approach...) and different methods of analysis (quantitative and qualitative), and which helps us to understand the complex nature of the reality and therefore the need to understand genre as a unit, despite the fact that, for research interests and for explanatory purposes, we can compartmentalise its analysis. An example of this mixed methodology are the projects developed by the GENTT research group in recent years and, specifically, the group's most recent project (2019-2022), the HIPÓCRATES project, in which they mix corpus analysis methodologies and the creation of document management tools with surveys, interviews, focus groups or role playing with actors to simulate real situations with a didactic or research purpose.

However, there is still a long way to go to define this category in different languages and cultures, both from a synchronic perspective (the predominant one so far) and a diachronic one, since genre is not unaffected by socio-cultural changes; and to offer, on the basis of contrastive characteristics (formal, communicative and cognitive typification), more or less stable patterns of behaviour that will facilitate the task of specialised translators and editors. The main issues that a translator may encounter include those arising from the existence of genre asymmetries in the working languages/cultures. Thus, depending on the context and the translation assignment, the translator:

(a) will face the conflict over whether to translate following the generic conventions of the TL, the generic conventions of the OL, or adopting a specific compromise solution for that translation (what some authors -Monzó 2002- have defined as a transgenre);

(b) will have to choose an equigeneric or intergeneric translation (García Izquierdo and Montalt 2014), both intra- and interlinguistically, in order to respond adequately to the requirements of communication in specific contexts, depending on whether it is necessary to maintain the same genre or opt for a different one (or a compendium of several); or c) will have to be able to respond to new communicative needs, for example, the emergence of “hybrid” genres, which may combine features of different domains (which do not necessarily coincide in the OL and the TL).

Ultimately, genre is presented as a category that makes it possible to reconcile traditionally exclusive approaches and to obtain a comprehensive view of the functioning of texts and their translation into different languages and cultures.