• SUVANNABHUMI
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.157-175
• /
• 2020

This paper presents the work of Southeast Asian scholar Ramon Guillermo. Using sophisticated computer-aided methods, Guillermo approaches a range of topics in the wide fields of social sciences and the humanities. A creative writer as well as an activist, Guillermo grounds his studies in nationalism and Marxism. Particularly interested in Indonesian and Philippine society and culture, Guillermo engages with the writings of labor leaders Tan Malaka and Lope K. Santos, translations of Marx's Capital into Bahasa and Filipino, and studies as well the discursive and historical connections between the Communist Parties of both countries. The paper aims to introduce the innovations of Guillermo's studies, particularly in the fields of cultural studies and translation studies. The type of cultural studies Guillermo practices is empirical, taking inspiration from innovations done in the digital humanities. Guillermo is most opposed to trendy, fashion-seeking approaches that are not grounded on history. He reserves particular ire for "hip" postcolonialism, and instead praises studies that are founded on politics and materialism. In translation studies, Guillermo goes beyond the mere cataloguing of mistakes. For him, it is the mistakes and "perversities" of a translation that is interesting and illuminating. Guillermo himself is a translator, and the paper ends with a brief discussion of his production in this field.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.17 no.10
• /
• pp.657-666
• /
• 2017

This paper explored contrasting responses of the press and the academic circle to The Vegetarian, the 2016 Man Booker International Prize winner, and delved into the controversy over its faithfulness to Han Kang's Ch'aesikjuuija. In the comparison of Han Kang's Ch'aesikjuuija and Deborah Smith's The Vegetarian, many mistranslation cases have been found in The Vegetarian. This paper is meaningful in that it did not stop at discussing translation errors in The Vegetarian but probed the cause of Smith's mistranslation and that it identified The Vegetarian as an English localization text, instead of a translation text. This paper concludes with a discussion of the achievements of The Vegetarian as Smith's rewriting of Ch'aesikjuuija and makes suggestions as to what translators and the academic world can do for the reader and the English translation of Korean literature in the future.