{"title":"Women's translations of scientific texts in the 18th century: a case study of Marie-Anne Lavoisier.","authors":"Keiko Kawashima","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the 18th century, many outstanding translations of scientific texts were done by women. These women were important mediators of science. However, I would like to raise the issue that the 'selection,' which is the process by which intellectual women chose to conduct translation works, and those 'selections' made by male translators, would not be made at the same level. For example, Émilie du Châtelet (1706-1749), the only French translator of Newton's \"Principia,\" admitted her role as participating in important work, but, still, she was not perfectly satisfied with the position. For du Châtelet, the role as a translator was only an option under the current conditions that a female was denied the right to be a creator by society. In the case of Marie-Anne Lavoisier (1743-1794), like du Châtelet, we find an acute feeling in her mind that translation was not the work of creators. Because of her respect toward creative geniuses and her knowledge about the practical situation and concrete results of scientific studies, the translation works done by Marie-Anne Lavoisier were excellent. At the same time, the source of this excellence appears paradoxical at a glance: this excellence of translation was related closely with her low self-estimation in the field of science. Hence, we should not forget the gender problem that is behind such translations of scientific works done by women in that era. Such a possibility was a ray of light that was grasped by females, the sign of a gender that was eliminated from the center of scientific study due to social systems and norms and one of the few valuable opportunities to let people know of her own existence in the field of science.</p>","PeriodicalId":35959,"journal":{"name":"Historia scientiarum : international journal of the History of Science Society of Japan","volume":"21 2","pages":"123-37"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Historia scientiarum : international journal of the History of Science Society of Japan","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In the 18th century, many outstanding translations of scientific texts were done by women. These women were important mediators of science. However, I would like to raise the issue that the 'selection,' which is the process by which intellectual women chose to conduct translation works, and those 'selections' made by male translators, would not be made at the same level. For example, Émilie du Châtelet (1706-1749), the only French translator of Newton's "Principia," admitted her role as participating in important work, but, still, she was not perfectly satisfied with the position. For du Châtelet, the role as a translator was only an option under the current conditions that a female was denied the right to be a creator by society. In the case of Marie-Anne Lavoisier (1743-1794), like du Châtelet, we find an acute feeling in her mind that translation was not the work of creators. Because of her respect toward creative geniuses and her knowledge about the practical situation and concrete results of scientific studies, the translation works done by Marie-Anne Lavoisier were excellent. At the same time, the source of this excellence appears paradoxical at a glance: this excellence of translation was related closely with her low self-estimation in the field of science. Hence, we should not forget the gender problem that is behind such translations of scientific works done by women in that era. Such a possibility was a ray of light that was grasped by females, the sign of a gender that was eliminated from the center of scientific study due to social systems and norms and one of the few valuable opportunities to let people know of her own existence in the field of science.
在18世纪,许多杰出的科学文献翻译都是由女性完成的。这些女性是重要的科学调解人。然而,我想提出的问题是,“选择”,即知识分子女性选择翻译作品的过程,与那些由男性译者进行的“选择”,并不是在同一水平上进行的。例如,Émilie du chtelet(1706-1749),牛顿《原理》唯一的法语翻译,承认她参与了重要的工作,但是,她仍然不完全满意这个职位。对于杜chtelet来说,翻译的角色只是在女性被社会剥夺创作者权利的现状下的一种选择。在玛丽-安妮·拉瓦锡(1743年至1794年)的例子中,我们发现,像杜夏斯特莱一样,她敏锐地感觉到翻译不是创造者的工作。由于她对创造性天才的尊重,以及她对科学研究的实际情况和具体结果的了解,玛丽-安妮·拉瓦锡的翻译作品是优秀的。同时,这种卓越的来源乍一看似乎是矛盾的:这种卓越的翻译与她在科学领域的低自我评价密切相关。因此,我们不应该忘记那个时代女性所做的科学作品翻译背后的性别问题。这种可能性是女性抓住的一线光芒,是由于社会制度和规范而被排除在科学研究中心之外的性别的标志,也是让人们知道自己在科学领域存在的为数不多的宝贵机会之一。
期刊介绍:
Scientiarum is the international journal of the History of Science Society of Japan. It was established in 1962, titled as Japanese Studies in the History of Science, and renamed to the present title in 1980. It is published three times a year, containing articles, notes, documents, and reviews, which are written in English/German/or French.