Description of the source and target texts submitted to analysis

The source language texts finally selected are Hungarian argumentative articles from two Hungarian daily papers: Kompenzáció (Compensation) by Ákos Tóth published in the Hungarian daily Népszabadság on 13th March 2008 and Másnap (The Next Day) by Attila Farkas published in the Hungarian daily Magyar Nemzet on 11th March 2008. The two source texts are shown in Appendix 2: both the original copies of the articles as they appeared in the newspapers as well as the texts of the articles featuring line numbers for easier referencing are included.

The two source language articles selected for translation meet all the criteria described in Section 7.2 as detailed below. For easier referencing, the description of the source texts submitted to analysis refers back to the points listed in Section 7.2.

1 The two articles are authentic and were used in the research in an unabridged form, thus excluding the researcher’s manipulative text management.

2 The two articles target political persuasion and are argumentative, which is underpinned by the fact these articles appeared in the Álláspont (Point of View) column

of Népszabadság and in the Nézőpont (Standpoint) column of Magyar Nemzet, respectively. Both columns publish argumentative opinion articles on the most controversial current political issues on a daily basis.

3 The two articles are about an extensively debated political issue. On 9^th March 2008, Hungary held a referendum called the Social Referendum initiated by the major opposition party Fidesz – Hungarian Civic Union and its parliamentary partner KDNP (Christian Democratic People’s Party). The Referendum centred around three questions:

the issue of hospital daily fee and the visit and tuition fees. Voters had to decide whether they agreed that the above fees (payable in excess of regular taxes and health contributions) be paid by those taking health and higher education services. The results of the Referendum showed that the large majority (over 80% with reference to each question relating to the three fees [Országos Választási Iroda 2008]) voted against the fees and urged that they be repealed. The results were a complete defeat for the governing coalition of the Hungarian Socialist Party (MSZP) and the Alliance of Free Democrats (SZDSZ) and marked a huge victory for Fidesz and KDNP. What is more, the Referendum generated considerable tension within the governing parties.

The Referendum was followed by lengthy and detailed political and media analyses of the positions of the governing parties and the major opposition party Fidesz. All the Hungarian dailies and magazines dealt with the Referendum and its results for about two weeks. As for the topics of the two articles selected as source texts, Kompenzáció focuses on the compensation of GPs for the loss of income due to the repeal of visit fees, which were retained by GPs for their services, and the general political consequences of the Referendum, whereas, Másnap deals with the possible political consequences of the Referendum.

4 The two articles were written at a time that was a heated period politically. The considerable tension between the governing parties and the fear that Fidesz might provoke early general elections gave rise to the release of considerable amounts of sentiments and feelings associated with the Referendum. Some regarded the Referendum as an instance of money down the drain and considered it a petty financial issue that voters refused (the position of MSZP and SZDSZ), while others interpreted the results of the Referendum as a clear case of democratic victory over an autocratic decision of collecting money from those who pay for these services anyway in the form of health contributions and taxes (the position of Fidesz and KDNP).

5 The two articles selected as source texts meet the criterion of length: the article

entitled Kompenzáció is 459 words long, while Másnap is 444 words long. This means that the articles are long enough to expound argumentation, are analysable using the Political Bias Screener put forward in the scope of the present undertaking and are translatable for the participants as part of the present research.

6 The two articles come from newspapers that politically oppose each other:

Népszabadság reflects political bias towards the left wing, while Magyar Nemzet towards the right political wing. In fact, Népszabadság mostly airs the views of the left wing Hungarian Socialist Party. On the other hand, Magyar Nemzet calls itself a “civilians’

daily” (polgári napilap) and publishes views associated with the right wing Fidesz. As the two above dailies have the biggest circulation in Hungary (Népszabadság had 116,568 copies sold daily in the first quarter of 2008, while Magyar Nemzet sold 61,089 copies daily in the same period [Matesz 2008]), these papers reach the largest possible Hungarian audiences. This means these newspapers have the biggest circulation in the Hungarian media market and are possibly designed and written in a way that they influence a large number of readers, i.e. voters in a political sense.

7 In terms of the phrasing of the source texts, it must be noted that they contain several phrases and expressions that are deeply rooted in Hungarian culture and the contemporary Hungarian political climate and thus cannot be rendered with the help of word-for-word translation. Therefore, it is expected that such translations will contain explicitation, which describes and draws on the cultural and political background of these texts. This is likely to yield political bias and facilitate the reproduction of ideology surfacing in the target texts. Such expressions in the source texts, for instance, are tetszettek volna... (sentence 24) in the article entitled Kompenzáció; or Őszödi Böszme (sentences 10 and 16), szocialista törzsközönség, latinovitsi fokon (sentence 17),

„Nincs a teremtésben vesztes, csak én” Bánk báni szólamot (sentence 17) in the article entitled Másnap.

With reference to the target texts, it must be noted that the translations of the source language articles show similar characteristics to those of the target texts. As Tirkkonen-Condit’s (1985) analyses have shown, the translations of argumentative texts will also be argumentative in nature. As the topics featured in the articles were widely debated and as the Referendum had quite long-stretching political effects in the Hungarian domestic political life, most probably memorable for the translators too, the translations are likely to be effected by political and emotional factors, which are prone to surface as political bias and reproduction of ideology in the target language texts.

As the two source texts reflect two opposing political sides, translators, affected by

the above political factors, have the opportunity to either purposefully or inadvertently manipulate the translations in favour of either political side. Lastly, the length of the translated texts, though it is a bit longer than that of the source language texts (between 585 and 680 words), is still manageable in terms of the current testing of the analytical tool developed in the current undertaking.

It can thus be concluded that the Hungarian articles selected adequately function as source texts within the scope of the first testing of the Political Bias Screener and that the target texts are also adequate for the same purpose.