Cross-Cultural Rewritings: Postcolonial Trauma in English-Language Adaptations

Thesis Abstract

This study investigates how postcolonial trauma is refracted, negotiated, and reconstituted through English-language adaptations across diverse cultural contexts, addressing the persistent gap in comparative analyses of trauma narratives in translated and adapted literature and media. The central aim is to examine how cross-cultural rewritings mediate memory, identity, and power relations, thereby shaping contemporary understandings of colonial histories. Specific objectives are (1) to analyze the tonal and narrative shifts that accompany adaptation, (2) to identify recurring tropes of trauma in source texts versus English-language adaptations, (3) to assess audience reception and interpretive variance across three cultural regions, and (4) to theorize a model of trauma translation that integrates postcolonial and translation-studies frameworks. The research combines textual analysis with reception data to illuminate the politics of telling and retelling colonial violence. The study adopts a mixed-methods design, anchored in postcolonial theory (Edward Said, Homi Bhabha) and trauma studies (Dominick LaCapra, Cathy Caruth) with a supplementary framework from translation studies (Law, Venuti). The population comprises twenty contemporary literary and media adaptations from non-English source works that have been re-scripted, re-narrated, or re-styled for English-speaking audiences between 1990 and 2020. A purposive sample of five primary adaptations from distinct postcolonial regions (South Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa, the Caribbean, Southeast Asia, and the Middle East) will be selected, with a comparative corpus of ten English-language reviews, critical essays, and audience-response data. Data collection instruments include (a) a coding framework for thematic shifts and narrative strategies derived from thematic analysis, (b) textual-structural analysis rubrics assessing voice, focalization, and agency, (c) reception data gathered from peer-reviewed articles, book reviews, social media discourse, and reader-response surveys (n=300 respondents), and (d) interviews with five editors or translators involved in the adaptations to illuminate decision-making processes. Validity and reliability will be addressed through triangulation across textual, reception, and interview data, intercoder reliability checks (Cohen’s kappa > .80), and pilot testing of the coding scheme. Analytical methods will include thematic analysis for trauma motifs (rupture, erasure, survivance), discourse analysis to examine power/agency dynamics, and comparative content analysis to identify shifts in agency and subject position between source texts and English adaptations. Additionally, regression analysis will test whether specific narrative strategies (e.g., testimonial framing, metafictional self-reflexivity) predict higher levels of reader perceived trauma salience in reception data (p < .05). A conceptual model of trauma translation will be proposed, integrating postcolonial subjectivity and translation ethics to explain how adaptation practices either perpetuate or challenge colonial memory hierarchies. Key expected findings include (1) systematic patterning of trauma representations that intensify, complicate, or partially translate trauma depending on cultural mediation; (2) evidence that English-language adaptations frequently reframe trauma through survivorship and resilience tropes, altering blame and culpability; (3) notable variation in reception correlating with readers’ cultural proximity to colonial histories, media literacy, and prior exposure to postcolonial discourse; and (4) confirmation that translator/editorial choices significantly shape trauma visibility and ethical responsibility. The study contributes to knowledge by offering an integrative framework for analyzing cross-cultural rewritings of postcolonial trauma, bridging literary criticism, translation studies, and reception theory. It develops a transferable methodology for comparative trauma analysis in adapted English-language texts and media, with practical implications for editors, translators, and educators aiming to mitigate retraumatization while fostering critical memory work. The conclusion will argue for principled guidelines in adaptation practice that foreground ethical representation, intercultural dialogue, and inclusive reader positioning, and recommendations will include developing a standardized trauma-translation rubric and fostering collaborative translation-practice workshops to enhance reflexivity among editors and authors.