From a semiotic perspective, translation can be understood as the interpretation and mediation of signs across diverse communicative systems. This view opens the possibility of examining how translation might operate beyond strictly human linguistic exchanges. Within literary discourse, representations of non-human communication may thus be seen as symbolic forms of interspecies translation that offer a possible window onto the minds of non-humans. However, such representations remain partial, inevitably filtered through anthropocentric modes of perception and expression.
In this sense, the translation of non-human voice becomes a central concern within eco-translation, closely linked to the rehabilitation of non-human subjectivity and the recognition of the human-non-human difference. Yet scholarly attention in translation studies has focused almost exclusively on human voices, leaving the translational representation of non-human agents largely unexplored. This panel therefore seeks to examine how non-human voice can be conceptualized from post-anthropocentric and non-anthropomorphic perspectives, and how translation might engage ethically and creatively with non-human expression.
To promote discussions, I have selected four panelists for a 13-minute presentation each and a 15-minute discussion led by Edith Adams, an expert in eco-translation, who will introduce each presenter, organize Q&A, and concluding remarks.
We will begin with Ji’s paper, “From Sounds to Words: Translating Animal Voice in Literature”. This paper explores how animal voice is translated through representations of interspecies communication in works such as The Art of Racing in the Rain (2008) and Being a Beast (2016). Drawing on eco-translation and biosemiotics, it conceptualizes translation as a semiotic mode of environmental dwelling across perceptual worlds. Through comparative analysis of French and Chinese translations, it identifies strategies such as onomatopoeic intensification, sensory reframing, and syntactic decentering that mitigate anthropocentrism and foreground nonhuman expression. These strategies re-sensitize language to the rhythms and materiality of the non-human world, enabling a more embodied, multisensory ecology of meaning and advancing practical approaches to representing animal voice in translation.
Adams’ “Can Trees Talk? Opacity and Umwelt in Language of Trees” engages recent work by Robin Wall Kimmerer, Suzanne Simard, and Toby Kiers, which suggests that trees communicate through mycorrhizal networks in ways that exceed human perception. The paper asks a cross-disciplinary question: what might interspecies translation look like if it preserves the source’s umwelt while acknowledging what remains inaccessible? Through a close reading of Language of Trees, which translates diverse texts into a Tree Alphabet, and guided by the concept of Umwelt, the perceptual worlds of different beings, it argues that the anthology models an ethical eco-translation by preserving difference through productive opacity.
Ngoi’s “Translating the Impossible Animal: Xu Zhimo’s Chinese Translation of ‘The Tyger’ ” considers how non-human voice emerges through the concept of the “impossible animal,” a voice that resists representation in human language yet compels reflection on literary form and translation. Xu Zhimo’s 1931 translation exemplifies this tension: while Blake stages a human speaker questioning the tiger, Xu’s version softens its fearfulness, abstracts imagery, and slows the rhythm, producing a more indeterminate voice. This indeterminacy confronts China’s inchoate identity around the May Fourth and New Culture Movements. Drawing on eco-translation theory, the paper foregrounds the limits of interspecies legibility and their political implications within human semiotic systems.
Wang’s “Translating Care: Tibetan Cosmological Ethics and More-Than-Human Relationality in Tseden’s Snow Leopard” examines how the film renders nonhuman voice through Tibetan Buddhist ethics. The snow leopard’s voice is understood as a broader mode of address—encompassing perception, affect, gesture, and relational presence—through which the animal appears as a communicative, sentient being. By emphasizing the leopard’s reciprocal gaze, the film stages interspecies recognition as both an affective and ethical encounter. Wang argues that these cinematic strategies render non-human voice legible as relational address, thereby unsettling anthropocentric assumptions about more-than-human communication.
These presentations explore the non-human voice in translation from various perspectives, including semiotics, ethics, and practical strategies of translation. They reflect the post-anthropocentric shift in understanding the human-non-human relationship. Scholars from various universities, including graduate students and professors, will discuss the topic in English, Chinese, Tibetan and Spanish contexts. The goal is to build a panel that encourages audiences to question eco-translation and embrace non-human voices in translation studies.