The evolution and development of ecotranslatology studies based on the analysis of CiteSpace mapping knowledge domains

Western translation studies have undergone several shifts in perspective (linguistic, cultural, sociological), leading to broader research angles. Ecotranslatology, emerging in East Asia at the start of the 21st century, further expands this scope to an ecological perspective, enriching research breadth, depth, and scope. This study aims to comprehensively understand the research landscape, academic groups, research hotspots, and differences between domestic and international research in ecotranslatology over the past 21 years using CiteSpace for visual and analytical purposes.

Chinese translation studies have progressed from imitating Western theories to developing its own systems, with ecotranslatology being a significant example. The theory's origins trace back to Hu Gengshen's work in 2001 and 2004. Key concepts like "translation as adaptation and selection," "translator-centeredness," and "translational eco-environment" have been established, but the field faces challenges and criticisms. While applied in various areas (literary, subtitle, cultural, political translation), concerns about "imposed interpretation" and theoretical limitations exist. Prior reviews mainly used qualitative methods; this study employs CiteSpace for a more objective, quantitative analysis.

Data were collected from CNKI (domestic) and Web of Science (international). For CNKI, keywords like "adaptation," "selection," and "ecotranslatology" were used. For Web of Science, "eco-translation," "eco-translatology," "translation ecology," and "ecological translation" were used. The time frame was 2001-2022. After data cleaning and deduplication, 2721 documents from CNKI and 69 from Web of Science were used. The data was divided into three stages based on publication trends: theoretical founding (2001-2008), theoretical development (2009-2014), and application and revision (2015-2022). CiteSpace was used for visual analysis of author co-occurrence, institutional co-occurrence, and keyword co-occurrence networks. Python was used for additional data analysis and summarization of author and institutional statistics.

CiteSpace analysis revealed a prominent research group around Hu Gengshen in China, but limited collaboration and diversity among other researchers. The research focus evolved from theoretical foundations to application, but quantitative and comparative studies remain scarce. Key international keywords included "ecological translation," "translational eco-environment," "adaptation and selection," and "three-dimensional transformation." There's limited collaboration in international research, with most authors being Chinese. Analysis of author and institutional co-occurrence networks across the three stages showed a general increase in participation but relatively low levels of collaboration. Keyword co-occurrence analysis indicated a shift in research focus across the three stages, moving from theory-building to application and revision, though quantitative research remains limited. International research also displayed similar stages but with a slightly different emphasis on keywords. The overall trend for both domestic and international research was a shift from broad theoretical concepts to more focused, nuanced revisions and applications, with a significant lack of quantitative and field-based research.

The findings highlight the dominance of a theory-founding group in Chinese ecotranslatology, suggesting a need for broader participation and collaboration. The shift in research focus reflects a maturing field, but the lack of quantitative studies and field research limits the robustness of the evidence. International research shows a similar trend but lags behind China in terms of both volume and focus on core ecotranslatology concepts. The study reveals the significant influence of Hu Gengshen and his associates in shaping the field's trajectory.

Ecotranslatology has shown significant development, particularly in China, but faces challenges. Future research should focus on increasing international collaboration, enhancing interdisciplinary approaches, incorporating quantitative methods, and addressing existing criticisms of the theory. Further research into the integration of Chinese and Western perspectives on ecological translation is also crucial.

The study's reliance on specific databases might limit the scope of findings. The categorization of research stages is based on publication trends and might not fully capture the nuances of intellectual development. The focus is primarily on China, with international perspectives comparatively less emphasized. More rigorous quantitative analysis could strengthen the findings.