Translation Studies: Function of Naming Systems

• Translators need to understand that texts function within interlocking systems.

Translation Studies

• As an example, Cathy Porter's translation of Alexandra Kollontai's "Love of Worker Bees" includes a note explaining the Russian naming system, which includes a first name, patronymic, and surname.
• The customary mode of address is first name plus patronymic, but there are also intimate abbreviations with subtle overtones.
• However, despite this explanation, Porter retains the variations of names in the translation, which can be confusing for the English reader.
• The SL system has been transported into the TL system, obstructing the reading process.
• Boris Uspensky shows how the use of names in Russian can denote shifts in point of view.
• The translator needs to consider the function of the naming system rather than the system itself.
• English reader needs to be aware of the function of each variant.
• Examples exist in: dialect forms, translation of regional linguistic devices.
• Robert Adams humorously suggests retaining French elements in translation to maintain the Parisian setting.
• Notion of sameness between SL and TL must be discounted.
• Translator needs to determine the function of the SL system and find a TL system that adequately renders that function.
• Levý raises questions about stylistic devices, linguistic standards, style, and the audience.

Translating Dramatic Texts

• Theatre translation is a neglected area, with limited material available compared to the study of poetry translation.
• Theatre text cannot be translated in the same way as a prose text, because the full potential of the text is realized in performance.
• The challenge for the translator: decide whether to translate the text as a literary text, or as an element in another (more complex) system.
• The linguistic system is only one component in a set of systems that make up the spectacle.
• A distinction between text and performance has led to the literary text gaining a higher status.
• Supremacy of the literary text has led to perception of performance as merely a 'translation.'
• Ubersfeld shows danger: written text → single right way of reading/performing text → translator is bound more rigidly to a pre-conceived model.
• Written text is a functional component in the process that comprises theatre and is characterized in specific ways.
• Jiří Veltrusky highlights that dialogue unfolds in time and space and is always integrated in the extralinguistic situation.
• Robert Corrigan, argues that the translator must hear the voice and take into account the 'gesture' of the language, rhythm and pauses.
• Peter Bogatyrev argues that linguistic expression is part of a larger system in theatre.
• If the plays need to be performable, something different has to be done compared to the translation of other texts.
• Idea of an extra dimension to the text still creates a distinction between the idea of the text and the performance.
• The theatre text contains structural features that make it performable and the translator needs to translate those into the TL.
• The problem is complicated by changing concepts of performance.
• Acting styles vary in different countries/contexts.
• Racine is an example of determining theatre text translations.
• It's possible it's translated singly, for a volume of complete works, or as part of a collected 'complete plays'.
• A "complete plays" volume is for reading.
• Performance must be taken into account to account for Bogatyrev's description of the expression as a whole.
• The difficulty of translating for the theatre has led to criticism that attacks the translation as too literal or too free.
• Quote about the shift in gestural patterning between SL and TL.
• Ben Belitt's translation made ideological changes and alterations through an over-emphasis of external criteria.
• In line from Phèdre there are semantic, syntactic, and stylistic problems emerge/difficulties by considering audience.
• Translators of the line into English emerge: three different translators create different translations (Cairncross, Lowell, Harrison).
• The different versions translate intentions but also each have different key factors, relationships, and stylistic levels.
• Jean-Louis Barrault noted that the opening line of Phèdre matched the rhythms of Hippolyte's footsteps, with emphasis and a climax.
• Translations also have to transfer the function of linguistic meanings and the signs of theatre.
• The first English version of Racine had a preface claiming the translation failed not to translation or verse, but audience reception.
• Ambrose Phillips' version become very successful, so Phillips adapted the text.
• Philips adapted the play by shortening it, adding speeches/scenes.
• Quote about keeping up with beauties and doing no prejudice to liberties.
• Philips criteria: playability, relationship to theatres of his day, clarity.
• He restructured English audience and restructured the play.
• One scene was modified by Phillips to follow English trends, remove certain dialogue, modify certain lines, etc..
• Phillips established a hierarchy in which written text is adaptable to live performance.
• Tony Harrison's translation moved away from Greece.
• Harrison's plays also discuss disparate world systems.
• Harrison translates Memsahib speaking of India's dark passions.
• Good example is comparing his view with Robert Lowell’s of the same scene.
• Version from Robert Lowell expand with explanations in relation to audience.
• Harrison makes a combination in comparison to Lowell.
• The scene is in motion, although there are differences in translation.
• Movement is the whole key in this comparison.
• The scene is on a new complex dimension for theatre translation, for the text is a sole element of discourse.
• Language is the sign in a network (what Thadeus calls auditive/visual signs).
• Since the text is for voices, the text also carries text sets.
• Includes the subtext as well.
• So it is a context, a code, the pattering, the movements that are the most important parts.
• The translater has to take risks.
• What concerns is the function of translation.
• Functions are operating at all levels.
• Therefore a central consideration must be its aspects.
• Suggestions are to justify any modifications to the original.
• Must consider the function as an element of performance.