Document Type : Original Article
Authors
lecturer, Higher Education Complex of Bam, Kerman, Iran
Abstract
Keywords
Introduction
Texts are often viewed as either literary or non-literary, implying that literature should be seen as a large super-genre, with genre being regarded as a category of communication act whose rules are roughly pre-agreed within the discourse community of users (Jones, 2004). As it was said, literary works have its own stylistic features, as well as its semantic richness and nuances of meanings. When the translator chooses a particular reading of the original text, and translates his own understanding or interpretation of it into the target language, much is lost from both those formal beauties and semantic richness of the original text. Translating literary works is always more difficult than translating other types of texts because literary works have specific values called the aesthetic and expressive values. The aesthetic function of work shall emphasize the beauty of the diction, figurative language, metaphors, etc., while the expressive functions shall put forwards the writer's thought, emotion, etc. The translator should try, at his best, to transfer these specific values into the target language (ibid). This paper will present in brief some problems, and considerations in poetry translation as well as the strategies introduced by Lefevere in this regard. So it is going to answer this question: To what extend Lefevere's strategies can convey stylistic features and overcome the socio-cultural discrepancies?
Literary Translation
In literary translation, language has more than a communicative, or social and connective purpose. The word functions as the "primary element" of literature, i.e., it has an aesthetic function. Between the inception and the completion of a creative work of translation, a complex process takes place the "trans-expression" (Pushkin's term) of the life captured in the fabric of imagery of the work being translated. Therefore, the problems of literary translation are within the sphere of art and are subject to its specific laws.
The discipline engagement with literary translation may be summarized from 3 viewpoints:
1- Translation as text: It is the traditional focus on source-target relations.
2- Translating process: Two broad translation studies approaches address this aspect: data-driven, and theory driven.
3- Links with social context: The issues which are central to the real -world context of literary translation are connected with the subject- setting relationship: Ideology, identity and ethics (Jones, ibid).
Poetry Translation
As one genre of literature, poetry has something special compared to the others. In a poem, the beauty is not only achieved by the choice of words and figurative language, but also by the creation of rhythm, rhyme, meter, and specific expressions and structures that may not conform to the ones of the daily language. The translation of poetry needs something more than translating other genres of literature. The central question that all studies of the translation of poetry have asked implicitly or explicitly is whether poetry can be translated or not. In fact, translated poetry plays such a large part in the literature of most cultures that it is taken very much for granted. (Honing, 1985: 1). The meaning of poetryas a figurative languageinvolves the use of metaphor, imagery, prosody, personification, simile, metonymy, and irony.
Some Problems in Poetry Translation
About poetry problems, Suryawinata (1982), finds that in general a literary translator faces linguistic, literary aesthetic, and socio-cultural problems.
In terms of linguistic factors, according to the writer, at least there are two points that should be considered: collocation and obscured syntactical structures. Collocations are of two types: syntagmatic or horizontal, pragmatic or vertical. Syntagmatic collocations consist of making a speech, and running a meeting. The latter consists of words belonging to the same semantic field or be semantic opposite. The collocates in this class may be the same for several languages. Whatever the reason is, where there is an accepted collocation in the SL, the translator must find and use its equivalent in the TL if it exists. However, a closer attention should also be paid to the collocation with similar form in the SL and TL, but different meaning.
The second point to be considered in terms of linguistic matters is obscure syntactic structures. Such kinds of structures may be intentionally written in a poem as a part of the expressive function of the text. Hence, such structures should be rendered as closely as possible.
The first step to deal with this problem is to find the deep structure. According to Newmark (1981: 116), the useful procedure is to find the logical subject first, and then the specific verb. In addition, the structure of each phrase or clause should be examined clearly.
Aesthetic values or poetic truth in a poem are conveyed in word order and sounds, as well as cognitive sense. These aesthetic values have no independent meaning, but they are correlative with the various types of meaning in the text. Therefore, if the translator destroys the word order, the word choice and the sound, he distorts the beauty of the original poem. For example, if the translator provides crude alliteration, he may ruin gentleness and delicacy.
The aesthetic values, according to Newmark (1981:65) are dependent on the poetic structure, metaphor, and sound. Poetic structures have to do with the shape and balance of individual sentences in each line. Metaphor has to do with the visual images created with combinations of words, which may also evoke sound, touch, smell, and taste. Sound is connected with rhyme, rhythm, assonance, onomatopoeia, etc. Although the translator may order them based on the nature of the poem translated, he can't ignore any of them during translation process.
The expressions that contain culturally-bound words create certain problems. The sociocultural problems exist in the phrases, clauses, or sentences containing words regarding the four major cultural categories: ideas, behavior, product, and ecology. (Said, 1994:39).
In translating culturally-bound expressions, translator may apply one or some of these procedures: literal translation, transference, naturalization, cultural equivalent, functional equivalent, descriptive equivalent, etc. None of the mentioned procedures can be applied evenly in different occasions, using each procedure depends on the situation in question. For example the translation of this Shakespeare sonnet "Shall I compare thee to the summer's day" … by an Arab translator is an evident instance of how translator should take socio-cultural adjustments into accounts.
Poetry Translation: Translatability and Untranslatability
The matter of translatability and untranslatability of literary texts is a controversial issue in translation studies which becomes more serious when it deals with the field of translation of literary texts.
One of the prominent scholars who has some words on the concept of untranslatability is Catford (1965, p.98) who believes that “The validity of the differentiation between linguistic and cultural untranslatability is questionable.” So, he proposes two types of untranslatability: 1. Linguistic untranslatability 2. Cultural untranslatability.
Linguistic untranslatability means “failure to find a target language equivalent due to differences between the source language and target language. Some examples of this type would be ambiguity, plays on words, etc…” (Catford 1965, p. 98). Cultural untranslatability due to the absence in the target language culture is a relevant situational feature for the source language text. (Cited in Bassnett, 1988).
One of the scholars who disagree with the concept of untranslatability is Pedro (1999). He elaborates “each linguistic community interprets reality in its own particular way, and this jeopardizes translatability” (1999, p.18). This discussion unfolds the fact that he agrees with Nida and Taber (1969). They claim that “anything that can be said in one language can be said in another unless the form is the essential demand of message” (1969, p.4). Dryden also emphasized that, poetry is translatable. He believes that “to render a poem, the translator should be a poet him/herself.” Dryden himself pays much attention to the style, or formal features of the original poetry. (Cited in Miremadi, 1995, p. 85).
It can be noted that the problem of untranslatability of poetry has had a long held debate, but many poems have been translated by different poets all around the world. In the process of poetry translation a translator may face a number of problems which make the poetry translation more difficult than other texts. Some of those problems are: unit of translation, metaphorical expressions, finding equivalence, and culture bound terms, etc.
Whit regard to this paper the mostly related and similar work can be regarded as follows:
The research done by Shole Kolahi, et al deals with poetry translation. They mention that since poetry is one of the subcategories of literary texts it is worth to say that, in translating literary texts specially poetry there is a great tension between form and content and the act of literary translation is indeed a challenging act in which a poetry translator’s main concern is whether to prefer the form over the content or vice versa. In fact, translating poetry is a controversial issue and there is a major debate on this challenging task in translation studies. They assert that among different scholars who have some words on poetry translation the most famous scholar is Jacobson, who believes that “Poetry by definition is untranslatable, and it requires creative transposition.” (Cited in Venuti, 2000, p.118). But some other scholars like Dryden (cited in Miremadi, 1995, p. 85) argue that all meanings and concepts are translatable and what is said in one language can be conveyed in another language. Many researches are designed to investigate the problems a translator may face during the task of literary, especially, poetry translation.
The mentioned study was conducted to find some problematic issues to be tackled in the translation of poetry. The main aim of the researcher was to investigate the most frequently applied strategies in translating Sohrab Sepehri’s poems into English. The selected framework for the study was Lefevere’s (1975) seven strategies for poetry translation.
The other related works on poetry translation regardless of Lefevere's strategies can be mentioned as follows:
Shilan Shafiei (2012) In her article tries to investigate whether Edward Fitzgerald's English translation of Khayyam quatrains is efficient in doing justice to the true philosophical image of Khayyam and his poems by means of investigating the extent of ideological manipulation applied by Fitzgerald in his translation, and by referring to the fundamental tenets of Post-colonialism.
She analyzed all the quatrains in the first edition of the translation of Rubaiyat by Fitzgerald with their corresponding Persian equivalents and used the ideological manipulation theory of Zauberga as her theoretical framework.
She investigates the key concepts of Khayyam’s philosophy and his poetry and effects of Fitzgerald colonialistic attitude toward Khayyam in his translation. It also revealed that the English translation of Fitzgerald has been subjected to ideological manipulations, and the translator has distorted Khayyam’s true image.
The findings indicated that there was no evidence to show a consistent effort on the part of translator to use any particular translation approach in the process of achieving adequate translation. The result showed that procedures suggested by Newmark have accounted well for the transfer of cultural as well as religious elements; it was observed that Newmark’s range of procedures were comprehensive.
Sobhan Shokri & Saeed Ketabi (2015) in their article sought to find which of the strategies was used more frequently in the English translation of the Persian literary masterpiece "Shazdeh Ehtejab", translated by Buchan (2005). To do so, at first, thirty-four culture-specific items were extracted and then analyzed according to Newmark’s categorization (1988) of culture-specific items. Then, these items were examined according to Aixela’s model of translating culture-specific items (1996), which divides all the strategies into two broader categories of Domestication and Foreignization, to find more frequent strategy.
Strategies for Poetry Translation
In translation studies, there are different theories and methods for poetry translation from different points of view. As an instance, Jones (1989) discusses four different levels or types of translation of poetry: Literal translation, Approximation, Adaptation and Imitation.
Another scholar is Holmes (1988, p.25), who suggests four different strategies to translate the verse form:
1. Mimetic: the original form is retained.
2. Analogical: the cultural correspondence is used.
3. Organic: the semantic material takes on its own unique poetic structure.
4. Deviant/extraneous: the adapted form is in no way implicit of the original.
The other scholar that is the focus of this paper is Lefevere, which will be discussed in details in the following.
Methodology
In the present study, the researchers have chosen Lefevere’s (1975) seven strategies for poetry translation as their framework.
Lefevere’s seven strategies for poetry translation are inclusive enough since they cover all the poetic features: formal and contextual. The literal, metrical and rhymed translation focus on the form of the poems, but the rest of the strategies emphasize on transferring the exact contextual meaning of a poem into the target language.
According to Sen & Shaole (2010), Lefevere’s classification of methods is useful for the cases in which either the source or the target language is English. They also add that the strategies are comprehensive enough and the elaboration on each strategy is well-defined.
Lefevere views poetry as a unified context in which the form, content and aesthetic issues are closely intermingled but all of the issues have their own special value.
The data in this study are analyzed on both textual and extra textual levels according to Lefevere’s model. This study is a descriptive analytical one.
Andre Lefevere in his Seven strategies and a blueprint, focuses on the ‘translation process itself and the influence of context on the original and translation. Not only does he discusses linguistic techniques but also adopts an early descriptive approach taking into account the external influences on translations of ‘time, place, tradition’ to the extent required.
Materials
The corpus of the present study contains the Persian translations of "Aiden Judaea, Behnam Moqaddam, Ali Reza Mehdi poor, Hamid Khademi, Elahi Qomshe'i", regarding "Kurt Cobain, Shakespeare, Robert Frost, Robert Herrick and Shelly's" Poems, and the English translation of Persian verses by "Negar Rejaee", translated by "Anahita Amirshojai", with regard to Lefevere strategies. Below is a list of his comprehensive and modern strategies
Lefevere's Strategies
Phonemic translation
This translation attempts to reproduce the SL sound in the TL while at the same time producing an acceptable paraphrase of the sense. In this type of translation which is more literal and faithful type, each phoneme renders to a phoneme in the target language. This strategy is mostly applied in languages which have similar phonemic systems such as English and French, so it is very rare.
The overall result (in this procedure) is clumsy and often devoid of sense altogether. As it was mentioned, this procedure may be performed across languages with similar phonemic elements, and it is so rare. A case has been mentioned here regarding to the mid nineteenth century which was considered the translation age in the history of Marathi literature.
It was full of translation activity, along with a sizeable corpus of critical material. The contact of English with Marathi has been of long duration, continuous and increasing. The Marathi speaking writers have gained a considerable linguistic competence in the field of English. So, the authors refer to the phonemic translation of Marathi into English as an example:
Source language text Target language text
lkoY; k iMrkr Shadows fall
Hkj nqikjh at the hour of noon
[kqjVysY; k dqCtslkj[; kk stunted like hunch, backed woman
ik; k[kkyh the black cats
vMeMrkr of a witch
vM[kGrkr puddling
psVfd. khph stumbling
dkGh ekatjs under the feet
Literal Translation
It is the case where the emphasis on word-for-word translation distorts the sense and syntax of the original. This strategy may seem unnatural and nonsensical in the target language and culture. In literal translation poetry is rendered to either poetry or prose. The main characteristic of literal prose translation is the preference of the meaning over the form. In this case the translator's main concern is the meaning or content of the poetry. The translation of "Kurt Cobain's poems “Jesus doesn't want me for a sunbeam” & “All apologies”, which are translated by "Aiden Judaea", can be regarded as the literal translation. Some stanzas are mentioned here:
* Sunbeams are not made like me
انوار خورشید برای من ساخته نشده
* Don’t expect me to cry
از من انتظار گریه نداشته باش
*What else should I be
دیگر چه باید باشم؟
* All apologies جز سراسر عذرخواهی
Metrical Translation
Metrical translation is where the dominant criterion is the reproduction of the SL meter. Lefevere concludes that, like literal translation, this method concentrates on one aspect of SL text at the expenses of the text as a whole. In the following, some stanzas of the 26th Shakespeare lyric are given which are translated in the mentioned way by Behnam Moqaddam:
*Sin of self-love possesseth all mine eye گناه خود پسندی دیده ام پوشیده دارد
And all my soul and all my every partهمه روح من و اندیشه ام پوشیده دارد
Prose Translation of Poems
Here Lefevere concludes that distortion of the sense, communicative value and syntax of the SL text results from this method, although not to the same extent as with the literal or phonemic types of translation. The translated text will be void of the formal aesthetics of the original. The 76th lyric of Shakespeare, is translated in this way by an unknown translator:
*Why is my verse so barren of new pride?
So far from variation or quick change?
چرا شعر من از درخشندگی سبک نو و از تنوع یا تغییر سریع این سان به دور است؟
Rhymed Translation
The original poem whether it is rhymed or unrhymed is rendered to the rhymed one. In this strategy the content of poem may be sacrificed for the sake of formal beauty. In the following the same poem mentioned above, (76th lyric of Shakespeare), has been translated by Behnam Moqaddam, and the Robert Frost's poem “The Road Not Taken” by Alireza Mehdi poor in rhymed form:
*Why is my verse so barren of new pride,
زهر سبکی چرا شعرم به دور است
So far from variation or quick change? چرا خالی زهر تغییر و شور است
*Two roads diverged in a yellow wood,
And sorry I could not travel both
And be one traveler, long I stood,
در جنـگلی زرد از خـزان روزی رسـیدم بـر دوراهـی
مـن یـک مـسافـر، راه دو، از دل کـشیــدم سـخـت آهــی
Blank Verse Translation
Again the restrictions imposed on the translator by the choice of structure are emphasized, although the greater accuracy and higher degree of literalness obtained are also noted.
The original may be either a rhymed poem or a poem in blank verse. As an example we can mention Robert Herrick's poem “Rosebuds” by Hamid Khademi:
*Gather ye rosebuds while ye may,
Old time is still a flying;
And this same flower that smiles today,
Tomorrow will be dying...
گل غنچه های سرخ را کنون که می توانی، برچین
اما باز زمان سالخورده در گذر است
و همین گلی که امروز لبخند می زند،
فردا خواهد مرد...
Or the following Persian blank verses of “من و کلاغ ها”translated by Anahita Amirshojai into English blank verses:
به دنبال گمشده ای در خود*
به ملاقات آب و آیینه رفتم
سراغش را از نگاهم گرفتم
آب مواج شد و آیینه نگاه از من دزدید
روحم دارد نم نم زنگار می زند
Looking for a lost ago in myself,
I went to meet the water and mirror
I asked my glance about it
The water became floating,
And the mirror put its glance off
My soul is rusting gradually …
Interpretation
Under this heading, Lefevere discusses what he calls versions and imitations where the substance of the SL text is retained but the form is changed and the translator produces a poem of his own. Here we can mention the translation of Shelly's poem “One and many”, by Elahi Qomshe'i:
The One remains, the many change and pass;
Heaven's light forever shines, Earth's shadows fly;
Life, like a dome of many-colored glass,
Stains the white radiance of Eternity.
آن گوهر یگانه باقی است جاودانه
وین جلوه های کثرت بر خیزد از زمانه
انوار آسمان ها رخشان کند زمین را
تا سایه های ظلمت بگریزد از میانه
نور سپید هستی بر گنبد جهان تافت
صد رنگ شد پدیدار زان گوهر یگانه
Evaluation based on Lefevere's Strategies
As the details of Lefevere’s strategies have been introduced, they must be carefully examined in the evaluation of selected translations of poems. To achieve this objective, each strategy has been examined separately:
Phonemic translation
As we mentioned, phonemic translation emphasizes on sound.
It may include alliteration (assonance and consonance). In the translation of the selected poem, it should be noted that sound is not transferable to the target language the same as source language. According to the Lefevere, the main point of this strategy is that phonemic translation distorts all the other aspects of the source text and reduces it to a curiosity. Fortunately, the translator's performance has not led to this issue.
The phonetic values of words and line-lengths of the poems are not all lost, but the effects of assonance, alliteration, pun and doubting are mostly lost. Onomatopoeia is also partially lost.
Literal translation
Sometimes the literal translation is inevitable. Due to the non-understandable poetic justice, literal translation is traceable in some parts; especially image of ambiguity when words have meaning beyond the close meaning. In the selected translated poems that are mentioned, literal translation can be clearly seen. It utilized the elements of target language to have sufficient literal meaning. It is noted that Lefevere defends the literal translation method as one major strategy that tends to serve translators in comprehending the text at hand.
Metrical translation
The selected and analyzed piece of poetry from Shakespeare relates to the middle ages era, which is iambic pentameter. In the rendering of mentioned poem, metrical translation is considerable in the translator’s performance. People such as Carlyle, Leigh Hunt and Postates believe that poetry cannot be translated into a form other than poetry, for its aesthetic impact is expressed through meter.
Poetry into prose
The selected poem overlaps with metrical translation because it is related to middle ages era poetry, and although scholars such as Mathew Arnold and Helaire Belloc expressed the possibility of translating poetry into prose, it is supposed here that since poetry has its distinctive features, it cannot be rendered into pure prose. Since, as it is observed, in this method no sound-effects are reproduced, although the original metaphor is remained.
Rhymed translation
The type of the selected poem is the same as the previous one, but translator has emphasized on rhymed translation. Rhyme and form are among the most aggravated issues in translation. Some reviewers believe that rhyme in the translation of poem is forced and artificial, since rhyme and form are deeply connected. In the selected poem, translator keeps the rhyme scheme without the loss of meaning. This strategy can mostly be seen in modern poetry appeared in the contemporary period which are dominant of rhymed verses.
Blank verse translation
The primary evaluation of the selected poem showed that translator used this strategy for translating, in spite of the style of the original poem which is related to modernity era and is in rhymed form. Here, the translator has used the fluent and eloquent style near to the original text.
In the selected Persian poem, perhaps as the type of the selected poem has adapted with blank verse, this has led the translator to use this strategy, but the translator has rendered the exact contextual meaning.
Interpretation approach
The examined poem was related to 19th century with the emphasis on religion and pantheism. The translator has used interpretation approach in his translation. He retains the content of the poem and changed the form but within the limitation of content. It can be said that he does not create a new poem. Interpretation is the freest type of translation strategy in translating poetry. The poem has different shape but the meaning is the same as the original one.
Applying this strategy, the translator extracts the main concepts of the original poem and recreates it based on his/her style. Generally speaking some of the Roman poets like Horace imitated Greek poets.
Discussion & Conclusion
It can be noted that the translation of the poems in whatever language, do not create the same response and effect as induced by the original poems’ reader, and the translated versions sometimes lead the readers to the sense of ambiguity.
Although there are several different ways of translating poetry, it would be fair to say that some of them aim to create versions that work as poetry in the target language.
In translating poetry we should pay attention to different kinds of level: phonological levels, linguistic level, aesthetic level, and cultural level.
The cultural level is very important because culture and language are basically interwoven and indivisible that meaning transference is impossible without transference of cultural concepts. Accordingly, any type of translation involves at least two cultures through which peoples will be acquainted with other nations' cultures (Larson, 1984:95).
Sapir (2000: 285) claims that no two languages are similar in representing the same social reality. The worlds in which different societies live are dissimilar worlds indeed. In addition, “no language can exist unless it is steeped in the context of culture” (Bassnet, & Lefevere, 1990: 14). Accordingly, she (ibid) likens language to “the heart within the body of culture,” shedding some light on the fact that “the surgeon, operating on the heart, cannot neglect the body that surrounds it, so the translator who treats the text in isolation from the culture is at his peril.” Hence, one can say that the translator is a sort of a chemist who brings two languages, two minds and two cultures into interaction (Lado, 1957: 111).
When the cultures are similar the translator will not face any difficulty in translation. This is because both languages will have equivalents for the various aspects of the culture, but when the cultures are different, s/he will find it very difficult to get a satisfactory equivalent (Larson, 1984:96). Therefore, the exit from this dilemma is to translate cultural concepts literally, supported by explanatory notes.
If we look at the translated versions mentioned here for each strategy, we can observe that:
With regard to Lefever strategies, it can be said that although he discusses linguistic techniques and descriptive approaches, taking into account the external influences on translations of ‘time, place, tradition’, these strategies take the aesthetic aspects of translating poems into account more than socio-cultural aspects, and they don't pay enough attention to the cultural discrepancies in translation of poem where form and meaning are bounded.
Cultural transposition which is the strategy of finding the cultural homologue of the poetic forms from a culture to the other has not been discussed completely.
In General, Lefevere views poetry as a unified context in which the form, content and aesthetic issues are closely intermingled but all of the issues have their own special value.
Implications
It can be recommended that to achieve the better literary result in the task of poetry translation, and to achieve equivalent effect, it is advantageous to have some special instructions and trainings for the poetry-interested translators. It can be useful for them to know all the existing strategies for poetry translation proposed by different scholars.
)