which a translator has to make wile translating problematic elements such as allusions and invented words from SL to TL (p. 270).” On recreation strategy he also notes; “we took liberty of creating them in places where there where not any, or in places where they did exist but where we could not find near equivalents (p. 270).”
In short, if the translator of allusion is regarded as a decision-making process where the translators should decide what is the most appropriate strategy to use, Leppihalme (1997, p. 124) suggests that all available strategies must be charity and put it priority order such a priority ordering could be based simply on observation and on how translators deals with allusion.
• Omission(I)
Omission, as noted earlier under PN allusion, should be the translator’s last resort, knowing that there are instances. For example: homonymic word play, where no other strategy may be appropriate. This strategy is allowed to be used when the loss caused by an omission is negligible in the context and the use of other strategies would lead to vagueness and obscurity (Leppihalme, 1997, p. 121).
۲.۷.۵. Complication of translating Allusive Texts
Leppihalme (1997, p.110) argued that there are two complicated factors in translating allusive text:
۱. It is probable that the readers of the translation cannot make much of the number of allusions, even if the source is given, because the connotations of those allusions are not activated in the reading process (Leppihalme, 1997, p. 110).
۲. Readers of translations are not a homogenous group, and some of them will probably spot and enjoy allusions if they are given a chance to do so, but will resent being written down to in the form of additional explanations (for an extreme example, not even a translation, see Leppihalme, 1997, p. 110).
Taking this pact into account, this study intends to investigate how the translators of two major English translations of Mantiq ut-Tair have dealt with allusions, namely KPs allusions. But since Mantiq ut-Tair is a poetic text, the researcher felt the need to address the issue of poetry translation a subcategory of literary translation-before proceeding to next chapter.
۲.۸. Poetry Translation
Poetry translation is the most important factor which has been investigates in the present study. As Newmark (1988, p. 163) maintained that poetry is the most personal and concentrated form of texts, in which no redundancy or phatic language is seen. Moreover; he asserted that in comparison with any other type of text, word has greater importance in poetry and is considered as the first unit of meaning while the second one is not the sentence or the proposition but is the line. Hence, there is a unique double concentration of units. And the translator ought to preserve the integrity of both the lexical unit and the lines. Accordingly, Lefevere (1992) elaborated more on this issue and regards translation as ‘rewriting’ by means of which new concepts, genres, and devices are introduced to the target literature. He also stated: “the history of translation is the history also of literary innovation, of the shaping power of one culture upon another (Lefevere, 1992, p. xi).”
۲.۸.۱. Translatability of poetry
“The central question that all studies of the translation of poetry have asked, implicitly or explicitly, is whether poetry can be translated or not (Baker, 1998, p. 194).” Baker (1998) pointed out that some related views argued that it may seem obvious that it can, for poetry has always been widely translated. In fact, translated poetry plays such a large part in the literature of most cultures that it is taken very much for granted (Baker, 1998, p. 194). But the opposite view on translatability of poetry is that poetry translation is difficult or even impossible arises from the coincidence of two assumptions:
۱. Translated poetry should be poetry in its own right
۲. Poetry is difficult, cryptic, ambiguous and exhibits a special relationship between form and meaning”(Baker, 1998, p. 194).
“These two assumptions together have led many writers such as Weissbort and Raffel to suggest that the translation of poetry, more than that of any other genre, demands both special critical abilities and special writing abilities (Baker, 1998, p.194).” She elaborated that translated poetry aims are to say that the aim of its translation is to carry over the SL function into the TT (Baker, 1998, p. 194). According to Baker (1998) Gardner’s translations of Dutch poet Remcc Campert (2007) suggested that successful translation of poetry does not depend upon the reader’s belief that the translated poem is an original (p. 195). Yet translators like Minhinnick pointed out that they attempt to ‘restyle’ the poems where necessary (Baker, 1998, p. 195).
Meanwhile, Baker (1998, p. 196), elaborated the idea that there is something peculiar to poetry which, if captured in translation, will allow the poetic effects of the original to be recreated is implicit in descriptions of poetic translation as writing which captures what Pope called the ‘spirit’ or Rowan Williams the ‘energy’ of the original poem. One way of making this abstract notion more concrete is to equate it with style, because style can be seen as the result of the poet’s choices and therefore the embodiment of poetic voice or mind as well as that which engages the reader (1998, p. 197). In fact, this focus on style as central to poetic translation is found especially in the writings of:
۱. Translators who are themselves poets and can be assumed to have an inherent (perhaps unconscious) knowledge of how poetry works (e.g. Pope, Paterson or Williams).
۲. Critics who take the view that a theoretical understanding of poetry is essential not only to the reading of translated poetry but also to the act of translation.
Some of the elements that have been put forward as distinctive of poetic style are:
۱. Its physical shape including use of lines and spaces on a page
۲. Its use of inventive language and, in particular, patterns of sound and structure
۳. Its openness to different interpretations
۴. Its demand to be read nonpragmatically
۵. Its openness to different interpretations
۶. Its demand to be read nonpragmatically
Discussions on the nature of poetry suggested that there might be poetic characteristics that are universal; Yet poetic traditions vary from one culture to another this is also an important consideration in translating poetry (Baker, p. 199).
Translators often try to recast the original in terms of the poetics of their own culture, simply to make it pleasing to the new audience and, in doing so, to ensure that the translation will actually be read. Some rules a good translator needs to observe are:
۱. To find between the poetics of the original and the poetics of their culture provide fascinating insights into the process of acculturation and incontrovertible evidence of the extent of the power of a given poetic
۲. The translator must be observed with greater diligence in languages that have not yet become established in the field of art than in others.
۳. The translator should observe the figures of speech, namely that he should link and arrange words with such sweetness that the soul is satisfied and the ears are pleased. He should never object to harmony in language (Levefere, 1992, pp. 24-27).
۴. The translator must understand to perfection the meaning and the subject matter of the author he translates. If he understands this he will never be obscure in his translation and if the author he translates is in no way obscene, he will be able to make him easily and perfectly intelligible.
۵. The translator should know the language of the author he translates to perfection and that he should have achieved the same excellence in the language he wants to translate into. In that way he will neither violate nor denigrate the splendor of one language or the other the translator also must understand that every language has its own characteristics, and therefore its diction, its patterns of speech, its subtleties, and its power must be translated accordingly. If the translator does not know this, he will hurt the author he translates and also the language he translates him into, for he will neither represent nor express the dignity and the riches of the two languages he has taken in hand.
۶. When s/he translates s/he should not enter into slavery to the point of rendering word for word. Whoever translates in this way does so because his mind is poor and deficient. In other words, he will work with sentences and not care about the order of the words, and he will see to it that the author’s intention is expressed while miraculously preserving the characteristics of both languages (Baker, 1998, pp. 196-7).
Nida (as cited in

دسته بندی : No category

دیدگاهتان را بنویسید