Venuti, 2000) believes that in translating poetry:
“There is obviously a greater focus of attention upon formal elements than one normally find in prose. Not that content is necessarily sacrificed in translation of a poem, but the content is necessarily constricted into certain formal molds.” Nida (as cited in Venuti, 2000) elaborated that only rarely can one reproduce both content and form in a translation, and hence in general the form is usually sacrificed for the sake of the content. On the other hand, a lyric poem translated as a prose is not an adequate equivalent for the original. Though it may reproduce the conceptual content, it falls far short of reproducing the emotional intensity and flavor. However, the translating of some types of poetry by prose may be dictated by important cultural consideration (p.154).
۲.۸.۲. Types of Poetry Translation
Lefevere (1992, p. 34) elaborated on this issue and regarded translation as “rewriting by means of which new concepts, genres and devices are introduced to the target literature. He (1992) also stated that the history of translation is also the history of literary innovation, of the shaping power of one culture upon another (p. 34). Lefevere (1992) pointed out the shaping effect of one culture over another can most vividly be seen in the translation of a literary text, for literature poetry in particular- is the expression of a nation’s sorrow, happiness, etc. it is through translation that a nation can share its experiences with others. Therefore, the translators of literary texts must be familiar with the culture of the source language and culture and try to make their best to make use of the most effective strategies in order to translate a literary text (p. 34).
Lefevere (1992) discusses: “different poetics dominant at different stages in the evolution of a literary system will judge both writings rewritings, in different, irreconcilable ways, all based on good faith and conviction that each is the representative of truth (p. 34).” He (1992) also believed that when translating a poem , the translator must be aware of the dominant poetics because the poetics of a given period in a given culture often’ forces translators to privilege one strategy at the expense of the original at the expense of the second, due to different language differences (p. 34).
Raffel (1991) pointed out poetry represents writing in its most compact, condensed and high-tened form, in which the language is predominantly connotational rather than denotational and in which form and content are inseparably linked. Poetry is also informed by a ‘musical mode’ or inner rhythm, regardless of whether there is any formal meter or rhyming pattern, which is one of the elusive yet essential characteristics of the work that the translator is called upon to translate (p. 95).
Jones (1997) (as cited in Ghanooni, 2008) discussed four different levels or types of poetry translation:
۱. Literal Translation
Literal translation is similar to ‘formal equivalence’, regarding which Nida (1964, p. 159) writes:’ formal equivalence focuses attention on the message itself, in both form and content. One is concerned that the message in the receptor language should match as closely as possible the different elements in source language’ (cited in Jeremy Munday, 2001, p. 41).
Catford (1965, p. 27) used the term ‘formal correspondence’ and describes it as ‘target language category (unit, class, element of structure, etc.) which can be said occupy, as nearly as category occupies in the source language’ (as cited in Munday, 2001, p. 60). Newmark (1981) maintained that ‘communicative as in semantic translation, provided that equivalent effect is secured, the literal word-for-word translation is not only the best; it’s the only valid method of translation’ (p. 39). Beekman and Callow (1974/1989, p. 23) argued that ‘modified literal translation’ in which some lexical and grammatical adjustment are made in order to avoid the errors which may arise for literalism.
As quoted by Hatim and Mason (1990), Nabokov (1964) said that literal translation is rendering as closely as the associative and syntactical capacities of another language allow, the exact contextual meaning of the original. Only this is true translation. It is when the translator sets out to render the ‘spirit’, and not the mere sense of the text, that he begins to traduce his author (pp. 14-15).
۲. Approximation
Approximation is another level or type of poetry translation in which the translator is faithful to some sensible translation may be produced; in adaptation, faithfulness to the original is less than that in approximation (Ghanooni, p. 38).
۳. Adaptation
According to Jeremy Munday (2001, p. 58) adaptation involves changing the cultural reference when a situation in the source culture does not exist in the target culture. In other words, adaptation, as Vinay and Darbelnet cited (in L. Vnuti, 2000, p. 90) is used in cases where the type of situation being referred to by the source language message is unknown in the target language culture.
۴. Imitation
Imitation creation of a new poem in the target language with the theme of that in the source language this type of poetry translation is mostly practiced by poet translators. As R. Jackson (2001) writes in ‘from translation to imitation’, ‘Ben Johnson had defined imitation in his Timber as merely a poem loosely based on another poem’. Regarding imitation, Jackson quotes Dryden as saying: “the translation(if now he has not lost that name)assumes the liberty, not only to vary words and sense, but to forsake them both as he sees occasion; and only taking some general hints from the original, to run division on the groundwork, as he pleases(p. 3).”
As Dryden (1680/1992, p. 17) stated imitation is a kind of translation and is more or less similar to adaptation. In imitating a poem, the imitator learns from it in order to create a poem of his own, retaining the theme of first in new one. Therefore although the two poems are different in the wordings, they are similar to each other in having the same theme.
Dryden (1680/1992, p. 17), as quoted by Jeremy Munday (2001, p. 25) reduced all translation to three categories:
۱. ‘Metaphrase’: ‘word-by-word’ and line by line translation, which corresponds to literal translation.
۲. ‘Paraphrase’: ‘translation with latitude, when the author is kept in view by the translation, so as never to be lost, but his words are not so strictly followed as his sense’; this involves changing whole phrases and more or less corresponds to faithful or sense-for-sense translation.
۳. ‘Imitation’: for saking’ both words and sense; this corresponds to Cowley’s very free translation and is more or less adaptation.
۲.۸.۳. Methods of translating poetry
Bassnet and Lefevere (1990) note some methods by English translators in translating Catullu’s poems:
۱. Phonemic translation attempts to recreate the sounds of the SL in the TL. And at the same time the translator tries to transfer the meaning. According to lefevere, in general the result sound awkward and sometimes leaves some parts of the original meaning behind.
۲. Literal translation means word-for-word translation. This method will not be able to transfer the original meaning; while the phrase and sentence structures tend to fall by the way side in the TL.
۳. Metrical translation emphasizes the reproduction of the original meter into the TL. And because each language has its own specific stressing and pronunciation system, this method will result in the inappropriate translation in terms of meaning and structure.
۴. Verse-to-prose translation has also some weaknesses. The outstanding weakness is the loss of the beauty of the original poem.
۵. Rhymed translation emphasizes the transferring of rhyme of the original poem into the translation in TL. The result will be appropriate physically but tend to be the semantically inappropriate.
۶. Free verse translation with this method the translator may be able to get the accurate equivalents in the TL with a sound literary value of the result. On the other hand, the rhyme and meter tend to be ignored. So, physically the result is different from the original, but semantically it seems the same
۷. Interpretation. A version of poem in the TL will semantically be exactly the same with the original, but physically totally different. Further, an imitation is exactly a different poem but the title, topic, and starting point are the same with the original poem (p. 81).
In the field of translation studies, Poetry translation has been regarded as one of the most controversial issues. Therefore, there are some considerations problems in translating poetry. Hariyanto (2002, p. 5)

دسته بندی : No category

دیدگاهتان را بنویسید