Accounting of the author’s and the reader’s time by the authors-translators

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Accounting of the author's and the reader's time by the authors-translators

Abdullayeva G.B.

Абдуллаева Г. Б. ОБЛІК ЧАСУ АВТОРА І ЧАСУ ЧИТАЧА АВТОРАМИ-ПЕРЕКЛАДАЧАМИ

Різниця між перекладом, зробленим автором-перекладачем, і перекладом, зробленим перекладачем не автором, виявляється в першу чергу в різному сприйнятті світу, в різному світогляді. В даному випадку слід говорити про індивідуальне сприйняття світу, оскільки і автор-перекладач, і професійний перекладач не автор є білінгвами і носіями не тільки мовних, а й культурних знань, відображених як в оригінальному тексті, так і в тексті перекладу. У зв'язку з цим великий інтерес представляють ідеї такого видного вченого і письменника У.Еко. Можна навести ще більше визначень терміну «переклад» інших вчених, але всі ці пояснення зводяться до наступної думки: переклад являє собою процес передачі думок, висловлених на одній мові, засобами іншої мови. Це означає, що переклад розглядається як іншомовна форма існування повідомлення, що міститься в оригіналі. При цьому перекладаються тексти вельми різноманітні за тематикою, мовою, жанрової приналежності; переклади можуть носити письмовий або усний характер; залежно від мети міжмовного спілкування переклад тексту-оригіналу може здійснюватися в різній формі і з різним ступенем повноти і т.п. всі зазначені особливості перекладу «викликають необхідність наукової класифікації видів перекладацької діяльності (видів перекладу) і детального вивчення специфіки кожного виду». Таким чином, перевагою автора-перекладача є те, що він не тільки володіє фоновими знаннями і знає лінгвокультурологічні особливості мовної картини світу двох націй, але також є сучасником тих подій (політичних, громадських, соціальних та ін.), які мають місце в житті двох етносів і, відповідно, підбирає більш правильні мовні конструкції, що знаходяться в комунікативному вживанні на момент написання художнього твору і його подальшого перекладу на іншу мову.

The problem statement

The problem of translation and translation activity is still one of the most topical and interesting in linguistics, literary studies, comparative studies, etc. According to U. Eco, “translation ... it happens not between systems, but between texts”, “in order to understand any text (and even more so to translate it), it is necessary to put forward a hypothesis about the possible world that it represents” [6]. In other words, in the course of translation activity, a secondary text (megatext) is created on the basis of the original, primary text, replacing the primary text in another linguistic and cultural environment and representing it. At the same time, a megatext, or a kind of invented world (according to U. Eco) can be transmitted by any language system: linguistic systems are comparable with each other, and possible ambiguities can be avoided if texts are translated in the light of contexts and in relation to the world about which this text speaks.

The purpose of the paper is to show difference the time of reader and author from point of view of the author-translator.

The main material

As a result, a text is created characterized by an attitude to the transmission of the communicative effect of the primary text, partially modified by differences between two languages, two cultures and two communicative situations and also characterized by the “double loyalty” of the translator - the attitude to “loyalty” to the original and the attitude to the addressee and norms his culture”. In other words, in the process of translation, two languages, two linguistic cultures interact, having both common and national specifics. The main task of the translator is to recreate the communicative effect for which the original is designed, to recreate the communicative attitude (informative, expressive, emotional, motivational) underlying the primary text.

To achieve the mentioned “effect”, U. Eco identifies 3 types of knowledge in the process of translation: cognitive type, nuclear content and molar content. Under the cognitive type of U.Eco implies schemes that allow us to explain “the phenomena of the intersubjective nature of consent in identification, as well as the constancy ... with which all people react quite similarly to well-known words or phrases” [6]. Unlike cognitive schemas that people have in their heads, but we cannot see or touch them, the nuclear content is “visible, tangible, comparable intersubjec- tively, since it is expressed physically through sounds, and if necessary - through images, gestures, and even bronze sculptures” [6].

No work of art exists in a space-time vacuum. It always somehow contains time and space, or a chronotope. Space and time play a huge role in the creation of a work of art, since the chronotope determines the genre, provides compositional construction, is inextricably linked with the plot, the system of images and motifs. The main significance of this literary category lies in the fact that artistic space and time serve as forms of the existence of the artistic world. It is believed that the artistic chronotope is also one of the main categories of the text, which participates in the construction of the text, provides concreteness, realism of the description. When analyzing the author's translations of Russian writers and poets, the category of time attracts attention.

From a literary point of view, artistic time is not a writer's thought about time, it is the time “that the writer himself creates in his work”. In artistic time, the action of the work takes place: its characters live and act and the events depicted in it take place. Artistic time does not reflect real time, it is only “an image, a certain model of reality, in which the real and fiction are combined”. Artistic time characterizes the interweaving of the properties of several times:

1) real, which includes a person's lifetime (physiological time) and cyclic time;

2) psychological - the time of the psychological world of man;

3) real: astral, mythological, fantastic, etc.

The poetic text is characterized by a slightly different typology:

1) a specific artistic time is the time correlated with the life of the lyrical hero;

2) generalized artistic time - time correlated with the life of any person;

3) time-abstraction - time devoid of the subject of being;

4) time-transformation is an unreal image, a substitute for time.

From the point of view of the linguistics of the text, artistic time includes:

1) the time of those events that make up the plot - plot time;

2) the time of the characters (individual, private, personal time), which includes: the subjective perception of time by the hero of the work, his biographical time, the time of his activity;

3) the author's time, reflecting “his concept of time, his temporal position in relation to the depicted events”;

4) The reader's time is “the time of rational and sensory-emotional perception of what he has read”.

In our study, we want to touch upon such aspects of artistic time as the time of the author and the time of the reader, since it is in these aspects that the fundamental difference between author's translations and translations made by professional translators not authors can be traced.

The first such fundamental difference is that the author-translator is a figure who is always a contemporary and an eyewitness of real and fictional events described in a work of fiction. Passing through the individual author's worldview the social, cultural and historical events of his era, the author-translator transfers them first into the original text, and then into the translation text. At the same time, both in the source text and in the translation text, the author's time will, on the one hand, express the author's position, on the other hand, act as an artistic device. To realize the author's time, the author-translator in the source and translated texts will use vocabulary, stylistics and syntactic constructions characteristic of both the language of the writer himself and the historical epoch that is described in the work of fiction. Unlike the authors-translators, professional translators are not authors, are not eyewitnesses of the era to which the author-writer belongs, in other words, for the translator not the author, the events described in the work of fiction are presented in two historical layers - knowledge of the realities of the era that is described in the work of fiction, and knowledge of the realities of the era, an eyewitness of which is the author of the artwork. If you do not know the information reflecting these two historical layers, the translation of a professional translator, not the author, becomes far from perfect. It is this phenomenon that we encounter when analyzing translations of an excerpt from the story “Mailbox” by J. Mammadkulizade.

Unlike G.Minasazov and A.Sharif, J.Mammad- kulizade more precisely selected words, phrases and syntactic turns characteristic of the Russian speech of the XIX century. This is evidenced by such con- sturctions as “I found her condition so satisfactory” and “very necessary things”. In these expressions, the words satisfactory in the meaning of `good enough' and necessary in the meaning of `important' have somewhat changed the compatibility with other words in modern Russian. Currently, the first expression is used mainly in the professional speech of doctors, while the second one has completely fallen out of use. However, these constructions were normative in the language of Russian classical literature of the XIX century. Examples from the Russian classical literature of the XIX century can serve as evidence of this: He actually expressed about the patient that he finds him at the moment in a very satisfactory condition; He got out of bed in the morning, as usual, with his right foot, washed, inquired if a courier had come for him with an invitation to come for final negotiations on a very necessary matter, asked for coffee, picked up a newspaper, and suddenly we see: Resigns from service on request: reckless adviser Diba and etc. Russian classical literature of the XIX century shows that the phrases used in the excerpt of the Russian translation of the story “Mailbox” by the author were alive for the Russian speech of the XIX century, as the author-translator knew, because he himself knew the Russian language of the late XIX century era. The situation is quite different with the translations of G.Minasazov and A.Sharif.

Consequently, when translating the story, the translators, not the authors, did not convey the stylization of the epoch of the XIX century. Russian literature could be for two reasons: firstly, despite familiarity with Russian classical literature, the translators and authors did not know the style of Russian speech of the XIX century, which was characteristic of the author-translator, a contemporary of Russian writers of the XIX century; secondly, they may not have considered it necessary to have such stylization in the translation of the author's narrative. These conclusions are also supported by the forms of transliteration of the only toponym used in the analyzed passage.

In the Russian translation by J.Mammadkulizade, the name of the Azerbaijani city Irdvan is rendered as Erivan. Erivan is a Russian transliteration of the Azerbaijani city, common in the XIX century. We find the same transliteration in G.Minasazov's translation (perhaps as an indication of the era in which the events described in the story take place), but in A.Sharif Irevan is already used in the Soviet vocalization - Erivan.

Thus, the advantage of the author-translator is that he not only has background knowledge and knows the linguistic and cultural features of the linguistic worldview of the two nations, but is also a contemporary of those events (political, social, social, etc.) that take place in the life of two ethnic groups and, accordingly, selects more correct speech constructions, which are in communicative use at the time of writing the work of art and its further translation into another language.

As already noted, another advantage of an author-translator over a translator who is not an author is the possibility of using the author's time as an artistic device, which can be included or shortened in the source and translated text due to the desire of the author-translator. To prove what has been said, we can cite an excerpt from the story “The Deceived Stars” by M.F. Akhundov about stupid Englishmen.

In the original:

Bu kdvakibin hdmaqdtind mdn tddcub edirdm ki, need bilmdmi^dildr iranildr onlari aldadirlar. Yusif Sdrrac Hdrkiz iranin gahi deyil idi. iranildr onu hiyld uzunddn pad^ahi-mdsnu eldmi^dildr. Beld saddlik olurmu ki, kdvakib ozldrini iranildrd aldadib bicard vd bitdqsir Yusif Sdrraci bddbdxt etdildr. §ah Abbasi kdnar qoyub qirx il sdrasdr onun sdffakligina vd cab- barligina bie'etina nazir oldular.

§ah Abbas cabbarliginin ddna dlamdti bu idi ki, bir oglunu oldurdu, ikisinin ddxi gozunu gixartdi. Ddxi oolu yox idi, ndvdsi ona varis oldu. Amma kdvakibi vd qinamaq (yeri) yoxdur. §ag Abbasin xudi-^dxsind nisbdtdn kdvakibin bir ddavdti yox idi. Olara lazim idi ki, novruzdan on be§ gun kegmi§ iran sdltdndtinin qdxtinddn bir §dxsi a§agi salib etsinldr. Bu vaxt da iran sdltdndtinin tdxtindd oturmu^du Yusif Sdrrac. Ona binadn kdvakib ona a§agi salib bddbdxt etdildr. Kdvakibin Hdrgiz xdyalindan xutur etmdzdi ki, iranildr olari aldadacaqlar, pad§ahi-hdqiqdnin dvdz- ind pad^ahi-mdsnuu olarin sdddmdsinin altina sala- caqlar...

Vallah, qdribd dhmdqdildr bu ingilis tayfasi ki, beld xdtdrli milldt ild az qalmi§di cdnk bafayar- lar [1, p. 231-232].

Author's translation:

I am surprised at the simplicity of the two planets, which could not notice that the Persians were cheating them by tricking Yusif Serrage into Shah, leaving aside Shah Abbas himself, and were then indifferent spectators of his forty-year tyranny and inhumanity, which, by the way, was expressed in the fact that he killed one son, and two gouged out his eyes... He has no more children left: he was succeeded by his grandson! - However, you can't blame the planets either. They actually had no personality to the person of Shah Abbas, they had to overthrow someone from the Persian throne at that time, and at that time it was occupied by Yusif Serrage: they broke his neck; it did not occur to them at all that the Persians would cheat them and put them in the place of the real king under their blow fake. [2].

In addition to minor abbreviations that do not disrupt the narrator's train of thought, there is no translation of the last sentence in the author's translation: “and how stupid are these Englishmen that they almost started a war with such a dangerous people!” [5, p. 50].

In the original text, M.F. Akhundov, recalling the British, tried to link historical events with his modernity: in the analyzed fragment, the author hinted at the Anglo-Persian war that began on November 1, 1856 and ended on March 4, 1857. The reason for the war was the claim of Persia to control the Afghan city of Herat. Thus, “the event described in the story, which took place in the XVI century (1595), is ironically connected with modern events and leads to the conclusion that one should beware of Persians who have experience in preventing astrological prescriptions” [5, p. 50].

Conclusion

Thus, the analysis of the presented fragments allows us to conclude that the author- translator is free in the way of transmitting the author's time in the translated text, but when introducing the reader's time in the translation process, he tries to focus on the emotional perception of the readership. As already noted, another advantage of an author-translator over a translator who is not an author is the possibility of using the author's time as an artistic device, which can be included or shortened in the source and translated text due to the desire of the author-translator.

Bibliography

1. Axundov M.F. 0sarlari. Baki: 1962, 245 s.

2. Axundov M.F. Aldanmi§ kavakib // Qafqaz, 1864, № 25, 27, 30, 31.

3. Quluzada Y.M. 0dabi tarcuma va adabi alaqalar. Baki: Mutarcim, 1999, 148 s.

4. Mammadquluzada C. 0sarlari. Baki, 1983.

5. Novruzov R.M. Muallif tarcumasinin tarixi. Baki: Mutarcim, 1997, 116 s.

6. Eco U. Experiences in translation. University of Toronto Press, 2000.

7. Fillmore Ch.J. Frame semantics // Linguistics in the morning calm: Selected papers from the SICOL. 1981. Seoul, 1982. p. 111-137.

8. Fodor J.A. Tha language of thought. Cambridge (Mass.), 1975, p. 3-78.

9. Givon T. Syntax: A functional-typological introduction. V 2. Amsterdam, 1990.

Размещено на Allbest.ru