2

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION OF THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA

COMRAT STATE UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF NATIONAL CULTURE
DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES

Admitted to Defense
Protocol ___ from ___ _______________2014
Head of Department
Sulac S.C., Ph.D., associate professor

MASTER THESIS

Linguistic difficulties in Literary Translation

General Training Trade 14:
Teaching Germanic Languages in Pre-university Institutions in
Multiethnic Society

Reg. ________

Written by

Date __________

Mincioglo Antonina I.
Academic Advisor
Sofia Sulac
Ph.D., Associate Professor

Comrat 2014

Content

Introduction ..4
I. Literary translation : criteria varying according to the text type 6
I.1 The uniqueness of literary translation8
I.2 The dominant structures of literary texts . .10
I.3 Literary language (poetic language).12
I.4 Linguistic issues in translation of Poetry25
II. Literary translation as a specific coding-encoding process 37
2.1 Literary translation as functional interaction of languages 37
2.2 Context and its role in literary translation 38
2.3 Literary translation of words having no correspondence in target language
..48
2.4 Style as a specific problem of literary translation..50
III. Philological analysis of linguistic difficulties in literary translation .....58
3.1 Literary translation of specifically English grammatical forms
and constructions 60
3.2 Lexical transformations..63
Conclusion...65
Bibliography ...67
Appendix

...70

Introduction
Translation is a process and the result of turning a text from one language into
another, which means expressing the same by the signs of a different language.
Bearing in mind that every sign has two planes (plane of expression and plane of
content) the essence of translation could be described as changing the elements of
the plane of expression while the plane of content remains constant.
The language of the original text is called "source language", the language into
which the text is translated is called "target language" (the corresponding Russian
terms are " " and " ").
One of the main difficulties of translating lies in the fact that the meaning of the
whole text is not exhausted by the sum of meanings of its elements. The meaning of
a text is made up by words (characterized by their denotative and connotative meanings and stylistic reference), syntactic meaning of sentences and utterances larger
than sentences, suprasegmental elements and lexico-semantic connections between
words and phrases. That is why this course work has a great importance in studying
literary translation.
Topicality of the course work is importance of studying linguistic difficulties of
literary translation, as adequate translation of literary texts has a great importance in
the field of philology.
The aim of course work is to analyze the importance of the adequate
translation and define linguistic difficulties that are faced in literary translation.
The objectives are:
- to give a general concept of literary translation;
- to define linguistic difficulties in literary translation;
- to give a classification of linguistic difficulties in literary translation;
- to determine the ways of solving these problems.
The subject of course work is translation of literary texts.
The object of course work is the linguistic difficulties of literary translation.

The methods of investigation are comparative analysis, descriptive analysis

and studying linguistic and methodological literature.
The theoretical significance is in determining the theoretical statements of
defining the linguistical difficulties of literary translation on the basis of native and
foreign scientists works such as Komissarov V.N., Garbovski N.K., Breus E.V.,etc.
The practical significance is in the fact that the materials of course work can
be widely used in teaching process of disciplines as Theory and practice of
translation, Translation problems, The basis of Translation.
The materials under analysis are works of native and foreign scholars in this
field, books on the theory and practice of literary translation and supplements for the
teachers and students of foreign languages institutes and departments.
The structure of the course work. The given course work contains
Introduction, two parts: theoretical and practical, Conclusion, bibliography and
Appendix. In introduction was considered the aim, objectives, subject, object,
methods of investigation, theoretical, practical significances and materials under
analysis of the course work. In the theoretical part Literary translation as a specific
coding-encoding process have been considered following questions Literary
translation as functional interaction of languages, Context and its role in literary
translation, Literary translation of words having no correspondence in target
language.
The practical part Philological analysis of linguistic difficulties in literary
translation consists of two parts: Literary translation of specifically English
grammatical forms and constructions and Lexical transformations.
In conclusion it is given a summary of the course work.
The bibliography contains 15 works of native and foreign scientists that were
analyzed during the investigation.
In appendix it is offered a list of words that have difficulties in literary and
adequate translation.

I. Literary translation: criteria varying according to text type

Literary translation has always been seen as more perplexing than the translation of
other texts, such as business documents or instruction booklets for machinery or
equipment. The translation of poems has traditionally been seen as even more
difficult, and there has always been much dispute about methods that can be used
and the kind of result which is the aim of such translation work. According to the
definition of Robert Frost, Poetry is what gets lost in translation.
This statement could be considered as a truthful one to a certain extent because
there is no one-to-one equivalent when comparing two languages. Even if the
translators obtain a profound knowledge in the source language (SL) they would
not be able to create a replica of the original text. What should be preserved
when translating poetry are the emotions, the invisible message of the poet, the
uniqueness of the style in order to obtain the same effect in the target language as it
is in the source. This is the conception of process of translation as the transmission
of creative energy. When talking about the translation of poetry we could not but
mention some of the numerous problems encountered during this process. Many
writers have struggled to define the difficulties of translating poetry.
A problem that has bedevilled generations of translators is, What is a satisfactory
translation? There exist numerous and varied answers to this question from
different theoretical perspectives and from different translators and translation
scholars. An insightful theory is Reisss functional theory, which holds that the
criteria vary according to the text type. Reiss places great emphasis on
equivalence at the communicative level, i.e. the function of the language of a text,
stating that The transmission of the predominant function of the ST is the
determining factor by which the TT is judged . She links the function of language
related to a certain text type as follows:
1 Plain communication of facts: information, knowledge, opinions, etc. The
language dimension used to transmit the information is logical or referential, the

content or topic is the main focus of the communication, and the text type is
informative.
2 Creative composition: the author uses the aesthetic dimension of language. The
author or sender is foregrounded, as well as the form of the message, and the text
type is expressive.
3 Inducing behavioural responses: the aim of the appellative function is to appeal
to or persuade the reader or receiver of the text to act in a certain way. The form of
language is dialogic, the focus is appellative and Reiss calls this text type operative.
4 Audiomedial texts, such as films and visual and spoken advertisements which
supplement the other three functions with visual images, music, etc. categorizes the
text types into specific genres. Reference work, reports, lectures, and operating
instructions, in her opinion, are informative; the poem is highly expressive, focusing
on its form and aesthetic value; electoral speeches and advertisements are operative
in that they attempt to persuade somebody to buy or do something .She categorizes
biographies and plays between expressive and informative, satire between
expressive and operative, and sermons between informative and operative.
Discussion in Translation Studies today does not just assume that a translation
should preserve things like function and text type. Instead, translation scholars
nowadays especially those who follow the paradigm Descriptive Translation
Studies dismiss translations from the restrictions of the equal value between the
ST and TT, with unthroning the ST; they take that equivalence is a quality of all
translations, and set about describing the many shifts and transformations that
translations produce. Even more radically, in terms of cultural translation,
translation is seen as a general activity between cultural groups, in which colonial
and postcolonial processes displaced and mixed languages ; to this effect, it is as if
all the colonizers and colonized are translators. The descriptive approaches do play
a central role in the development of Translation Studies as an academic discipline ,
yet they have been criticised in that descriptions do not help train translators and
the models all concern texts and systems, not people.

1.1 The uniqueness of literary translation

Literary text as an expressive text type by Reiss has a set of typical
features. Thanks to Joness summary of a wide range of viewpoints from Stockwell ,
Venuti , Pilkington , and Berman , the features attributed to literary texts include the
following: they have a written base-form, though they may also be spoken; they
enjoy canonicity (high social prestige); they fulfil an affective/aesthetic rather than
transactional or informational function, aiming to provoke emotions and/or entertain
rather than influence or inform; they have no real-world truth-value i.e. they are
judged as fictional, whether fact-based or not; they feature words, images, etc., with
ambiguous and/or indeterminable meanings; they are characterized by poetic
language use (where language form is important in its own right, as with word-play
or rhyme). In other words, literary texts are in a written form, fictional, and
canonical, and they have an aesthetic function, focusing on the expression of
emotions, with poetic language, implicit meanings, heteroglossia, and deviations,
most features of which will be covered in this thesis.
In literary translation, the typical features of the source literary text not only
need to be taken into account, but also the influential elements from the target
perspective, such as the linguistic and cultural differences and the target readers.
Emphasising both sides, with regard to the uniqueness of literary translation, this
thesis will mainly focus on the following points.
First and foremost, literary texts distinguished from non-literary texts are
characterized by rhetorical and aesthetic value, which is the essence expected to be
captured and maintained in a literary translation. For example, unlike standard
language, literary or poetic language has the feature of foregrounding. Reading and
rewriting in translating is a cognitive process with aesthetic enjoyment. Literary
works are created artistically by increasing the difficulty and length of perception,
which leads to defamiliarization . Once the defamiliarization is comprehended by
the translators or readers, a unique sensation is created. To reproduce the rhetorical
and aesthetic value is one of the main tasks for literary translators.

Second, in literary translation the form interlinks with the content; while in
non-literary translation the content may be considered detachable from the form or
structure. Poetry appositely indicates the fact that the form makes sense; in
Jakobsons words: Phonemic similarity is sensed as semantic relationship .In
poetry, devices such as assonance, alliteration, onomatopoeia, rhythm, verse, metre,
and rhyme are sometimes used to achieve musical or incantatory effects. Likewise,
in prose a certain linguistic feature or level can also have a certain textual function.
For instance, the repetition in Hemingways In Another Country contributes to
express the characters tedious life .
Third, literary translators choices of wording are highly dependent on the
target language (TL) and culture. Literary texts are solidly rooted in the source
language (SL) and culture, yet due to linguistic or cultural differences, literal
translations might fail to gain acceptability. There are a set of issues potentially
impacting the translators choices: translation texts, translators, and institutional
factors (including extensive cultural factors), among which linguistic and cultural
differences are the main factors. How to cope with the linguistic and cultural
differences is a crucial question for literary translators.
Fourth, a consideration of the target audiences is another important issue in
literary translation. Literary translation always has a readership which is likely to be
quite different from the one the writer originally had in mind. A good translation
of any text from any period will, to some extent, only be good in the context of a
particular audience at a particular time and place. So we have to keep this question
of audience constantly in mind. For instance, a good studying translation is to
some extent similar to studying physiology. Physiologists research about special
bodies is like translation scholars examination of literary texts. To research upon a
world champion boxer, a whole cluster of things such as the body, the balance, and
the strength are supposed to be scrutinized. One physiologist may prefer to do
research upon the champions muscles; while another may focus on his or her
mental attitude. Neither of them is wrong; it is just selective. One thing is especially

10

important, that is: how to identify the research topic. Stylistic approaches to
translation studies supply a theoretical perspective, which identify the style as the
essence of literary translations.
1.2 The dominant structures of literary texts
Many people think that the translation of literary works is one of the highest
forms of rendition because it is more than simply the translation of text. A literary
translator must also be skilled enough to translate feelings, cultural nuances,
humour and other delicate elements of a piece of work. In fact, the translators do
not translate meanings but the messages. That is why, the text must be considered
in its totality. Alternatively, Peter Newmark delineates translation as rendering the
meaning of a text into another language in the way that the author intended the
text . A further point is that there are examples in which the source text contains
facets that are advocated in an apt manner by Lawrence Venuti : discursive
variations, experimenting with archaism, slang, literary allusion and convention.
Additionally, it is no less than potentially contradictory that the translator
should be visible and make use of foreign sing attributes simultaneously, as
foreign sing attributes, at any rate in the Schleiermacher tradition, were chiefly
initiated into the Target Text (T.T) from the Source Text (S.T), not by the
translators innovation.
A literary text is a set of related systems; the relation of parts to each other and
to the whole is essential for a literary text. A literary text has its own individual
structure, which will lay stress on certain linguistic features or levels and not on
others . The dominant structure, i.e. the dominant linguistic features or levels, is the
significance of the text, and hence needs to be adequately grasped. Bassnett points
out that The failure of many translators to understand that a literary text is made up
of a complex set of systems existing in a dialectical relationship with other sets
outside its boundaries has often led them to focus on particular aspects of a text at
the expense of others. She offers examples at greater length: the reader/ translator

11

who does not acknowledge the dialectical materialist basis of Brechts plays or who
misses the irony in Shakespeares sonnets or who ignores the way in which the
doctrine of the transubstantiation is used as a masking device for the production of
Vittorinis anti-Fascist statement in Conversazioni in Sicilia is upsetting the balance
of power by treating the original as his own property. And all these elements can be
missed if the reading does not take into full account the overall structuring of the
work . Lotman is also aware of readers positions in terms of contents or structures
in reading literary texts: (1) Where the reader focuses on the content as matter, i.e.
picks out the prose argument or poetic paraphrase. (2) Where the reader grasps the
complexity of the structure of a work and the way in which the various levels
interact. The readers positions also link to a 23 translator since the translator is first
a reader and then a writer. Position (1) is held by many problematic translators who
in particular focus on content at the expense of formal structuring of the text.
Position (2) would seem an ideal position for a literary translator. Nida claims that
content and form mutually affect each other, yet which is to be given priority is
determined by the different nature of the message. He believes that The content of a
message can never be completely abstracted from the form, and form is nothing
apart from content , but in some messages the content is of primary consideration,
and in others the form is more important. Generally, in his opinion, since the content
of poetry is restricted and reflected by its form, the form should be greatly
emphasised. He stresses that In poetry there is a greater focus of attention upon
formal elements than one normally finds in prose therefore, a lyric poem translated
as prose is not a proper correspondence to the original; Though it may reproduce
the conceptual content, it falls far short of reproducing the emotional intensity and
flavour. He argues, however, that for the acrostic poems in the Old Testament of the
Bible even though written in the form of poems in a religious text the content is
far more important than the form, and the translators should give priority to the
message.

12

Compared with translating poetry, which mainly raises the issues of rhyme, metre,
verse, etc., It seems to be easier for the (careless) prose translator to consider
content as separable from form .
1.3 Literary language (poetic language)
Though the basic characteristics of translation can be observed in all
translation events, different types of translation can be singled out depending on
the predominant communicative function of the source text or the form of speech
involved in the translation process. Thus we can distinguish between literary and
informative translation, on the one hand, and between written and oral translation,
on the other hand.
Literary translation deals with literary texts, i.e. works of fiction or poetry
whose main function is to make an emotional or aesthetic impression upon the
reader. Their communicative value depends, first and foremost, on their artistic
quality and the translators primary task is to reproduce this quality in translation.
A literary text may, in fact, include some parts of purely informative
character. Literary works are known to fall into a number of genres. Literary
translation may be subdivided in the same way, as each genre calls for a specific
arrangement and makes use of specific artistic means to impress the reader.
Translators of prose, poetry or plays have their own problems. Each of these forms
of literary activities comprises a number of subgenres and translator may specialize
in one or some of them in accordance with his talents and experience. The
particular tasks inherent in the translation of literary works each genre is more
literary than linguistic. The greet challenge to the translator is to combine the
maximum equivalence and the high literary merit.
The translator of a belles-lettres text is expected to make a careful study of
the literary trend the text belongs to, the other works of the same author, the
peculiarities of this individual style and manner and so on. This involves both

13

linguistic considerations and skill in literary criticism. A good literary translator

must be a versatile scholar and talented writer or poet.
So many problems of translating poetry have been discussed for centuries
that one should just follow some of the good useful or bad and tricky
recommendations of predecessors. One of the best is that provided by Dante
Gabriel Rossetti, which asserts, the life blood of translation is this that a good
poem shall not be turned into a bad one. Presumably, we know what a good poem
is and how it differs from a bad one.
Whatever the versification system, each poem is unique. It has an individual
flavour and, even within a most conservative traditional metric pattern, is market
by a rhythm, pitch and infection of its own. It is a pointless exercise to pursue
absolute fidelity to the original, but it is necessary at least at attempt to preserve at
much as possible of the sources principle of poetic arrangement and imagery.
Ideas of now to approach of poetic translation have varied in Russia, but not
greatly, from the beginning of the nineteenth century up to the present day. When a
translator is to translate a poem, he may put it into one of two main categories
according to its form. One is so-called free verse, or verse libre; the other is
classically structured poetry, that is, verse based on regular metre, rhyme and
stanza pattern. It is evident that the impact a free verse poems of on the reader
differs greatly from that of traditional poetic harmony. It appeals to different points
of perception: while a traditional poem speaks more to the emotions, vers libre
tends to appeal to the reason rather than to the heart. Verse libre has properties of
its own, which makes the reader seek other thinks in such a text than he would in a
sonnet. Besides requires sophisticated decisions and techniques in translation.
Alliteration
Definition: Alliteration is a literary device where words are used in quick
succession and begin with letters belonging to the same sound group. Whether it is
the consonant sound or a specific vowel group, the alliteration involves creating a
repetition of similar sounds in the sentence. Alliterations are also created when the

14

words all begin with the same letter. Alliterations are used to add character to the
writing and often add an element of fun to the piece...Example: The Wicked
Witch of the West went her own way.
Alliteration in Poetry
In relation to English poetry, poets can call attention to certain words in a
line of poetry by using alliteration. They can also use alliteration to create a
pleasant, rhythmic effect. In the following poetic lines, notice how alliteration is
used to emphasize words and to create rhythm:
"Give me the splendid silent sun
with all his beams full-dazzling!'
Walt Whitman, "Give Me the Splendid Silent Sun"
They all gazed and gazed upon this green stranger,/because everyone
wondered what it could mean/ that a rider and his horse could be such a color-/
green as grass, and greener it seemed/ than green enamel glowing bright against
gold. Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, translated by Benard O'Donohue
"Some papers like writers,
some like wrappers.
Are you a writer or a wrapper?"
Carl Sandburg, "Paper I"
Alliteration also can add to the moods of poem. If a poet repeat soft,
melodious sounds, a calm or dignified mood can result. If harsh, hard sound are
repeated, on the other hand, the mood can become tense or excited. In this poem,
alliteration of the s, l, and f sound adds to a hushed, peaceful mood:
"Softer be they than slippered sleep
the lean lithe deer

15

the fleet flown deer ." e. e. cummings

"All in green went my love riding"
Alliteration in Rhetoric
Alliteration also serves as a linguistic rhetorical device more commonly used in
persuasive public speaking. Rhetoric is broadly defined as the "Art of Persuasion",
which has from earliest times been concerned with specific techniques for effective
communication.Alliteration serves to "intensify any attitude being signified".Its
significance as a rhetorical device is that it adds a textural complexity to a speech,
making it more engaging, moving, and memorable. The use of alliteration in a
speech captivates a person's auditory senses that assists in creating a mood for the
speaker. The use of a repeating sound or letter forces an audiences attention
because of their distinct and noticeable nature. The auditory senses, hearing and
listening, seem to perk up and pay attention with the constant sounds of
alliteration. It also evokes emotion which is key in persuading an audience. The
idea of pathos solidifies that playing to a person's emotions is key in persuading
them and connecting them to the argument that is being made. For example, the
use of a "H" sound can produce a feeling of calmness. Other sounds can create
feelings of happiness, discord, or anger, depending on the context of the
alliteration. These feelings become memorable to a listener, which have been
created by alliteration.
The most common example of this is in John F. Kennedy's Inaugural
Address, where he uses alliteration twenty-one times throughout his speech. The
last paragraph of his speech is given as an example here.
"Finally, whether you are citizens of America or citizens of the world, ask of
us here the same high standards of strength and sacrifice which we ask of you.
With a good conscience our only sure reward, with history the final judge of our
deeds, let us go forth to lead the land we love , asking His blessing and His help,
but knowing that here on earth God's work must truly be our own."

16

Other examples of alliteration in some famous speeches: "I have a dream

that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be
judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character". -Martin
Luther King.
"We, the people, declare today that the most evident of truths that all of
us are created equal is the star that guides us still; just as it guided our forebears
through Seneca Falls, and Selma, and Stonewall; just as it guided all those men and
women, sung and unsung, who left footprints along this great Mall, to hear a
preacher say that we cannot walk alone; to hear a King proclaim that our individual
freedom is inextricably bound to the freedom of every soul on Earth". -Barack
Obama.
"And our nation itself is testimony to the love our veterans have had for it
and for us. All for which America stands is safe today because brave men and
women have been ready to face the fire at freedom's front."Ronald Reagan,
Vietnam Veterans Memorial Address.
"Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a
new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are
created equal". -Abraham Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
Assonance
Definition: Assonance refers to repetition of sounds produced by vowels
within a sentence or phrase. In this regard assonance can be understood to be a
kind of alliteration. What sets it apart from alliterations is that it is the repetition of
only vowel sounds. Assonance is the opposite of consonance, which implies
repetitive usage of consonant sounds.Example: A long song . (Where the o
sound is repeated in the last two words of the sentence).
Assonance, in prosody, repetition of stressed vowel sounds within words
with different end consonants, as in the phrase quite like. It is unlike rhyme, in
which initial consonants differ but both vowel and end-consonant sounds are
identical, as in the phrase quite right. Many common phrases, such as mad as a

17

hatter, free as a breeze, or high as a kite, owe their appeal to assonance. As a

poetic device, internal assonance is usually combined with alliteration (repetition
of initial consonant sounds) and consonance (repetition of end or medial consonant
sounds) to enrich the texture of the poetic line. Sometimes a single vowel sound is
repeated, as in the opening line of Thomas Hoods Autumn: I saw old Autumn in
the misty morn.
Sometimes two or more vowel sounds are repeated, as in the opening lines
of Shelleys The Indian Serenade, which creates a musical counterpoint with
long i and long e sounds:
I arise from dreams of thee
In the first sweet sleep of night
Assonance at the end of a line, producing an impure, or off, rhyme, is found
in La Chanson de Roland and most French verses composed before the
introduction of pure rhyme into French verse in the 12th century. It remains a
feature of Spanish and Portuguese poetry. In English verse, assonance is frequently
found in the traditional ballads, where its use may have been careless or
unavoidable. The last verse of Sir Patrick Spens is an example:
Haf owre, haf owre to Aberdour,
Its fiftie fadom deip:
And thair lies guid Sir Patrick Spence,
Wi the Scots lords at his feit.
Rhythm & Rhyme
Definition: The concept of rhythm and rhyme refers to a pattern of rhymes
that is created by using words that produce the same, or similar sounds. Rhythm
and rhyme together refer to the recurrence of similar sounds in prose and poetry,
creating a musical, gentle effect. Example: I am a teapot Short and stout; This is

18

my handle And this is my spout. When the water s boiling Hear me shout; Just lift
me up And pour me out
Types of rhyme
The word rhyme can be used in a specific and a general sense. In the specific
sense, two words rhyme if their final stressed vowel and all following sounds are
identical; two lines of poetry rhyme if their final strong positions are filled with
rhyming words. A rhyme in the strict sense is also called a perfect rhyme.
Examples are sight and flight, deign and gain, madness and sadness.
Perfect rhymes
Perfect rhymes can be classified according to the number of syllables included in
the rhyme, which is dictated by the location of the final stressed syllable.
masculine: a rhyme in which the stress is on the final syllable of the words
(rhyme, sublime)
feminine: a rhyme in which the stress is on the penultimate (second from
last) syllable of the words (picky, tricky)
dactylic: a rhyme in which the stress is on the antepenultimate (third from
last) syllable (cacophonies, Aristophanes)
General rhymes
In the general sense, general rhyme can refer to various kinds of phonetic
similarity between words, and to the use of such similar-sounding words in
organizing verse. Rhymes in this general sense are classified according to the
degree and manner of the phonetic similarity:
syllabic: a rhyme in which the last syllable of each word sounds the same
but does not necessarily contain stressed vowels. (cleaver, silver, or pitter, patter;
the final syllable of the words bottle and fiddle are /l/, a liquid consonant.)
imperfect (or near): a rhyme between a stressed and an unstressed syllable.
(wing, caring)
weak (or unaccented): a rhyme between two sets of one or more unstressed
syllables. (hammer, carpenter)

19

semirhyme: a rhyme with an extra syllable on one word. (bend, ending)

forced (or oblique): a rhyme with an imperfect match in sound. (green,
fiend; one, thumb)
assonance: matching vowels. (shake, hate) Assonance is sometimes referred
to as slant rhymes, along with consonance.
consonance: matching consonants. (rabies, robbers)
half rhyme (or slant rhyme): matching final consonants. (bent, ant)
pararhyme: all consonants match. (tell, tall)
alliteration (or head rhyme): matching initial consonants. (ship, short)
Identical rhymes
Identical rhymes are considered less than perfect in English poetry; but are valued
more highly in other literatures such as, for example, rime riche in French poetry.
Though homophones and homonyms satisfy the first condition for rhyming
that is, that the stressed vowel sound is the samethey do not satisfy the
second: that the preceding consonant be different. As stated above, in a perfect
rhyme the last stressed vowel and all following sounds are identical in both words.
If the sound preceding the stressed vowel is also identical, the rhyme is
sometimes considered to be inferior and not a perfect rhyme after all. An example
of such a "super-rhyme" or "more than perfect rhyme" is the "identical rhyme", in
which not only the vowels but also the onsets of the rhyming syllables are
identical, as in gun and begun. Punning rhymes such are "bare" and "bear" are also
identical rhymes. The rhyme may of course extend even farther back than the last
stressed vowel. If it extends all the way to the beginning of the line, so that there
are two lines that sound identical, then it is called a "holorhyme" ("For I
scream/For ice cream").
In poetics these would be considered identity, rather than rhyme.
Eye rhyme or sight rhymes or spelling rhymes refer to similarity in spelling but not
in sound where the final sounds are spelled identically but pronounced differently
Examples in English are cough, bough, and love, move.

20

Some early written poetry appears to contain these, but in many cases the
words used rhymed at the time of writing, and subsequent changes in
pronunciation have meant that the rhyme is now lost.
Mind rhyme
Mind rhyme is a kind of substitution rhyme similar to rhyming slang, but it is less
generally codified and is heard only when generated by a specific verse context.
For instance, this sugar is neat / and tastes so sour. If a reader or listener thinks
of the word sweet instead of sour, then a mind rhyme has occurred.
Classification by position
Rhymes may be classified according to their position in the verse:
tail rhyme (also called end rhyme or rime coue): a rhyme in the final
syllable(s) of a verse (the most common kind)
When a word at the end of the line rhymes with a word in the interior of the
line, it is called an internal rhyme.
Holorhyme has already been mentioned, by which not just two individual
words, but two entire lines rhyme.
Off-centered rhyme is a type of internal rhyme occurring in unexpected
places in a given line. This is sometimes called a misplaced-rhyme scheme, or a
Spoken Word rhyme style
Broken rhyme is a type of enjambement producing a rhyme by dividing a
word at the line break of a poem to make a rhyme with the end word of another
line.
Cross rhyme matches a sound or sounds at the end of a line with the same
sound or sounds in the middle of the following (or preceding) line.
A rhyme scheme is the pattern of rhyming lines in a poem.
Old English poetry is mostly alliterative verse. One of the earliest rhyming
poems in English is The Rhyming Poem.
As English is a language in which stress is important, lexical stress is one of
the factors affecting the similarity of sounds for the perception of rhyme. Perfect

21

rhyme can be defined as the case when two words rhyme if their final stressed
vowel and all following sounds are identical.
Some words in English, such as "orange", are commonly regarded as having
no rhyme. Although a clever writer can get around this (for example, by obliquely
rhyming "orange" with combinations of words like "door hinge" or with lesserknown words like "Blorenge", a hill in Wales), it is generally easier to move the
word out of rhyming position or replace it with a synonym ("orange" could become
"amber").
One view of rhyme in English is from John Milton's preface to Paradise
Lost:
The Measure is English Heroic Verse without Rime, as that of Homer in
Greek, and of Virgil in Latin; Rime being no necessary Adjunct or true Ornament
of Poem or good Verse, in longer Works especially, but the Invention of a
barbarous Age, to set off wretched matter and lame Meeter; grac't indeed since by
the use of some famous modern Poets, carried away by Custom...
A more tempered view is taken by W. H. Auden in The Dyer's Hand:
Rhymes, meters, stanza forms, etc., are like servants. If the master is fair
enough to win their affection and firm enough to command their respect, the result
is an orderly happy household. If he is too tyrannical, they give notice; if he lacks
authority, they become slovenly, impertinent, drunk and dishonest.
Forced or clumsy rhyme is often a key ingredient of doggerel.
The first issue of Rhythm was a summer 1911 edition. It was a quarterly
until after the Spring 1912 issue, when it began to publish monthly. The final issue
under the name Rhythm was published in March 1913; in May 1913, the magazine
resumed publication under the name The Blue Review. After publishing additional
issues in June and July 1913, the magazine then ceased publication.
The magazine, sometimes referred to as a "little magazine", was focused
primarily on literature, music, art, and theatre.

22

Throughout its history, the magazine was edited by John Middleton Murry,
with Katherine Mansfield serving as the associate editor from June 1912 until the
magazine folded. Its title was borrowed from a major painting of a female nude (a
drawing of which appears on its front cover) by J. D. Fergusson who became its art
editor. The magazine went through three separate publishers: it began with St
Catherine Press; when it became a monthly, it was published by Stephen Swift &
Co. Under the name The Blue Review, it was published by Martin Secker.
Unlike text types such as scientific texts, documentary texts, scripts for spoken
language, etc., literary texts are the act of expression and an art with aesthetic
values. Literary language has a different function from standard language. The main
difference lies in the fact that literary language has the function of foregrounding the
utterance. Foregrounding, however, does not exclusively exist in literary texts; it can
also be found in journalistic texts and in essays . Yet it is worthy of attention that it
is in literary texts that foregrounding serves the act of expression itself. Mukaovsk
explicates it so clearly: The function of poetic language consists in the maximum of
foregrounding of the utterance. Foregrounding is the opposite of automatization, that
is, the deautomatization of an act; the more an act is automatized, the less it is
consciously executed; the more it is foregrounded, the more completely conscious
does it become. Objectively speaking: automatization schematizes an event;
foregrounding means the violation of the scheme The standard language in its
purest form, as the language of science with formulation as its objective, avoids
foregrounding Foregrounding is, of course, common in the standard language,
for instance, in journalistic style, even more in essays. But here it is always the
subordinate to communication: its purpose is to attract the readers (listeners)
attention more closely to the subject matter expressed by the foregrounded means of
expression In poetic language foregrounding achieves maximum intensity to the
extent of pushing communication into the background as the objective of expression
and of being used for its own sake; it is not used in the services of communication,
but in order to place the foreground of the act of expression, the act of speech itself.

23

In other words, for the purpose of expressing, poetic language foregrounds the
utterance through breaching the norms of the standard language; while ordinary
language focuses on the subject matter always having a pragmatic function.
The importance of aesthetic valuation in literary texts is underscored. In the
arts, aesthetic valuation necessarily stands highest in the hierarchy of the values
contained in the work, whereas outside of art its position vacillates and is usually
subordinate.
Likewise, the leading Formalist Jakobson declares that The subject of literary
science is not literature, but literariness, i.e. that which makes a given work a literary
work.Instead of seeking abstract qualities like imagination as the basis of
literariness, the Formalists start to define the observable devices by which literary
texts (especially poems) foreground their own language, in metre, rhyme, and other
patterns of sound and repetition.
Defamiliarization is central to the concept of literariness. To put it simply,
defamiliarization is to make the text unfamiliar, and it is the renewing and
prolonging of perception that refreshes and attracts the readers subconsciously.
Prague School structuralists and Russian formalists consider the notion of
defamiliarization the set towards the message leading to a new and fresh
perception of reality. Defamiliarization was the basic aim of art, according to
Shklovsky. The purpose of art is to impart the sensation of things as they are
perceived and not as they are known. The technique of art is to make objects
unfamiliar, to make forms difficult, to increase the difficulty and length of
perception because the process of perception is an aesthetic end in itself and must be
prolonged A work is created artistically so that its perception is impeded and the
greatest possible effect is produced through the slowness of the perception.
Shklovsky highlights the slowness of perception as a characteristic of literariness; in
other words, works are created artistically by increasing the difficulty and length of
perception. The effects of a host of techniques and craft involve this cognitive
process.

24

For instance, the metaphor as a non-literal expression of a certain proposition

or propositions often entails greater interpretive efforts, which enforce the
aesthetic value.
Turning to literary translation, the complexity of poetic language and the
subtleness of the effects raise a great challenge for the literary translator especially
for the prose translator to recognize or be aware of them in the source literary
texts. Many translation scholars have underscored the importance of a thorough
understanding of the source text. For example, Steiner argues that translation has an
interpretive nature and indicates the importance of understanding the source text in
translating, claiming that the main task for the translator as a complete reader is to
establish the full intentional quality of the source text states that The claim that
translation generally falls under interpretive use is significant in that it offers an
explanation for one of the most basic demands standardly made in the literature on
translation that is, that a thorough understanding of the original text is a necessary
precondition for making a good translation. It is manifest that a thorough
understanding of the source text would be a good starting point; the problem,
however, is: how do we know someone has a thorough understanding of the
source text? Stylistics assists us in searching for the answer to this question.1 Even
though a strictly thorough understanding is impossible due to the openness of
literature, stylistics a literary linguistic method to do literature can hopefully
interpret the source text and the target text in a systematic way, and attempt to
develop the fundamental concerns of the another related challenge is that poetic
language as opposed to standard language tends to be non-standard and hence
the translation does take the risk of being unfamiliar. The nonstandard language in
translation which involves the use of some strategy to force us to look is
interestingly at variance with a common theme in translation: that of smoothness,
neutrality, readability .Bassnett points out that Again and again, translators of
novels take pains to create readable target language texts, avoiding the stilted effect
that can follow from adhering too closely to source language syntactical structures,

25

but fail to consider the way in which individual sentences form part of the total
structure. Bassnett suggests that What the translator must do, therefore, is to first
determine the function of the SL system and then to find a TL system that will
adequately render the function, which shows her view of giving priority to the
aesthetic function. Here to determine the function of the source language does
require the translators knowledge of the style, which guides the translators to
consider the way in which individual sentences form part of the total structure.
With regard to the translation strategy here to maintain the non-standard feature of
language or adapt it into the standard (smooth and neutral) target language the
translators criterion is the function of the source language system. It is worth
noting that to maintain the non-standard language of a literary text does not
necessarily mean to translate word for word and hence produce unsmooth
translation; creatively producing the correspondence in smooth and acceptable target
language is also one of the strategies. Gutt sees the essence of poetic language or
non-standard language to be the communicative clue which guides us to the
authors intention and alerts us to the speakers wish to draw attention to a
particular word, phrase or passage .
In other words, it is not the words in the source text that are the most
significant; while it is the alerting function of the non-standard language that
indicates the meaning. In Boase-Beiers words, The style of the utterance, which
provides clues to the intended interpretation, is of paramount importance . To this
extent, a creative translation which can function to induce a similar attention in the
target readers is often justified.
1.4 Linguistic issues in translation
Anne Cluysenaar, in her book on literary stylistics, makes some important points
about translation. The translator, she believes, should not work with general
precepts when determining what to preserve or parallel from the SL text, but
should work with an eye on each individual structure, whether it be prose or

26

verse, since each structure will lay stress on certain linguistic features or levels
and not on others. She goes on to analyse C.Day Lewis translation of Valrys
poem, Les pas and comes to the conclusion that the translation does not work
because the translator was working without an adequate theory of literary
translation. What Day Lewis has done, she feels, is to have ignored the relation of
parts to each other and to the whole and that his translation is, in short, a case
ofperceptual bad form. The remedy for such inadequacies is also proposed:
what is needed, says Cluysenaar, is a description of the dominant structure of
every individual work to be translated. Cluysenaars assertive statements about
literary translation derive plainly from a structuralist approach to literary texts that
conceives of a text as a set of related systems, operating within a set of other
systems. As Robert Scholes puts it: Every literary unit from the individual sentence
to the whole order of words can be seen in relation to the concept of system. In
particular, we can look at individual works, literary genres, and the whole of
literature as related systems, and at literature as a system within the larger system
of human culture.
The failure of many translators to understand that a literary text is made up of
a complex set of systems existing in a dialectical relationship with other sets
outside its boundaries has often led them to focus on particular aspects of a text at
the expense of others. Studying the average reader, Lotman determines four
essential positions of the addressee:
(1) Where the reader focuses on the content as matter, i.e. picks out the prose
argument or poetic paraphrase.
(2) Where the reader grasps the complexity of the structure of a work and the
way in which the various levels interact.
(3) Where the reader deliberately extrapolates one level of the work for a
specific purpose.
(4) Where the reader discovers elements not basic to the genesis of the text and
uses the text for his own purposes.

27

Clearly, for the purposes of translation, position (1) would be completely

inadequate (although many translators of novels in particular have focused on
content at the expense of the formal structuring of the text), position (2) would
seem an ideal starting point, whilst positions (3) and (4) might be tenable in certain
circumstances. The translator is, after all, first a reader and then a writer and in the
process of reading he or she must take a position.
So, for example, Ben Belitts translation of Nerudas Fulgor y muerte de
Joaqun Murieta contains a statement in the Preface about the rights of the reader
to expect an American sound not present in the inflection of Neruda, and one of
the results of the translation is that the political line of the play is completely
changed. By stressing the action, the cowboys and Indians myth element, the
dialectic of the play is destroyed, and hence Belitts translation could be described
as an extreme example of Lotmans third reader position.
The fourth position, in which the reader discovers elements in the text that
have evolved since its genesis, is almost unavoidable when the text belongs to a
cultural system distanced in time and space. The twentieth-century readers dislike
of the Patient Griselda motif is an example of just such a shift in perception, whilst
the disappearance of the epic poem in western European literatures has inevitably
led to a change in reading such works. On the semantic level alone, as the meaning
of words alters, so the reader/translator will be unable to avoid finding himself in
Lotmans fourth position without detailed etymological research. So when
Gloucester, in King Lear, Act III sc.vii, bound, tormented and about to have his
eyes gouged out, attacks Regan with the phrase Naughty lady, it ought to be clear
that there has been considerable shift in the weight of the adjective, now used to
admonish children or to describe some slightly comic (often sexual) peccadillo.
Much time and ink has been wasted attempting to differentiate between
translations , versions, adaptations and the establishment of a hierarchy of
correctness between these categories. Yet the differentiation between them

28

derives from a concept of the reader as the passive receiver of the text in which its
truth is enshrined.
In other words, if the text is perceived as an object that should only produce
a single invariant reading, any deviation on the part of the reader/translator will
be judged as a transgression. Such a judgement might be made regarding scientific
documents, for example, where facts are set out and presented in unqualifiedly
objective terms for the reader of SL and TL text alike, but with literary texts the
position is different. One of the greatest advances in twentieth-century literary
study has been the reevaluation of the reader. So Barthes sees the place of the
literary work as that of making the reader not so much a consumer as a producer of
the text,5 while Julia Kristeva sees the reader as realizing the expansion of the
works process of semiosis . The reader, then, translates or decodes the text
according to a different set of systems and the idea of the one correct reading is
dissolved. At the same time, Kristevas notion of intertextuality, that sees all texts
linked to all other texts because no text can ever be completely free of those texts
that precede and surround it, is also profoundly significant for the student of
translation. As Paz suggests all texts are translations of translations of translations
and the lines cannot be drawn to separate Reader from Translator.
Quite clearly, the idea of the reader as translator and the enormous freedom
this vision bestows must be handled responsibly. The reader/ translator who does
not acknowledge the dialectical materialist basis of Brechts plays or who misses
the irony in Shakespeares sonnets or who ignores the way in which the doctrine of
the transubstantiation is used as a masking device for the production of Vittorinis
anti-Fascist statement in Conversazioni in Sicilia is upsetting the balance of power
by treating the original as his own property. And all these elements can be missed
if the reading does not take into full account the overall structuring of the work and
its relation to the time and place of its production. Maria Corti sums up the role of
the reader in terms that could equally be seen as advice to the translator.

29

Every era produces its own type of signedness, which is made to manifest in
social and literary models. As soon as these models are consumed and reality
seems to vanish, new signs become needed to recapture reality, and this allows us
to assign an information-value to the dynamic structures of literature. So seen,
literature is both the condition and the place of artistic communication between
senders and addressees, or public. The messages travel along its paths, in time,
slowly or rapidly; some of the messages venture into encounters that undo an
entire line of communication; but after great effort a new line will be born. This
last fact is the most significant; it requires apprenticeship and dedication on the
part of those who would understand it, because the hypersign function of great
works transforms the grammar of our view of the world.
The translator, then, first reads/translates in the SL and then, through a
further process of decoding, translates the text into the TL language. In this he is
not doing less than the reader of the SL text alone, he is actually doing more, for
the SL text is being approached through more than one set of systems. It is
therefore quite foolish to argue that the task of the translator is to translate but not
to interpret, as if the two were separate exercises. The interlingual translation is
bound to reflect the translators own creative interpretation of the SL text.
Moreover, the degree to which the translator reproduces the form, metre,
rhythm, tone, register, etc. of the SL text, will be as much determined by the TL
system as by the SL system and will also depend on the function of the translation.
If, as in the case of the Loeb Classics Library, the translation is intended as a line
by line crib on the facing page to the SL text, then this factor will be a major
criterion. If, on the other hand, the SL text is being reproduced for readers with no
knowledge either of the language or the socioliterary conventions of the SL
system, then the translation will be constructed in terms other than those employed
in the bilingual version. It has already been pointed out that criteria governing
modes of translation have varied considerably throughout the ages and there is
certainly no single proscriptive model for translators to follow.

30

As discussed, that, of all types of translation, the most elusive one is

translation of poetry. Two of our distinguished scholar-critics Sri Aurobindo and
K.R.S. Iyengar have cautioned us while translating poetry into a second language.
Iyengar says: Poetry by its very nature is untranslatable. Ideas can be
translated from language to language, but poetry is theidea touched with the
magic of phrase and incantatory music. Competent translator can, however, play
the good broker between the poet and the reader, and surpassing the mere prose of
statement can give intimations of the poets sovereign utterance. Good translation
can create trust and stimulate interest.
Through translation we understand others and their civilization, therefore,
we are interested to do it carefully and sincerely, because mistakes in this field may
be disastrous. The meaning of culturally marked words is often difficult to
understand without cultural knowledge and poses translation problems, particularly
when the words are associated with cultural domains. Words encoding cultural
information are difficult to translate since they involve cultural knowledge and a
cultural background. Each language describes the world in a different way.
Translators need to be well informed of two languages, and need, ideally to be
familiar with the subjects of the texts they are translating. Translation plays an
important role in filling the gaps between different cultures and nations. Literary
translations in particular help these different nations reach a universal culture on a
common ground. A good translation is not simply concerned with transferring the
propositional content of the source language text (SLT), but also its other
pragmatic features. The attention given to pragmatic facts and principles in the
course of translation can enhance the understanding of the text and improve the
quality of translation. Since the concept of culture is essential to understanding the
implications for literary translation and culture-specific items in translation, many
translation theorists have dealt with definition of culture. In 1984 Larson defines
culture as a complex beliefs, attitudes, values, and rules which a group of people

31

share . He notes that the translator needs to understand beliefs, attitudes, values,
and the rules of the SL audience in order to adequately understand the ST and
adequately translate it for people who have a different set of beliefs, attitudes,
values, and rules. In 1998, Newmark remarks that culture is the way of life and its
manifestations are peculiar to a community that uses a particular language as its
means of expression . Here, he asserts that each language group has its own
culturally specific features. Indeed, one of the most difficult problems in
translating literary texts is found in the differences between cultures. People of a
given culture look at things from their own perspective. Larson notes that
different cultures have different focuses. Some societies are more technical and
others less technical. Therefore, if the SL text originates from a highly technical
society it may be much more difficult to translate it into the language of a
nontechnical society. However, in the case of similar cultures the conditions are not
the same. When the cultures are similar, there is less difficulty in translating. This
is because both languages will probably have terms that are more or less equivalent
for the various aspects of the culture. When the cultures are very different, it is
often difficult to find equivalent lexical items. Translation plays an important role
in increasing awareness and understanding among diverse cultures and nations.
Literary translations in particular help these different cultures reach a compromise.
The increasing interest in the literature of other languages has required a more
studious regard for the problems of literary translation. A translator deals with a
text which involves linguistic, pragmatic and cultural elements. Such problems
often pose problems to target readers. More often than not, translators pay more
attention to linguistic and cultural elements than to pragmatic aspects of a source
text.
The linguistic problems in translating verse is two fold; the words and
meaning on one hand, whereas the flow and rhythm onthe other hand.The words
and meaning embody certain issues related to the images, similes, metaphors,

32

culture-specific words, phrasal verbs,idioms, punned expressions, enjambment

and grammar of both the TL text and the SL text.According to Ezra Pound,
an image is that which presents an intellectual and emotional complex in an
instant of time.
In Pounds definition, the image is not just a stand in for something else; it
is a putting-into-word of the emotional, intellectualand concrete stuff that we
experience in any given moment. It is also important to note that an image in
poetry, contrary to popular belief, is not simply visual. It can engage any of the
senses. And in fact, for it to be an image, it must engage at leastone of the senses
by using sensory detail. This is a great challenge for a translator, as s/he has to put
the same sensory effectin the translated form as well.Another problem in
translating poems is regarding the metaphors. Metaphor is the concept of
understanding one thing interms of another. A metaphor is a figure of speech that
constructs an analogy between two things or ideas, the analogy isconveyed by the
use of a metaphorical word in place of some other word. Metaphor is or was also
occasionally used to denoterhetorical figures of speech that achieve
their effects via association, comparison or resemblance (e. g. antithesis,
hyperbole,metonymy and simile, which are then all considered types of
metaphor).The most difficult challenge while translating literary texts is found in
the differences between cultures. People of a givenculture look at things from their
own perspective. Larson notes that different cultures have different focuses. Some
societiesare more technical and other less technical. This difference is reflected in
the amount of vocabulary which is available totalk about a particular topic .
Larson adds that there may also be both technical and non-technicalvocabulary
which is available to talk about the same thing within a given society. Therefore,
if the SL text originates from ahighly technical society it may be much more
difficult to translate it into the language of a nontechnical society. However, inthe
case of similar cultures the conditions are not the same:When the cultures are
similar there is less difficulty in translating. This is because both languages will

33

probably haveterms that are more or less equivalent for the various aspects of the
culture. When the cultures are very different, it is often difficult to find
equivalent lexical items.
Other difficulties of translation are regarding the idioms and phrasal verbs.
An idiom is an expression peculiar to a languageand not readily understandable
from its grammatical construction or from the meaning of its parts. It is considered
that theliving language of any country is idiomatic. In other words, idiom means a
group of words having unique meaning of theindividual word in the group.
Similarly, phrasal verb is a combination of verb + adverb or preposition or
verb to havedifferent meaning compared to the meaning of the verb. The unique
meaning of the idioms and phrasal verbs become difficult to translate.
Punned expressions have appeared in literature since the time of Homer .Shaw
defines this term as a playon words; the humorous use of a word emphasizing
different meanings or applications. However, it does not seem appropriateto
consider puns as merely a humour device. According to Nash , we take punning
for a tawdry and facetiousthing, one of the less profound forms of humour, but that
is the prejudice of our time; a pun may be profoundly serious, or charged with
pathos.
Hence, translating these expressions into another language becomes another
problematic issue.According to the structuralist point of view, grammar is the study
of the rules governing the use of a language. That set of rules is also called the
grammar of the language, and each language has its own distinct grammar. Hence,
for any translator,grammar becomes a matter of concern. As the complete language
system of any society depends on its grammatical rules, so,for the translator,
grammatical knowledge of both, the TL and SL becomes necessary. Flow and
rhythm cause another problem in translation. As the rhyme, rhythm, alliteration,
assonance, consonance, etc, produce musicality in any poem, hence its existence
becomes important. But most of the time it is observed that these musicalelements,
that are the beauty of the poems, are somewhat lost in translation.

34

Aesthetic values or poetic truth in a poem are conveyed in word order and sounds,
as well as in cognitive sense (logic). And these aesthetic values have no
independent meaning, but they are correlative with the various types of meaning in
the text.Hence, if the translator destroys the word choice, word order, and the
sounds, s/he impairs and distorts the beauty of the original poem. Delicacy and
gentleness, for instance, ruins if the translator provides crude alliterations for the
original carefully-composed alliterations. So, the problem in translating a verse is
how to retain the aesthetic values in the TL text. The aesthetic values, are
dependent on the structure (or poetic structure), and sound. Poetic structure
includes the plan of the original poem as a whole, the shape and the balance of
individual sentence in each line. While sound is anything connected with sound
cultivation including rhyme, rhythm, assonance, onomatopoeia, etc. A translator
cannot ignore any of them although s/he may order them depending on the nature
of the poem translated. The first factor is poetic structure. It is important to note
that the structure meant here is the plan of the poem as a whole, the shape and the
balance of individual sentence of each line. So, it does not have to relate directly
to the sentential structures or grammar of a language, even in fact it is very
much affected by the sentential structure. Thus, maintaining the original structure
of the poem may mean maintaining the original structure of each sentence. Another
literary or aesthetic factor is sound. As stated before, sound is anything
connected with sound cultivation including rhythm, assonance; onomatopoeia etc.
a translator must try to maintain them in the translation. As Newmark further
states, In a significant text, semantic truth is cardinal [meaning is not more or
less important, it is important!], whilst of the three aesthetic factors, sound (e.g.
alliteration or rhyme) is likely to recede in importance... rhyme is perhaps the most
likely factor to give- rhyming is difficult and artificial enough in one language,
reproducing line is sometimes doubly so. In short, if the translation is faced with
the condition where s/he has to make a sacrifice, s/he should sacrifice the sound.

35

On the other hand, the translator has to balance where the beauty of a poem
really lies. If the beauty lies more on sounds rather on the meaning (semantic), the
translator cannot ignore the sound factor.
Cultural Issues Words or expressions that contain culturally bound word(s)
create certain problems. The socio-cultural problems exist in the phrases, clauses,
or sentences containing word(s) related to the four major cultural categories,
namely: ideas, behavior , product and ecology . The ideas includes belief, values,
and institution; behaviors includes customs or habits, products includes art,
music, and artifacts, and ecology includes flora, fauna, plains, winds and
weather. In translating culturally-bound expressions, like in other expressions, a
translator may apply one or some of the procedures: Literal translation,
transference, naturalization , cultural equivalent, functional equivalent, description
equivalent, classifier,componential analysis, deletion, couplets, note addition,
glosses, reduction, and synonymy. In literal translation, a translator does unit-tounit translation. The translation unit may vary from word to larger units such as
phrase or clause. One applies transference procedure if s/he converts the SL
word directly into TL word by adjusting the alphabets (writing system) only. The
result is loan word. When s/he does only adjust the alphabets, but also adjust it
into the normal pronunciation of the TL word, s/he applies naturalization .In
addition, the translator may find the cultural equivalent word of the SL or, if s/he
cannot find one, neutralize or generalize the SL word to result functional
equivalents. When the translator modifies the SL word with description of form in
the TL,the result is description equivalent. Sometimes a translator provides
a generic or super ordinate term for a TL word and the result in the TL is called
classifier. And when the translator just supplies the near TL equivalent for the
SL word, s/he uses synonymy. In componential analysis procedure the translator
splits up a lexical unit into its sense components, often one-to-two, one-to-three, or
more translation. Moreover, a translator sometimes adds some information,
whether he puts it in a bracket or in other clause or even footnote or even deletes

36

unimportant SL word in translation to smooth the result for the reader.The writer
does not assert that one procedure is superior to others; it depends on the
predicament considering the aestheticand expressive functions a poem is carrying.
A translator should try to find the cultural equivalent (synonym) first before trying
the other procedure. It also depends on the translator that s/he should say bothwhat the author says and what s/he means. Otherwise, translation would forfeit
its splendor and the translator, his/her credibility.

37

II. Literary translation as a specific coding-encoding process

2.1 Literary translation as functional interaction of languages
Usually when people speak about translation they are seldom specific about the
meaning. The presumption is quite natural - everybody understands the meaning of
the word. However, to describe translation intuitive understanding is not sufficient what one needs is a definition. Translation means both a process and a result, and
when defining translation we are interested in both its aspects.
In order to explain translation it is important to compare the original (source)
text and the resulting (target) one. Every language is characterized by a specific
structure of its lexico-grammatical fields and has its own lexical, morphological and
syntactic systems. It may result in lack of coincidence between the means of
expressing the same content in SL (source language) and TL (target language).
That is why good practical knowledge of the two languages is quite necessary
but not sufficient for translating. Besides this knowledge one must possess a number
of skills and be guided by a number of principles worked out by the theory of
translation. These principles are connected both with linguistic and extralinguistic
aspects. In translation we deal with two languages (two codes) and to verify the
information they give us about the extralinguistic objects (and concepts) we should
consider extralinguistic situation, and background information.
In short, translation is functional interaction of language and to study this
process we should study both the interacting elements and the rules of interaction .
While translating one must keep in view typological characteristics of both the
languages and remember that the same idea may be expressed lexically in one of
them and grammatically in the other.
One of the main demands upon a person translating any text is that he should be
well acquainted with its subject matter. If all these principles are taken into
consideration there will be no danger of so-called "literal" translation, which means
a word-for-word translation. This type of translation with all its seeming accuracy
ignores both linguistic and extralinguistic factors discussed above. It leads to

38

preserving the meanings of separate words and at the same time it distorts the
meaning of the whole text, thus often creates an undesirable comic effect.
Also we can distinguish between literary and informative translation, on the
one hand, and between written and oral translation (or interpretation), on the other
hand.
In this work it is considered literary translation. Literary translation deals with
literary texts, for example, works of fiction or poetry whose main function is to
make an emotional or aesthetic impression upon the reader. Their communicative
value depends, first and foremost, on their artistic quality and the translators
primary task is to reproduce this quality in translation.
Literary works are known to fall into a number of genres. Literary translations
may subdivide in the same way, as each genre calls for a specific artistic means to
impress the reader. Translators of prose, poetry or plays have their own problems.
Each of these forms of literary activities comprises a number subgenres and the
translator may specialize in one or some of them in accordance with his talents and
experience. The particular tasks inherent in the translation of literary works of each
genre are more literary than linguistic. The great challenge to the translator is to
combine the maximum equivalence and the high literary merit.
All branches of the theory of translation are concerned with important aspects
of the translators work and constitute a body of theoretical thought of indisputable
practical value.
2.2 Text and Context and its role in literary translation
Text may be taken for a specific language medium which enables the
formation of cognitive ideas with the aim of imparting information and
forming/interpreting a coherent sequence of utterances. It is supposed to be
endowed with referential continuity and logical reasoning. For this reason, to
create, understand and translate a text means to form a specific cross connection
between its semantic contents. Within the ambit of text linguistics, text was

39

initially viewed as an organized unit larger than a sentence which consists of a

sequence of formally (i.e. morphosyntactically) and semantically linked utterances
unified thematically as well. This means that a text was understood as a network
made of intertwined syntactic wholes: individual sentences and paragraphs. This,
by a long way, oversimplified formal conception of a text was substantially altered
after the so-called communicative pragmatic turn in linguistic studies at the outset
of the 1990s when a text started to be conceived of as text-in-function, text-insituation, as a socio-communicative functional unit). Hand in hand with this,
one of the central issues became the elaboration of the notion of textuality: which
properties does a text have to possess in order to be called a text? In this regard, de
Beaugrande and Dressler interpret text as a communicative occurrence which
must meet certain standards/criteria of textuality, these being: cohesion, coherence,
intentionality, acceptability, informativity, situationality and intertextuality. If any
of these standards is not considered to have been satisfied, the text will not be
communicative and in turn, non-communicative texts are treated as non-texts.
Gpferich offers the following definition of text in her article in the seminal
German publication Handbuch Translation by Snell-Hornby: A text is a thematic
and/or functionally oriented, coherent linguistic or linguistically figurative whole
which has been formed with a certain intention, a communicative intention and
which fulfils a recognizable communicative function of the first or second degree
and represents a functionally complete unit in terms of content (for the
communicative function of the first or second degree). As it follows from the
recent definition of text given above, the modern perception of text takes it beyond
a mere list of sentences and emphasizes the communicative act-insituation
providing the framework in which the text has its place. Nowadays, the linguistic
and semiotic fashioning of text seems determined by its communicative function
and the requirements for the above-said thematic orientation, intentionality, a
recognizable communicative function, coherence and completion, seem common
for the majority of text definitions available.

40

In linguistics, context carries tremendous importance in disambiguation of

meanings as well as in understanding the actual meaning of words. Therefore,
understanding the context becomes an important task in the area of applied
linguistics, computational linguistics, lexical semantics, cognitive linguistics, as
well as in other areas of linguistics as context triggers variation of meaning and
supplies valuable information to understand why and how a particular word varies
in meaning when used in a piece of text. Keeping this question in mind, I have
made an attempt here to understand the nature, type, and role of context in the act
of meaning disambiguation of words used in a language. In contrast to the
observation of earlier scholars, I have identified four types of context that can help
us to understand the actual meaning of a word. At certain situations, although
reference to the local context appears to be the most suitable proposition, reference
to other contexts also becomes equally important to decipher the actual meaning of
a word in a natural language text.
A word, when used in a piece of text, usually denotes only one meaning out of
multiple meanings it inherently carries. Although it is still unknown to us how does
it happen, the general observation is that it is the context that determines which
meaning of the word should be considered. This observation, as a logical
consequence, leads us to identify the context responsible for meaning variation of a
word. The general conviction is that identification of context depends heavily on
intuitive ability of a language user. I argue that natural language texts are the best
resources for the task, since words are usually represented within these texts with
all kinds of context-based information. Language corpora, made with different
kinds of natural text, contain numerous examples of contextual use of words to
provide useful information for understanding meaning variation of words as well
as for deciphering their actual context-based meanings.
Context refers to an immediate linguistic environment (rarely detached or
isolated) in which a particular word occurs. Since it is not always explicit, it may
be hidden within the neighboring members of a word used in a piece of text. If we

41

cannot extract the information relevant to the meaning of a word from its
immediate linguistic environment, we need to take into account the topic of
discussion as a sphere of necessary information. Taking these factors into
consideration, Miller and Leacock have classified context into two types: (a) local
context, and (b) topical context. While the local context refers to one or two words
immediately before and after the key word (KW) under investigation, the topical
context refers to the topic of the text where the KW has been used. According to
these scholars, reference to the two contexts is more of less sufficient in
understanding the actual contextual meaning of the KW used in a text. In certain
readings, information acquired from the local context and the topical context may
be sufficient, but these are not enough for understanding all possible meaning
variations of a word.
A language is way to see and understand the world. It is the vehicle of our
ideas, thoughts and perspectives of our world. However since human being is
essentially a social animal we perpetually interact with our environment. This
interaction with environment is a factor of time and space. When and where we are
interacting determines what actually we are meaning. For example March is an
act as well as month. The meaning depends on when, where and how.
Translation is understood as an act of carrying the meaning of a text from one
language to another. This process involves interpretation of meaning of the source
text and producing the same meaning in another language. Text however cannot
exist out of context. By context what is meant is the entire environment in which
the word or sentence is expressed or stated. So a translator has to go into the
background of the text to understand the text. Thus translator first decontextualizes the original text and re-contextualizes it for the target text. This
forms a good contextualized translation.While seeking the context of a text there
may be two categories of factors that may influence the meaning of the textlinguistic context or the situational context.

42

Linguistic context cites the linguistic factors influencing the meaning of the
text. Any word in the text is not present in isolation but interacts with other words
in the text and with the whole text at large. This interaction among words
determines their meaning rather than its isolated meaning. For example see the use
of word press in these sentences. A). press my shirt. B). I work in a press. C).
press the button. Linguistic context too can either be immediate or remote.
Immediate context refers to the words or sentences that make the context evident
then and there through the whole text. Remote context pertains to existence of
word or sentence somewhere else. It may refer to author using the word
somewhere else or there may be special reasons to use that word or phrase.
Situational context refers to the factors of situation and circumstances influencing
the meaning of a text. These factors are little harder to be recognized than
linguistic ones. The situational factors may pertain to the facial expressions,
gestures and stances at micro level and the social, political and economical milieu
and the culture at large. Conventions and the whole value system differ from one
culture and society to another. What is right and what is wrong differs.
Ideologies may also be a factor to refer to the context. Language therefore should
be considered a part of culture and understood in its context. Translator must be
giving over the top stress to understand the context so as to produce a good
contextualized translation. The meaning of equivalents practically does not depend
on the context, so to translate them literary one should merely look them up in a
dictionary. The demand to consult dictionaries is essential. No guesswork is
allowed in translation.

It is much more difficult to translate those words of SL

which are characterized by partial correspondence to the words of TL. Such words
are mostly polysemantic. That is why in order to translate them correctly it is
necessary first of all to state which particular meaning of such a word is realized in
the utterance. The most reliable indicator in this case is the context in which the
word is used. They usually differentiate, as it has been mentioned above, between
linguistic context and extralinguistic context (or context of situation). Linguistic

43

context in its turn is subdivided into narrow (context of a phrase or a sentence) and
wide (utterance-length context or sometimes context of the whole text). Very often
the meaning of a word is revealed in the minimum context, i.e. in a phrase ("green"
, , , etc., but there is no problem in translating the phrase
"green trees" - " " or "green years" - " "). However,
there are such cases when we need at least a sentence to see what the word means,
e.g. "I'll be sitting in the 3rd carriage from the front of the train" - "
". The whole sentence is necessary here to
understand the meaning of the word "carriage" and to choose the variant ""
but not ", ". Sometimes linguistic context is closely connected with
extralinguistic factors. So literary translation of any word begins with contextual
analysis of its meaning after which it becomes possible to choose correctly the
corresponding word of TL. All types of context can help to identify the meaning of
words in SL characterized by partial correspondence to the words of TL, as well as
the meaning of words that do not correspond to any words of TL. Literary
translation of the latter group causes many difficulties and requires special means.
Although it must be admitted that not much attention has been paid to the
issueof the definition of literature over the past two decades or so, what has
attracted interest, as Culler contends, is that literature is seen as a historical and
ideological category with its social and political functioning. Nowadays,
definitions of literature tend to be functional and contingent rather than formal or
ontological, as illustrated by Eagleton who argues in his influential textbook
Literary Theory that literature is best defined as a highly valued kind of writing.
On the other hand, Culler adopts in his Literary Theory: A Very Short Introduction
a two pronged approach: the designation literature serves as institutional label,
denoting a speech act or textual event that elicits certain kinds of attention .
However, for historical reasons attention of the literary kind has been focused on
texts displaying certain features, notably such things as foregrounding of
language, the interdependence of different levels of linguistic organisation, the

44

separation from the practical context of utterance, and the perception of texts as
both aesthetic objects and intertextual or self-reflexive construct. This specificity
of literature is also confirmed by Toury who depicts it by means of the presence
of a secondary, literary code superimposed on a stratum of unmarked language.
In order to grasp the specifics of literary translation, it is deemed reasonable to
look at the properties of a literary text first. These are pre-determined by the realm
of literature, which has an innate capacity to appeal to ones feelings and unfetter
ones imagination. Bearing this in mind, it might seem appropriate to pose a
question why most people usually enjoy literary texts much more than their nonliterary counterparts. It would not be an overstatement to suggest that literary texts
guarantee entertainment on the basis of their artistic quality, provide the recipient
with the authors experience or world-view which may motivate them to think, act
and re-evaluate their attitudes. Clearly, the most important feature of a literary
work of art is that it is a bearer of an aesthetic function. Literary text comes into
existence as a subjectively transformed reflection of the objective reality in tune
with the aesthetic-emotional intent of the author: he/she endeavours to convey
his/her ideas, thoughts and emotions, which is enabled by his/her orientation
towards experience. From the point of view of the language resources choice, an
immense lexical variability coupled with the 22 uniqueness of expression comes to
the fore here. Another crucial feature of literary text is connected with the release
of the polysemy of words for an adequate understanding of the text is achieved
only through a careful mapping of its entire denotative and connotative
dimension. Besides, it is claimed that the principal feature of literary text rests on
its focus on the message, not on content.
Consequently, literary translation must be approached as a kind of
aesthetically-oriented mediated bilingual communication, which aims at producing
a target text intended to communicate its own form, correspondent with the source
text, and accordant with contemporary literary and translational norms of the
receptor culture. In the ambit of literary translation, the translator delves in the

45

aesthetic pleasures of working with great pieces of literature, of recreating in a TL

a work that would otherwise remain beyond reach or effectively encrypted. One of
the exasperatingly difficult things about literary translation in general is the
translators ability to capture and render the style of the original composition.
Notably, in literary translation how one says something may be as significant,
sometimes even more significant, than what one says. In technical translation, for
instance, style is not a consideration as long as the informational content makes its
way unaltered from SL to TL. Landers illustrates this issue by using a vivid
freight-train analogy: in technical translation the order of the cars is
inconsequential if all cargo arrives intact.
In literary translation, however, the order of the cars which is to say the style
can make the difference between a lively, highly readable translation and stilted,
rigid, artificial rendering that strips the original of its artistic and aesthetic essence,
even its very soul.
Ideally, the translator should take pains to have no style at all and endeavour
to disappear into and become indistinguishable from the style of the author he/she
translates now terse, now rambling, sometimes abstruse but always as faithful to
the original as circumstances permit. However, all literary translators have their
individual styles, i.e. characteristic modes of expressions, which they more or less
consciously or unconsciously display. More specifically, literary translation
traditionally splits into translation of poetry, translation of prose (fiction) and
translation of drama, reflecting three major strands of literary texts. While in the
translation of poetry, achievement of the same emotional effect on the TT recipient
is intended, in drama the relationship between text and performance, or readability
and performability comes under focus.
Within the field of literary translation, more time has been devoted to
investigating the problems of translating poetry than any other literary mode. Many
of the studies purporting to investigate these problems are either evaluations of
different translations of a single work or personal statements by individual

46

translators on how they have set about solving problems.8 Rarely do studies of
poetry and translation try to discuss methodological problems from a nonempirical
position, and yet it is precisely that type of study that is most valuable and most
needed. There are various methods and strategies of translating poetry:
(1) Phonemic translation, which attempts to reproduce the SL sound in the TL
while at the same time producing an acceptable paraphrase of the sense;
(2) Literal translation, where the emphasis on word-for-word translation
distorts the sense and the syntax of the original.
(3) Metrical translation, where the dominant criterion is the reproduction of
the SL metre, this method concentrates on one aspect of the SL text at the expense
of the text as a whole.
(4) Poetry into prose. 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 metrical types of translation.
(5) Rhymed translation, where the translator enters into a double bondage of
metre and rhyme. Lefeveres conclusions here are particularly harsh, since he feels
that the end product is merely a caricature.
(6) 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.
(7) Interpretation.The substance of the SL text is retained but the form is
changed, and imitations where the translator produces a poem of his own which
has only title and point of departure, if those, in common with the source text.
In other words, in establishing a set of methodological criteria to follow, the
translator has focused on some elements at the expense of others and from this
failure to consider the poem as an organic structure comes a translation that is
demonstrably unbalanced. However, Lefeveres use of the term version is rather
misleading, for it would seem to imply a distinction between this and translation,
taking as the basis for the argument a split between form and substance. The

47

translator has the right to differ organically, to be independent, provided that

independence is pursued for the sake of the original in order to reproduce it as a
living work.
Translating prose is of special interest to us since the literary text under
investigation represents a sample of fiction. Compared to other genres of literary
translation, poetry in particular, far fewer works have been devoted to the specific
problems of translating literary prose. One explanation for this could be the higher
status that poetry usually holds, but this is more probably due to the proliferated
erroneous assumption that a novel is usually supposed to have a simpler structure
than a poem and is therefore more straightforward to translate.
Since two prose texts differ not only in languages entering the process of
translation but also in terms of cultures and social conventions, fiction translation
must be thought of as not only interlingual transfer but also cross-cultural and
cross-social transference. Unlike other literary genres, fiction translation is not
endowed with an insignificant social influence because translated novels or short
stories (being the most common genres of prose fiction) may be read by millions of
voracious readers and sometimes successful novels may adapted into movies. All
in all, the yardstick by which quality of fiction translation is measured is the
correspondence in meaning, similarity in style (both authorial and text style) and
function. Turning our attention to the selected literary text subject to analysis, it
should be said that the novel pertains to expressive text type within the framework
of Reiss text typology because the author foregrounds the aesthetic dimension of
language. Drawing on a well-known Barthes-inspired dichotomy employed for
literary texts classification, the analyzed novel belongs to so-called readerly texts.
These texts have a fairly smooth narrative structure and commonplace language,
with narratives and characters presented to the reader by the text allowing him to
be a consumer of the meanings, as opposed to writerly texts, challenging the
reading process in some way and making the reader work much harder to produce
meanings from a range of possibilities. From a translatological angle, the literary

48

text corresponds to Nords instrumental translation, which serves as an

independent message-transmitting instrument in a new communicative action in
the target culture, and is intended to fulfil its communicative purpose without the
receiver being aware of reading or hearing a text which, in a different form, was
used before in a different communicative action .
In order to flesh out the explanation above, it should be added that TT
receivers read the TT as if it were a ST written in their own language. What is
more, Nords instrumental translation can be put on a par with Newmarks
communicative translation whose essence rests on producing on its readers an
effect as close as possible to that obtained on the readers of the original, being
smoother, simpler, clearer, more direct and tending to undertranslate. Last but not
least, literary texts may brim with culture-specific terms, in contrast to non-literary
texts, which supports the idea that literary translation champions rendering as an
instrument of cultural transmission and negotiation.
2.3 Literary translation of words having no correspondence in target
There are several ways of translating such words. The simplest way is to
transcribe them (lobby - , lump - , etc.). This method is widely used for
rendering personal names, place names, titles, etc
Sometimes transliteration is used for the same purpose, but transcription is
preferable because it renders the original sound-form of the word, while
transliteration is based upon its graphical presentation (for example, two ways of
rendering the name of Shakespeare in Russian: its transcription is while
its transliteration is neape). It is evident that for the purposes of oral
communication it is necessary to know the sound-form of the names, so with the
growth of contacts between the countries transliteration is being gradually ousted by
transcription. Those names which have already been rendered by means of transliteration are now traditionally used in this form (King George - , not
) and there is no need to change them. Such names should not be

49

translated anew, they have their translated equivalents. However, in translating those
names which have no equivalents, it is preferable to use transcription. Being a very
good way of rendering proper names, transcription is not very convenient for
translating notional words. Substitution of the Russian sounds for the English ones
does not make the English word understandable for the Russian readers. The words
"" or "" are hardly more informative for them than the original
"drugstore" or "lump". That is why transcription is often combined with footnotes or
explanations introduced into the text by the translator. As soon as the new word is
thus explained it can be freely used in the text in its transcribed form.
It is necessary to remember that explanations and footnotes contain additional
information which is not expressed directly in the original text and is introduced by
the translator. So it demands great knowledge on the part of the translator. The next
method of translating words having no correspondence in TL is based on
approximate rendering of the notion. It can be described as "translation on the
analogy". If a word in SL expresses some notion that has no name in TL it is
necessary to look for some analogous, similar (though not identical) notion in TL.
E.g.: if we are not translating a cookery book but a story or a novel it is quite
possible to translate the Russian "" as "jelly", though actually they are
different things (they use starch for "" and gelatin for jelly).
The last way out of the difficulty caused by lack of correspondence between
words of SL and TL is the so-called descriptive translation. In this case the meaning
of one word in SL is rendered by a group of words in TL ("spacewalk" - "
", " "division into districts", etc.).
So above we odered some ways of translating words that have no direct lexical
correspondences in TL. They all have certain drawbacks and their use is limited both
by linguistic and extralinguistic factors (explanations make the text too long and
sometimes clumsy, analogues are not always accurate enough, etc.). However,
proper combination of these means makes it possible to translate any literary text
rendering all the necessary information. When choosing the means of translating it is

50

also important to keep in view stylistic characteristics of the text itself and of
different words in both the languages. Special attention should be paid to
peculiarities of word combinability in TL, which may differ greatly from that of SL.
Many people think that the translation of literary works is one of the highest
forms of rendition because it is more than simply the translation of text. A literary
translator must also be skilled enough to translate feelings, cultural nuances, humour
and other delicate elements of a piece of work. In fact, the translators do not
translate meanings but the messages. That is why, the text must be considered in its
totality. Alternatively, Peter Newmark delineates translation as rendering the
meaning of a text into another language in the way that the author intended the text.
A further point is that there are examples in which the source text contains facets
that are advocated in an apt manner by Lawrence Venuti : discursive variations,
experimenting with archaism, slang, literary allusion and convention . Additionally,
it is no less than potentially contradictory that the translator should be visible and
make use of foreignising attributes simultaneously, as foreignising attributes, at
any rate in the Schleiermacher tradition, were chiefly initiated into the Target Text
(T.T) from the Source Text (S.T), not by the translators innovation.
Language has more than a communicative, or societal and connective purpose
in literary-prose translation. The word works as the key ingredient of literature, i.e.
it has an arty function. A tricky course of action emerges between the start and the
conclusion of an innovative work of translation, the trans-expression of the life
incarcerated in the framework of imagery of the work being translated. Hence, the
problems in prose-translation are within the area of art and they depend on its
particular laws.
2.4 Style as a specific problem of literary translation
Style has been an object of study from ancient times. Aristotle, Cicero and
Quintillian treated Style as the proper adornment of thought.

51

An essayist or an orator is expected to frame his ideas with the help of

sentences and choose figures suitable for his mode of discourse.
Arthur Schopenhauers definition of Style as the physiognomy of the mind
suggests that no matter how calculatingly choices may be made, a writers Style
will bear the mark of his personality. An experienced writer is able to rely on the
power of his habitual choices of sounds, words and syntactic patterns to convey his
personality of fundamental outlook .
Many scientists agree on the statement that language is said to have two
functions: it serves as a means of communication and also as a means of showing
ones thoughts. The first function is called communicative, the second
expressive. In connection with the second function there arises the problem of the
interrelation between the thought and its expression. As for the problem of
expression J. Middleton Murry considers that Style is a quality of language which
communicates precisely emotions or thoughts or a system of emotions or thoughts
peculiar to the author.
Notwithstanding the fact every writer has his own individual style using a
unique combination of language units that make his work easily recognizable the
mechanism of the applying SD is still the same (Annex 2).Thus, it is feasible to
take up general characteristics of SD when speaking about the individual style of a
writer.
Concerning this issue, many scholars are at variance with the typology of
SD. At the same time it is difficult to deny that SD must be observed on different
levels: phonetic, morphemic, lexical, phraseological and syntactical. I.Galperin
adds the utterance level.
First of all let us determine what SD proper is. This term is suggested by
I.Galperin who considers SD a conscious and intentional literary use of some of
the facts of the language (including expressive means) in which the most essential
features (both structural and semantic) of the language forms are raised to a
generalized level. Needless to say that most SD may be regarded as aiming at the

52

further intensification of the emotional or logical emphasis. This conscious

transformation of language units into a Stylistic Device has been observed by
certain linguists whose interest in scientific research have gone beyond the
boundaries of grammar. Thus A. Potebnja writes, As far back as in Ancient Rome
and Greece and with few exceptions up to the present time the definition of the
figurative use of a word has been based on the contrast between ordinary speech
used in its own, natural, primary meaning and transferred speech.
First, we would like to dwell upon the Literary Translation versus translation
proper, for Literary Translation issues (such as style) spring from the peculiarities
of its methods and techniques.
V. Comissarov suggests dichotonomous aspect of translation based on
predominant communicative function of the source text. Thus, he distinguishes
between Literary and Informative translation on the one hand and between Written
and Oral translation on the other hand.
The main function of Literary Translation, he continues, is to make an
emotional or aesthetic impression upon the reader. Communicative value of
literary texts depends first and foremost on their artistic quality and the translators
primary task is to reproduce this quality of translation, whereas main function of
informative translation is to convey a certain amount of ideas, to inform the reader.
However, he adds, translations of same texts can be listed as Literary or
Informative only as an approximation. A literary text may include some of purely
informative character and informative translation may comprise some elements
aimed at achieving an aesthetic effect .
Susan Basset, a British scientist, is interested in structural approach seeing
translation as a semiotic transformation that deals with invariant core of the SL.
Following A. Popovitch she affirms that Semiotic transformations or variants are
those changes which do not modify the core of meaning but influence the
expressive form. This statement can be interpreted as a main problem of any
literary translation: how to render expressive means of the Source Text, in other

53

words its style. S. Basset affirms that specific problems of Literary Translation
can emerge from the individual translators criteria. She believes that failure of
many translators to understand that a literary translation, which is made up of a
complex set of systems existing in a dialectical relationship with other sets outside
its boundaries, has often led translators to focus on particular aspects of a text at
the expense of others. Her statements derive from principles of Structuralism
which consider literary text as a set of related systems operating within a set of
other systems.
After the overview of Literary Translation we think feasible to narrow and
specify the problem. As to investigation of Literary Translation concerning its
style, A.Feodorov singles out 3 kinds of translation material: Scientific literature,
Publicist and socio-political texts, Fiction.
He fairly notices that fiction is art, thus the role of image here is crucially
important, for art thinks by means of images. It should be taken into account when
analyzing literary translation.
Needless to say that techniques mostly characteristic of informative
translation cannot be applied to the literary one.
Besides Feodorov, Barhudarov, Comissarov and others I.Retzker establishes
the specific techniques typical of different texts meaning their different styles and
kinds of translations.
Thus, when translating a scientific text the determinative point is the termequivalence, the permanent correspondence that does not depend on the context.
High frequency current is always .
As to translation of socio-political or publicist texts there an analoguefinding technique can be applied. It presupposes selection of a synonym that will
perfectly fit the context.
E.g.: The press proprietors have taken the Tories point and for many years
the noisy presses of Fleet Street have skillfully maintain an almost total silence on
Irish affairs. It was an effective blackout.

54

-
.
.
Though, in dictionary blackout is translated as ,
the contextual synonymic expression
perfectly fits the context.
And at last, when translating fiction the technique of adequate substitution is
largely applied. For example, translation of Ch.Dikkence`s American Notes
made by T.Kudreavtseva.
However, they booked twelve people inside and the luggage, including such
trifles as a large rocking chair and a good-sized dining table being at length made
fast upon the roof, we started off in great state.
The translator, feeling the irony of this scene (rocking chair and dining table
plus 12 people for one carriage is really a trifle), uses adequate substitution
technique, expressively differentiating the meaning of the neutral word book.
, ,
(
), , , ,
.
To translate a thought exactly, writes T.Retzker, the translator should not
follow the form of the ST but take it as a single whole, though consisting of
contents, main ideas and style.
Undoubtedly, every translator has his own method of rendering the style of
the original text. If you ask, for instance, several translators to translate one and the
same poem there will be definitely several different pieces of literature. More over,
in the History of Literary Translation there are many colourful pictures of different
literary currents. Method of Modernistic translation, for example, is extremely
subjective, introducing subjective style of translation, change of main ideas and

55

images. Romanticism insists on making things mysterious and introducing fantasy

elements (basically in poetry).Formalistic Approach opts for literal rendering of
every minute element of the ST.
Concerning the translation method some Soviet scientists suggested the term
realistic translation that substituted the term adequate or full-fledged
translation. According to G. Gachechiladze translation is the reflection of the
original text just as the latter is the reflection of reality.
Having covered some bullet-points of the theory and historical outlook of
Literary Translation we would like to approach closer to the style rendering
problem within it.
The stylistic equivalence pursuit is the corner stone of Literary Translation.
Style retaining is a highly problematic goal and it cannot be achieved completely.
Concerning this issue, I.Leviy believes that Literary Translation is a hybrid.
It is not a monolith work of literature, but interpenetration and
conglomeration of two structures: on the one hand contents and stylistic
peculiarities of the original text, on the other hand the whole complex of specific
stylistic features characteristic of translators language. In the work of literature i.e.
translation these two stratums are in the state of permanent tension, that can results
in a contradiction.
The translator is to iron out the contradiction thus, achieving stylistic
correspondence. Sometimes a minute detail will be enough for the reader to feel
translators failure in doing that.
As a matter of fact, it happens when translator either weakens the style or
resorts to unnecessary exaggerations.
G.Gachechiladze speculates a lot on stylistic weakening opposing it to the
full-fledged literary translation, The main goal of Literary Translation is the
enriching of the national literature and serving its interests, whereas literal
translation sets the opposite goal to reproduce the form of the original text.

56

For example, the famous Goethe`s poem The song of the stranger in the
night was translated by several Russian poets, but only Lermontov managed to
render the spirit of this poem, writes Gachechiladze.
M. Lermontov:

V. Briusov:

Comparing these two poems we realize why namely Lermontov`s poem

became a masterpiece, notwithstanding V.Briusov keeps to more exact
correspondence of lexical units and prosody.
In Russia literal translation was a real opposition to those who were eager to
preserve the inner essence of the original text. For instance, famous and
respectable poet A.Fet was the apologist of literalism. He writes, The translator is
happy when he manages, at least partially, to achieve the beauty of form that is
inseparable from the original text. The main task of translation is to be literal. No
matter it can sound heavy and uneven; the reader with an artistic flair will feel the
power of the original text .
Logic prompts us if even there is a reader with an artistic flair he will not
actually need this sort of translation (what about his good taste?). He would rather
read the original. Or, perhaps, he would be interested in comparing two texts out of
curiosity? Then what is the main function of Literary Translation to satisfy the
inquisitive reader? With retaining the inner essence of the original text,

57

Gacheciladze points out one interesting detail: the translator must find the stylistic
key with the help of which translator does not merely translates SD given in the
ST using stylistic potential of a separate word. He translates the complex
interaction of these Stylistic Devices with the main idea and authors individual
style, thus rendering the tone of the ST.
Adequate substitutions briefly reviewed in this Chapter can be interpreted as
indispensable constituents of the stylistic key.
Let us take B.Zahoder`s translation.
They (bees) might think you were only part of the tree.
,
, being translated literally, will sound much worse - it is not
the style of a book meant for children.
Much attention was paid by different scholars to literalism (weakening of the
style), however, I.Leviy warns us about the opposite phenomenon the deliberate
exaggeration of some stylistic elements in the ST.
Unlike Alan Duff he considers that the translator has no right to embellish.
K.Tchukovsky, a famous Russian writer and translator, who wrote a lot about
translation, gives vivid examples concerning unnecessary exaggerations, Balmont
translates instead of , instead of and
instead of .
Balmont, writes K. Tchukovsky, is ashamed that Witmen uses such a plain
language. That is why he sweetens Witmen`s poems with Slovonicisms .55
Summing up all analyzed ideas and phenomena we should bear in mind that
techniques acceptable for the Informative Translation are inadmissible for the
Literary one. Beauty does not exclude the accuracy. What is more, it should not be
interpreted as prettiness and accuracy as literalism.

58

III. Philological analysis of linguistic difficulties in literary translation

3.1 Literary translation of specifically English grammatical forms and
constructions.
To translate English grammatical forms and constructions one should not
necessarily look for the same forms and constructions in Russian as it was
mentioned, there may be none(Annex 1). Nevertheless, it is always possible to
translate them adequately since it is not the form itself but its meaning and function
in the sentence that should be rendered in literary translation. That is why translation
of any such unit should begin with its semantic and functional analysis. It can be
illustrated with the problem of rendering the definite and indefinite articles. Unless
articles have some special role in the sentence or some additional meaning, they are
not translated at all - they are merely omitted. However, there are cases when articles
are used to mark the rheme of the sentence. Sometimes, besides their usual meaning
of definiteness or indefiniteness articles have some additional meaning, e.g., the
indefinite article used with personal names has the meaning "some, a certain",
showing that someone is unknown to the speaker. Such meaning should be rendered
by corresponding means of the Russian language: "a Mrs. Smith" "
, - ". The indefinite article may also coincide in its
meaning either with the pronoun "one" ("I remember a friend of mine buying a
couple of cheeses..." -" , . . .") There are many
more meanings which the article may combine with its main grammatical function.
In this respect translation of articles does not differ from translation of other words first its meaning should be analyzed and then a proper word of TL can be chosen.
The same is true of prepositions and conjunctions. It is most important to remember
that even such a "simple" conjunction as "and" has at least 10 different meanings; in
different contexts it may correspond to the Russian "a" ("they stayed at home, and
we left" - " , "), "" ("And you did it?" " ?"), etc. Speaking of conjunctions, it should also be

59

mentioned that besides their main function (connecting and introducing different
clauses and parts of the sentence) they enter idiomatic constructions the meaning of
which cannot be guessed: it should be known or looked up in the dictionary ( if
anything" - " , , "). One
and the same preposition is also translated differently in different constructions and
contexts. As for the so-called notional parts of speech, they may differ in SL and TL
in the set of syntactic functions that they fulfill in the sentence. That is why
translation should always be based on a thorough syntactic analysis since it is not the
grammatical form itself but rather its function in the sentence that predetermines the
way of translation. For example, before translating an infinitive it is necessary to
state its role in the sentence - to see if it functions as a subject, object, attribute, or
adverbial modifier, etc. If it is an adverbial modifier, it is essential to see its type - an
adverbial modifier of purpose, of result, of attendant circumstances, etc. After this
functional and semantic analysis it is possible to render the infinitive into Russian
using any part of speech in the corresponding function (or changing the structure of
the sentence in order to express the same idea according to the norms of TL). It is
impossible to warn a beginner against all possible difficulties. However, it seems
reasonable to point out some English constructions that are most likely to cause
trouble. Most frequent among them are the so-called absolute constructions. There
are two main difficulties in dealing with them: first of all they are not always easy to
recognize and besides they do not correspond to any particular construction of the
Russian language. Based on secondary predication, these constructions usually
express some additional thought, something that happens in connection with the
main action, but still "outside" it. It is often hard to say if the construction indicates
time or cause of the main action - it may indicate them indiscriminately.
Generally

speaking,

translation

of

specifically

English

grammatical

constructions consists of two stages: first it is necessary to understand their meaning

and then find a corresponding way of expressing it in Russian. For the purpose of
translation, grammar does not exist separately. It is not the grammatical form but the

60

grammatical meaning that is of primary concern for a translator or an interpreter. A

mistake in grammar (whether it is a misunderstood construction of SL or a wrong
variant in TL) always tells on the sense and logic of the text. As soon as the sense
and logic of a sentence stop to be transparent it is necessary to stop and look for a
mistake in the translation.
3.2 Lexical transformations
They say that translation starts where dictionaries end. Though somewhat
exaggerated, this saying truly reflects the nature of literary translation. Dictionaries
list all regular correspondences between elements of lexical systems of languages.
Translation deals not so much with the system of language but with speech (or to be
more exact - with a text, which is a product of speech). So in the process of
translating one has to find it by himself which of the meanings of a polysemantic
word is realized in a particular context, to see if under the influence of this context
the word has acquired a slightly new shade of meaning and to decide how this new
shade of meaning (not listed in any dictionary) can be rendered in TL. E.g. no
dictionary ever translates the verb "to be" as "", nevertheless it is the best
way to translate it in the sentence "She was in hospital" - "
". Moreover, it has already been said that every language has its specific
way of expressing things, a way that may be quite alien to other languages. That is
why a literal (word-for-word) translation of a foreign text may turn out clumsy (if
not ridiculous) in TL. To avoid it one has to resort to some special devices worked
out by the theory of translation and known as lexical transformations (or contextual
substitutions). There are several types of such transformations.
1. The first type of lexical transformations is used in translating words with
wide and non-differentiated meaning. The essence of this transformation lies in
translating such words of SL by words with specified concrete meaning in TL. When
translating from English into Russian they use it especially often in the sphere of
verbs. If English verbs mostly denote actions in rather a vague general way, Russian

61

verbs are very concrete in denoting not only the action itself but also the manner of
performing this action as well: "to go (on foot, by train, by plane, etc.)" - "
", " ", ", etc. The choice of a particular
Russian verb depends on the context. It does not mean, of course, that the verb "to
go" changes its meaning under the influence of the context. The meaning of "to go"
is the same, it always approximately corresponds to the Russian "",
but the norms of the Russian language demand a more specified nomination of the
action. The same can be illustrated with the verb "to be": "The clock is on the wall",
"The apple is on the plate and the plate is on the table" - " ",
" , ", though in all those cases "to
be" preserves its general meaning "". The sentence "He's in Hollywood"
in J.D. Salinger's "The Catcher in the Rye" should be translated as "
", but if "Oxford" were substituted for "Hollywood" the translation would
rather be "". This transformation is applicable not only to verbs but to all
words of wide semantic volume, no matter to what part of speech they belong:
adverbs, adjectives, nouns, etc.
The English pronoun "you" deserves special attention. It can be translated only
with the help of differentiation, i.e. either "" or "". The choice depends on the
character, age, the social position of the characters, their relations, and the situation
in which they speak. One should remember that the wrong choice can ruin the whole
atmosphere of the text.
2. The second type of transformation is quite opposite in its character and is
usually called "generalization". In many cases the norms of TL make it unnecessary
or even undesirable to translate all the particulars expressed in SL. Englishmen
usually name the exact height of a person: "He is six foot three tall". In Russian it
would hardly seem natural to introduce a character saying "
"; substituting centimeters for feet and inches wouldn't make it much
better: "On 190,5 ". The best variant is to say: "
".

62

Generalization is also used in those cases when a SL a word with differentiated

meaning corresponds to a word with non-differentiated meaning in TL ("a hand" "", "an arm" -"", etc.).
3. The third type of transformation is based upon logical connection between
two phenomena (usually it is a cause-and-effect type of connection), one of which is
named in the original text and the other used as its translated version. This
transformation presupposes semantic and logical analysis of the situation described
in the text and consists in semantic development of this situation. If the situation is
developed correctly, that is if the original and translated utterances are semantically
connected as cause and effect, the transformation helps to render the sense and to
observe the norms of TL: "Mr. Kelada's brushes ... would have been all the better for
a scrub" (S.Maugham) - " . ". It
may seem that the translation " " somewhat deviates from
the original "would have been all the better for a scrub". However, the literal
translation " " is clumsy while "
" is quite acceptable stylistically and renders the idea quite correctly: why
would they have been all the better for a scrub? - because they
. Another example: "When I went on board I found Mr. Kelada's luggage
already below" (S.Maugham) ". . . " is
not Russian. The verb or do not render the situation
adequately. It is much better to translate it as "...
", which describes the situation quite correctly: why did I find his luggage
below? - because .
These two examples illustrate substitution of the cause for the effect: the
English sentence names the effect while the Russian variant names its cause. There
may occur the opposite situation - substitution of the effect for the cause : "I not only
shared a cabin with him and ate three meals a day at the same table..." (S.Maugham)
- " "; "Three long years had
passed ... since I had tasted ale..." (Mark Twain) - "

63

..." In these examples the English sentences name the cause while the Russian
versions contain the effect (I ate three meals a day at the same table with him, so
; three long years had passed
since I tasted ale, so ).
4. The fourth type of transformation is based on antonymy. It means that a
certain word is translated not by the corresponding word of TL but by its antonym
and at the same time negation is added (or, if there is negation in the original
sentence, it is omitted in translation): "It wasn't too far." - "
" ("far" is translated as "" and negation in the predicate is omitted).
Not far = .
The necessity for this transformation arises due to several reasons: 1)
peculiarities of the systems of SL and TL, 2) contextual requirements, 3) traditional
norms of TL.
5. The fifth transformation is usually called "compensation". To be exact, it is
not so much a transformation but rather a general principle of rendering stylistic
peculiarities of a literary text when there is no direct correspondence between
stylistic means of SL and TL. This transformation is widely used to render speech
peculiarities of characters, to translate puns, rhyming words, etc. The essence of it is
as follows: it is not always possible to find stylistic equivalents to every stylistically
marked word of the original text or to every phonetic and grammatical irregularity
purposefully used by the author. That is why there should be kept a general stylistic
balance based on compensating some inevitable stylistic losses by introducing
stylistically similar elements in some other utterances or by employing different
linguistic means playing a similar role in TL. Suppose a character uses the word
"fool-proof which is certainly a sign of the colloquial register. In Russian there is
no colloquial synonym of the word "" or "". So the colloquial
"fool-proof is translated by the neutral " " and the speech of
the character loses its stylistic coloring. This loss is inevitable, but it is necessary to
find a way of compensation. There is another variety of compensation which

64

consists in creating the same general effect in TL with the help of means different
from those used in SL. A combination of phonetic and grammatical mistakes is used
by G.B.Shaw to show that his character is an uneducated person: "Old uns like me is
up in the world now". It is impossible to make the same mistakes in the
corresponding Russian sentence: " , , ".
Nevertheless, speech characteristics are very important for creating the image of
Beamish, so it is necessary to make him speak in an uneducated manner. With the
help of these five types of transformations one can overcome practically all lexical
difficulties.

65

66

Annex 4
The skill clusters for translators.
Cultural
Information
Making decisions communication
understanding
technology
What
Hardware and
Consulting;
Clarity of
influences of
software used
expression;
Reflecting;
the
in producing
Establishing
Analyzing
development
translations;
rapport;
and
of source
Electronic
Giving and
evaluating;
language;
file
processing
Establishing
National
management;
feedback;
facts;
characteristic
E.commerce.
Listening and
Making
s where the
questioning;
judjements .
language is
Observing and
spoken:
checking
Hazards of
understanding.
stereotyping.

Language and
literacy
Understanding
the source
language;
Writing skills
in the target
language;
Proof-reading
and editing.

Project management
Resource
coordonation;
Terminology
research;
Administration;
Quality control.

67